I figured he'd go after Trek for being "woke".
Nope. For one reason and one reason alone. He believes in a free and open market.
Explanation: Trumpās philosophy is simply, āgo woke and go brokeā. Itās not without some meritā¦ just ask Anheuser-Busch after the Dylon Mulvaney Bud Light debacle. They lost anywhere between $2-$4 billion, depending on who you ask. Thatās not chump change by any measure. Other companies like Ford, Chevy, Harley Davidson, TSC had their own little social experiments and were able to pivot quickly enough when they started to see their numbers start to slip. Other companies waited too long and werenāt so lucky.
Trump will trust that if the viewers want to see something less āSJWā, theyāll go elsewhere to find something more in alignment with that desire. If they want to see social commentary common to Trek, theyāll stay, and the suits at Paramount or CBS will look at the viewership numbers and possibly make some hard decisions about how program formatting should be adjusted based on the perceived reactions to the viewers. Do they take a chance on less social commentary and move towards less politically-charged subject matter to bring in more numbers or do they double down on the āwokeā thinking it will tip the scales? It really is a chess game with demographics. One that Disney seems to have been failing more than most lately. And their market share has shown it, as they have doubled and tripled down with DEI-charged programming. It is their prerogative to do so. It is also the prerogative of the viewing customer to switch to another streaming service if it gets too much. Who will blink first?
At the end of the day, Trump really doesnāt care what the studios do. They will sink or swim based on their programming choices and he will sit back and let the free market economy decide their fate. Itās the main reason why he demolished the EV mandates levied by the previous administration. He knew that EVās are not ready for prime time acceptance by the buying public. Too many problems, including but not limited to long charging times compared to gas fill-ups, shorter ranges on a single charge vs full tank, costly battery replacements after excessive aging, dangerous explosive combustion being compromised post-accident, sometimes weeks after a simple fender bender, as well as the fact that EV charging stations still largely use fossil fuels to power and the negative environmental impact from mining and processing materials to make the batteries in the first place. All these things really offset the ācarbon footprintā that such vehicles supposedly save. This is why we were āmandatedā to by these ridiculous things, as nobody would do it freely. Too many problems inherent within them. If they were so amazingly good, why should people be forced to buy them through government mandate? It violates the first rule of a free market: freedom of choice. And maybe- just maybe- the removal of the mandates will make EVās
better by addressing all these problems, making them more appealing to the market. And if they die, they die, paving the way for the next great experiments and innovation.
So no. Trump couldnāt care less about Paramount or Trek or Disney or Star Wars or whatever. Heās a proven master capitalist and will let the market sort them out. Heās got bigger fish to fry than a little sci fi show.
Yep, could definitely be that too.
www.ft.com
techcrunch.com
deadline.com
variety.com
