LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
I was sad when you departed but also pleased for you. You saved yourself many pointless hours!
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Toxic fandom ?
- Thread starter networkpro
- Start date
ShookieJones
We need time for things to happen.
This has nothing to do with Disney Fandom. It's just the internet. 
What we are seeing/hearing is that every single thing in the US (quite possibly the world) has become political.
What we're seeing/hearing is that we can discuss little to nothing now-a-days without someone getting up in arms and making it something political.
You have one side clamoring for the way things used to be and they want it back
You have one side clamoring for the way things should be and they want it right now
No compromise.
No middle ground can be accepted.
Is that the way things ACTUALLY are, is that they way MOST PEOPLE think or is that what we're being led to believe?
I don't know, for sure, but I THINK all this noise is coming from the vocal minority.
A few way too angry 'old' people.
A few way too woke 'young' people
Both tiny groups with way too much time on their hands. So they turn to social media and all their fears are met with confirmation.
They in turn go back and feed social media (with their ample time) with more BS about how bad things are for them due to XY&Z.
Most people I talk to, hang out with, work with and see on a regular basis are decent human beings don't condemn other and truly would help others if they needed help. They all seem pretty happy and not angry or overly woke and wouldn't do anything truly awful to hurt other humans.
I think most humans are nice people and they will react nicely to being treated nicely.
We're generally good people 'around here'. Sure there may be a few folks that get a little too political one way or the other but most of us are not trying to be mean to each other.
What we are seeing/hearing is that every single thing in the US (quite possibly the world) has become political.
What we're seeing/hearing is that we can discuss little to nothing now-a-days without someone getting up in arms and making it something political.
You have one side clamoring for the way things used to be and they want it back
You have one side clamoring for the way things should be and they want it right now
No compromise.
No middle ground can be accepted.
Is that the way things ACTUALLY are, is that they way MOST PEOPLE think or is that what we're being led to believe?
I don't know, for sure, but I THINK all this noise is coming from the vocal minority.
A few way too angry 'old' people.
A few way too woke 'young' people
Both tiny groups with way too much time on their hands. So they turn to social media and all their fears are met with confirmation.
They in turn go back and feed social media (with their ample time) with more BS about how bad things are for them due to XY&Z.
Most people I talk to, hang out with, work with and see on a regular basis are decent human beings don't condemn other and truly would help others if they needed help. They all seem pretty happy and not angry or overly woke and wouldn't do anything truly awful to hurt other humans.
I think most humans are nice people and they will react nicely to being treated nicely.
We're generally good people 'around here'
. Sure there may be a few folks that get a little too political one way or the other but most of us are not trying to be mean to each other.
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
That is very kind of you to say and I very much sympathise with you for staying as I have had the impulse at other times. I did come to the conclusion, though, that I neither enjoyed it nor would anything productive come from staying in there!
mysto
Well-Known Member
I think a "dislike" button gives posters the ability to quietly disagree without bothering to literally argue. It's much more useful than a "report" button.
When someone says something crass and gets a bunch of downvotes on other forums they tend to skulk away, even apologize. Without that feedback arguments just escalate into louder and louder shouting until someone reports something.
When someone says something crass and gets a bunch of downvotes on other forums they tend to skulk away, even apologize. Without that feedback arguments just escalate into louder and louder shouting until someone reports something.
Michaelson
Well-Known Member
It's a bit more than just the internet. After a full year of hiding behind walls of toilet paper for a year, folks came out into the light of day with a mind set of 'survival of the fittest'.
I've seen more people blow through red lights and pass me doing at LEAST 80+ (I was doing 68 myself on the interstate), and in more numbers than I've ever witnessed in my life....on a daily basis! Laws of the road are more guidelines than anything else.
It's been interesting to watch, as long as you don't get side swiped while watching.....that goes with internet exchanges too! The keyboard warriors are even MORE emboldened these days.
As a moderator/administrator of another hobby website, we've been dealing with exactly the same type mindset.....folks I've exchanged conversations with for literally decades have suddenly got an 'edge' to their responses that, quite frankly, surprise the heck out of me! It takes little to nothing to trigger a firestorm of debate over a topic of little consequence. A few are on the cusp of being given a time out too!
Weird times.
Sociality civility is a hard sell (say THAT 3 times fast! LOL!)
Regards! Michaelson
I've seen more people blow through red lights and pass me doing at LEAST 80+ (I was doing 68 myself on the interstate), and in more numbers than I've ever witnessed in my life....on a daily basis! Laws of the road are more guidelines than anything else.
It's been interesting to watch, as long as you don't get side swiped while watching.....that goes with internet exchanges too! The keyboard warriors are even MORE emboldened these days.
As a moderator/administrator of another hobby website, we've been dealing with exactly the same type mindset.....folks I've exchanged conversations with for literally decades have suddenly got an 'edge' to their responses that, quite frankly, surprise the heck out of me! It takes little to nothing to trigger a firestorm of debate over a topic of little consequence. A few are on the cusp of being given a time out too!
Weird times.
Sociality civility is a hard sell (say THAT 3 times fast! LOL!)
Regards! Michaelson
Last edited:
GrumpyDude
Active Member
My Disney never had Internet forums. We had to wait until we got there to discover when changes were made.
Tony the Tigger
Well-Known Member
Entitlement of amateurs. Across the board.
When they want your untrained opinion, they’ll send a survey.
When they want your untrained opinion, they’ll send a survey.
TotallyBiased
Well-Known Member
The Social Dilemma on Netflix was an interesting take. I'm not sure whether it's more factual or alarmist, but it's interesting nonetheless.
Here in Knox,, the yellow lines are apparently meant to align your car with down the middle but the drivers aren't nearly as crazy otherwise from what I've seen.
That varies per city. New England has always been pretty crazy in that respect. Lived in MA until 2013 and then transferred to Knoxville, TN. Commuted from MA to Windsor CT daily. I91 was essentially a track meet every day; and if you didn't keep up, you were gonna get run over. I'll make a drive north from time to time (13-14 hrs straight). 81N to 95E to 91N. As soon as you cross over from NY to CT, it changes to chaos within like 30 min. If I haven't been up in awhile, I'm usually a bit caught off guard until I settle back into northeastern driving mode. I can't really say if it's gotten any worse than it was. The wife says Dallas is just as bad if not worse.
Here in Knox,, the yellow lines are apparently meant to align your car with down the middle but the drivers aren't nearly as crazy otherwise from what I've seen.
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
I don't know, Reddit is not exactly known for being the most civil place on the Internet.
Dead2009
Horror Movie Guru
The political forum was the perfect example of ppl being belittled for their opinion....
jloucks
Well-Known Member
This has nothing to do with Disney Fandom. It's just the internet.
What we are seeing/hearing is that every single thing in the US (quite possibly the world) has become political.
What we're seeing/hearing is that we can discuss little to nothing now-a-days without someone getting up in arms and making it something political.
You have one side clamoring for the way things used to be and they want it back
You have one side clamoring for the way things should be and they want it right now
No compromise.
No middle ground can be accepted.
Is that the way things ACTUALLY are, is that they way MOST PEOPLE think or is that what we're being led to believe?
I don't know, for sure, but I THINK all this noise is coming from the vocal minority.
A few way too angry 'old' people.
A few way too woke 'young' people
Both tiny groups with way too much time on their hands. So they turn to social media and all their fears are met with confirmation.
They in turn go back and feed social media (with their ample time) with more BS about how bad things are for them due to XY&Z.
Most people I talk to, hang out with, work with and see on a regular basis are decent human beings don't condemn other and truly would help others if they needed help. They all seem pretty happy and not angry or overly woke and wouldn't do anything truly awful to hurt other humans.
I think most humans are nice people and they will react nicely to being treated nicely.
We're generally good people 'around here'
The core for it all is the "No Compromise" mentality. It is everywhere and it is fueled by a new sense of moral and ethical righteousness. When people think they have the moral high-ground, something weird happens. They label anyone that doesn't agree as a moral degenerate and you cannot compromise with a moral degenerate or you too become a little degenerate. ...and they get a little hit of moral dopamine.
And, now here is where is gets really weird, I think we can all think of some examples where we completely agree that you cannot compromise with a moral degenerate. Many examples I would think.
Where do you draw the line? Well, now, see? That is part of the problem.
Karakasa
Well-Known Member
I feel like the article doesn't really do a good enough job at specifying what the author means by toxic fans. There are certainly subsets that people would consider toxic, and others would not, all depending on their world or political views.
. Others would see criticism of that part of the fandom as a good thing (such as myself), while others still would say any in-fighting at all is inherently toxic and simply want an environment without any argumentation at all.
Certainly, I feel like honest criticism of the Walt Disney Company, its art/products, and its CEOs could possibly be seen as toxicity by a huge swathe of the Disney fandom. "If you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all" is a nice thought, but nothing gets changed that way. And things are always in need of changing with anything. Especially for the cast members and employees of the company, who still get mistreated to this day (albeit, some don't mind, but they inherently do).
. But it does mention, at points, honest criticism, such as attraction changes or price hikes. Honest criticism can indeed be biting, even if the intent is not to demean effort or individuals, but rather, the work they presented or actions they performed. Its inclusion makes it seem as if the author believes such criticism can potentially be considered toxic.
That, in my opinion, is nonsense. Saying Chapek should be fired, for instance, is simply not something I'd consider toxic, (even if as the interviewed individual in the article points out, is ultimately a deflection). It could be for someone lower on the pecking order, but for the literal CEO, it simply doesn't effect him. That individual comment is one he will never see, likely wouldn't care about, and likely isn't something major shareholders and the board of directors would consider. If such a decision is made, it will be made based on customer comments on things the company produced under his lead, not comments on him directly (unless he suddenly says something inappropriate, anyway). In fact, I would argue the author was irresponsible in featuring that one tweet calling for firing Chapek - at the time I read the article, there were only 2 replies and 4 likes on that tweet. Certainly it was rather inflammatory and over the top without a seeming intent to be humorous, but ultimately, it was extremely smalltime when it comes to tweets. At best, the author called attention to a tweet they considered toxic enough to include in spite of so few people knowing it existed, and at worst, they've sent harassment the tweeter's way for, again, a comment that will not effect Chapek in the slightest.
Saying something even less inflammatory, like expressing distaste for Harmonious or not liking the way representation is handled across the company's films and parks; or something essentially true, such as cast members and employees deserve better conditions and pay... well, that could be seen as toxic under the article author's view as well, given someone at the company could potentially have their feelings hurt at maybe potentially seeing that comment.
It seems most here are in agreement that there's a certain level of toxicity in the fandom, but here, it seems like most is focused on the bigoted aspects or the individuals who harass others over benign opinions. The article very well could have focused on that, and it did spend a lot of time on those subject. But it jumps around too much and makes an "all sides" argument. Or, well, it doesn't even necessarily condemn anyone. It just says "there is a toxicity problem in the Disney fandom, here are examples" and while the implication is condemnation, it doesn't actually carry through. The article simply says "well, Disney fans are passionate" and... that's it.
And I'm sorry, but the bigoted aspects of the fandom do indeed need calling out- just as much as the company itself needs to be called out for its treatment of cast members and for aspects of its artistic offerings that are problematic and either require a WB-style disclaimer (in the case of film/TV) or a removal/replacing (in the case of things in the parks). And maybe, just maybe offering opinions on social media, so long as they do not target harassment at anyone, is not toxic, but genuine human nature, looking to ensure things are best for everyone? Just an idea.
In conclusion: The article correctly identifies there's an issue in the fandom. But it fails to properly identify what that issue is; at best, it fails to separate the ills of the company and its consumers from genuine critique, and really ought to take a stance of some sort. At worst, it "both sides" the issue, which solves nothing.
. Others would see criticism of that part of the fandom as a good thing (such as myself), while others still would say any in-fighting at all is inherently toxic and simply want an environment without any argumentation at all.
Certainly, I feel like honest criticism of the Walt Disney Company, its art/products, and its CEOs could possibly be seen as toxicity by a huge swathe of the Disney fandom. "If you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all" is a nice thought, but nothing gets changed that way. And things are always in need of changing with anything. Especially for the cast members and employees of the company, who still get mistreated to this day (albeit, some don't mind, but they inherently do).
. But it does mention, at points, honest criticism, such as attraction changes or price hikes. Honest criticism can indeed be biting, even if the intent is not to demean effort or individuals, but rather, the work they presented or actions they performed. Its inclusion makes it seem as if the author believes such criticism can potentially be considered toxic.
That, in my opinion, is nonsense. Saying Chapek should be fired, for instance, is simply not something I'd consider toxic, (even if as the interviewed individual in the article points out, is ultimately a deflection). It could be for someone lower on the pecking order, but for the literal CEO, it simply doesn't effect him. That individual comment is one he will never see, likely wouldn't care about, and likely isn't something major shareholders and the board of directors would consider. If such a decision is made, it will be made based on customer comments on things the company produced under his lead, not comments on him directly (unless he suddenly says something inappropriate, anyway). In fact, I would argue the author was irresponsible in featuring that one tweet calling for firing Chapek - at the time I read the article, there were only 2 replies and 4 likes on that tweet. Certainly it was rather inflammatory and over the top without a seeming intent to be humorous, but ultimately, it was extremely smalltime when it comes to tweets. At best, the author called attention to a tweet they considered toxic enough to include in spite of so few people knowing it existed, and at worst, they've sent harassment the tweeter's way for, again, a comment that will not effect Chapek in the slightest.
Saying something even less inflammatory, like expressing distaste for Harmonious or not liking the way representation is handled across the company's films and parks; or something essentially true, such as cast members and employees deserve better conditions and pay... well, that could be seen as toxic under the article author's view as well, given someone at the company could potentially have their feelings hurt at maybe potentially seeing that comment.
It seems most here are in agreement that there's a certain level of toxicity in the fandom, but here, it seems like most is focused on the bigoted aspects or the individuals who harass others over benign opinions. The article very well could have focused on that, and it did spend a lot of time on those subject. But it jumps around too much and makes an "all sides" argument. Or, well, it doesn't even necessarily condemn anyone. It just says "there is a toxicity problem in the Disney fandom, here are examples" and while the implication is condemnation, it doesn't actually carry through. The article simply says "well, Disney fans are passionate
" and... that's it.And I'm sorry, but the bigoted aspects of the fandom do indeed need calling out- just as much as the company itself needs to be called out for its treatment of cast members and for aspects of its artistic offerings that are problematic and either require a WB-style disclaimer (in the case of film/TV) or a removal/replacing (in the case of things in the parks). And maybe, just maybe offering opinions on social media, so long as they do not target harassment at anyone, is not toxic, but genuine human nature, looking to ensure things are best for everyone? Just an idea.
In conclusion: The article correctly identifies there's an issue in the fandom. But it fails to properly identify what that issue is; at best, it fails to separate the ills of the company and its consumers from genuine critique, and really ought to take a stance of some sort. At worst, it "both sides" the issue, which solves nothing.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dear Prudence
Well-Known Member
It's worth noting that the author of this piece (and I hesitate to call it a "piece") has repeatedly used Black and Indigenous pain for her own monetized clickbait on SF Gate. This person's whole MO--she constantly uses buzzwords or brings things up that don't have anything to do with her she KNOWS are inflammatory. So, whilst there may be a toxicity issue, not just in Disney fandom, but literally everywhere the internet reaches these days-- and has always been there, this is just another garbage monetized clickbait "piece" by this person.Interesting article
'Calling you Hitler': The toxic online infighting of Disney superfans
‘The happiest place on Earth’ is bringing out the worst in people online.www.sfgate.com
Dear Prudence
Well-Known Member
This is another issue--people aren't using N*zi as a flippant insult, they literally exist in these spaces, and in many cases, have been allowed to thrive, unfortunately. I know there are many who take issue with the "lack of compromise," but there is no compromise and there are no "both sides" when you are talking about certain ideologies.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
'They start calling you Hitler': Why [Insert fandom of your choice here] has some of the most toxic fans on the internet
AdventureHasAName
Well-Known Member
Amazingly, Reddit became even less civil after it banned all the conservatives.
Dear Prudence
Well-Known Member
Apparently, Reddit is some kind of cesspool, but I have never seen this. I am not saying it doesn't exist, but since the only threads I've seen are makeup, Pokemon, or theatre gossip-related, I've somehow missed this.
Squidney
Active Member
People can easily abuse that dislike button to get under other people's skin. Not sure you'd want that on a place this big.
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
The laughing emoji is already misused for that purpose, even though there’s a rule against it.
Squidney
Active Member
I mean, from what I've heard, everyone here abused that ability.