When Ron DeSantis signed the bill that gives him control of Disney’s special tax district, he declared an end to the "corporate kingdom."
"There’s a new sheriff in town, and accountability will be the order of the day," the Florida governor said 10 days ago.
A New York Times news story said "his vitriol followed Disney’s decision to pause political donations in the state over the education legislation, which opponents call the ‘Don't Say Gay’ law."
An MSNBC columnist wrote that the governor was attempting "to punish Disney for daring to speak out against his homophobic policies and to bully the company into complying with his crusade against so-called wokeness."
JIM JORDAN ‘WEAPONIZATION’ PROBE DRAWS EARLY FLAK AFTER DISPUTED TESTIMONY
It was, at the very least, portrayed as a highly controversial crusade by a Republican pushing a hard-right agenda. (The law that drew Disney’s objections bar public school teachers from discussing sex, sexual orientation or gender identity with students in kindergarten through third grade.)
When Gavin Newsom announced that his state would stop doing business with the giant Walgreens chain in a battle over abortion pills, the tone of the coverage was very different.
"California won’t be doing business with @walgreens — or any company that cowers to the extremists and puts women’s lives at risk," the Democratic governor tweeted. "We’re done."
Politico noted, "The declaration underscores California’s stance as an abortion safe-haven that works to defend women."
"By publicly confirming that it would not dispense in the 21 states," the Times said, "Walgreens faced blowback from consumers and politicians alike. There were social media calls for shoppers to boycott the company."
My own view is that corporations shouldn’t be subjected to government retaliation based on the political stances they take, but we now live in a world in which everything is weaponized.
The conservative Federalist highlighted the contrast: "Many Democrats celebrated Newsom’s threat, as they’ve celebrated threats before, because they have zero qualms about compelling or hurting companies. They don’t believe it’s authoritarian. They’re just angry they no longer have a monopoly on the practice."
Each situation has its complications, but there’s little question that DeSantis’ war on Disney is being depicted as revenge, while Newsom having his state cut ties with Walgreens is being described as an effort to protect women.
HOW CANDIDATES ARE PURSUING THE WHITE HOUSE WITHOUT HITTING THE FRONT-RUNNERS
Disney has gotten more subsidies than any company in the history of Florida, but its Orlando theme park is also one of the state’s biggest employers, drawing tens of millions of tourists each year.
When the media reported that one of DeSantis’ appointees to the board is a former pastor who had called homosexuality "evil" and shared a theory that tap water could be making more people gay, that was a legitimate story.
It is not clear how California’s vast government would carry out Newsom’s order against Walgreens, but the governor’s office said "all relationships" with the nation’s second-largest drug chain are being reviewed.
SUBSCRIBE TO HOWIE'S MEDIA BUZZMETER PODCAST: A RIFF ON THE DAY'S HOTTEST TAKES
Walgreens says it would distribute the abortion pill, mifepristone, where it is legal, but first has to be certified by the FDA and also follow state law. Republican attorneys general in 21 states have warned of legal repercussions if any pharmacy tries to sell the pills there.
Major corporations are big players, if only because of their political donations and lobbying clout. But the media helps shape the narrative when it comes to which politicians are taking them on and why.
