WDW Social 'Media' and Conspiracy

Originally Posted By Dis-Philip

That's why overly-negative nihilists like Al Lutz and Kevin Yee get disrespected--they're almost never happy and are not legit at all, despite what certain members think!

And that's why positive-types like Lou Mongello deserve to be treated with respect.

 

Originally Posted By davewasbaloo

Keep snorting the dust Phil. Why should it bother you if we are disatisfied and want Disney to really push themselves?

 

Originally Posted By DDMAN26

See Philip what you do is take a little from the Yee/Lutz side of things, a little from the Mongello side, blend them together and you get a Disney fan who wants them to be the best and calls them on it when they aren't. I'm speaking company wide, not just the parks.

But think of it like a sports team. Of course you're going to cheer them on, but if they lose a game, you're not going to say everything is all right.

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

Social media isn't a brave new world as many would suggest. As a matter of fact, it's the modern equivalent of a small town hair salon (picture a bunch of old biddies under dryers with those curlers in their hair saying 'did you hear about Mabel? ...') ... well, that salon might be more reliable than social media.

One need only look at the non-story/hoax (reported frantically by most legit media) of 30 dismembered thought-to-be children's bodies being found in Houston to see how dangerous a thing it is.

Someone Tweets something and things wind up taking on lives of their own.

It's more of a (no life) lifestyle really. People conversing in 140 characters where there's no room for pesky things like facts and reality.

As the economy tanked and journalists were sent packing, and in a Democracy they are a cornerstone, there was an idea that 'citizen journalists' (I do cringe at that term) would take their place.

Just substitute 'policemen ... doctors ... teachers' ... there's a reason people are journalists and having an iPhone doesn't make you one.

So ... if blurring the line between real reporters and regular folks can cause huge problems, why wouldn't there be an issue when you don't know that someone is employed by TWDC or not? Or compensated for their coverage?

Someone watch a podcast by Loveable Lou and tell me that a normal guest would know he isn't employed and represented by WDW Co.

Disney is making some HUGE mistakes to justify people's jobs and Iger's misplaced bulge for technology and platforms (he ain't gonna rule the world or the media world by whatever Jobs creates!)

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

<<My question now becomes does TWDC care about the social media situation or not?>>

Care?

Of course they care.

They want to control the message and the fan community.

They can't ban WESH or the O-Sentinel from covering them, but there are no rules when it comes to fan sites.

They don't like Kevin Yee, so he gets no cooperation, let alone invites.

A Mommy blogger from Ohio (with 43 visitors a day) gets treated like Katie Couric.

And do you think Disney is paying attention to this thread ... or a thread about changes to LMA?

Here's a question for you: do you think they want an open and frank discussion like this taking place?

***Still waiting for Duncan or Thomas or Gary to pop on in over here ... after all, they do care about the fan community, right? ;-)

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

<<Like all propaganda, it is to bury the negativity and promote the key message. If you do a google search on Disney, compared to a few years ago, will it bring up negative or positive messages. It brings up the positive (unless it is the week of an accident or law suit).>>

Just wish I had titled this Disney Social Media and not WDW Social Media ...

<<That I think is what is in it for them, along with cheap market research.>>

I would disagree that it's cheap. Disney is spending loads of money, literally throwing it at the Social Media fan sites, and there's no legit market research to it.

These folks are predisposed to love anything that comes with a side of pixie dust. That's why they're selected for inclusion and to feel special -- in a different way than they are considered in daily life.

And their audiences are generally foamers who take anything they say as gospel.

Where's the market research?

Where's the brand building?

Where's the new audiences?

It's the equivalent of going into a chruch and asking the congregation if they are religious.

<<Walt never asked people if they wanted a boat ride with pirates that goes up a waterfall. But then in the 80's and 90's, Disney had focus groups and survey takers. Now they have survey takers and social media as a source of research - hence more characters, more buffet meals, more cruise style options, the "free" buses. All designed to counteract what people are talking about.

That is my 2 bits.>>

Sure, the people that are talking are the worshippers. Damn the rest of us to Hell! (and, no, let's not take religion beyond the analogy, please!)

<<BTW - I know I owe you an e-mail. Things have been kind of heavy here, but I will get to you my friend.>>

I understand. Things are never boring for either of us, are they? I guess that's why we're special

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

>>Yes, and that's why the whole initiative to drown out anything negative in social media does not make sense.<<

<<For a corporation to do this makes complete sense. Viral marketing has been a huge game-changer for well established companies. The big idea now is to co-opt as many bloggers/web sites/online personalities as possible to spread a positive message to counteract any negative ones.

For the average consumer, this may seem deceptive. But honestly, would you expect a web site called "Magical Mouse Minions" to offer an objective look at Disney? Conversely, would you expect the same from a site called "Disney World Sucks?">>

Seem deceptive? It IS deceptive by design. This site is LaughingPlace.com, but it's not a mouthpiece for TWDC, WDW Co or its affiliates.

It often praises things that Disney does, but it is balanced. And no one here is afraid to go against Disney's talking points. THAT is what makes this site so valued and valuable.

There's a reason why threads for the discussion boards here are often discussed inside the company. This isn't a place where mindless fanbois lap up everything and anything The Mouse puts out.

This is where TWDC can come in the cyber world and get real world feedback.

People want things that are authentic. Remember MySpace? It became too corporate, another marketing tool for companies. A way to manipulate something that began organically. People communicating amongst themselves in a community. See any parallels here to FB, Twitter and ... yes, ... Disney fan sites?

Would you sit down to play a game at a table when you knew the outcome was fixed?

I guess if you were in on the fix (like the bloggers and podcasters) you would. But would anyone else?

<<There seems to be an attitude that anyone who enthusiastically supports Disney just cannot be in any way professional or honest-- but fierce critics are given a pass. I didn't know much of anything about the various online personalities that cover WDW before reading this thread. Based on the content, the "magical" folks are all uniformly dismissed as some sort of nasty leeches. But after a bit of checking up on the 'net, I find that many of them work hard, do their homework, and have a pretty good following. They may not be appealing to me, but... so what?>>

I disagree. People can be honest and enthusiastic. Want to ask me about my last DCL voyage? Or my time at the resorts in Asia? Or what I thought about WoC?

No one is dismissing all of the online folks as nasty leeches at all. But there are certainly many who are.

I don't know how to respond to them 'doing their homework' ... when your homework is vacationing all the time, regurgitating press releases and talking points ... I dunno ... maybe cutting and pasting is a life skill today. And as to followings, well, Jim Jones had a big following too ... BUT that's not what this thread is about.

It's about WDW Co's use of Social Media and their overarching strategy in using it.

<<I absolutely agree that anyone engaging in commerce on Disney property should be stopped. And I am uncomfortable with the over-the-top, pixie dusted "true believers," just as I don't care for the nattering nabobs of negativism who are lauded for their "guts" and "honesty" in taking on The Mouse.>>

I, obviously, agree. These tour guides would be at the top of the list of people that should be put out of business. The problem, as I am sure you probably know very well, is that Disney is allowing these tours to go on in Orlando (why? that's a question I've been trying to get to the bottom of? are people at WDW Social Media and/or Guest Relations getting kickbacks? is it a coincidence that one of these tour guides has another job working at said Guest Relations? is it all just looked away from because of the positive publicity they shill through their sites?) ... it all feels very sleazy ... like a drug deal in some alley that's about to go bad, only it's Main Street USA.

Besides, if Disney lets one person do so, they must allow everyone to, right? They say they don't employ, endorse or affiliate with these 'independent' people ... if so, they clearly can't claim any knowledge or control over the substance of the tours. Yet, we know Jim Hill got shutdown and threatened by the police in Anaheim (and from Westsider, that these tours are not allowed out there). And I think we're all generally sure that we can't simply start giving tours of WDW (and I'd put a shingle out ...because most people who have toured the parks with me have said I'd be a damn fine guide if I just toned down some of my rhetoric ... usually quite positive I might add ... and I don't charge for people spending time with me).

I'm pretty sure that if I suddenly gave tours tomorrow at EPCOT that ... wait, somone's at the door ... brb ... ... ... um ... yeah, my cease and desist order just came from TWDC ... oh well, here I was looking forward to being tasered by the OC Sheriff's depututies in front of the EPCOT fountain with Danny Cockerell smiling from a safe distance.

I am sure, especially in light of some people changing disclosures online, that there's been a whole lot of hair-pulling behind the scenes. Maybe Disney thinks it is covered if the money changes hands off-property. But really how stupid must anyone be to buy that one? Does that mean I can sell Disney tees in the parks provided I am just meeting to hand them off after getting CC #s off-site?

Of course not.

And while I don't really wish to go back and forth about being negative, I'll tell you that it is always simpler and easier to just smile and be positive all the time ... I see people bumble through life that way with never a worry or a care.

It's much harder when you have a critical eye and you yearn for things to be right ... to be the best they can ... whether in your home, 'hood, work place, school or theme park!

<<There's got to be a balance in all this. But it isn't the Walt Disney Company's duty to find it. Their task is to leverage every possible bit of positive publicity that's out there.>>

Again, the thread is about Social Media and the way WDW Co. has chosen to wrongfully (illegally? unethically?) employ it. It isn't out to bash the many fans who have excellent sites, are not simply shills for Disney and DO have a place at the buffet table.

I really want to make that clear.

But WDW has made Social Media a huge whorefest and there are many unsavory characters in the mix, whether they have online followings or people who like them really isn't the point. Disney leveraging its great name and reputation to get into bed with some of these people isn't going to have a Happy Ever After Ending.

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

<<Yet, no one has been able to simply 'splain to me how Disney engaging in very unethical, at best, behavior with bloggers/podcasters/webmasters somehow adds new customers and adds value to the Brand.>>

<<You already explained it with a quote from Duncan Wardle about 10 pages back.>>

No, I don't think I did ... I used that quote to show how out of touch with reality he appears to be.

<<Duncan Wardle: Many companies are scared of loosing control of their brand. They fail to understand that they never had control of their brand.

That has always resided in the hearts and minds of their consumers. What is changing now is that brands no longer have control of the message. However, what brands gain in return, is the ability to leverage the passion of their brand advocates to reach people they cannot reach in a credible and relevant manner.

Consumers are today’s publishers. By providing platforms that allow them to share their passion and content with yours, brands will be able to extend their reach in a much more meaningful way.>>


<<The last paragraph I think sums up why this is their focus, "Consumers are today's publishers".

Back in the olden days I think we used to call it "word of mouth". >>

Except word of mouth actually meant something. It still does. I make decisions based upon word of mouth mixed with knowledge and research.

Duncan uses 'brand advocates' in a scary Orwellian way. Does WDW offer so poor a product in the 21st century that it needs essentially paid advocates to fill its parks and resorts?

And leveraging the passion of these 'advocates' ... what does that mean? To me, it means paying off bloggers/podcasters/webmasters to spew forth company talking points and PR spin.

Total propaganda.

That isn't what attracted me to the LP over a decade ago as a lurker. If I want Disney's official view on things, then I'll visit the appropriate official channels. When you go to a fan site, it should be independent. Disney is co-opting the fan community by paying off these people.

That renders their word of mouth almost meaningless.

Again, how are they attracting new audiences? No one planning their first MAGICal vacation does so based on watching a fanboi podcast ... or looking at a site with 654 pictures of construction walls ... or visiting another that talks about taking an 18-month old to the MK ... or another that simply talks about dining at WDW restaurants etc. Those are sites for people Disney already OWNS!

They aren't attracting more business. They aren't growing the value of the BRAND.

What they are doing is working actively to destroy or at least render inconsequential sites such as this.

<<In those days getting the Sunday Philadelphia Inquirer with the special travel section devoted to WDW was like Christmas morning. The travel writer wrote how awesome WDW was and revealed all the new and cool things you could do. They even had color pictures which was still rare in newspapers. And while word of mouth was and is powerful, back then it was slow relatively speaking to major advertising efforts. Maybe it's catching up, fast.>>

I'd argue almost the opposite, although I do feel your point has some merit. I just can't help but go back to the simple 70s and 80s when WDW did almost no advertising at all, there was no Internet and fan sites, and people flocked to the place by the millions. How did they ever know it existed?

What Social Media does is largely push out an agenda into an echo chamber. Sure, that may seem better than having people on a fan site advocating execs losing jobs or talking about how rundown a park may be or how lousy and overpriced food is etc.

But at the end of the day, it's still an echo chamber.

The most valuable people in the world are the one's that have small or no digital footprints, but that's a whole 'nother subject.

 

Originally Posted By DDMAN26

<<Someone Tweets something and things wind up taking on lives of their own.

It's more of a (no life) lifestyle really. People conversing in 140 characters where there's no room for pesky things like facts and reality.>>

It's the digital macarena.

 

Originally Posted By DlandDug

>>I just can't help but go back to the simple 70s and 80s when WDW did almost no advertising at all, there was no Internet and fan sites, and people flocked to the place by the millions. How did they ever know it existed?<<

"Simple" is an accurate description. Entertainment, as an industry, has exploded since the 1980s. The hustling for the consumer's entertainment dollar has become very competitive.

How many theme parks were there in 1970? In 1980? In 1990? How many are there today? How about multi-plexes? Home video players? Gaming platforms?

Disney got those millions of folks with just a weekly TV program (with easily maintained ratings in a world of just three TV networks) and word-of-mouth. But if Disney did the same today, they'd be KILLED. So... they use what the zeitgeist offers. And sometimes that's mommy-bloggers, pixie-dust-huffers and stay-at-home site owners.

 

Originally Posted By Dis-Philip

The Spirit is still obviously a big fat baby!

 

Originally Posted By leobloom

^This guy's a riot.

 

Originally Posted By Bolna

<<There seems to be an attitude that anyone who enthusiastically supports Disney just cannot be in any way professional or honest-- but fierce critics are given a pass. I didn't know much of anything about the various online personalities that cover WDW before reading this thread. Based on the content, the "magical" folks are all uniformly dismissed as some sort of nasty leeches. But after a bit of checking up on the 'net, I find that many of them work hard, do their homework, and have a pretty good following. They may not be appealing to me, but... so what?>>

I have been following quite a few different websites and blogs over the last years and I agree with you that quite a few people out there do a great job and provide a lot of good and entertaining content. But I had noticed a shift some time ago (long before Spirit started this thread) that some (not all!) people were getting more and more positive. And there were new sites coming along which had way more of that positive vibe as well. And it started around the time that the Disney Parks Blog came into existence. It is that shift that worries me.

 

Originally Posted By DDMAN26

So wait is the Disney Parks Blog the official company blog?

 

Originally Posted By DDMAN26

Btw Dis-Philip take a chill pill.

 

Originally Posted By Bolna

<<So wait is the Disney Parks Blog the official company blog?>>

Yes, and I would guess that starting this was one of the corner stones of the new social media initiative they have (after the moms panel - which actually gives out some useful advise). I remember that I heard people on a podcast mentioning Thomas Smith and what a great guy he was and was a bit surprised that they would know him until it dawned to me that his title "Social Media Director" also means that he is the contact for those folks.

 

Originally Posted By MPierce

>> No, they are not! You, Spirit, etc. are the ones who are shallow! <<

He's so shallow he makes Lauderdale-By- The-Sea at low tide look like the Puerto Rico Trench next to him.

 

Originally Posted By MPierce

>> Actually, Spirit of 74 NEVER has fun at WDW. And it's obvious.

He's such a chauvanist pig that needs to be banned from the parks ASAP! <<

He's only a chauvinist pig on his good days.

Mickey would ban him, but he doesn't want to give up the money Spirit spends on his AP, plus all the money spent by his friends buying him meals there.

 

Originally Posted By MPierce

>> How come Dis-Philly only comes out to rant and rave about one person? Very tiresome. <<

It's Spirit we'er talking about here EE. It should be obvious why.

 

Originally Posted By MPierce

>> For a corporation to do this makes complete sense. Viral marketing has been a huge game-changer for well established companies. The big idea now is to co-opt as many bloggers/web sites/online personalities as possible to spread a positive message to counteract any negative ones.

For the average consumer, this may seem deceptive. But honestly, would you expect a web site called "Magical Mouse Minions" to offer an objective look at Disney? Conversely, would you expect the same from a site called "Disney World Sucks?"

There seems to be an attitude that anyone who enthusiastically supports Disney just cannot be in any way professional or honest-- but fierce critics are given a pass. I didn't know much of anything about the various online personalities that cover WDW before reading this thread. Based on the content, the "magical" folks are all uniformly dismissed as some sort of nasty leeches. But after a bit of checking up on the 'net, I find that many of them work hard, do their homework, and have a pretty good following. They may not be appealing to me, but... so what?

I absolutely agree that anyone engaging in commerce on Disney property should be stopped. And I am uncomfortable with the over-the-top, pixie dusted "true believers," just as I don't care for the nattering nabobs of negativism who are lauded for their "guts" and "honesty" in taking on The Mouse.

There's got to be a balance in all this. But it isn't the Walt Disney Company's duty to find it. Their task is to leverage every possible bit of positive publicity that's out there. <<

Excellent post DlandDug.