I'm skeptical that anyone high up in the WT heirarchy could be classified as "objectors"; it would imply that they personally found something objectionable about WT policies, and the odds of that happening to someone that high up are pretty remote.
Policy changes in the WTS are far more commonly attributed to a preponderance of growing evidence that the "Old Lite" on a certain topic was simply flat-out wrong and was impacting the Org in a demonstrably negative manner.