I should keep a list of these reruns.
Apology for cultural appropriation rerun, check. Apology for rerun comparison to '40s Germany, check. If I'm tying these reruns to any movie in the recent broadcast lineup, I'll choose something other than a fairytale remake, considering these apologies point to the loss of more than a shoe.
Meanwhile, there are other things to watch, such as discussions among folk in cassocks. It's interesting to watch a talk regarding the current situation of, if I'm interpreting what I see correctly, scrambling to link to modern issues such as environmental protection in order to keep the organization afloat, and how the scrambling is unnecessary when there are ways to both hold to tradition and address those issues. Was that monk sanctioned for anything other than holding to Marxism, and is his inclusion in the keyholder's financial talks a search for replacement 兄弟?
Just a guess, but I'd say being chosen to lead means making judgments on behalf of the people being led. What does it say when decisions are based on clicks and photo ops? What does it say when apologies are only made so the person making the apology can repeat the offending behavior? (Speaking of decisions, how many are uninformed because of avoidance due to distrust?) When the man with the keys stands by those whose choices weaken the grip on the keys,* I'm quite comfortable questioning his judgment, and have no objection to reading about those who are better placed than I to do the same.
*I'm thinking this article, which reads to me like a heads-up as opposed to applause, is related to that weakening grip, if only distantly. I don't agree with the view that it cheers eugenics, but it does present how that sort of population control would be the cumulative result of individual difficult decisions made for reasons beyond their effect on a job or a waistline. It's an unenviable position, having to make that tough call regarding the life of another person.