WDW Social 'Media' and Conspiracy

Originally Posted By Manfried

This thread is like the Energizer Bunny. It keeps on going and going and going....

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

<<This has been going on for a long time! And his comment is also always one of the first - either he is never separated from his computer and constantly refreshing the Disney Parks Blog to see if there are new posts - or he might be aware when new posts appear...>>

<<I don't read the site regularly, so I had no idea.

But I am not surprised.

Lou Mongello, Part of the MAGIC of The Walt Disney Company (excuse me while I go vomit).>>

I usually don't quote myself as that is a sure sign of mental illness in the fan community, right? ;-)

But ... I really think this needs a bit more said.

As far as I can tell, Lou Mongello is the ONLY individual allowed to stick an ad/plug for his FOR PROFIT personal website/business on the official Disney Parks Blog.

That is a blatant example of Disney engaging in underhanded behavior with this questionable (at best) character.

Everybody should tag their comments from now on as so and so from 'LaughingPlace.com' or whatever site/affiliation you choose. Hell, I don't care if JeffLangeDVD.com ... there just is no reason why this one dude gets what sure looks like an explicit blessing from THOMAS SMITH (who should be fired for crap like this) and Disney Social Media.

Maybe someone that appears to have scruples (giving her the benefit here) like Jenn Fickley-Baker can 'splain why Lou is being allowed to do what he does IF he indeed isn't in a business relationship with TWDC?

Any of you fanbois want her email?

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

<<Spirit, EE is hooked on social media like a soccer mom on pixie dust. He's already fallen under the spell of Google+.>>

I'll devote a special chapter of my book to him. May even include a picture of him clutching his Figgy plush as a tear streams down his cheek while watching Wishes! ;-)

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

<<I've had a few questions for thought running around in my head regarding this topic, since the word of P&R being shopped came out in the other thread.

In terms of social media in relation to the potential sale of the P&R division:

- Where does Disney Social Media exist corporately? Is it part of P&R proper or is it in a separate division?>>

Social Media is really part of every division now to some degree. But from the standpoint of this thread (and that one) and what if ... these people who work for Social Media fall under the umbrella of P&R. They are part of the publicity machine.


<<- Were the parks to be sold, would Disney Social Media even need to exist anymore? (For that matter, D23?) Heck, would a new owner even be interested in that kind of message control?>>

I think one would be a fool to ignore Social Media in 2011. Hell, both these threads are case studies in the topic really.

I would guess there might be changes, even wholesale ones (which I haven't been shy about advocating now as I'd dump them all at this point from Duncan Wardle on down) ... D23 is harder to gauge. Right now, it's struggling in some ways (like getting bodies to the Expo), doing better in others. I think the fact it is so obviously corporate PR turns off so many fans. I may love the parks, for instance, and enjoy sports on ESPN and Pixar films (no, haven't seen Cars 2 yet, so that may change), but don't shove Marvel or Playhouse Disney or The Chew down my throat and expect that I love all that is part of the corporate empire.

D23 is simply synergy out of control. And that's why it's struggling ...

<<- Were the parks to be sold, would the online Disney world as we know it (user end) cease to exist? Wouldn't all Burbank and Glendale sources immediately either disappear or become irrelevant? >>

Wow, you do have a lot of good/intriguing questions. Where do I pick up my check? (don't say Iger's as he has a 'shoot to kill' order on the Spirit right now) ;-)

I don't see why the online world, if you mean sites like this, would change or cease to exist. The official sites may change some (many of Disney's operating units have sites that are user unfriendly and some are just awful ... park hours on WDW.com comes to mind here).

Some sources would likely be out of jobs, others would go along with a new owner ... as would WDI.

<<- Would TWDC, having its hands washed of operational involvement, have more time and resources to crack down on IP/content infringement? If the parks, to them, would only exist as sources of licensing revenue, wouldn't they be going after such licensing revenue from third parties (blogs, forums, et al.) that feed off the parks?>>

Never thought about that until reading your post. I think it would likely lead to some cracking down, which is probably why so many in the fan community don't want to consider it a possibility as they may be forced out of their 'Disney Lifestyles' and into waiting tables at Red Lobster (if they are lucky).

<<- Has the larger Disney social media world and Disney's inability to control the message and tame the wild beast actually contributed to TWDC's desire to shop the parks? Did it contribute to Disney saying "Enough, we aren't going to deal with this any more"?>>

No, I don't think so. I think the biggest problem with these boneheads is they actually think they are controlling the message right now. I'm sure they think that as they eagerly await the next post ... or say someone blindsides Bob Iger at Sun Valley with a question he has no desire to even acknowledge ;-)

Right now, who's controlling who? Or what?

 

Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer

>>>I'll devote a special chapter of my book to him. May even include a picture of him clutching his Figgy plush as a tear streams down his cheek while watching Wishes! ;-)<<<<


Sooooooooo... this is a work of FICTION, isn't it, Spirit?

;-)

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

<<My passion for Disney is for it to be the best, push the creative frontiers while not spitting on the past, surprise and wow me regularly and, oh yeah, stay profitable too.

Rest assured, my type of passion isn't viewed kindly by Disney. They'd rather people like me stop visiting. They want bumpkins high on Pixie Dust.>>

<<Yes, but isn't that what true passion should be like: having a strong foundation to build on.>>

Ah ... but Disney is letting the foundations rot both literally and figuratively. They don't want passion founded in logic/history/perspective/experience. Do you think Disney wants someone like me (and others here) pointing out when thing used to be done differently? When WDW was a much higher quality destination?

No, they want emotionally fragile simpletons who think WDW is all about spending $15,000 and taking out a second mortgage (can you still do that in the USA these days?) so that Brittany can be made over at the Jon Benet Boutique and then get a picture with Cindy in her castle where the hostess (who is a princess and all, even if she lives in a motel room with five other people on a seedy part of US 192 when she isn't at 'home') charges $30 for a watery scrambled egg breakfast ... and then come home and blog about how MAGICal it all was.

Doesn't sound like your friendly LP Spirit who just longs for the days when he could dine on a slab of tastey and fairly reasonably priced prime rib served on pewter dinnerware in a kinda elegant dining room in said castle, does it?

I am real. They are fakes. They want guests who are very superficial as well.

<<Not some hollow emotion which just is created by perpetually talking about it. That's just fake, there isn't anything behind it.

Just like the personalities on the Disney Parks Blog. >>

Exactly. When everything is MAGICal, nothing is MAGICal.

Disney is going to get that point in the end (no fanboi joke will be inserted here to preserve the dignity of this thread).

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

<<IF... AND ONLY IF.... used in excess or used in the wrong way.>>

Twitter is designed, like Pixie Dust, as social crack.

I know two types of people who use it (I have never nor will I) ... I recall someone here calling it the Macarena about 300 posts ago!

The two types are:

1.) someone who signs up, tweets a few times and then you look and realize they got smart and last tweeted on January 27, 2010; and

2.) the kind that Tweet so much you wonder if they ever have time for bowel movements (let's get leo to start a Tweeting on the Toilet thread ... could do a musical takeoff of that beloved 70s song 'Dancing in the Moonlight') let alone sleep or any other activity;

Very, very few individuals are in between (yes, they do exist ... but they'll soon realize what a waste it is and give it up!)

<<If you LIVE on Twitter and out out every insignificant thought or action or instance on there and it's your only medium of expression, I agree. >>

See #2 above (that has a double meaning!)

<But if you use it in a intelligent way, to gauge popular opinion as it happens, to keep a record and travelogue of places you've been, to exchange news, to communicate in a meaningful way, I have to disagree with you. >>

Popular opinion? I can ask someone if I want to know their opinion. I can read opinions in real forums from newspapers and journals and books to online blogs and discussion forums like this.

And I don't need Twitter to tell me where I've been.

I guess you can exchange news in 140 characters or less (only what if said news requires a whole lot more?) ... and you can howl until they rebuild Horizons but I don't see how Twittering is any real form of communication.

A lot of people have been sold a bill of goods, much like with FB (which I can actually see some uses for, even though I do not like it).

<<I use Twitter. Yes. But I don't base my life around it. Of course, THAT would be unhealthy. Same level of mental illness that a person has who obsesses over message boards and posting, or facebook, or ANYTHING that's "too much". >>

You doth protest too much, Young Explorer. The comment wasn't about you or anyone else in particular. It's about many people in general. ... You also chose to use the term 'obsesses' ... I never did ;-)

<<But if you actually have a iota of self control, and think about what you are doing, I can't say that something like Twitter is such a bad thing. It's interesting, to me. >>

I very much hope you grow out of it. You have a good brain in your head ... it's a terrible thing to waste!

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

<<This thread is like the Energizer Bunny. It keeps on going and going and going....>>

NOTE TO TWDC: That is what true social media is all about ... but you keep selling your Wishes, Dreams and MAGIC ... and others will be around to keep you honest.

 

Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer

>>>You doth protest too much, Young Explorer. The comment wasn't about you or anyone else in particular. It's about many people in general. ... You also chose to use the term 'obsesses' ... I never did ;-)<<<

I protest because although I have the utmost respect for your writings, they can be a little one sided on issues like this. It isn't ALL bad.

And yes, I chose to use the term obsess. Because some people do do that. And that's scary and wrong.

>>I very much hope you grow out of it. You have a good brain in your head ... it's a terrible thing to waste! <<

Well, thank you.

... I don't know "if" I'll "grow out of it", but I'm sure it won't last forever. This is what's being used right now, and that's about it.

 

Originally Posted By MousDad

>>(don't say Iger's as he has a 'shoot to kill' order on the Spirit right now) ;-)<<

I find the mental image of his tirade-inducing irritation quite amusing.

 

Originally Posted By DlandDug

>><<but only a handful will have the perfect mix of pixie dust, passion and knowledge>>

Pixie dust and passion are more important than knowledge?<<

It doesn't say they are MORE IMPORTANT than knowledge. It just asks for all three to be present.

"Pixie Dust" has become a good shorthand term for a type of irrational exuberance. Combined with passion and knowledge, I would tend to agree you have a good mix for an online "authority" on something that is, admittedly, kind of silly (ie: Disney). Take away any one of these and you end up with a lot of twittery blather, or a scholarly blog that would be of little interest outside of academic circles.

 

Originally Posted By DlandDug

I did find the responses following the blog post amusing. I can't wait to see where the escalation of claims will lead. So far we have:

Post #1: Pixie dust level = High!
Post #5: My Pixie Dust level is super high!
Post #8: My Pixie Dust level is to the moon!!
Post #10: Oh my gosh! My pixie dust level soars to another universe!

(False note: #10 should have three exclamation points.)

 

Originally Posted By dshyates

I am pretty sure that the P&R for sale thread really got Igers panties in a bunch.

And I do believe that sites like MiceAge and this one ARE why Disney is so concerned with trying to control the message. Just like GK feeding Al his info and Voila, Al plays nice.

It just blows me away how much money Disney spends in trying to wrestle EVERYTHING into what they want, while absolutely refusing to actually spend money in the right things it would take to get a positive message all over the web. Which is, keep the parks maintained like we all know they should and build exciting new parks and attractions. It really is that simple. They threw out a turd of a park and were called out on it. So now they combat it with a bazzilion $$$$$ social media initiative. But what really changed the tone of the unaffiliated social media was $1.5 billion in fixes to make DCA less turd-like. It is pretty obvious what happened out there and yet Disney is still clueless. They never understood why DCA was perceived as a turd to start with. They thought they had a blockbuster right out of the box. The creatives that tried to explain it to them were fired. And social media was blamed for it's failure. And yet they put $1.5 B into the place and it turned it around. And they think their social media dept. wrestled the message into submission. What a bunch of fricken' morons.

 

Originally Posted By leobloom

Funny, Doug!!!! (Mandatory four exclamation points)

 

Originally Posted By ChiMike

These people most be breeding mass quantities of pixies.

 

Originally Posted By leobloom

I debated giving this its own thread, but what the heck. I wanna see this Social Media thread reach 1000 or 2000 posts.

This is sort of in line with Bolna's and Spirit's so-called research on the Corporate Blog.

There's a post about some overpriced $285 event for the Haunted Mansion that will permit you the chance to buy more merchandise. Incidentally, the blog post doesn't mention the price -- you have to click away from the page to find out the cost. So someone commented:

"So is anything happening in Magic Kingdom Park on October 1st for the 40th anniversary?"

And Dara Trujillo replied:

"Disney Theme Park Merchandise is currently working on a few plans to celebrate the 40th Anniversary in a fun way! Stay tuned to the Disney Parks Blog for details!"

So I guess that means WDW's birthday will be celebrated with limited edition merchandise. That's cool. DL got the Indiana Jones Adventure and a castle stage show. MK gets some merch. Gnarly.

The other comments for this post are interesting -- you could say these are people who have have levels of pixie dust, I guess:

"Oh man, I think I need to move closer to WDW!!"

"I am totally about this! Sign me up for this epic, ghoulish feast. Long live the dead!"

"Wow, this sounds fantastic! If there weren’t so many other things going on at Disney World that weekend I would try and get a ticket. I’m sure all the happy haunts that attend will have a fabulous time."

First comment that brings up the cost of the ticket to the event which allows you to spend more money to buy merch:

"I want to go to this event in the worst way! Hefty price though! Is this a yearly event or once in a lifetime?"

Trujillo replies:

"While we have done Haunted Mansion themed events in the past, this is the first Haunted Mansion event that Walt Disney World has hosted in almost 6 years!"

So -- because it's something that rarely happens, the exorbitant cost is justified.

And then there's...this:

"Oh if only it were true! If this event is like the Disneyland Haunted Mansion Anniversary event and the Happy Haunts events, the only way to get merchandise is to purchase a ticket and pre-order, or be at the event. Everyone else will have to be like me and troll ebay for a chance to get some cool stuff at a little more cost. Wish I could be there…….seems like I wish that several times a year! Disney really comes up with fun ways to celebrate the things we love from the Parks! I will admit though, I would live at the Haunted Mansion if Disney and my wife and kids were ok with it! Of course, we would also have a residence at The Many Adventures Of Winnie The Pooh! And that said, dont forget to take the kids to see the new Pooh in theatres tomorrow! Mouse Power!"

Stunning. Simply stunning.

I glanced over this next blog post about MouseGear 2.0, and the second comment is mind-numbing:

"MouseGear is one of my favorite places to go in all of Walt Disney World. It’s the epitome of the WDW experience. I can’t wait to see the improvements when we’re there soon...."

The guy goes on to ask a question about what shop predated MouseGear. But I'm just a little amazed by these merchandise posts -- shopping for sweatshirts and watches at what amounts to Epcot's major souvenir stand is the epitome of the WDW experience? I'd be embarrassed to post that comment -- I mean, how obvious can you get Disney? We got it: you've brainwashed some of the high-level p'dusters, but I can honestly say I'll never get to the point where I would say shopping at MouseGear is the epitome of the WDW experience. (Now maybe visiting the quail tile restroom is...)

I admit I've never spent much time looking at the Disney Parks Blog (I'm a little shocked by how phony the bloggers' pictures are, too) -- but if this is par for the course, someone should start a thread just to document what's being posted over there.

 

Originally Posted By DlandDug

>>...someone should start a thread just to document what's being posted over there.<<
What a great idea. There's blogs devoted to the People of Walmart-- how about one about the Pixie-Dusted Posters of Disney?

As far as people getting excited about shopping at the magic kingdoms, it's really not all that unusual. Even Walt recognized that shopping is an important component of a full day of entertainment*. I have friends who plan their vacations around merchandising events. It's not for me, but I understand that this is what others enjoy.


*New Orleans Square was planned, in part, to increase the higher end shopping opportunities in Disneyland.

 

Originally Posted By Manfried

...and going and going...

 

Originally Posted By Bolna

<<It doesn't say they are MORE IMPORTANT than knowledge. It just asks for all three to be present.>>

Well, it does not state it explicitly, but from the whole article the emphasis certainly is on the pixie dust.

I guess, I just jumped at that because I can get so annoyed by people who are all excited about Disney but give people advice which is just wrong (such as taking a direct bus from DTD to the parks for example). I have come across that so often online as well as when listening on conversations on Disney transportation.

 

Originally Posted By Bolna

<<I admit I've never spent much time looking at the Disney Parks Blog (I'm a little shocked by how phony the bloggers' pictures are, too) -- but if this is par for the course, someone should start a thread just to document what's being posted over there.>>

Yes, reading some of the comments there, you don't wonder why the Spirit goes on about the mental health of Disney fans. However, creating a thread to document that might raise some more mental health questions... ;-)

I said it before - I am sure that the way the blog works it actually encourages people to write in that style. Because the blog itself is so cheerful, people will reply in the same manner. Even I cringed a little bit when I recently reread the three comments of mine which can be found on there.

I would agree about the pictures though. Some are quite good, but the one that really sticks out to me is actually Thomas Smith's picture. It just looks strange, kind of a bit out of focus. As if it was cropped from a bigger pictures. Every time I see it I wonder why the guy in charge of the whole blog cannot have a photographer take a better picture of him. I am sure the man looks better in person than on this picture.