Disney CEO Bob Iger Offers Terse Response To Gina Carano's THE MANDALORIAN Lawsuit

Disney CEO Bob Iger Offers Terse Response To Gina Carano's THE MANDALORIAN Lawsuit

In a recent interview with CNBC, Disney CEO Bob Iger was asked his thoughts on the recent lawsuit brought against the company by former The Mandalorian actor Gina Carano. He offered a one-word response...

By MattIsForReal - Feb 08, 2024 08:02 AM EST
Filed Under: Star Wars

Earlier this week, it was reported that Gina Carano, a former actor on The Mandalorian, is suing Disney and Lucasfilm for discrimination and wrongful termination. Carano played the fan-favorite Cara Dune, Din Djarin's loyal ally, in the first two seasons of the hit series before Lucasfilm fired her for what the company called "abhorrent and unacceptable" social media posts.

Despite finding work with The Daily Wire and appearing in a couple of other projects, Carano still believes she was unfairly terminated from the series. And with the financial backing of X owner Elon Musk, Carano is suing Disney and Lucasfilm for discrimination and wrongful termination, alleging she was fired for voicing right-wing opinions on social media.

Asked by CNBC about the lawsuit in a recent interview, Disney CEO Bob Iger had very little to say about it. "None," was his simple response before moving the conversation along to a more productive topic.

Iger probably does have opinions on the lawsuit but probably can't share them, so his terse response isn't terribly surprising.

Carano is currently seeking a court order that would force Lucasfilm to recast her in the series and pay at least $75,000, plus punitive damages. 

“Some of us have been unjustly singled out, harassed, persecuted and had our livelihoods stripped away because we dared to encourage conversation, asked questions, and refused to go along with the mob,” Carano said in a statement alongside the lawsuit filing. “I am honored that my case has been chosen to be supported by the company that has been one of the last glimmers of hope for free speech in the world.”

However, given that Carano was an at-will employee, she will likely face an uphill battle in obtaining damages for terminations over her online posts. Typically, workers in the private sector are not protected from discipline under the First Amendment. In this case, Disney found Carano's posts to be damaging to its brand and opted to move on from the actor.

In addition to backing Carano, Musk has pledged on X to pay for the legal bills for anyone who believes they were "unfairly treated by your employer due to posting or liking something on this platform."

Iger is probably wise not to speak out on the lawsuit, instead focusing on the more exciting and less controversial company news — such as the announcement of Moana 2 and its release later this year, Disney's investment in Epic Games, and more.

THE ACOLYTE: Disney Boss Reveals Why The Divisive STAR WARS TV Series Was Canceled After One Season
Related:

THE ACOLYTE: Disney Boss Reveals Why The Divisive STAR WARS TV Series Was Canceled After One Season

SKELETON CREW Episode 4 Spoiler Recap: A Shocking Twist Puts The Crew In Danger From One Of Their Own
Recommended For You:

SKELETON CREW Episode 4 Spoiler Recap: A Shocking Twist Puts The Crew In Danger From One Of Their Own

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

1 2 3 4
SonOfAGif
SonOfAGif - 2/8/2024, 8:35 AM
Musk: (unfairly treated by your employer due to posting or liking something on this platform) yet he unfairly treated his employees who liked the possibility of becoming a union. And his first course of action on X was banning the guy who tracks private jets.
Humperdink
Humperdink - 2/8/2024, 8:54 AM
@SonOfAGif -

You should look into the claims from the lawsuits for abusive conditions, sexist & racist behaviors and a horrendous working atmosphere from employees at Tesla. Yikes...it's bad. 🫣

This is all just performative theater for his fans because if he cared about fair treatment of employees and wrongful termination he would start by cleaning up his own house.
OmegaDaGrodd
OmegaDaGrodd - 2/8/2024, 9:08 AM
@Humperdink - Elon Musk is a true case study in how money can't buy happiness.

He's more or less the richest person in the world, and spends his time and energy fighting make believe culture wars and being an internet troll who clearly doesn't believe half the stuff he says. I'll never understand how money could make someone that uncomfortable in their own skin that they need this much validation from the most deranged strangers on the internet
Goldboink
Goldboink - 2/8/2024, 9:21 AM
@SonOfAGif -
He's a horrible person through and through. The rubes eat it up though because, ya know, FREEDOM!
lazlodaytona
lazlodaytona - 2/8/2024, 9:28 AM
@SonOfAGif - and Iger has been known, Marvel studios overall, to treat their Special Effects workers like complete garbage.

There is a precedence here with Marvel studios. They have become so arrogant they're happy to treat their actors, producers, directors, writers, the 'behind-the-scenes' crew, and so on like complete sh1t.

Get off your high-horse.
lazlodaytona
lazlodaytona - 2/8/2024, 9:32 AM
@OmegaDaGrodd - it's funny to me u idiots have turned this topic into an "Elon Musk" hatred thread instead of focusing on the greedy, disney/marvel idiots that treats everyone like crap that works for them (besides RDJ because he's the one who kick started the Marvel universe and the 'mouse' enjoys sucking his ... big toes).
Matchesz
Matchesz - 2/8/2024, 9:37 AM
@SonOfAGif - by employees do you mean the ex twitter employees who were censoring freedom of speech in the first place?
Goldboink
Goldboink - 2/8/2024, 9:53 AM
@lazlodaytona - So, what you are saying is that Elon Musk, who is financing this lawsuit, is this altruistic titan who just wants to help people who have been wronged.
OmegaDaGrodd
OmegaDaGrodd - 2/8/2024, 10:00 AM
@lazlodaytona -

"it's funny to me"



Every damn time
Clintthahamster
Clintthahamster - 2/8/2024, 10:03 AM
@lazlodaytona - "and Iger has been known, Marvel studios overall, to treat their Special Effects workers like complete garbage."

Pure whataboutism. Musk mistreats his workers, and Disney mistreats their workers. Both things are bad.
UncleHarm1
UncleHarm1 - 2/8/2024, 10:37 AM
@Matchesz - Look up freedom of speech, it doesn't mean what you think lol.

Republicans are mad because they can't spew hate on a pointless social media site. If your best examples of what a republican is are Trump, Elon Musk, and Gina Carano you should maybe take a step back and think about how people see you as a human being O_o
lazlodaytona
lazlodaytona - 2/8/2024, 10:55 AM
@Goldboink - nope. I don't claim to know Musk's agenda. However,
people like him and Caranos just fight the 'popular opinion' and you hollywood/far-left nut-jobs pull out all the stops to silence these type of people.
lazlodaytona
lazlodaytona - 2/8/2024, 10:57 AM
@OmegaDaGrodd - um. ok then. good on u bro ... i guess
lazlodaytona
lazlodaytona - 2/8/2024, 10:59 AM
@ClintThaHamster - you are correct. both are terrible. won't argue/disagree with you on this.
Nightwing1015
Nightwing1015 - 2/8/2024, 11:14 AM
@UncleHarm1 - The way in which Twitter were censoring users was obviously violating the principles and ideas behind freedom of speech. A bit reductive to say it only applies to the government and that the actual values behind that amendment can simply be ignored. That's what people were objecting to with Twitter for a long time.
Clintthahamster
Clintthahamster - 2/8/2024, 11:21 AM
@Nightwing1015 - I think it's worth making a distinction between the abstract ideal of freedom of speech, and the constitutionally protected right to free speech. The former only applies to actions of the state, not to private entities, and isn't relevant to a conversation about Twitter. The former is not legally binding, and no private organization or institution is under any obligation to adhere to it.

From the jump, Twitter had terms of service, and those that violated those terms were banned from the service. No different than a "No shirt, no shoes, no service" sign at a gas station. There's an argument to be made that it was applied unevenly against folks on the right, but it could also be argued that folks on the right were more likely to violate proscriptions against racist, homophobic, transphobic, or misogynistic speech.

And let's not pretend like Musk's Xitter (pronounced shitter, naturally) is any better with free speech. His first actions upon taking over included firing employees that criticized, or even questioned, him on Twitter.
Nightwing1015
Nightwing1015 - 2/8/2024, 11:26 AM
@ClintThaHamster - I agree with your post, I'm not saying Twitter was under any legal obligation - they can censor who they like for whatever reason they like.
UncleHarm1
UncleHarm1 - 2/8/2024, 11:35 AM
@Nightwing1015 - The "actual values" of the original authors were that objecting to something the government does shouldn't get you killed or arrested. Protesting the colonialist policies of the English monarchy is why it was created. Pretty sure nobody cared about Twitter in 1791.
Nightwing1015
Nightwing1015 - 2/8/2024, 11:53 AM
@UncleHarm1 - "the original authors were that objecting to something the government does shouldn't get you killed or arrested"

There are more reasons to support the concept of freedom of speech than just this. This is only what the amendment says but to say there wasn't more to the enlightenment principle of freedom of speech/expression is silly. It has far more extensive origins than the founding fathers so not sure why anybody would try and reduce it to the American constitution.
SonOfAGif
SonOfAGif - 2/8/2024, 4:19 PM
@Matchesz - No. Tesla employees in factories. The guy he banned on X was a regular person who tracked private jets.
Ryguy88
Ryguy88 - 2/8/2024, 6:25 PM
@SonOfAGif - the guy was tracking jets flying his kids around. [frick] that guy.
Ryguy88
Ryguy88 - 2/8/2024, 6:27 PM
@lazlodaytona - yeah but that's (D)ifferent
SonOfAGif
SonOfAGif - 2/8/2024, 10:17 PM
@Ryguy88 - So commercial flights with kids are fair game but flights with celebrities and politicians trying to hide from the FAA are off limits right?
Ryguy88
Ryguy88 - 2/9/2024, 7:56 AM
@SonOfAGif - any kind of targeted doxing of children is not okay
UncleHarm1
UncleHarm1 - 2/9/2024, 9:50 AM
@Nightwing1015 - Most of the people writing the first amendment owned slaves bro. If they were free to say whatever they want on Twitter they would be rambling about secession just like all the racist idiots on there now complaining about censorship. Freedom of speech does not cover hate speech or inciting violence, especially for companies who are trying not to lose all their business by catering to a loud, obnoxious minority like white supremacists and whatever Gina Carano is doing.
Nightwing1015
Nightwing1015 - 2/9/2024, 1:24 PM
@UncleHarm1 - Almost no advocates of freedom of speech argue that inciting violence or criminal speech should be allowed. But they do object to the extremely vague term 'hate speech' which can be interpreted in a vast number of different ways. The idea that only extremists or white supremacists are in favour of such things being on the internet is ridiculous - you advocate for a platform that allows the widest possible range of speech without yourself agreeing with those sentiments.
UncleHarm1
UncleHarm1 - 2/10/2024, 2:59 PM
@Nightwing1015 - Comparing being a rich republican to being Jewish during the holocaust makes the holocaust seem trivial. Even the fact that she's allowed to speak up about her beliefs means she has infinitely more rights than a Jewish person in the holocaust. That's either hateful or ignorant, and either way offended a lot of people, but she was allowed to say it. Being fired was a result of her offending people and that's legal too. Nobody wants to work with an idiot. Supporting her right to say such things is advocating for free speech, good job. But that makes you complicit in hurtful idiocy.
Nightwing1015
Nightwing1015 - 2/10/2024, 4:53 PM
@UncleHarm1 - Yeah I wasn't really defending Gina here, it's an inappropriate comparison. She was trying to say something about dehumanising political enemies and picked the worst example that's way too far.

I never said she shouldn't be fired, Disney are at liberty to fire whoever they want if they think they're getting too heated/political, stiring up controversy etc.

"Supporting her right to say such things is advocating for free speech, good job. But that makes you complicit in hurtful idiocy."

That's absolute nonsense. If you think that defending somebody's right to say something is tantamount to endorsing the viewpoint, that's completely nonsensical not to mention antithetical to any kind of functioning democracy.
Evansly
Evansly - 2/8/2024, 8:35 AM
Wow an article about how he had nothing to say
lazlodaytona
lazlodaytona - 2/8/2024, 9:34 AM
@Evansly - nothing concrete is this site's m.o.
Even one of their writers, about a few weeks ago, said "we've gotta come up with content" and posted it on a thread....that was about rumors.
HashTagSwagg
HashTagSwagg - 2/8/2024, 9:55 AM
@Evansly - Basically this
Gabimaru
Gabimaru - 2/8/2024, 8:39 AM
Now this is peak article Josh 2.0
ProudPatriot76
ProudPatriot76 - 2/8/2024, 8:40 AM
This will be settled out of court and we’ll never hear about it again. Disney will do whatever it takes to save face.
Itwasme
Itwasme - 2/8/2024, 8:46 AM
@ProudPatriot76 - if that were true wouldn't they want it to play all the way out? There's no real case here.

Most likely scenario is the case gets thrown out by a judge.
Origame
Origame - 2/8/2024, 8:46 AM
@ProudPatriot76 - assuming they'll agree to a settlement.

Which I doubt since musk is involved and he's openly against iger and disney.
ProudPatriot76
ProudPatriot76 - 2/8/2024, 8:58 AM
@Itwasme - I truly believe there is a case. I’m no lawyer, but clearly she was discriminated against. Her co-star was able to keep his job after spouting off his comments.

It’s also no secret that Christians and Conservatives are targeted (by some) in entertainment. She’s proof
ProudPatriot76
ProudPatriot76 - 2/8/2024, 8:59 AM
@Origame - if I had to guess, she’s using his lawyers! Definitely hope Musk is in this for the right reasons
Origame
Origame - 2/8/2024, 9:04 AM
@ProudPatriot76 - really sounds like he is on a crusade for free speech. Hence buying Twitter and helping people "unjustly fired" for liking or posting something online.

He's also apparently planning to buy disney. So in general this isn't gonna just stop.
Itwasme
Itwasme - 2/8/2024, 9:14 AM
@ProudPatriot76 - her costar likely got the same treatment she did. She was asked to chill and didn't. Pascal was likely asked to chill and did. Plus given they are both Cristian she can't claim it was religious. The only other protected class would be that she's a woman, but that clearly wasn't a factor. So there is no case. This is about clicks.
lazlodaytona
lazlodaytona - 2/8/2024, 9:37 AM
@ProudPatriot76 - agreed. she'll get some money but that's pocket-change to Disney.
Her motive, at least hopefully, is to put a stain on the "invincible" disney product.
1 2 3 4

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.

View Recorder