But it's way less satisfying that emotional appeals.

The base of your statement is just wrong.

A company is a legal fiction. It doesn't have thoughts, wants, desires. It's not rich or poor. It's a piece of paper. It's an entry in government database.

What is not a fiction is Oracle's owners i.e. shareholders.

They are not rich. Majority of them, either direct owner of stock or in-direct owners via pension plans etc. are like you and me. They are not rich and the price of Oracle shares can be a difference between them being able to pay rent today or being able to retire tomorrow.

Those people rightfully care about the share price.

The executive are correctly responding to wishes of owners of the company by managing it to make a profit and therefore keep the stock price high.

What in the above chain do you find objectionable?

That millions of Americans investing in public companies depend on and therefore care about stock price?

That management of public companies is correctly responding to demands of owners of those companies by managing companies for profit?

Or maybe you just want to skip to the end of the line and seize means of production from private citizens to bask in the warm glow of collectivism?