It's simple economics - Hollywood does not rely on income from movie theatres to survive; the distribution and production companies do. These companies have absorbed the losses from the decline in movie admission; they have tried to regain market share, but because there is no alternative, they are stuck with trying to peddle Hollywood's films. Hollywood doesn't have to care what people think of there movies because they survive off their backers - not ticket reciepts. Those backers are still there, and are not going away any time soon, thus Hollywood will not change.
You can see this so clearly when there are alternatives presented - films like "The Passion of the Christ", which was developed totally independantly of Hollywood, and doesn't reflect their liberal doublethinkg became a nation wide hit because distribution companies jumped all over a palatable product to sell. If there ever becomes a "Fox News" version of Hollywood, you'll see a total revolution in American cinema.
You just rewrote, with the same thoughts, the posted article you so disliked.
How can anyone follow your logic when you just flipped your own position??
Ummm.... It's the production and distribution companies which make Hollywood, well, Hollywood. The two are inseparable. So, if the production and distribution companies *need* the revenue income from the movies theatres to survive, then the rest of Hollywood does as well...
the infowarrior