Also streaming services.
However, Forbes editors are not drawing a cause-effect relation. They are drawing a correlation association.
The point Ozanian is making is in the question “is it wise for this social protest unrelated to NFL entertainment to occur amidst falling revenues?”. And related questions such as “Is it wise to broadcast and amplify anti-Trump social justice antics that are irrelevant to the entertainment product?”.
The media for NFL still has opportunities to shape the narrative. The NFL owners have opportunities to clamp down on social justice protest disruptions.
These protests are no different than a couple of Black Lives Matter protestors storming into a busy restaurant to scream and shout about their issues, and with a couple of numbskull reporters following with cameras playing it up. If the restaurant and the reporter’s broadcasters have started to lose customers and viewers to competition, is it wise for the business owners to put up with the BLM disruptors? Of course not. The business owners should call the cops and tell the protestors to get the hell out.
A related question: Does this "protest" actually promote discussion of whatever is being protested and positive change? The answer seems to be a big "no". Leftists talk about the free speech right to protest. Decent people talk about the rudeness of disrespect to our anthem, our flag, our country, and our ancestors. No one talks about whatever the now unemployed 2-14 loser from the 49ers claimed this protest was supposed to be about.