At the end of the day if you refuse to mut coins madden 21 admit when a company creates a little step you love then how do they ever learn how to make a big step you appreciate? You are treating this like a negotiation in which making this concession implies you won't have the bargaining power to earn a larger one in the future. But I don't think that's how this works: EA is testing the waters and learning from their customers whether this is the kind of thing they support or not. Is your lesson you would like them to understand from all that human decency isn't worth appealing to because it doesn't actually affect buying decisions?

I think based on your comment that we're likely to essentially disagree on idealism vs. realism, and that's fine. I find myself normally at the center of realism and idealism since I understand how the world works but I still want a better world; you don't have to pick one or the other. I don't understand why we have to provide corporations a pass just because they aren't people (that Citizens United would disagree with but that's another discussion.) We shouldn't only accept the best we're given by a company, we ought to expect the best we want out of them. Companies are produced from people calling the shots and there are an infinite number of examples of companies that make enormous profits and stand up for good causes. Patagonia is an excellent example. They do not need to create sustainable goods and supply repair and reuse programs to go against fast fashion, but they do and they make a lot of money.

"Everybody must do the right thing" is only naive if you do nothing about it. This instance does not include the many gray topics where opinions have a place; this is literally a discussion of if you need black people to have rights or not. It is not brave of a business to state that black people deserve rights just because they will lose white supremacist customers. It really IS very easy for a company to put out a statement of belief like this, as we have seen from all of the businesses doing so at this time like Amazon and the NFL. I really do not understand how it's difficult to get a multi-million dollar business to give up a tiny fraction of their gains for the larger good. If people who do not like Black Lives Issue make up a majority of a company's customerbase, then maybe they shouldn't have those profits (not claiming EA's playerbase from BLM, this is a hyperbolized example)

Since we have not seen them doing. Back your words up. Sony handled things better than EA by not only having a statement, but heading after All Lives Matter fans in remarks, matching donations by a few workers, claiming they'll have more in the upcoming week, also supposedly forming a studio in San Diego headed by POC programmers. They could have either held the announcement until they had something to reveal, or told us what they are going. Are you currently treating a company like how a parent talks about a child? I really don't understand why it is our responsibility to baby companies into getting empathy. Why is it that they need to"learn" to do good for humanity, why can't they just do it? It is the same as white people putting the responsibility on black people to educate them to not be displaced when there's lots of resources out there on how to perform it.

That said, I really do want to say that I apologize if any of my remark comes off as hostile or assaulting. I appreciate that this discussion a lot even when I think in its end we will still disagree. I would say people fall somewhere between idealism and realism. It simply seems like you and I disagree about the worth of words. I hope that I am not making a strawman out of your argument once I say you see value in making a statement to back it up. That conveys a bit of cheap Mut 21 coins cash if they don't do anything else, whereas when a formal announcement is made by a company I think.