zlacker

>>GavCo+(OP)
I'd be interested in hearing the most credible/reputable sources speaking out in favor of these changes. I've exclusively seen commentators dunking on this (rightfully so), across the political spectrum. To be clear: I'm wondering if we can find specific people speaking up for this, not an analysis of whose side of the culture war is most culpable for it.

>>tptace+aH
The most cogent analysis I've seen is that the changes were made by the owners of the books in order to sell more books.

>>mcguir+aT
From the article:

> The Dahl estate owned the rights to the books until 2021, when Netflix bought them outright for a reported $686 million, building on an earlier rights deal. The American streaming service now has overall control over the book publishing, as well as various adaptation projects that are in the works.

I suspect they're hoping netflix will make movies based on his books. Netflix seems pretty sensitive to twitter opinions. They're probably trying to throw a bone to the twitter mob to make it less likely any new movies get "cancelled".

>>joseph+IW
I sympathize with the view of Netflix bowdlerizing to broaden the audience but they're also the platform with Dave Chappelle - which makes it hard to align them with "pretty sensitive to Twitter opinions" since a bunch of people have declared that fellow persona non grata.

>>renewi+bZ
True; but I don't think they paid to have Dave Chappelle produced. They stopped making House of Cards after the sexual harassment thing with Kevin Spacey.

I'm sure they'd rather have less controversy around Dahl's work. And its pretty easy to imagine Dahl's estate making the 'conservative' choice and allowing these edits if there's even a risk of their netflix deal falling apart.