As an Ex-Catholic, that's...not how material cooperation works.
For anyone not aware, "cooperation" with a sin is when you don't actively do a sinful thing, but you help someone else do it. The two main divisions are formal and material. Formal cooperation is when you (either explicitly or implicitly) participate directly in a sinful act. The classic example would be driving a getaway car for someone who holds up a bank. Implicit cooperation's a little trickier, because the person implicitly cooperating doesn't have to have the same motive as the perpetrator. An example would be a bomber pilot who flies a load of incendiary charges out to destroy a city full of innocent people with no military targets (assuming someone else actually targets and drops the bombs) because even though she disagrees, she believes that following orders is the right thing to do. Those are both considered intrinsically immoral, for obvious reasons.
Material cooperation, on the other hand, involves doing something that helps someone else commit a sin without actually participating. Catholics don't believe that it's always immoral. It's an inevitable part of life, at least to an extent. It has to be justified at times. It all depends on how close someone is to the sinful act and on how necessary their participation is for it to happen. It also can't cause scandal, which is when you make other people think that a sin is okay.
Proximate/immediate material cooperation is when you don't participate in a sinful act or share the intent of the perpetrator, but you directly make it possible. It's a fine line between that and implicit formal cooperation. Going back to the bombing example, a factory owner tasked to build incendiary charges that are explicitly used for terror bombing would be an example. He's not bombing the city, he's not flying the plane, and he may not believe that it's right, but he's directly making it possible. Just like implicit formal cooperation, it's always seen as immoral. Even if a person is compelled to assist in the act, that doesn't mean that it's not a sin. That's important in the distinction between mortal and venial sin, since mortal sin requires "full consent of the will". If they didn't know what the bombs were used for, that would negate the sinfulness of the act since sin has to be deliberate.
Mediate/remote participation contributes to making a sinful act possible, but not directly. This would be paying taxes to the regime that uses tax money to bomb cities. It's not always immoral. In this case, paying taxes is pretty justifiable on other grounds. You would be jailed if you didn't, and taxes go to good things, too. It's also not necessary for a particular person to do it in order for the immoral act to happen, so it's contingent remote material cooperation. In this particular case, it wouldn't be seen as immoral (necessary remote material cooperation can also be moral, but it requires stronger justifications since the act wouldn't happen without your involvement).
So, going to this quote, it's actually pretty obvious that this isn't proximate. It's remote. It's also contingent, since HBO would make these shows without the individual subscriber. Whether it would be justifiable, I don't know or really care. I'm not Catholic anymore, and so I'm not worried about falling into mortal sin by watching Game of Thrones. This person's just throwing around words that they don't understand, though.
