People are equating him to Kanye when there's significant difference between the two controversies. Kyrie is stubborn for sure and easily could've calmed the situation from the onset by issuing a genuine apology for sharing a film that he didn't fully grasp in terms of how harmful it was, but I think intention is also important.

I don't believe Kyrie had intentions of harming anyone or being hateful when he shared the film, whereas Kanye clearly has bad faith intentions with some of his direct rhetoric, intending to be harmful.

I give Kyrie some benefit of the doubt as well because he's done objectively great things in the community, including generous donations/support to Standing Rock Sioux during difficult times. Generally, I think Kyrie is being genuine when he talks about loving all cultures/people. However, he did need to own up to the glaring problems of the film he shared and learn/grow from it, and maybe he will, just on his own timeline.

Also - the problem with demanding an apology (driven by media pressure) inevitably meant that there would be many (including many here) who do not accept/buy his apology. It was always going to come off as forced in this context, but now that he's issued the apology, I do think we have to accept it and move on, particularly if you don't assign any ill intent from Kyrie. If you think he's a rabid anti-Semitic bigot I can understand why you wouldn't buy his apology and would want him to be further punished for this, but I'm not so sure it's fair to characterize him with that brand of bad faith.