• Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
Money Rise Today – Investing and Stock News
  • Investing
  • Stock
Editor's Pick

Disney tries to silence grieving husband and learns not all news is good news

by August 26, 2024
written by August 26, 2024

Disney, one of the world’s most iconic entertainment companies, recently found itself entangled in a legal controversy that has shone a spotlight on the perils of overreaching legal tactics. The case involves Jeffrey Piccolo, who is suing Disney and the operators of a Disney Springs restaurant for the wrongful death of his wife, Dr. Kanokporn Tangsuan, following a severe allergic reaction.  

In a surprising twist, Disney initially sought to push the case into arbitration, citing a clause from the terms and conditions of its Disney+ streaming service, which Piccolo had briefly subscribed to in 2019. After a public backlash, Disney withdrew its claim, allowing the case to proceed in court. However, this episode illustrates a broader danger for Disney: the Streisand effect. 

The Streisand effect refers to a phenomenon where attempts to hide or suppress information only lead to greater public attention. It originated from a 2003 incident in which Barbra Streisand tried to prevent aerial photographs of her home from being published. Her legal efforts, rather than keeping the photos under wraps, brought widespread public and media attention to the images.  

In Disney’s case, the attempt to move the lawsuit into private arbitration, away from public scrutiny, backfired in a similar way. Instead of avoiding negative publicity, the company found itself at the center of a growing controversy, as the public reacted strongly against what seemed like an attempt to sidestep accountability. The public’s reaction underscored the risks of aggressive legal tactics, particularly when they conflict with a company’s carefully crafted public image.’ 

Legal experts quickly criticized Disney’s approach. The idea that signing up for a streaming service could prevent someone from pursuing a wrongful death claim seemed not only legally tenuous but also ethically questionable. Disney was seen as pushing the envelope of contract law by arguing that agreeing to Disney+ terms meant accepting arbitration for any dispute involving the company, no matter how unrelated. This legal maneuver smacked of corporate overreach and sparked significant public backlash. 

The outcry was swift, with many viewing Disney’s actions as an attempt to prevent a grieving husband from having his day in court. The perception that a media giant was trying to shield itself from accountability by exploiting an unrelated arbitration clause did not sit well with the public.  

In response to the backlash, Josh D’Amaro, chairman of Disney Parks, Experiences, and Products, issued a statement acknowledging the sensitive nature of the situation and announced that Disney would no longer pursue arbitration. Instead, the company agreed to allow the case to proceed in court, hoping to expedite a resolution for the grieving family. 

While this reversal may have been intended to stem the negative publicity, the damage had already been done. The incident not only generated bad press for Disney but also raised broader concerns about corporate arbitration practices.  

The case highlighted the potential for companies to misuse arbitration clauses in ways that may not serve the best interests of consumers or, in this case, victims of tragic circumstances. By trying to keep the matter out of the public eye, Disney inadvertently drew even more attention to it, underscoring the risks of the Streisand effect. 

For Disney, whose brand is built on wholesomeness and family values, the optics of this legal maneuver were particularly damaging. The disconnect between the image Disney projects and the reality of its legal strategies could have long-term implications for its reputation. This case serves as a reminder that in the digital age, where information spreads rapidly and public sentiment can turn on a dime, the line between protecting business interests and maintaining a positive public image is increasingly thin. 

The lessons from this incident extend beyond Disney. For any corporation, the balance between legal prudence and public perception is crucial. Disney’s initial push for arbitration came across as an attempt to evade responsibility rather than a genuine effort to resolve the dispute fairly. As Disney moves forward, it must be mindful of the broader implications of its legal strategies and adopt a more transparent approach to maintain the trust of its audience.   

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
0 comment
0
FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

previous post
Bronfman’s Paramount bid could keep Shari Redstone involved at the company
next post
Sports gambling takes a toll on Americans’ checkbooks, research shows

related articles

Trump announces Israel agrees to Gaza ‘initial withdrawal...

October 4, 2025

‘Schumer shutdown’ already cost taxpayers $1.2B in pay...

October 4, 2025

Mike Johnson rallies House Republicans on government shutdown...

October 4, 2025

Mike Waltz sees Trump’s Gaza plan as ‘once-in-a-generation...

October 4, 2025

FBI busts alleged Maduro-linked money laundering network spanning...

October 4, 2025

Democrats roll out new campaign ads targeting Republicans...

October 4, 2025

Supreme Court’s emergency docket delivers Trump string of...

October 4, 2025

Iran executes 6 prisoners accused of carrying out...

October 4, 2025

Japan poised for first female prime minister after...

October 4, 2025

Johnson sends critical signal to Schumer as Dems...

October 3, 2025
Enter Your Information Below To Receive Free Trading Ideas, Latest News, And Articles.


Your information is secure and your privacy is protected. By opting in you agree to receive emails from us. Remember that you can opt-out any time, we hate spam too!

Latest News

  • Iran’s Khamenei warns of ‘strong blow’ as Trump threatens to drop bombs, Putin silent on US ire

    March 31, 2025
  • Iran’s Khamenei says Americans should avoid talking ‘nonsense’ in nuke talks

    May 20, 2025
  • USAID has ‘demonstrated pattern of obstructionism,’ claims top DOGE Republican in letter to Rubio

    February 5, 2025
  • Trump has his own deadline, ‘no allegiance to anybody’ in Ukraine-Russia peace deal

    April 24, 2025
  • GOP lawmaker gifts ‘chip of the Berlin Wall’ to colleagues in bid for top committee spot

    December 3, 2024

Popular Posts

  • 1

    Secret Service admits leaning on ‘state and local partners’ after claim it ignored Trump team’s past requests

    July 21, 2024
  • 2

    Five more House Democrats call on Biden to drop out, third US senator

    July 19, 2024
  • 3

    Forex Profit Calculator: Maximize Your Trading Potential

    July 10, 2024
  • 4

    Elon and Vivek should tackle US funding for this boondoogle organization and score a multimillion dollar win

    December 4, 2024
  • 5

    Biden calls to ‘lower the temperature’ then bashes Trump in NAACP speech

    July 17, 2024

Categories

  • Economy (829)
  • Editor's Pick (6,266)
  • Investing (634)
  • Stock (935)

Latest Posts

  • Russian drone crashes in Polish field as Warsaw protests airspace violation and plans formal complaint

    August 20, 2025
  • Ukraine unveils 600-mile cruise missile that can reach Moscow amid peace talks

    March 17, 2025
  • Wall Street rallies as inflation concerns ease; Nvidia, Tesla, and Arm lead gains

    February 14, 2025

Recent Posts

  • Trump admin urged to probe allegations pro-Hamas college groups had ‘prior knowledge’ of Oct 7 attack

    March 27, 2025
  • Europe’s inflation may rise due to Olympics and Taylor Swift events, but UBS claims local wallets will remain unscathed

    August 12, 2024
  • Short Meta Platforms: Repeated lower highs and bearish divergence signal downtrend potential

    August 9, 2024

Editor’s Pick

  • Trump FCC chair targets NPR, PBS for investigation ahead of Congressional threats to defund

    January 30, 2025
  • CTNT Stock Alert: Must-Know Details on Cheetah Net Supply

    August 16, 2024
  • Trump admin lays out who exactly was cut at HHS in face of ‘Democrat hysteria’

    February 19, 2025
  • About us
  • Contacts
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions

Disclaimer: moneyrisetoday.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

Copyright © 2025 moneyrisetoday.com | All Rights Reserved

Money Rise Today – Investing and Stock News
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
Money Rise Today – Investing and Stock News
  • Investing
  • Stock