IDK. Seems legit on the surface. Point is, I hear the "We need someone like Bear" comment all the time. This guy has been engaged for years. I don't know if he limits his exposure to the BSA or the BSA is terrible at marketing, or both.
I think BSA will continue to exist, but in a very different incarnation than we know today. Some sort of bankruptcy reorganization seems inevitable. Many of the changes ahead will be dictated by courts and creditors and parties entirely detached from Scouting. But setting aside the gloom and doom ...
OA will soon be forced to abandon its Indian-themed ceremonies - too much cultural appropriation for this PC era. Whether OA continues to exist at all after that - who knows?
God is next on the chopping block. I fully expect that Duty to God will become an optional component, if not eliminated from the oath altogether.
Yes - everything seems to point in the direction that BSA wants to emulate the UK Scouting program. With Irving's track record, I personally think they will end up emulating the Canada Scouting program. BSA National just doesn't have the wisdom and competence.
I wholeheartedly support the idea of this kind of BSA ambassador. I would choose a male role model who exudes outdoor adventure and healthy manhood. That doesn't seem to fit the current trend toward genderless Scouting, so I'm sure BSA will bungle things by picking both a man and a woman.
This is the wrong way to go. STEM is currently being pushed everywhere in our society. Who needs BSA for that? BSA needs to differentiate itself around outdoor adventure (something that should already be its core strength). Less indoors - more outdoors. Less bookwork - more adventure.