THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY | Publication of charitable contributions

Status
Omitted
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Resolution details
Company ticker
DIS
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Governance
ESG sub-theme
  • Lobbying / political engagement
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Consumer Discretionary
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Resolved: Shareholders request the Company list the recipients of corporate charitable contributions of $5,000 or more on the Company's website, along with the amount contributed and any material limitations or monitoring of the contributions.
Whereas clause
Whereas: Charitable contributions should enhance the image of our Company in the eyes of the public. Increased disclosure of these contributions would serve to create greater goodwill for our Company. It would also allow the public to better voice its opinions on our corporate giving strategy. Inevitably, some organizations might be viewed more favorably than others. This could be useful in guiding our Company's philanthropic decision making in the future. Corporate giving should ultimately enhance shareholder value in line with the Company's fiduciary duty.
Supporting statement
Supporting Statement: Current disclosure is insufficient to allow shareholders to evaluate the proper use of corporate assets by outside organizations and how those assets should be used, especially for controversial issues. According to Disney's "Global Charitable Giving Guidelines," Disney "May Not Support...Organizations that are actively engaged in highly controversial issues...."1 The Guidelines state that, ”A controversial issue is a serious matter for which different segments of the community have strong opposing positions."2 Nonetheless, Disney insists on contributing to controversial organizations. Disney's 2022 Corporate Social Responsibility Report reveals it pledged $5 million to organizations serving the LGBTQIA+ community, noting it donated all June 2022 profits from its "Pride" collection "to organizations...that support LGBTQIA+ communities."3 These organizations include groups such as The Trevor Project and GLSEN.4 These issues and organizations are not without controversy, and therefore contributing to them is antithetical to Disney's own guidelines. A review of the Trevor Project's website reveals that to support its suicide prevention and mental health services is to support "gender affirming care."5 This is because it views "gender affirming care" as a key method of suicide prevention for gender dysphoria among youth. But what gender affirming care for youth really means is dangerous puberty blockers and genital mutilation. A review of GLSEN's website reveals similarly controversial views. It advocates for concealing a student's preferred gender identity from parents and integrating gender ideology at all levels of curriculum in public schools.6 Nonetheless, Disney is prominently listed as a "Senior Corporate Partner" on GLSEN's website.7 It's time Disney stop injecting itself into controversial and significant social policy issues. Parents, consumers, and shareholders are tired of its extreme pursuits that ignore the beliefs of a majority of Americans. A majority of Americans oppose access to puberty blockers and hormone treatments for children and teenagers.8 A majority of Americans believe whether someone is a man or a woman is determined by the sex they were assigned at birth.9 It's one thing to ensure a welcoming environment for all employees by respecting LGBTQ+ rights in the workplace that adhere to antidiscrimination laws. It's another to spend Company time, resources, and philanthropic dollars on a radical agenda that alienates your customer base and undermines your fiduciary duty to shareholders.

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.