>Not fighting harder, or getting involved at all in the first place?

In a way, from a cynical business perspective, both. He needed to either not get involved at all, which would have preserved relations with Florida and conservatives at the cost of angering creatives in the company and progressives more generally, or needed to respond harder, earlier, more publicly, which would have angered Florida and conservatives but preserved relations with creatives and progressives.

Instead he oversaw a response that both did too little, too late to avoid the repercussions of angering creatives and company morale, and too much, when he did do something, to avoid the repercussions of angering Florida and conservative governments.

He managed to take a situation where he was unavoidably going to anger one important group out of two, and chose the response that angered both.