I am saying that the people signing the checks made a business decision to narrow the focus of one of their brands. In my own opinion, a large number of the people working at Deadspin should have rightly been fired at this point.
Another thread mentions Google's 20% time, something that largely doesn't even exist anymore and for a long time still required approval to work on. Business changes and adapts with time. They aren't asking their writers to generate fake news stories or to not include culture in their sports writing, but that articles should have a focus on sports. They have other brands that write the types of articles they're asking Deadspin to stop writing.
In the end, the owners don't want another general millenial rage bait woke journalism site. They want a focused sports brand that they can grow in that space. Branding is important, and having a focus on branding is important. That's why PowerAid isn't labelled "Coca Cola". There are many valid business reasons why the people paying for the site want a specific brand focus.
I'm pretty sure that this has been explained at least once to Deadspin editors. However, it seems to me like the editors are a bunch of petulant children who don't understand that there are times where the person signing your check makes decisions you don't agree with, and not everything deserves to be rallied or protested against and that the adult decision is to either comply or find another job.
I've left jobs when decisions were made that I didn't agree with. I once mentioned I'd leave if the MPAA were taken on as a client. There wasn't malice, there wasn't a fit involved that brought a lot of undue public attention. These people need to grow the fuck up already.
Seems like a good way to superficially limit opportunity with that line of reasoning.