re: Why Hollywood is FAILING - The Devil's in The DEI

quote:

---

Haha … you have no clue. I’m not an up
And comer breaking into the business. White - yes. Male - yes . In demand - yes.

---

Brad Pitt over here arguing with dudes on a Louisiana-based, anonymous movie message board

quote:

---

Downvote away you bitter losers with zero clue how any of this really works … I’ll check back in 7 months after we wrap WLs3 in Thailand.

---

this attitude towards your customers leaves me zero doubt that you truly are a hollywood exec.

quote:

---

Do people legitimately just not care to get fair and balanced reporting or do we just want to be told what we already think so we feel justified

---

any time someone sends me a link of a professional youtuber/tiktokker it seems to be this

I dunno, maybe. But it feels way more like Elon brought attention to it that kick started a lot of the pushback we are seeing now. I mean the lawsuit you just posted while filed Wednesday. I'm sure they didn't need two years to get the paperwork in order to file it.

We still have affirmative action and title IX. Both of those are racism/sexist policies at the core. And those two are government policies, the DEI is a policy created internally by a private business. I just don't see this getting overturned.

Ehhh I'm sorry to tell you, but no, it may not illegal.

We have to look at the hiring aspect of this directive as requirements about storylines have no bearing.

To have a show greenlit there needs to be 50% or more of underrepresented characters/actors.

That on the surface looks like discrimination. However, Disney also states at the bottom that when hiring, you are prohibited from asking about issues such as race, sex, gender, age, or other protected statues. That sounds counterproductive to their goals. How can a hiring manager make sure they are fulfilling their requirements if they can't confirm?

Disney's lawyers are going to immediately point to this when defending against illegal hiring practices. How can we discriminate when we don't ask about these subjects?

Also, notice Disney never defines what they consider an "underrepresented group" is. Would a white, straight, male, veteran be considered underrepresented because of their military service? What about a straight, white, female with a disability?

I think the way Disney's lawyers frame their requirements will be very important.

These two rules feel like they are similar to this;

In Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003), the University of Michigan's Undergraduate Admissions Office used a points-based system in its admission process. The office added points for an applicant who was an underrepresented minority. The Supreme Court held that the race-based methods must use strict scrutiny. The Court held that the generalization of "underrepresented minorities" failed the narrow tailoring requirement that strict scrutiny imposes.

Grutter v. Bollinger
In Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003), the University of Michigan Law School Admissions Office used race in its admissions process. However, the school did not assign points based on race. Instead, the school used race as one of a number of factors; race could not automatically result in an acceptance or a rejection (which contrasts with Gratz, in which those 20 points used in Gratz could have resulted in admission or rejection).The Court held that this plan is narrowly tailored enough to satisfy strict scrutiny because the "program is flexible enough to ensure that each applicant is evaluated as an individual and not in a way that makes race or ethnicity the defining feature of the application . . . The Law School engages in a highly individualized, holistic review of each applicant's file, giving serious consideration to all the ways an applicant might contribute to a diverse educational environment." In dicta contained in the majority opinion, Justice O'Connor wrote, "The Court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today."

EDIT* Sorry! I know this is an incredibly long post already, but I wanted to add this about Affirmative Action that I think may hurt Disney:

quote:

---

May a contractor set quotas as a way to meet its affirmative action obligations?

No, OFCCP regulations do not permit quotas, preferences, or set asides. They are strictly forbidden. Placement goals (under Executive Order 11246), utilization goals (under Section 503), and hiring benchmarks (under VEVRAA) are not to be interpreted as a ceiling or floor for the employment of particular groups of persons but, rather, should serve as a benchmark against which the contractor measures the representation of persons within its workforce. Placement goals, utilization goals, and hiring benchmarks are not rigid or inflexible quotas to be met but, rather, standards of measurement of how a contractor is fulfilling its affirmative action obligations. When a contractor fails to meet a utilization goal or hiring benchmark, the contractor assesses its employment practices and takes appropriate measures to address identified problem areas and remedy potential discrimination. Such remedies may include assessing and revising policies and practices that hinder employment opportunities, broadening recruitment and outreach to increase the diversity of applicant pools, and/or instituting training and/or apprenticeship programs to increase promotion opportunities and applications from underrepresented groups.

---

So I think Disney stating quotas of 50% or more can really hurt them here. Unless they can convince the court that this was internal use to establish goals and not firm requirements, which given the wording of the release, seems like it will be pretty hard to do.

quote:

---

To have a show greenlit there needs to be 50% or more of underrepresented characters/actors.

---

Illegal.

The 'underrepresented characters' nonsense is purely arbitrary.

They can dress it up any way they want, virtue signal all manner of good intentions, but at the end of the day, using race, sex, etc... as determining factors to hire ( or not hire) qualified individuals isn't legal.

This is going to be fun to see Disney crash on this one.

Well, the plan was always to reunite the original crew, but Olivia broken up with her then boyfriend -- the guy that bought G4.

OMG are you Tom Cruise??

You sound as if playing along with this nonsense is in and of itself nothing but smart business practices.

I got news for you, people of been looking the other way & allowing this garbage to pass as normalcy for far too long.

Check the landscape. Disney is getting rocked from all sides. This isn’t gonna go the way they want it.

quote:

---

I got news for you, people of been looking the other way & allowing this garbage to pass as normalcy for far too long.

---

Yes since the 60's when Affirmative Action was put in place.

Like, this isn't some new 2020's Left Wing bullshite. This is something with roots in the Civil rights movement.

Some businesses had racist hiring practices so now everyone in class is punished. Affirmative Action says you can't hire based on race but if you have too many of one race (which they mean too many whites) you can be fined.