Note your comment states 34 percent disagree, but didn't state how many didn't care one way or the other, or rate the relative likelihood of spending money or refusing to based on the stance.

The snowflake conservatives may be more likely to get offended and boycott. It may be that 50 percent didn't care either way, so the trade off becomes 34 versus 16 percent. I suppose from another comment it seems like their poll returned approximately 1/3rd disliked, 1/3rd wanted, and 1/3rd didn't care. So they can probably have their cake and eat it too by waffling a bit on the issue to have both sides buying up their preferred content to "prove" to Disney the right way to go, even if they boycott the current "wrong" mindset, they may want to spend on their favored content to steer things. But those thirds still don't reflect the nuance of how much they like/dislike to know if liking LGBT inclusion is a "good on them, even though I'm not that personally invested" or more "I will not give them a dime if they don't have inclusion".

Of course they may also be concerned about their place in a potential authoritarian state and aligning themselves is a way to avoid being a target. If after all of the doom and gloom turn out to be wrong and progressives come back in a few years, then they just have to have their logo be rainbow colored for a bit and have a few progressive characters and all will be forgiven.

The majority doesn't approve of more LGBT characters either, it's just Newsweek being intentionally misleading.

In summary, 36 percent disapproved in some form, 34 percent approved, while 31 percent neither approved nor disapproved, or didn't know how they felt.

I'd venture the majority of people prefer a good story. When you shoehorn any elements into a story it distracts the audience. The Star Trek Beyond Lt Sulu scene is a good example it did not provide any character or story development. Many of the star wars shows have similar elements which hurt an all ready damaged story.

It's Newsweek.

Let's be real no threat is needed. If this made them win craploads of money they would be plastering Disney world with transexual parades every second of the day

The fact that they are not doing it says a lot

One of my personal favorites:

• Luke 12:46-48:

46 the master of that slave will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will cut him in pieces, and assign him a place with the unbelievers. 47 And that slave who knew his master’s will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes, 48 but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of [d]a flogging, will receive but few. From everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more.

Jesus sure loved his slaves, huh? Gives you guidelines on how to beat them. Told people to "love your enemies," but clearly people you own don't deserve that courtesy. He hung out with prostitutes, but was never able to disavow the practice of owning other humans as property? Kind of unacceptable imo.

The canonical Bible (the supposed ordained word of god) also include's Paul's further interpretation of Jesus' teachings on slaves in...

• Ephesians 6:5–8:

5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. 6 Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. 7 Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people, 8 because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free.

Oof.