The Walt Disney Company has entered a new era.

On March 18, 2026, Josh D’Amaro officially became Disney’s new chief executive officer, succeeding longtime CEO Bob Iger and taking responsibility for one of the world’s most recognizable entertainment brands. D’Amaro is not an outsider brought in to radically remake the company. He is a longtime Disney executive who joined the company in 1998 and spent much of his career working across its theme parks, resorts, operations and experiences businesses. Before becoming CEO, he served as chairman of Disney Experiences, the division encompassing the company’s parks, resorts, cruises and related consumer businesses. 

His promotion is significant because it places a leader closely associated with Disney’s physical, family-oriented experiences at the center of a company undergoing a much broader transformation.

Disney today is far more than a movie studio.

It is a combination of film and television studios, streaming services, sports networks, theme parks, cruise lines, consumer products, games and enormous intellectual-property franchises. The company’s strength comes from connecting those businesses — turning a movie into a streaming series, a theme-park attraction, merchandise, a game or a cruise experience.

D’Amaro has repeatedly emphasized that interconnectedness.

At Disney’s 2026 annual shareholder meeting, where he officially began his tenure as CEO, he described the company’s next chapter around creativity, innovation and connection. His message emphasized bringing the company’s businesses together and strengthening Disney’s ability to create experiences that audiences can connect with across multiple platforms. 

Reuters likewise reported that D’Amaro entered the job with a focus on a more unified Disney and on accelerating the company’s ability to move intellectual property across movies, television, streaming, parks and other businesses. His background in Disney’s highly profitable Experiences division was an important factor behind his selection. 

But almost immediately, D’Amaro’s leadership became associated with something far less glamorous: layoffs.

In April, Disney announced plans to eliminate approximately 1,000 positions as part of an effort to streamline operations. Reuters reported that D’Amaro informed employees about the cuts in an April 14 message, with many of the affected positions connected to marketing and related corporate functions. 

The scale of the reduction is significant, but the circumstances are more complicated than the viral claim that D’Amaro simply arrived at Disney and “fired 1,000 employees.”

Reuters had already reported before the layoffs were formally announced that Disney was planning to eliminate as many as 1,000 positions, and that the restructuring plans had begun before D’Amaro officially assumed the CEO position in March.

That distinction matters.

D’Amaro inherited many of the problems he is now being asked to solve.

Disney has spent years restructuring itself in response to the disruption caused by the pandemic, the changing economics of television, the enormous cost of building a profitable streaming business and the increasingly competitive entertainment market.

The company has also been trying to make its businesses operate more efficiently after years of organizational complexity.

The new CEO therefore did not walk into an empty room and suddenly decide to start cutting jobs.

He inherited a company already in the middle of a difficult transformation.

Nevertheless, the timing of the layoffs has given the D’Amaro era a clear symbolic beginning.

A new CEO arrived.

A new corporate structure began taking shape.

And approximately 1,000 employees were told that their positions would disappear.

For supporters of D’Amaro, the cuts can be interpreted as evidence that the new CEO is willing to make difficult decisions instead of protecting inefficient structures.

For critics, they raise a different question: Can Disney restore its creative and emotional identity while simultaneously reducing the workforce responsible for creating, marketing and supporting that experience?

That tension will likely define much of D’Amaro’s early tenure.

But the controversy surrounding the new CEO goes beyond jobs.

It also involves something much more emotional: what kind of Disney does D’Amaro want to build?

That question has become especially prominent because of reports that traditional language is once again being heard at Disney World.

For years, Disney had deliberately moved away from some gendered greetings in its parks.

In 2021 and 2022, the company publicly discussed efforts to make its parks more inclusive, including changes to language used by cast members. Disney’s diversity and inclusion leadership said the company had removed gendered greetings such as “ladies and gentlemen” and “boys and girls” from live announcements and encouraged alternatives such as “hello, everyone” and “hello, friends.” 

The changes became highly visible.

In 2021, Disney replaced the traditional “ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls” introduction at the Magic Kingdom’s Happily Ever After fireworks show with “Good evening, dreamers of all ages.” Disney said at the time that the change was part of its broader diversity and inclusion efforts. 

That decision became a symbol in the broader American culture war.

To supporters, it represented a company attempting to make its public spaces more welcoming to guests who might not identify with traditional gender categories.

To critics, it represented something very different: another example of a beloved American brand abandoning familiar language in pursuit of corporate political correctness.

Now, several years later, traditional language has once again been heard in at least some Disney World announcements.

And that has created the perception that Disney is reversing course.

But perception and evidence are not always the same thing.

The most controversial part of the viral claim about D’Amaro is also the part that requires the most caution.

The claim says that Disney’s new CEO has “eliminated gender-neutral language,” brought back “Ladies and Gentlemen,” and launched a broader effort to restore a “common sense culture.”

There is a real story underneath that claim.

But the evidence does not currently support the idea of a companywide order eliminating gender-neutral language.

What has actually happened is more limited — and, in some ways, more interesting.

In April 2026, videos circulated showing the phrase “Ladies and gentlemen” being used again on the Magic Kingdom Express Monorail at Walt Disney World.

The return of the phrase immediately attracted political attention because Disney had previously become known for replacing gendered greetings with more inclusive alternatives.

Conservative commentators celebrated the apparent change as evidence that Disney was moving away from its earlier approach.

Some social-media posts went much further, claiming that D’Amaro had personally ordered Disney to abandon gender-neutral language throughout its parks and restore traditional language as part of a cultural reset.

But an investigation by PolitiFact found that the situation was considerably more complicated.

The organization examined Disney monorail recordings and public footage dating back several years and found that the phrase “Ladies and gentlemen” had not disappeared from every monorail announcement in a consistent way.

There were examples of the phrase being used by monorail operators as early as 2022. Other recordings did not use it. In April 2024, a recording included the phrase, while another recording later that year did not. PolitiFact also found evidence of the phrase being used in a January 2026 recording — before D’Amaro became CEO. 

That makes the viral narrative considerably less straightforward.

Yes, “Ladies and gentlemen” was heard again.

Yes, Disney previously moved away from gendered greetings.

But there is no verified evidence that D’Amaro personally ordered a companywide reversal.

Disney also did not publicly announce a policy declaring that gender-neutral language was being eliminated throughout the company. PolitiFact reported that Disney did not respond to its questions about the specific monorail announcements. 

This distinction is important because Disney’s actual corporate statements under D’Amaro do not describe his agenda in those terms.

When D’Amaro became CEO, his public message focused primarily on creativity, innovation, storytelling, connection and the company’s ability to operate as “one Disney.” His official shareholder-meeting remarks did not announce a companywide rollback of diversity initiatives or a policy eliminating gender-neutral language. 

That does not mean Disney cannot be changing its tone.

It means the evidence does not justify claiming that the company has officially abandoned inclusive language.

There is a meaningful difference between those two things.

A company can become less politically explicit without eliminating its existing inclusion policies.

A theme-park announcement can return to traditional wording without a companywide ideological reversal.

And a CEO can emphasize storytelling and family entertainment without declaring war on diversity.

This is particularly important because D’Amaro himself has a history that complicates the simplistic narrative.

In 2021, when he was chairman of Disney Parks, Experiences and Products, D’Amaro published a Disney Parks statement titled “A Place Where Everyone is Welcome.”

The statement explicitly discussed Disney’s desire to make guests feel represented and cast members feel a sense of belonging. It included changes to costumes, hairstyles and other aspects of the guest and employee experience. 

In other words, the same executive now being portrayed online as the architect of a total rejection of inclusive language previously played a role in Disney’s efforts to make its parks more inclusive.

That history does not prove what D’Amaro will do as CEO.

But it does demonstrate why the viral version of the story is too simple.

The more credible interpretation is that Disney may be trying to find a different balance.

For several years, Disney became deeply involved in cultural debates that extended far beyond entertainment.

Questions about gender, sexuality, race, representation and corporate activism increasingly became part of the Disney brand itself.

That created both opportunities and risks.

Some customers welcomed Disney’s willingness to embrace inclusion.

Others felt that the company was becoming too politically involved and moving away from the nostalgic, broadly appealing identity associated with Walt Disney.

The problem for Disney is that both groups are part of its potential audience.

A company that sells family vacations, children's entertainment, movies, toys and theme-park experiences has an unusually broad customer base.

Its audience includes conservatives and liberals.

Parents and young adults.

Traditionalists and people who strongly support social change.

Disney cannot easily choose one group without risking another.

That is why the return of something as small as “Ladies and gentlemen” can become a national political story.

The phrase itself is not particularly consequential.

The symbolism is.

For some people, hearing it again represents a return to normality.

For others, it may suggest that a company that once made a conscious effort to use more inclusive language is reversing progress.

But there is another possibility.

Disney may simply be returning to language that sounds natural in certain contexts while leaving its broader inclusion policies intact.

That may ultimately be the more commercially practical strategy.

Rather than defining Disney through political language, D’Amaro appears to be emphasizing the things Disney has historically done best: stories, characters, experiences and emotional connection.

That is consistent with the public strategy he has articulated since becoming CEO.

And it may be the real cultural shift taking place.

Not necessarily a dramatic rejection of inclusion.

Not necessarily a wholesale return to the past.

But a move toward a Disney that wants the brand itself to become the center of attention again.

If the “gender-neutral language” claim is overstated, the story of D’Amaro’s Disney is still significant.

Because the new CEO is making changes.

The more consequential changes may simply be less ideological than social media suggests.

The approximately 1,000 job cuts are real.

The leadership restructuring is real.

The push for greater efficiency is real.

And D’Amaro has inherited a company that needs to make its various businesses work together more effectively.

That may ultimately be the foundation of his “new Disney.”

The company has enormous assets.

Its franchises are among the most valuable in the world.

Disney, Pixar, Marvel, Star Wars, ESPN and National Geographic give the company a portfolio that few competitors can match.

Its theme parks and cruise businesses provide something streaming companies cannot easily replicate: physical experiences that customers are willing to travel for and pay substantial amounts to enjoy.

D’Amaro knows that world better than most Disney executives.

Reuters noted that Disney’s Experiences division was a major source of profit under his leadership, making his appointment a logical choice at a time when the company needs to connect its intellectual property more effectively across businesses. 

That could be the key to understanding his strategy.

Imagine a Disney movie.

Under the traditional Hollywood model, the movie makes money at the box office.

Under Disney’s model, that same story can become a streaming series, a theme-park attraction, merchandise, a video game, a cruise experience and a long-term franchise.

The faster and more effectively Disney can connect those pieces, the more valuable each individual story becomes.

The Wall Street Journal has described D’Amaro’s strategy in terms of accelerating Disney’s “flywheel” — moving franchises more quickly among film, television, consumer products, parks and interactive entertainment. 

That approach is much more consequential to Disney’s future than whether a monorail operator says “ladies and gentlemen.”

Yet the language debate matters because it reflects a broader question about Disney’s identity.

For much of its history, Disney was extraordinarily effective at creating a sense of cultural neutrality.

The company could appeal to people across political and social divisions because its core product was imagination.

A Disney vacation did not require customers to agree about politics.

A child watching a Disney movie did not need to know what the company’s executives believed about the culture wars.

The magic was the product.

Over the last decade, that separation became harder to maintain.

Social media made corporate decisions immediately political.

Executives were expected to respond to social controversies.

Employees increasingly expected companies to take positions on public issues.

Consumers, meanwhile, began evaluating brands not only by their products but also by their perceived values.

Disney became one of the most visible examples of this phenomenon.

The result was polarization.

Some people accused Disney of becoming too “woke.”

Others accused critics of attacking the company because it was becoming more inclusive.

The commercial problem is that polarization can weaken a mass-market brand.

Disney does not need every customer to agree with it.

It needs customers to want to buy Disney products.

That means D’Amaro’s greatest challenge may be restoring broad emotional appeal without creating another political backlash.

The easiest way to do that may be to talk less about ideology and more about entertainment.

That does not necessarily mean abandoning diversity.

It means making diversity less of the headline.

Instead, the headline becomes the story.

The attraction.

The character.

The experience.

The family vacation.

The movie people want to see.

The game they want to play.

The cruise they want to take.

That strategy could allow Disney to appeal to traditional audiences without explicitly alienating younger and more diverse consumers.

But the company has another major problem to solve: employees.

Cutting approximately 1,000 positions may improve efficiency, but layoffs also create uncertainty.

Disney's workforce is enormous, and its culture depends on people in studios, parks, television networks, streaming services, marketing departments and corporate offices.

The challenge is therefore not simply reducing costs.

It is determining which activities create value and which have become redundant.

D’Amaro must convince investors that Disney can become more efficient without becoming less creative.

That is not an easy balance.

A company built around storytelling cannot treat creativity as an ordinary expense.

At the same time, Disney cannot indefinitely maintain every layer of corporate infrastructure created during years of expansion.

The job cuts therefore represent something larger than a headline about 1,000 employees.

They are a test of D’Amaro’s management philosophy.

Can he make Disney leaner while preserving the creative culture that made it powerful?

Can he make the company more unified without making it bureaucratic?

Can he restore the emotional connection with consumers without alienating audiences who value representation?

And can he make Disney feel less politically divisive without turning back the clock on every social change the company has embraced?

Those questions will determine whether the D’Amaro era becomes a genuine transformation or simply another chapter in Disney's long cycle of restructuring.

For now, it would be premature to declare that Disney has completely abandoned gender-neutral language.

It would also be premature to claim that D’Amaro has launched an official “common sense culture” campaign.

Those phrases describe a political interpretation of developments rather than a documented Disney policy.

What is documented is more interesting.

Disney has a new CEO.

That CEO comes from the company’s most successful consumer-facing division.

He is emphasizing creativity, innovation, connection and a more integrated Disney.

The company has begun cutting jobs as it streamlines its operations.

And traditional language has been heard again in some Disney World contexts after several years in which the company deliberately moved toward more gender-neutral greetings. 

Taken together, these developments suggest that Disney is reassessing how it presents itself.

Whether that becomes a genuine cultural reset remains to be seen.

But there is a powerful strategic logic behind the possibility.

Disney may have realized that its greatest strength is not its ability to win cultural arguments.

It is its ability to make people feel something.

For generations, that emotional connection was the foundation of the Disney brand.

Parents took their children to Disney parks.

Families watched Disney movies together.

Fans bought toys, clothes and collectibles.

Visitors boarded cruise ships and stayed at resorts.

Audiences grew up with Disney characters and then introduced those characters to their own children.

That is a remarkably durable business model.

The danger comes when the brand itself becomes more controversial than the stories it tells.

D’Amaro now has an opportunity to change that.

He can make Disney more efficient.

He can push its franchises across platforms more aggressively.

He can use the enormous strength of the parks business to support entertainment and streaming.

And he can attempt to make Disney feel familiar again without necessarily abandoning the modern audience it has spent years building.

That is a much more complicated mission than simply bringing back the words “Ladies and gentlemen.”

And it is also a much more consequential one.

The viral headline may say that Disney is “returning to common sense.”

The verified facts tell a more nuanced story.

This is a company undergoing a major strategic reset under a new CEO — one involving leadership, jobs, technology, storytelling, branding and the delicate question of how a global entertainment company should position itself in an increasingly polarized culture.

Whether D’Amaro succeeds will not ultimately be determined by a monorail announcement.

It will be determined by whether millions of people once again feel that Disney is speaking to them.

Not as Democrats or Republicans.

Not as conservatives or liberals.

Not as members of one cultural camp or another.

But simply as Disney fans.

And that may be the most important reset of all.