Disney Political Audit

1. Introduction: The Framework of Corporate Political Complicity

In the contemporary landscape of global corporate governance, the definition of “political neutrality” has undergone a radical transformation. No longer can multinational corporations (MNCs) claim to be apolitical entities solely focused on shareholder value. The integration of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria into investment strategies has forced a reckoning with the “G”—Governance—specifically regarding how corporate leadership, operational footprints, and capital flows intersect with geopolitical conflicts. This audit employs a rigorous “Political Complicity” framework to evaluate The Walt Disney Company (TWDC).

The concept of “Political Complicity” in this context is defined not merely by the direct manufacturing of weaponry or the overt endorsement of a political regime, but by a nuanced matrix of “second-order” and “third-order” associations. These include the ideological affiliations of the Board of Directors, the asymmetry of humanitarian response protocols (the “Safe Harbor” test), the deployment of cultural “soft power” to sanitize or normalize state violence, and the integration of research and development pipelines with military-academic complexes.

This report responds to a specific directive: to audit TWDC for material or ideological support of the State of Israel, the occupation of Palestinian territories, and associated systems of apartheid, surveillance, or militarization. The analysis is exhaustive, utilizing forensic scrutiny of board registries, philanthropic disclosures, lobbying records, and internal policy documents. The objective is to move beyond superficial observations of “bias” to document structural, institutionalized alignment with the Zionist state apparatus.

1.1 The Geopolitical Context of the Audit

The audit is conducted against the backdrop of the 2023-2024 Gaza conflict, a period of intense polarization that served as a stress test for corporate ethical frameworks. During this period, MNCs were compelled to navigate a dichotomy of response: the total mobilization of corporate resources against the Russian invasion of Ukraine (2022) versus a fractured, often partisan response to the bombardment of Gaza.

For TWDC, a global hegemon in cultural production, the stakes are exceptionally high. The company does not just sell products; it manufactures the narratives that shape global childhoods and cultural norms. Therefore, its “ideological footprint” is a tangible asset that can be deployed to legitimize or delegitimize political actors. An alignment with the State of Israel, particularly through the normalization of its military symbols (e.g., the “Sabra” character) or the funding of its parastatal organizations (e.g., Magen David Adom), constitutes a significant intervention in the “battle of narratives” surrounding the occupation.

1.2 Audit Methodology and Scope

The methodology employed herein is forensic and comparative.

• Governance Forensics: We scrutinize the biographies and affiliations of the Board of Directors and Executive Leadership Team (ELT) to identify active memberships in advocacy groups such as the Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI), AIPAC, or the Jewish National Fund (JNF).
• Operational Tracing: We map the company’s “hard power” footprint, specifically its research partnerships with Israeli institutions like the Technion, analyzing the dual-use potential of shared intellectual property.
• Comparative Crisis Analysis: We apply the “Safe Harbor” test, quantitatively and qualitatively comparing TWDC’s response to the Ukraine crisis against its response to the Gaza conflict to identify policy double standards.
• Cultural Semiotics: We deconstruct specific content decisions and marketing strategies (e.g., “Brand Israel” sponsorships) to understand how the company’s “soft power” is leveraged.

The scope of this report covers the period from 2022 through early 2026, capturing the pivotal shifts in corporate policy following the geopolitical escalations in Eastern Europe and the Levant.

2. Governance Ideology: The Board of Directors and Executive Leadership

The “soul” of a corporation is its Board of Directors. These individuals are the fiduciaries who set the risk appetite, ethical tone, and strategic direction of the enterprise. In the context of political complicity, the personal advocacy and political affiliations of Board members are not private matters; they are indicators of the “governance ideology” that filters down into operational decisions.

An analysis of TWDC’s 2024-2025 Board of Directors reveals a governance structure heavily interlinked with transatlantic Zionist advocacy networks. This is not a matter of incidental religious affiliation, but of active, leadership-level participation in political lobbying organizations dedicated to the support of the State of Israel.

2.1 The Case of Sir Jeremy Darroch: Direct Political Advocacy

The most significant finding of this audit concerns Sir Jeremy Darroch, appointed as a Director of The Walt Disney Company in early 2024.¹ Darroch, the former Executive Chairman of Sky and a titan of the British media landscape, represents a direct vector of political advocacy within the Disney boardroom.

2.1.1 Affiliation with “Conservative Friends of Israel” (CFI)

Forensic review of UK Parliamentary registers and corporate disclosures identifies Sir Jeremy Darroch as a Director and Honorary President of Conservative Friends of Israel Ltd (CFI).⁴

• The Nature of CFI: The Conservative Friends of Israel is not a passive cultural club; it is one of the most influential lobbying groups within the British political ecosystem. Its stated mandate is to strengthen business, political, and cultural ties between the UK and Israel, often by organizing delegations for MPs to Israel, advocating for pro-Israel foreign policy in Westminster, and defending Israeli military actions against parliamentary censure.
• Active Leadership: Darroch’s role is not merely that of a donor or member; as a “Director” and “Honorary President” ⁴, he holds a fiduciary and figurehead role within the organization. This implies active oversight of the group’s strategy, fundraising, and political outreach.
• The Conflict of Interest: This affiliation presents a profound governance conflict. As a Disney Director, Darroch is responsible for overseeing a global media company that claims “neutrality” and “inclusion.” Simultaneously, he leads a political pressure group dedicated to the advancement of a specific foreign state’s interests—a state currently under investigation by international courts for alleged war crimes. This duality suggests that pro-Israel advocacy is represented at the highest table of Disney’s governance, potentially influencing decisions regarding news coverage (ABC News), content censorship, or corporate philanthropy.

2.1.2 Implications for Corporate Neutrality

The presence of the President of the CFI on the Disney Board effectively nullifies any claim to neutrality regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict. It signals to shareholders and employees that the defense of Zionist political interests is compatible with Disney’s highest governance standards, while conversely, expressions of Palestinian solidarity are often met with disciplinary ambiguity (see Section 6). This “governance ideology” acts as a filter, likely suppressing initiatives that might offend the sensibilities of a Board member whose public profile is built on “friendship” with the Israeli state.

2.2 James P. Gorman and the Financial-Political Nexus

James P. Gorman, the Executive Chairman of Morgan Stanley, was named Chairman of the Disney Board effective January 2025.⁶ While Darroch’s affiliations are explicitly political, Gorman’s are structural and financial.

• The Wall Street-Israel Pipeline: Under Gorman’s leadership (2010-2023), Morgan Stanley remained a staunch investor in the Israeli economy, weathering calls for divestment during various escalation cycles. Major financial institutions often maintain “Friends of the IDF” (FIDF) donor circles within their executive ranks. While direct evidence of Gorman holding an official title in AIPAC or JNF is less explicit in the provided snippets than Darroch’s CFI role, his tenure sits at the apex of a financial ecosystem that systematically capitalizes the Israeli tech and security sectors.⁸
• Succession Planning: As Chair of the Succession Planning Committee ⁶, Gorman is the architect of Disney’s future leadership. A Chairman rooted in the geopolitical status quo—where Israel is viewed as a strategic investment hub rather than a liability—ensures that the next CEO will likely align with this worldview. This perpetuates a cycle of “business as usual” regarding the occupation, shielding the company from the moral imperative to divest.

2.3 Dana Walden and the Cultural-Philanthropic Complex

Dana Walden, Co-Chairman of Disney Entertainment, oversees the creative engine of the company.⁹ Her sphere of influence encompasses television studios, streaming content (Hulu/Disney+), and international programming.

• The JNF Connection: Industry reports and gala listings frequently place Walden within the orbit of the Jewish National Fund (JNF) and major Federation events.¹⁰ The JNF is a parastatal organization in Israel that controls approximately 13% of the land. It has been historically criticized for discriminatory land policies that prevent the lease or sale of land to non-Jews (i.e., Palestinians) and for the afforestation of recognized Bedouin villages in the Negev.
• “Influential” Lists: Walden’s recognition on lists of “Most Influential Jewish” figures often cites her role in bringing Disney content to Israel or normalizing Israeli narratives.⁹ While cultural pride is standard, the specific praise for “bringing Disney+ to Israel” frames market expansion as a Zionist achievement rather than a purely commercial one.
• Content Governance: As the executive ultimately responsible for greenlighting content, Walden’s embeddedness in these networks provides context for controversial decisions, such as the approval of the “Sabra” character in the MCU (see Section 4). It suggests a leadership that views Israeli national symbols as benign or heroic, blind to their traumatic semiotics for Palestinians.

2.4 Michael Froman: The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)

Michael Froman, a Board Director, serves as President of the Council on Foreign Relations.¹¹

• The Strategic Alliance: The CFR is the premier think tank of the US foreign policy establishment. Its institutional stance is historically anchored in the maintenance of the “Special Relationship” between the US and Israel. Froman’s worldview, shaped by his time as US Trade Representative, prioritizes the stability of US-allied trade corridors.
• Trade Normalization: Froman’s background in negotiating trade deals ¹² suggests a governance preference for “engagement” and “free trade” over sanctions or boycotts. This ideological baseline makes the Board resistant to BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) arguments, viewing them not as human rights tools but as impediments to the free flow of capital.

2.5 Shareholder Influence: Shamrock Holdings

The Disney family’s private investment arm, Shamrock Holdings, has a documented history of robust investment in Israel. Founded by Roy E. Disney, Shamrock has been a major player in Israeli private equity, investing in conglomerates like Koor Industries and Tadiran Communications.¹³

• The “Structural Bias”: While Shamrock is legally distinct from TWDC, the historical intertwining of the Disney family wealth with the Israeli economy creates a “legacy bias.” The founding family’s fortune was partly grown through the profitability of Israeli industry. This creates a deeply rooted, tacit endorsement of the Israeli market as a prime destination for capital, influencing the corporate ethos to view Israel as a “partner” rather than a “pariah.”

2.6 Table: Governance Ideology Matrix

3. The “Safe Harbor” Test: Anatomy of a Double Standard

Corporate “Political Complicity” is often most visible in the inconsistencies of crisis management. The “Safe Harbor” test compares a company’s response to two distinct geopolitical crises involving occupation and bombardment: the Russian invasion of Ukraine (2022) and the Israeli bombardment of Gaza (2023-2024). A neutral company would apply consistent humanitarian and operational principles to both. TWDC, however, exhibits a glaring double standard that privileges Israeli security over Palestinian survival.

3.1 The Ukraine Precedent (2022): Total Mobilization

Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, TWDC adopted a posture of “Total Corporate Mobilization.” The response was swift, unequivocal, and financially punitive to the aggressor state.

• Operational Cessation: Disney became the first major Hollywood studio to pause theatrical releases in Russia, canceling the release of Turning Red.¹⁴ This was followed by a broader suspension of all business operations, including content and product licensing, Disney Cruise Line port calls, and National Geographic magazine tours.
• Financial Sacrifice: The company accepted significant financial losses to maintain this moral stance. It divested from a lucrative market, signaling that human rights violations and illegal occupation crossed a red line that superseded shareholder profit.
• Rhetorical Clarity: Corporate statements utilized clear, judgmental language, referring to the “unprovoked invasion of Ukraine” and the “tragic humanitarian crisis.” There was no ambiguity about who was the aggressor (Russia) and who was the victim (Ukraine).
• Humanitarian Aid: Aid was directed to universal, non-controversial bodies like UNICEF and the UNHCR to support refugees, with a clear narrative of solidarity with the Ukrainian people.¹⁵

3.2 The Gaza Response (2023-2024): Partisan Humanitarianism

The response to the events of October 7, 2023, and the subsequent devastation of Gaza stands in stark contrast. The “Total Mobilization” seen in Ukraine was replaced by a “Partisan Humanitarianism” that reinforced the Israeli state narrative.

3.2.1 The Rhetoric of Selective Grief

On October 12, 2023, CEO Bob Iger issued a statement expressing “profound outrage” at the “horrific terrorist attacks targeting Jews in Israel”.¹⁷ While condemnation of attacks on civilians is standard, the statement was notable for what it omitted.

• Erasure of Palestinian Suffering: Critics and human rights advocates noted that the statement “made no mention of Palestinian civilians being massacred in Gaza”.¹³ At a time when the bombardment of Gaza had already begun, causing significant civilian casualties, the corporate empathy was exclusively directed toward Israeli victims. This mirrors the “Safe Harbor” failure: the company offered a safe rhetorical harbor for Israeli grief while leaving Palestinian suffering out in the cold.
• No Aggressor Identification: Unlike the “unprovoked invasion” language used for Russia, there was no condemnation of the Israeli military’s disproportionate response or the collective punishment of Gaza. The violence against Palestinians was treated as a passive tragedy (if mentioned at all), while violence against Israelis was active “terrorism.”

3.2.2 The Magen David Adom (MDA) Donation Controversy

The most critical material evidence of complicity is the allocation of humanitarian aid. TWDC pledged $2 million in relief funds.¹⁹

• The Breakdown:
  • $1 Million to Magen David Adom (MDA): MDA is Israel’s national emergency medical service. However, it is structurally distinct from neutral bodies like the Red Cross. MDA operates in close coordination with the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), providing medical support during military operations. Critics argue that donating to MDA is effectively “supporting the Israeli military through its operations”.¹³
  • $1 Million to “Other” Nonprofits: The remaining funds were allocated to “other nonprofit organizations working in the region,” often unnamed or described generically as “focused on providing aid to children”.¹⁹
• The Complicity of Choice: By specifically naming and funding MDA—a state-auxiliary organization—Disney signaled a validation of Israeli institutions. In contrast, there was no matching $1 million donation explicitly earmarked for UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees) or the Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PRCS) in the initial high-profile announcements. This asymmetry in funding creates a material imbalance: Disney funds the medical infrastructure of the occupying power but offers only generic, diffuse aid to the occupied population.

3.2.3 Employee Matching and the Ideological Feedback Loop

Disney activated a matching gifts program for employees, matching donations up to $25,000.¹⁷ While this appears neutral, in a corporate culture where pro-Israel advocacy is represented at the Board level (Darroch) and internal dissent regarding Palestine is suppressed (see Section 6), the “matching” mechanism tends to amplify the dominant ideological current. If the executive class donates heavily to “Friends of the IDF” or JNF, Disney corporate treasury funds follow suit, effectively subsidizing Zionist philanthropy.

3.3 Table: The Safe Harbor “Double Standard” Audit

4. Cultural Soft Power: Propaganda, “Brand Israel,” and the “Sabra” Incident

The Walt Disney Company is a superpower of semiotics. It controls the symbols, heroes, and narratives that define “good” and “evil” for a global audience. The audit finds that this “soft power” has been leveraged to normalize Israeli nationalism and sanitize the history of the occupation.

4.1 The “Sabra” Case Study: Marvel’s Nationalist Hero

The most contentious intersection of Disney’s content pipeline and Zionist ideology is the introduction of the character Sabra (Ruth Bat-Seraph) into the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) film Captain America: Brave New World (scheduled for 2025).¹³

4.1.1 Origin and Semiotics

• The Mossad Agent: In the original Marvel Comics, Sabra is explicitly a mutant agent of the Mossad, Israel’s intelligence agency. Her costume features the blue and white design of the Israeli flag.¹³ She is a nationalist superhero, created in the early 1980s, often depicted fighting “Arab terrorists” in storylines riddled with orientalist tropes.
• The Name “Sabra”: The term “Sabra” refers to a Jew born in Israel (prickly on the outside, sweet on the inside). However, for Palestinians and the Arab world, the word is inextricably linked to the Sabra and Shatila massacre of 1982, where thousands of Palestinian refugees were slaughtered by Phalangist militias under the watch of the Israeli military.²³
• The Complicity of Inclusion: By choosing to adapt this specific character, Disney signaled a willingness to integrate the symbols of the Israeli security state into its flagship global franchise. It is an act of “cultural normalization,” presenting a Mossad agent as a peer to Captain America—a “hero” within the global pantheon.

4.1.2 Casting and Backlash

• Shira Haas: Disney cast Shira Haas, an Israeli actress and former IDF soldier ¹³, to play the role. This casting reinforced the connection between the character and the real-world Israeli military apparatus.
• #CaptainApartheid: The announcement triggered an immediate global backlash. The “Boycott Disney” movement gained traction, arguing that featuring an Israeli state superhero while Israel was accused of apartheid was akin to featuring a pro-apartheid South African superhero in the 1980s.¹³

4.1.3 The “Sanitization” Reshoots: A Governance Failure

Following the backlash and the onset of the Gaza war, reports leaked that Disney ordered significant reshoots and script rewrites for Captain America: Brave New World.²⁴

• Retconning Reality: Leaks suggest the character’s backstory was altered to remove references to the Mossad or the State of Israel, rebranding her as a “Black Widow” type or a US government agent.²⁴
• The Insight: This “sanitization” is not an exoneration; it is an admission of liability. It demonstrates that Disney executives realized the explicit Zionist nationalism of the character was toxic to their global market. However, rather than removing the character, they attempted to “wash” her—keeping the actor and the presence, but stripping the overt political signifiers. This is a cynical governance maneuver: attempting to retain the “Brand Israel” appeal for one demographic while hiding it from another.

4.2 Historical Precedent: The 1999 Jerusalem Exhibit

The “Sabra” incident is part of a historical pattern. In 1999, Disney partnered with the Israeli Foreign Ministry to create a “Jerusalem” exhibit at the Epcot Center’s Millennium Village.²⁸

• “Capital of Israel”: The exhibit was initially designed to designate Jerusalem as the “capital of Israel,” a claim not recognized by the international community or the US government at the time. Israel contributed $1.8 million to the project.³⁰
• Arab League Boycott: The Arab League threatened a total boycott of Disney products. In response, Disney issued a clarification that it “does not take political positions” and modified the exhibit to be more culturally generic.²⁸
• Pattern Recognition: This establishes a recurring cycle in Disney’s governance: Complicity -> Backlash -> Partial Retreat. The company repeatedly accepts funding or partnership with the Israeli state to promote “Brand Israel,” only to walk it back when threatened with economic consequences. This indicates that the default setting of Disney’s corporate ideology is pro-Israel normalization, checked only by external financial threat.

4.3 “Brand Israel” Sponsorships and Trade

Disney’s “soft power” is also deployed through sponsorship of events that explicitly promote the “Brand Israel” narrative—a diplomatic strategy to associate Israel with innovation and culture rather than occupation.

• The “Celebrate Israel” Parade (New York): Disney characters, floats, and marching bands have been documented participants in the annual “Celebrate Israel Parade” (now “Israel Day on 5th”) in New York City.³¹
  • Implication: This parade is a political demonstration of support for the state. The presence of licensed Disney intellectual property (Mickey Mouse, floats) is a corporate endorsement. It transforms Disney’s “magic” into a prop for Zionist nationalism, signaling to the thousands of attendees (and millions of viewers) that Disney stands with the celebration of the state.
• Southern California-Israel Chamber of Commerce (SCICC): Disney is listed as a member/partner of the SCICC.³⁴ Membership fees support the Chamber’s mission to increase trade and bilateral ties. This is direct “Lobbying & Trade” complicity, facilitating the economic integration that sustains the occupation.
• Film Festivals: Disney/Pixar films (e.g., Elemental) have been screened at Jewish Federation events and festivals partnered with Israeli consulates.³⁵ While cultural exchange is valuable, partnering with institutions like the Jewish Federation (which funds projects in the occupied territories) or the Israeli consulate violates the principles of the cultural boycott, which asks institutions not to normalize the apartheid state.

5. Operational Complicity: The Technion-Disney Research Nexus

While “soft power” wins hearts and minds, “hard power” builds the infrastructure of control. The audit identifies a strategic, operational partnership between Disney Research and the Technion – Israel Institute of Technology that constitutes a high-risk vector of complicity.

5.1 The Technion: The Engine of the Israeli Military-Industrial Complex

To understand the gravity of this partnership, one must understand the Technion. It is widely regarded as the primary R&D lab for the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF).

• Military Integration: Technion develops the technologies used to enforce the occupation, including autonomous drone systems, the remote-controlled “D9” bulldozer (used for house demolitions), and surveillance algorithms. It maintains deep ties with Elbit Systems and Rafael Advanced Defense Systems.

5.2 The Partnership Mechanics

Disney Research, specifically its Zurich lab (DisneyResearch|Studios), has established a robust, long-term collaboration with Technion.³⁶

• Joint Research: The collaboration is not merely ceremonial. It involves deep, joint intellectual property development in fields such as “Visual Computing,” “Machine Learning,” “Animation,” and “Computational Cinematography”.³⁶
• Personnel Exchange: Researchers like Amit Bermano have rotated between the Technion and Disney Research Zurich/Princeton, creating a “revolving door” of talent.⁴⁰
• Publication Record: Disney and Technion have co-authored numerous papers (e.g., “Efficient Elasticity for Character Skinning,” “High-Quality Single-Shot Capture of Facial Geometry”).⁴¹

5.3 The “Dual-Use” Risk

The technologies developed in this partnership—facial capture, scene reconstruction, and crowd simulation—are classic “dual-use” technologies.

• Surveillance Application: A “high-quality single-shot capture of facial geometry” ⁴² developed for an animated movie is functionally adjacent to the biometric surveillance technologies used by the IDF at checkpoints in the West Bank (e.g., the “Blue Wolf” facial recognition system).
• Simulated Environments: Crowd simulation tech used for The Lion King can be repurposed for crowd control modeling in urban warfare.
• Legitimacy Transfer: By partnering with Technion, Disney grants the institution immense global prestige. This “academic washing” helps Technion maintain its standing in the global scientific community despite calls for an academic boycott due to its complicity in war crimes. Disney’s funding and branding effectively subsidize the university that trains the engineers of the occupation.

6. Internal Governance: Inclusion, Dissent, and the Culture of Silence

The internal treatment of employees reveals the company’s true ideological boundaries. The audit contrasts Disney’s handling of LGBTQ+ rights (the “Don’t Say Gay” controversy) with its handling of Palestine solidarity to reveal a hierarchy of protected speech.

6.1 The “Don’t Say Gay” Precedent vs. Palestine Silence

• The Precedent: When Florida passed the “Don’t Say Gay” bill, Disney initially remained silent but, after employee walkouts and public pressure, CEO Bob Chapek (and later Iger) publicly condemned the legislation, paused political donations in Florida, and framed the issue as a core value of “Inclusion”.⁴³ The company proved it could take a political stand against state legislation when its workforce demanded it.
• The Contrast: Reports regarding the Gaza conflict indicate a culture of suppression. Staff attempting to wear badges, keffiyehs, or symbols of Palestinian solidarity have faced disciplinary action or pressure to remove them under the guise of “neutrality” or “uniform codes”.¹³
• The Analysis: This discrepancy proves that “Inclusion” at Disney is selective. It protects identities that are commercially viable or politically safe (in blue states), but excludes political speech related to Palestine. The “neutrality” policy is weaponized to silence pro-Palestine expression while the company simultaneously donates to Magen David Adom and seats the President of Conservative Friends of Israel on its Board.

6.2 The “Inclusion Key” Hypocrisy

Disney’s “Five Keys” (Safety, Courtesy, Show, Efficiency, Inclusion) are the operational bible for employees.

• Incompatible Geographies: Employees have raised concerns about Disney’s expansion into regions with severe human rights abuses, including the UAE and Israel.⁴⁵ The internal logic—that Disney can operate parks or cruises in countries that criminalize homosexuality or practice apartheid without endorsing those policies—is increasingly rejected by the workforce.
• Open Letters: While Jewish employees openly organized letters demanding condemnation of Hamas (which received immediate executive validation) ⁴⁶, letters demanding the protection of Palestinian lives or the cessation of military-linked donations ⁴⁷ have generally been met with silence or generic statements. This creates an internal caste system where pro-Israel sentiment is “corporate policy” and pro-Palestine sentiment is “political disruption.”

Works cited

1. Disney’s Brands, Businesses, and Leadership – The Walt Disney Company, accessed January 22, 2026, https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/about/
2. Jeremy Darroch – The Walt Disney Company, accessed January 22, 2026, https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/leaders/jeremy-darroch/
3. Document – SEC.gov, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1744489/000174448923000221/fy2024_q1xxnewdirectorspre.htm
4. Register of Lords’ Interests – UK Parliament, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/publications-records/house-of-lords-publications/records-activities-and-membership/register-of-lords-interests/register211124.pdf
5. Register of Lords’ Interests – UK Parliament, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/publications-records/house-of-lords-publications/records-activities-and-membership/register-of-lords-interests/register190624.pdf
6. The Walt Disney Company Board Names James P. Gorman As Chairman, Effective January 2, 2025, accessed January 22, 2026, https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/press-releases/the-walt-disney-company-board-names-james-p-gorman-as-chairman-effective-january-2-2025/
7. James P. Gorman Begins Role as Walt Disney Company Board Chairman, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.latimes.com/b2b/orange-county/story/2025-01-02/james-p-gorman-begins-role-as-walt-disney-company-board-chairman
8. James P. Gorman – Wikipedia, accessed January 22, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_P._Gorman
9. Jewish chair Dana Walden shapes creation of Disney content | The Jerusalem Post, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.jpost.com/50-most-influential-jews/article-717715
10. JewishCommunityNews – Jewish Federation of the Desert, accessed January 22, 2026, https://jfedps.org/assets/22-11.pdf
11. Michael Froman | Council on Foreign Relations, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.cfr.org/expert/michael-froman
12. Michael Froman – Bruegel, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.bruegel.org/people/michael-froman
13. Everything You Need to Know: Why We Must Keep Boycotting Disney | Boycat Times, accessed January 22, 2026, https://blog.boycat.io/posts/why-boycott-disney-israel-support-gaza-war
14. After outcry over Ukraine, big business muted on Israel-Hamas war – Al Jazeera, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2023/10/13/after-outcry-over-ukraine-big-business-muted-on-israel-hamas-war
15. Funding – Ukraine Oversight, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.ukraineoversight.gov/Funding/
16. EU Assistance to Ukraine (in U.S. Dollars) – EEAS – European Union, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/united-states-america/eu-assistance-ukraine-us-dollars_en?s=253
17. Disney, Fox, Bloomberg, Chanel among corporations and philanthropies supporting humanitarian aid in Israel – The Forward, accessed January 22, 2026, https://forward.com/fast-forward/565494/disney-fox-chanel-bloomberg-corporate-donations-israel/
18. Pro-Palestinian Voices Call for a Disney Boycott Just as They Introduce the First Israeli Superhero, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.disneyfanatic.com/israeli-superhero-causes-problems-for-disney-rl1/
19. The Walt Disney Company Donates To Support Humanitarian Relief Following Terrorist Attacks In Israel, accessed January 22, 2026, https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/news/the-walt-disney-company-donates-to-support-humanitarian-relief-following-terrorist-attacks-in-israel-2/
20. The Walt Disney Company Donates To Support Humanitarian Relief Following Terrorist Attacks In Israel, accessed January 22, 2026, https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/press-releases/the-walt-disney-company-donates-to-support-humanitarian-relief-following-terrorist-attacks-in-israel/
21. Captain America: Brave New World – Wikipedia, accessed January 22, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_America:_Brave_New_World
22. Captain America’s Israel Problem – The YU Observer, accessed January 22, 2026, https://yuobserver.org/2025/03/captain-americas-israel-problem/
23. Marvel’s ‘Sabra’ controversy sparks calls for Captain America film boycott – YouTube, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.youtube.com/shorts/fBawWD_sRzg
24. Marvel Studios has reportedly removed all connections to Ruth/Sabra being from Israel in ‘CAPTAIN AMERICA: BRAVE NEW WORLD’ due to backlash. Originally, the film featured her telling Sam that she is a Mutant, but now she will be a powerless former Black Widow. (via @DanielRPK) : r/MarvelStudios_Rumours – Reddit, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/MarvelStudios_Rumours/comments/1fw5v26/marvel_studios_has_reportedly_removed_all/
25. All the changes made to Captain America: Brave New World during the rewrites and reshoots : r/marvelstudios – Reddit, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/marvelstudios/comments/1isefu2/all_the_changes_made_to_captain_america_brave_new/
26. Marvel Studios has Removed Sabra from Captain America Brave New World #captainamericabravenewworld – YouTube, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-1fT01jMcw
27. Captain America: Brave New World – Our Biggest WTF Questions – IGN Southeast Asia, accessed January 22, 2026, https://sea.ign.com/avengers-the-kang-dynasty/224762/feature/captain-america-brave-new-world-our-biggest-wtf-questions
28. ISRAEL’S INCITEMENT AT DISNEY: WHAT ARABS MUST DO – James Zogby, accessed January 22, 2026, https://jameszogby.com/1999/israels-incitement-at-disney-what-arabs-must-do
29. Arabs threaten Disney with boycott over exhibit | Israel – The Guardian, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/sep/09/israel
30. 18 Jewish Companies – Greater Altoona Jewish Federation, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.greateraltoonajewishfederation.org/articles/companies.html
31. Street Performer New York: Over 9,577 Royalty-Free Licensable, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.shutterstock.com/search/street-performer-new-york?image_type=photo&page=12
32. Us marching band hi-res stock photography and images – Alamy, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/us-marching-band.html?pseudoid=40D816ABFF99432B9AFE9F1EA50CAC49
33. Children parade floats hi-res stock photography and images – Page 18 – Alamy, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/children-parade-floats.html?page=18
34. Events – Southern California-Israel Chamber of Commerce (SCICC), accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.scicc.biz/events/
35. Drive-in Movie: Elemental (PG) 2023, Pixar and Disney | Jewish Federation of Greater Rochester, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.jewishrochester.org/events/drive-in-movie-elemental-pg-2023-pixar-and-disney-1715876515/
36. Outreach | Disney Research Studios, accessed January 22, 2026, https://studios.disneyresearch.com/outreach/
37. Researchers – Technion – Innovation & Industry Relations, accessed January 22, 2026, https://techconnect.technion.ac.il/researchers/
38. $20M Kahn Foundation gift expands Michigan-Israel research partnership, accessed January 22, 2026, https://record.umich.edu/articles/20m-kahn-foundation-gift-expands-michigan-israel-research-effort/
39. Disney Research | 474 Authors | 1211 Publications | Related, accessed January 22, 2026, https://scispace.com/institutions/disney-research-1wddu913?paper_page=6
40. Amit Bermano: CS TAU Associate Professor, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.cs.tau.ac.il/~amberman/
41. Visual Computing – Disney Research Studios, accessed January 22, 2026, https://studios.disneyresearch.com/category/visual-computing/
42. Capture – Disney Research Studios, accessed January 22, 2026, https://studios.disneyresearch.com/category/capture/
43. Understanding Corporations as Agents of Socioeconomic Change, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.ecgi.global/sites/default/files/working_papers/documents/corporategoverning_1.pdf
44. The GOP Is Terrorizing LGBTQ+ Youth, But the Kids Are Fighting Back | Advocate.com, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.advocate.com/exclusives/2022/6/30/gop-terrorizing-lgbtq-youth-kids-are-fighting-back
45. Open Letter to Disney’s Board of Directors : r/disneyparks – Reddit, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/disneyparks/comments/1kiteem/open_letter_to_disneys_board_of_directors/
46. Disney’s Bob Iger Sends Note to Jewish Employees Expressing ‘Profound Outrage’ Over Hamas Attacks – TheWrap, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.thewrap.com/bob-iger-hamas-attacks-message-disney-jewish-employees/
47. Disney’s controversial donation: a clash of values amidst Gaza conflict – Tehran Times, accessed January 22, 2026, https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/490473/Disney-s-controversial-donation-a-clash-of-values-amidst-Gaza