The Scoop: Disney allows lawsuit to go ahead after social media backlash

After days of public backlash, Disney has withdrawn its protest over a wrongful death lawsuit moving forward. 

The company had originally contended that the lawsuit filed by Jeffrey Piccolo – stemming from the 2023 death of his wife after an allergic reaction following a meal at a non-Disney-owned restaurant at one of its parks – should have gone to arbitration. Disney’s contention was Piccolo agreed to that legal approach when he signed up for a free Disney+ trial years ago and did so again when he created an account to purchase the theme park tickets for him and his wife.

After the news of the situation broke, a Disney executive told the Associated Press that the company was just defending itself against a lawsuit.

But that’s not how the social media users perceived it. What resulted was outrage – ranging from news headlines like “Disney wants NYU doctor allergy death suit tossed because of widower’s Disney+ subscription” to a slew of social media posts similar to “Disney villains are real.”

On Monday night, Josh D’Amaro, chairperson of Disney’s theme park division, told the AP his company had changed course and would allow the lawsuit to proceed. 

Why it matters: Disney’s legal team undoubtedly was acting in the best interest of its company when it filed for dismissal of Piccolo’s lawsuit. But given the nature of the situation, the PR team should have been more looped in, it seems, to help think through the approach more clearly.  

On the surface, the initial response caused Disney to appear insensitive to a grieving family. 

“Given that a woman is dead because of a meal at Disney Springs, claiming that a multi-billion company could be harmed by having to go to court is not a way to look like the good guy here,” wrote Inside The Magic, an independent website that writes about Disney news.

Ultimately, Disney came out and said all the right things in its latest statement; it voiced a company-wide commitment to “humanity” and voiced a desire to be “sensitive” to the Piccolo family’s situation as it deals with a “painful loss.” 

Editor’s Top Reads:

• Former President Barack Obama and Michelle Obama headlined night two of the Democratic National Convention, using their primetime speaking slots to draw parallels between presidential nominee Kamala Harris and their own time in the White House. The Obamas sprinkled in the word “hope” – a term that became synonymous with Barack Obama’s successful campaign in 2008 – multiple times Tuesday night, with the former first lady saying “America, hope is making a comeback.” Barack Obama remains popular in Democratic circles and among moderates as well. In the end, the success or failure of the Harris/(Tim) Walz ticket is going to come down to policy, debate preparedness and a general ability to resonate with prospective voters.  She’s only been the Democratic candidate for a month, after all. With less than two and a half months until Election Day, it’s a wise PR move to invoke the Obama name as a way to fire up prospective voters who may still be warming up to Harris. Harris has a big speech Thursday night – made even more important by the abbreviated time since she took the nomination.
• A new report indicates the majority of baby food sold at supermarkets in the United States contain misleading labels and may not be as nutritious as they appear. In total, 60% of 651 foods marketed for children ages 6 months to 36 months failed to meet age-specific nutrition guidelines recommended by the World Health Organization, according to CNN. What’s more, 99.4% of the products contained at least one marketing claim – terms like “non-genetically modified” or “organic” – prohibited by the WHO recommendations for being potentially misleading to shoppers. It’s important to note that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has its own regulations on infant formulas and baby food, and it makes recommendations on food safety and handling. But that perspective isn’t shared in the CNN story other than one line midway through the 1,200-word piece titled “Nearly two-thirds of supermarket baby foods are unhealthy, study finds.” It’s not yet clear if any of the industry associations that represent baby food manufacturers will comment on the story. But it’s another reminder that the marketing and PR teams need to be aware of all messaging, so they’re not caught off guard by a headline like this one.
• A federal judge in Texas has barred a Federal Trade Commission rule from taking effect that would’ve banned non-compete agreements across the country. U.S. District Judge Ada Brown had temporarily blocked the rule in July while considering a request from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and others to strike down the rule. In her decision, Brown noted that FTC doesn’t have the power to ban practices it deems unfair by adopting broad rules, according to Reuters. The rule, which would have gone into effect on Sept. 4, could’ve had major implications for media outlets and PR firms as these two industries have tended to operate with non-competes. The FTC hasn’t ruled out a possible appeal of the situation. It’s time to wait and see.

Casey Weldon is a reporter for PR Daily. Follow him on LinkedIn.