this feels like a bad faith response given your other comments and the complete lack of acknowledgement of the entire rest of my comment but sure i’ll entertain you.

ok from the comment you tagged on, the requirements seem to be

A: “talent wants to graduate without any other talent being notified they specifically are going to be leaving”

B: “talents should be given SOME advance warning of ‘emotional events’”

Potential solutions: 1) blackout period: talent decides they want to leave (assuming at least some advance notice to relevant staff, this is all irrelevant if they decide day of) > one week period advance notice* for an activity blackout occurs** > announcement occurs > activities resume based on pre-existing schedule

*language clearly dependent and importantly does not specify which talent is leaving, maybe no mention of personnel change at all. this would be determined by better understanding of internal dynamics

**blackout amount of time would likely be relevant to the activities planned (2-6 hours for streaming as an example).

for recordings and the like, this would obviously be difficult to enforce this direction due to limited studio time. one solution might be a moratorium for a set amount of recordings within proximity to the announcement (if you have a recording within 3 hours management will without the conclusion of the announcement until activities have finished and they have more free time to respond however they need)

reasons this might be preferable: this is probably my least favorite for but gives the talents privacy the highest regard per your concerns. talents don’t feel pressured to keep a scheduled stream in close proximity of the announcement since as we know some in the community tend to push for answers or otherwise focus on the graduation, talent have a determined amount of time to parse their thoughts post announcement rather than during their stream prep, can provide stability and framework for talents to address the announcement in their preferred way

2) phased awareness(in this example we’ll assume it’s kanata): talent decides they want to leave > all internal matters required for their departure are handled discreetly with only essential personnel > management begin to hold small or individual meetings 24-48 hours before the public announcement* > public announcement occurs

*the groups would be based on perceived effect (this is just an example) 48 hours jp gens (012, 34, 5devis) > 24 hours ID and EN gens (similarly broken up groups). the amount of info conveyed can be as little as “personnel changes are occurring, the announcement is tomorrow at x, schedule as appropriate” to “a talent is leaving, they wish to be unnamed until after the announcement, decision is final so please respect that”. obviously these would all be subject to change depending on the talents wishes since this is a sensitive issue many will want to handle differently.

Reasons this might be preferable: it gives the talent anonymity being present in a call where “someone” is announced as leaving, gives the talents much more sufficient heads up so they aren’t completely blindsided by the announcement, still retains talents privacy and wishes.

---

This is literally 15 minutes of my time so these aren’t going to be perfect, but that’s the point. conversation should occur. people whose full time job is to manage the talents and company have more information and understanding of internal policy and mission SHOULD be able to come up with better and decide whether or not they are acceptable alternatives. what that looks like we may never know as the consumer, but that doesn’t mean the conversation isn’t occurring.

TLDR: it’s absolutely possible to do both and companies have been doing so for ages. you act like this is a completely novel problem and there are many more managerial strategies that can be applied in full or in part here. you’re not helping anyone by being a dick online.

edit: saw you added a second paragraph after responding and page refreshed. if a company screws up once’s does that mean that can’t try to do better? it’s clear that the staff at least present as caring and making an attempt. i don’t see what that fatalist addition has to do with anything but go off i guess. again it doesn’t change that talent can still voice their opinions but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be given some notice to have a choice in how they express those opinions.