WDW Social 'Media' and Conspiracy

Originally Posted By RoadTrip

<<But was it directed at Disney or at each other? I did lurk on Usenet news groups now and then, but can't remember whether it was so negative about Disney.>>

LOL You've got a point there. Some of it was directed at Disney, but the worst stuff was reserved for each other!

<<Oh, and RoadTrip: If you are thinking about visiting Universal, wdwinfo.com has a deal for the two-park-one-day ticket which includes return shuttle transfer from a WDW hotel for just a few dollar more than the normal ticket price would be.>>

Thanks for the info.

 

Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer

>>><<Remember, when you buy a MacBook, iPhone or iPad, you aren't simply buying the latest technology, but you're buying into something much bigger: The Apple Lifestyle (cue creepy happy music). >><<<

And if you don't subscribe to the "Apple Lifestyle" and just use the product because it is easier, has better quality, and has superior tech?

I mean, I use Apple products... but I'm not about to get emotional over a iPad. LOL.


Same thing with Disney. You can like them to a certain extent, but getting emotional or tied to something that's nonliving is a extreme. Just because you like or prefer something doesn't mean you are joined to the hip by it.

I like Apple. I like Disney.

I care about the output of both companies. But I'm not so emotionally invested in either of them that it impairs other aspects of say, personality or life.

I think the issue, here, is the severity of someone's attachment to a product. Just the way there are people that REALLY blubber at Wishes, and we think that they are a little unhinged, I'm sure there are Apple Fanbois that do the same thing.

But not everyone who buys a Mac is automatically subservient to the company. Same for Disney. Yes, we all like it, but it's not, as you say, the center of some people's lives.

And Mr. Yee! Very nice to see you hear. Great posts.

 

Originally Posted By KevinYee

Spokker is on to something. I ran across a few articles back in 2008 that sounded breathless and excited for the future of advertising happening on the basis of "individual networks" and calculating CPM based on YOUR word of mouth power. All of us, it seems, would earn micro payments. People with more 'friends' would make payments that were slightly less micro, and so on. (it's also related glancingly to Malcolm Gladwell's Tipping Point book). Here's a fuller article that says it better than I could:

<a href="http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=98788" target="_blank">http://www.mediapost.com/publi...id=98788</a>

 

Originally Posted By SpokkerJones

"Ummm... yes. The venom that dominated the old Usenet new groups was so extreme that it makes World Events here look like an absolute love fest!"

Remember that when ADD was at its height, Disneyland was at its lowest point. It wasn't just a crappy New Tomorrowland or DCA turning out to be a dud, it was widespread disrepair across the parks.

People documented the horrible state Pirates was in, and it was no joke at the time.

While some may have philosophical differences about the direction of the parks are going in, I think it is undeniable that the operations side of things is much improved these days.

 

Originally Posted By SpokkerJones

"I did lurk on Usenet news groups now and then, but can't remember whether it was so negative about Disney."

Well, everybody was there because they were a fan of Disneyland at one point or another. The venom toward each other was fierce, but my philosophy is that people generally love a good troll, even if they say otherwise.

 

Originally Posted By SpokkerJones

"the future of advertising happening on the basis of "individual networks" and calculating CPM based on YOUR word of mouth power. All of us, it seems, would earn micro payments."

In this future, we'll be pining for the good old days when fandom meant something. If this becomes widespread, you won't know who is genuine about their praise and who isn't. When we gush about things we enjoy, wouldn't we want it to mean something?

 

Originally Posted By SpokkerJones

I must say, however, that there are examples of companies (usually smaller companies) that run official forums or blogs that do try to not sugar coat everything. One example is independent game developer Harmonix (creator of the Rock Band games). You can certainly give them the business on their forums if you desired and they answer questions, even negative ones. In fact, their official answers to occasionally controversial issues are all cataloged in a permanent stickied thread. Since they've become independent, they have become even more open and honest with their fans.

Another good official propaganda mill is Los Angeles Metro's blog. It is run by the former transportation reporter for the LA Times, and though they aren't going to tear apart the agency, they do allow negative comments and will answer tough questions. Recently, they have been taking a proactive lead in discussing photography on transit when most transit agencies would rather avoid the issue and keep harassing photographers on train platforms.

Speaking of their blog, am I crazy or is this Ward Kimball?

<a href="http://thesource.metro.net/2011/06/03/the-art-of-transit-175/" target="_blank">http://thesource.metro.net/201...sit-175/</a>

 

Originally Posted By SpokkerJones

Also, negativity and cynicism are out and positivity is in. Remember Up With People? In the 80s they were universally hated by everyone. Today, that sort of thing is a mainstream hit. Look at Glee.

I blame the advent of the word "hater." Have a negative criticism of anything and "you're just a hater," as if that says anything at all.

 

Originally Posted By Bob Paris 1

Spokker, I believe a lot of that is the fault of the entire PC "philosophy".

You CANNOT, DARE NOT say ANYTHING even slightly negative about someone of a different ethnicity than you these days or some PC nutjob will jump forth from the bushes(where they have been laying in wait for this precise moment)to scream the now clichéd and much overused, "RACIST!!!!"(the more extreme version of "hater")

Modern society is stuck in a predicament - we cannot discuss the problems we have with each other, for fear of being labelled "racist!!!" so there is this false veneer of "everything is okay and nobody does anything wrong". In Australia there is outrage because the indigenous Aboriginal population make up a disproportionate percentage of the prison population. The PC nutbags would rather just bleat about "HOW RACIST THIS IS!!!!1!!"(The alternative being that we simply don't jail anybody who is Aboriginal, which, to my way of thinking is just as racist!), rather than look into EXACTLY WHY THIS IS and look for ways to curtail this in the future.

From where I stand, having looked deeply into this for the last decade, the whole PC movement stifles free speech and exchange of ideas, creates irrational fear and has greatly harmed society. It is the modern day equivalent of the McCarthy era. Not to mention the whole Orwellian angle which is terrifying!

 

Originally Posted By SpokkerJones

It isn't just a race thing. It's any kind of negative thought. If you tell someone that you think they are doing the wrong thing, they will probably come back with, "well u just a hater!!" This term is used when the person probably knows they are doing the wrong thing, but does not wish to change course, so they respond with "hater."

But I do understand the PC thing in regard to race and culture. When I speak about my Hispanic background with praise, the diversity nuts love me. Oh it's all a rich cultural tapestry. The traditional dance, the food, the history, oh boy, nothing but good vibes.

But when I talk about my own experiences with the real problems plaguing Hispanic communities, things I've actually lived through, I'm suddenly a horrible monster. How dare you speak those things, and all that.

It's kind of frustrating when people preach a diversity of viewpoints when those viewpoints must be approved beforehand.

 

Originally Posted By Scutr

>>repeat customers will more readily notice, oh I don't know, broken yetis and black Thunder Mountain tarps. Or lame Carousel of Progress signs. But hey, they finally fixed that laundry room door at the Beach Club,<<

>>Declining by degrees, huh?<<


Just like the rest of human society.

 

Originally Posted By Bob Paris 1

"But I do understand the PC thing in regard to race and culture. When I speak about my Hispanic background with praise, the diversity nuts love me. Oh it's all a rich cultural tapestry. The traditional dance, the food, the history, oh boy, nothing but good vibes.

But when I talk about my own experiences with the real problems plaguing Hispanic communities, things I've actually lived through, I'm suddenly a horrible monster. How dare you speak those things, and all that."

Indeed.

One of the hallmarks of what is wrong with the PC ethos.

It's based on tokenism(hence the name of the character in "South Park")and surface approval of "diversity". I actually find it patronizing and insulting.

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

<<Admit it Spirit... we're dinosaurs. People don't read newspapers or magazines anymore. The "prime audience" doesn't even watch TV much anymore. And God knows, we don't talk with our next-door neighbor over the back fence anymore. How is Disney to reach today's customers better than through Social Media? >>

Oh boy, Trippy, or should I call you T-rexy? ... I couldn't disagree with you more. And, believe me, I have had this discussion with everyone from media moguls to my fanboi friends in their 20s. There's a huge misperception that old media is dead or on life support. It just couldn't be further from the truth.

Newspapers are absolutely in trouble, but in large part their content, and the need for it, still exists. They're just taking much of it to a new platform. I admit as a Generation Xer (not nearly as ancient as yourself), I grew up reading actual newspapers. I still read them. I like to hold paper in my hands. But I also read a tremendous amount online too. And there are probably more magazines today than there were 20 years ago, many that I don't see a place for, but the market will determine that.

As for TV, this is really a 'hot button' issue for me. I recently had a heated discussion with two young friends over butterbeers at WWoHP discussing the subject. They have the view that network TV is dead and no one watches it. Now, the reality is totally different, but when did reality ever matter to most Americans anyway?

Some of the highest numbers in broadcast history have been recorded the past few years. People watch network TV whether it's special events like the Oscars, Super Bowl etc ... or scripted shows from Lost to Big Bang Theory to Modern Family to Hawaii Five O. Some people in the industry firmly believe more people than ever are watching programming (just talking the four major broadcast networks here, not cable or pay at this point), but because of the DVR, they aren't being counted since they may watch two days later. YET, the network programming is still bringing in huge numbers, which in turn brings in huge sums of advertising dollars.

I was amused that one young friend opted to leave early to go watch something on TV live when 1.) he could have DVR'd; 2.) watched it on his iPhone (because this bull---- is what I continually hear is how people want to watch content ... sure tiny, lousy screen vs. nice huge LCDs at home ... yeah, I'm buying that one, Bob Iger!) and; 3.) he was one of the pals who believes network TV isn't going to exist five years from now.

As to talking to neighbors, well, I admit it's been a long time since I regularly knew my neighbors. But that's more a facet of our closed American lifestyles and people working 90 hours a week and not having time to chat ... could also be too many people wasting too much time online reading what Disney websites have to say about new meet-greet-and-gropes!

But again ... you ask how is Disney supposed to reach people today if not for Social Media. And all I can do is repeat what I've said about life in the simpler 1970s and 80s. Disney didn't nearly have the worldwide grip it does. This was before multiple overseas resorts. This was when there was no Disney Channel and then only one in the USA. There weren't huge campaigns in traditional media. And, again, people somehow not only found WDW, but they flocked to it, repeatedly, and they spread the word about how amazing it was ... all without the Internet. All without online sites that showed 896 pictures in a month of Horizons being constructed or the first MVMCPs or an expansion of the Poly.

If WDW is relying on Social Media to spread its message about its MAGICal product, then it is really in trouble. I just Googled 'WDW Social Media' and trust me, TDO does NOT want people reading the first thing that comes up? Any guesses ... c'mon ... someone might have an idea what would be the FIRST hit? It has something to do with your favorite Disney Spirit! ;-)

Relying on Social Media is worse than throwing up a white flag ... because it has opened so many cans of worms ... we are now 45 some pages into this discussion and no one has (in addition to telling me how this helps grow the BRAND) been able to tell me what Disney's legal status is if some bozo podcaster films me without my consent and broadcasts it to the world ... Disney doesn't put signs up when its filming in its parks because it wants to, but because it has legal obligations to. I have yet to see a sign saying 'The Mongello' has taken over the MK today, your image may be used to further enrich his standing with TWDC and his personal bank account.

<<They can't control it anymore... Disney has what is really a pretty darned good website for WDW. And I never spend time there. I spend it here. They have to rely on their uber-fans to spread the word. Why do I hang out here where there are so few uber-fans? Because I'm a glutton for punishment. Being a Disney apologist AND a moderate on LP is like being in masochist heaven. LOL>>

What site are you talking about? WDW.com? or The Disney Parks Blog? The former is the go-to company info site. It's the first place I'd tell someone planning a trip to WDW to go to. But I can't imagine why anyone here would spend much time there unless they were making a reservation or checking park hours. As for the Blog, when did that debut? Maybe two years ago now? It's total PR spin. Just try to get a negative comment through following a post by a PR hack ... the only time that was allowed was when, strangely IMHO, it appeared as though the entire fan community let Disney have it over the removal of The Lights of Winter at EPCOT and it got ugly. Disney didn't have a clue how to respond, so one person after another ripped them.

As to control ... do you mean Disney can't control the bloggers/podcasters/webmasters who have liberally (even if many are quite conservative, but I'll leave the politics out until Pierce returns) 'borrowed' Disney's IP/copyrights/etc? Disney could control them quite easily. I know what type of people work in their legal department, if they wanted to totally shut down your favorite Disney site (other than this one, of course), they could do it almost overnight. Really.

That goes to the heart of the whole discussion. Who is being allowed to skirt company policies, and even copyright laws, and to what end. Why is it that Jim Hill gets threatened with arrest when he gives tours at DLR, but Lou, Mike and Co. get explicit help from WDW when they do the same thing? Why do some daycare centers see $750 an hour lawyers at their doors when they paint a mural of Pooh and Pals, but others are allowed to make $20 a shot on selling DVDs of Disney's IP? Why do some insignificant fan sites get treated like royalty, while legit folks (like Kevin Yee) can't even get professional treatment from WDW Social Media?

Anyone want to answer the above?

As to why you hang out here, only you can answer that. And as for uber-fans ... well, believe it or not, I consider myself one. I think any normal person in the world with no more than a passing interest in Disney would say that anyone who visited every Disney resort on the planet in an 18-month period (WDW, DL and HKDL, multiple times), took a two-week Transatlantic cruise with the company, stayed in WDW resorts, dined at all the other resorts on the planet and even bought some Disney merchandise would be a DISNEY NUT!

Maybe you aren't here because you are a glutton for punishment so much as you actually enjoy Spirited adult, intelligent, thought-provoking debate and discussion? Maybe you feel like your opinion is actually heard here (it is)? Maybe you just like the pics of VBDAD prancing down Michigan Ave wearing his Ariel two-piece, tiara, DVC lanyards and Bears warpaint? Only you can say ... really.

I know exactly why I am here.

 

Originally Posted By andyll

<<As to control ... do you mean Disney can't control the bloggers/podcasters/webmasters who have liberally (even if many are quite conservative, but I'll leave the politics out until Pierce returns) 'borrowed' Disney's IP/copyrights/etc? Disney could control them quite easily. I know what type of people work in their legal department, if they wanted to totally shut down your favorite Disney site (other than this one, of course), they could do it almost overnight. Really.>>

Why do you exclude this site? Because you post here?

Plenty of Disney IP here... including videos of park entertainment... surrounded by ads to generate revenue off of them.

 

Originally Posted By vbdad55

where the issue is spirit is not so much who is reading or not- it's the quality of work the print media in specifi is doing - or can do today. They have cut staffs to the bone and the 'investigational' reporting genre is dead because of that. The best investigative people who uncovered so many important issues in the past and actually had some'bad people' fearful of them have either left their work- been laid off- or hav eto cover so much fluff- they have no time for important journalistic ventures any more. I know a lot of these people in Chicago..and they are frustrated also--

so the quality of what's in the papers- blows. Hell spelling and grammar are horrible- let alone content. Not enough quality people - and they are not allowed the time to use their skills even when they do possess them..

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

<<The video is just creepy... and it has a major logical flaw. It claims to be about a problem and a solution for said problem. But the solution just isn't one.

He identifies the problem that with new media you only see what you want to see (there is some truth in that). So for Disney that is a problem because it means that people who aren't actively trying to see Disney won't see it. So far it still makes sense.

But then he goes on to say that the solution is to engage the fans and communicate with them. How is this going to get those people interested in Disney who at the moment are not aware of Disney????? This just does not make any sense at all! He claims that the moms' panel has been convincing a lot of people to take their first trips. I can see that to a certain extent, but only if they are already thinking about a trip and then start searching the internet for more information about whether they want to go. How else would they ever get to ask those moms any questions? Communicating with fans or even the moms panel does not get the message out to those who don't think about going to WDW. How can they not see that?

And if they think that those fans will then convince others - well, there is a thread here at the moment called "Your are going where? Again?" which is just about the sentiment that those who aren't thinking about a Disney vacation consider fans to be rather crazy. I don't think that those who are distant to your product can be convinced to have a closer look by people they think are crazy (not saying all fans are, just that this is the perception people might have).>>

That was incredibly well said. I am kinda afriad to add anything because you covered all the bases.

I will second you on the creepy part, however. Imagine if TWDC was a country/political group/religious cult and those same words were coming from Duncan's mouth ...

Anyone from WDW Social Media want to wade in? C'mon, we all know you are reading ... make up some funny name and join in?

 

Originally Posted By vbdad55

^^^ careful there's a serious troll running around on W/E again ( and has made an appearance here)- asking for made up names may be too much of a temptation....LOL

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

<<I think it would be safe to say that at the present time there is absolutely no one in the developed world that is not aware of Disney and what it has to offer.

Demographics are working against them... both age-wise and income-wise, there will be fewer and fewer people who are aware of Disney that will choose to go on a Disney vacation for the first time. So who is their best market? Make regular repeat customers out of those who already love the place. If they can get a fair percentage of those who go to WDW every-other year to go EVERY year, they will have been enormously successful.>>

Fewer people? I'm confused. I thought in another thread you were trumpeting (or were you on tuba?) that more people than ever can afford a MAGICal WDW vacation. Am I mistaken? Isn't that the argument you tossed out for value resorts and timeshares?

And I have to tell you that for Burbank, growing the Brand means new bodies ... new vic.. I mean guests. The folks who are hooked on pixie dust are gonna visit, even if they get pissed at some of the things happening in the swamps. They may cut time down or dine elsewhere etc, but, for the most part, they won't give it up. Much like I haven't.

There used to always be a desire to make EVERY guest come back ... and there was always something on the horizon to bring them back. And a quality/consistent product there to make them want to come back. Does anyone else recall when they always had something 'coming soon' advertised in the back of guidebooks? Does anyone recall when you had regular preview center exhibits on Main Street where Mickey's pricey new digs are?


<<That is the whole idea behind DVC. They are not trying to make a killing in the real-estate market. If so they would have stopped building five years ago. They are trying to build an extremely loyal base of customers who will continue to come to WDW EVERY YEAR for the next 20 years! DVC makes it so your WDW vacation will likely be less out of pocket expense than any other vacation destination. So if you liked WDW enough to buy DVC in the first place, WHERE are you going to go this year? DUH! >>

I don't want to get into an umpteenth discussion of DVC. First, it doesn't fit the thread. And, of course, Disney is trying to make a killing (albeit by killing WDW a bit more) in real estate by virtue of its continual build-out campaign.

<<Spirit, you are immensely knowledgeable, but I think you have never "gotten it" when it comes to DVC and likewise do not "get it" when it comes to social media. I know you hate it. It means that some uneducated social media “whore” can replace a pro like you. Welcome to the Internet in 2011.>>

Trippy, I get Disney's version of timeshare quite well. Feel free to start a thread on 101 ways DVC is MAGICal and maybe I'll join in ... but I just don't wish to be derailed when I damn well know how important the issues being talked about here are.

As to Social Media and what I get, I'll let the 45 pages of posts and all the angst they've caused among so many do the talking as there are so many out there reading and listening (so many eyes and ears!)

And, rest assured, those eyes and ears wouldn't be paying one bit of attention to this thread, or what is happening behind the scenes, if some 'uneducated social media whore' could replace me. ... I am a one of a kind Spirit, my friend.

 

Originally Posted By RoadTrip

I think AT THE PRESENT TIME more people than ever can afford a Disney vacation. Not so in 5 or 10 years. Society is going to become increasingly divided between the haves and the have-nots. Many of the haves will consider Disney beneath them. The kind-of-haves like us who still love Disney will be dieing out.

The population will become increasingly Hispanic with many families having quite a few children and low incomes. They will not be able to afford WDW. Already Florida has a major Hispanic population. Where do you see them at WDW? As Housekeepers and Buildings and Grounds workers at the resorts. Not going through the turnstiles at the parks. Whether it is lack of income or a cultural lack of interest in what Disney offers, they just aren't there.

So will the Disney Parks eventually die? Yes, they certainly will in their current form. Disney is trying to extend the life of them as long as they can by trying to appeal to current fans that are moderately well off and visitors from other countries. Current fans are getting older and will soon stop coming; foreign visitors will discover like Dave has that there is better stuff close to home.

Who will Disney's audience 20 years from now be? Either they will go totally upscale like they are with the Four Seasons and Golden Oak or they will totally Wal-Mart the place out and become a somewhat nicer version of a Six Flags Park.

This will not be Disney's doing. It will be the result of more than 40 years of increasing income disparity between the top 10% and the rest of us. The middle class, which Disney has relied on, is shrinking and will continue to shrink. Disney Parks cannot remain what they are today and have any chance of surviving. I tend to think that 20 years down the road or so WDW will become an exclusive domain of the well to do. Disney will once again go for the quality we would love to see but people of our means will never be able to go there. It will be a place where movie stars and ball players and business executives go to get away from the riff-raff that dominates much of the country. The entire Disney experience will radically change to meet the expectations of those who see nothing odd about spending 10K a day for a wonderful vacation experience. Welcome to the Republican vision for America.

 

Originally Posted By Bob Paris 1

"but people of our means will never be able to go there"

Or rather, "people of our means" will have to put up with, oh I dunno, maybe saving their vacation money and maybe visiting for a day or two once every three or four years......like most normal people, rather than treat Disney theme parks as some kind of middle aged day care centre for churro chewing, soda chugging, overweight, bored males in mouse ears who are desparately trying to hang onto their childhoods.

You see them in videos and pictures all the time, waddling around the parks in their jorts in slightly undersized t-shirts, for all the world looking like Kevin Smith in a pixie dusted sugar daze.


Personally I think it would do some of these reprobates good to not be able to pop into a theme park(and check out of reality)after work/cashing their social security six afternoons per week. These types of amusement ventures were NEVER meant to be something people "lived" in. To lament a hypothetical future where those very same oxygen thieves CANNOT indulge themselves in this manner is like saying "In the future people will be restriced as to how much McDonald's or KFC they can purchase per week".


For some of these people it may not actually be SUCH a BAD thing!