I don't even understand, if the guy was able to leave and create a new channel to serve this audience how is that an example of what you call ideological capture.
An important part of business is targeting your offering to the intended market -- it sounds like the intended market for Hallmark is not the same as the intended market for Great American Channel. If Hallmark content is so objectionable to its viewership that they lose all their viewers to Great American Channel, surely Hallmark will pivot, or go out of business.
Or do you think Ron Desantis has to pass a law forcing Hallmark to make the kind of content which the Great America Channel shows? Is that your solution here, a command economy for basic cable?
Hallmark is a traditionally conservative channel, this is extremely well known to marketing arms of other firms. It's rapid switch to LGBT content was idealogical capture because a large amount of its executives,employees,and target market did not want such things.
Hallmark is a company that was ideologically captured. Imagine a meat company, that forces its president out, to become a vegan company. That meat company underwent idealogical capture, and now works against its original goals that were profitable. Notice how this is different than a pivot, a pivot is executed when the company is not profitable.
The Great America Channel was created and supported by many many ex-hallmark channel employees including executives, actors, finance, and more. It's subscribers increasing every day. Our firm fully expects it to become the new "hallmark" channel within 2 years.
I guess I figured there was some import to the idea of ideological capture. If by that you mean leaders can set direction of their company, some can disagree and leave and found a competitor, and the winner can prevail in the market, then, that’s what I call market capitalism and what you call ideological capture I suppose.
I just don't get it. To me "ideological capture" would imply no alternative in the market, basically there is an inefficiency which is explained and maintained by ideology. And yet, this entire anecdote about the Hallmark channel is about how a guy quit from working there and founded an alternative channel to exploit the inefficiency, and apparently is succeeding!
An important part of business is targeting your offering to the intended market -- it sounds like the intended market for Hallmark is not the same as the intended market for Great American Channel. If Hallmark content is so objectionable to its viewership that they lose all their viewers to Great American Channel, surely Hallmark will pivot, or go out of business.
Or do you think Ron Desantis has to pass a law forcing Hallmark to make the kind of content which the Great America Channel shows? Is that your solution here, a command economy for basic cable?