A Spirited Perfect Ten

[hopemax]

But it would require REAL WORK on the part of the so called Journalist, Instead he takes the 'easy' story which promises further 'access'...

We still live in a world where journalists require "editorial approval," though, right. I can't imagine the readership of the Wall Street Journal wants to see the Disney company taken down and their investments suffer the consequences. As potentially interesting as the China story is, how much American money do we think will be risked to talk about it?

In other news, I guess Goldman Sachs did some analysis into Millennial Moms. I'm trying to reconcile how Disney is expected to do well in that environment, (Goldman still recommended them) when that WSJ article basically has Iger and Staggs' strategy in direct opposition to what this group usually chooses. Still banking on the nostalgia about how Disney USED to be, I guess.

 

[Funmeister]

What? Seriously?

I'm not trying to PROVE anything. How many times can I say, this may be true? But the evidence - the behavior of the anonymous poster, the lack of clarification of simple points about the origins of the "smoking gun" document, etc., does not lead to a foregone conclusion just because some people hate Bob Iger and they are friendly with WDW1974.

There is a difference between claiming something is false and having a reasonable doubt about some of the massive claims made here and asking for more that innuendo and dismissal.

And like I said - if WDW1974 is so connected with so many powerful people as he has bragged about so often, that jet him around and he has personal access to - why is he bothering trying to convince people here? Why did he spend hours replying to me and others about this instead of contacting those people if this is all such a big deal?

Nice try.

Ok, if you are not trying to "prove" anything then you are trying to disprove something.

If you are not trying to "prove" anything then what is your agenda? Why post?

Would be interesting if you started your own...let's call it a "Bizarro Spirited" thread giving the flipside of this argument and see where it goes.

 

[AEfx]

carefully put together over a long period of time.

So putting it across dozens of pages in a 950+ page thread, in between the same person arguing incessantly with people about petty things, making constant jabs and bringing everything down to a grade-school recess level - that's carefully put together?

Sorry, you just hit on exactly what my biggest issue is with this whole thing - NOTHING is carefully put together. How can it be taken seriously in it's current form? Let's say some journalist with integrity showed up here - do you really expect they are going to sift through this mess of a thread to figure it all out?

That's just another reason this all just does not add up. If I had this kind of information, it would be written in one piece and I would publish it myself if I had to. You know, this new Internet thing is great like that - you can create a blog, promote it and get as many eyes on it as possible.

THAT'S how change happens. Not scattered postings like has been done here.

 

[khale1970]

Spirit approaches his reporting as if he were being held to high journalistic standards. Most of what he puts out, especially anything involving China, has been vetted with at least three separate sources. This is very carefully thought out. Whether some folks choose to understand or appreciate this is up to those who question the quality of the reporting.

But even with anonymous posters vouching for the anonymous poster, an anonymous poster citing anonymous sources isn't reporting as if held to the highest journalistic standards. If no one, including the reporter, is willing to put their name on the info, it stays on a message board and doesn't make the WSJ. That doesn't make the story untrue, but it does lead to legitimate skepticism when the poster has a known agenda.

 

[PhotoDave219]

You are being obtuse and not answering my question.

If YOU had this story, would YOU go to the ONE reporter who MOST likely was in-bed, to get a quid pro quo, etc. whatever you want to call it, from the WDC who regularly writes about them, knowing all that you just said to me?

I would. If I was playing this game, because I'd know that a WDC story would be coming out anyway and I could point to it and say SEE!

Given that WDW1974 has now upped the accusations and named him, I'm waiting for the next step - a C&D. "Look guys, they've got me - I can't say anything else."

If I were playing the game going on here, that's how I'd get myself out of it.

I've answered your question the best I can.

 

[doctornick]

If you have info to counter a claim, then present it. But if you're just disagreeing and have no info to back it up, you're just wasting bandwidth.

Why would someone have to have info countering a claim to be involved in the discussion? Is it not enough to comment on lack of evidence or on leaps of logic that others are making?

 

[AEfx]

If you are not trying to "prove" anything then what is your agenda? Why post?

I want the truth to come out, whatever it is.

 

[ItlngrlBella]

Not from what I've seen at Rotten Tomatoes. It's not going to be a classic like the original, but it's actually reviewing pretty well for a summer blockbuster (around 75%).

I was in the car for 2 hours today most of the time the radio talk host was quoting reviews but I don't remember who/which ones. He just went on and on about how bad it was. That's what I was going off of - maybe the guy was just bent? I'm surprised to see its doing that well on Rotten Tomatoes after hearing the opposite.

 

[Phil12]

Ok, if you are not trying to "prove" anything then you are trying to disprove something.

If you are not trying to "prove" anything then what is your agenda? Why post?

Would be interesting if you started your own...let's call it a "Bizarro Spirited" thread giving the flipside of this argument and see where it goes.

What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. Why? Because it is rumor.

 

[AEfx]

I've answered your question the best I can.

No, you didn't - you patronized me like I didn't realize how stories are traded. I couldn't have asked it any more simply, so I guess I have my answer.

 

[PhotoDave219]

I want the truth to come out, whatever it is.

I do as well. Alas, we're talking about the corporate image of the company and whatever evidence that exists, will be hard to come by.

 

[PhotoDave219]

No, you didn't - you patronized me like I didn't realize how stories are traded. I couldn't have asked it any more simply, so I guess I have my answer.

Because you're off base on the idea of someone being "bought-off"... that not what likely happened here.

 

[lazyboy97o]

How many years did it take for the American media to cover the worker suicides at the Foxconn facilities that make much of the world's electronic devices?
How many years did it take for them to treat the NSA domestic surveillance programs like a major story as opposed to something on page A9?

Just because a BIG story is out there does not mean it will be covered. A handful of tech blogs reported on the suicides at "iPod City" back in the mid aughts, but it never recieved significant attention beyond that. A now retracted piece of faux journalism on This American Life brought it to the forefront. The warrantless wiretapping program was largely brushed off in the American media until The Guardian recieved the Snowden documents two years ago.

Spirit never said that there weren't ANY journalist who wanted to cover this, but rather the most influential outlets were turning the story down or their reporters were told by Disney to look elsewhere for fear of reprisals. This is big story that Spirit, because of his circumstances working in Asia and his connections at Disney and in the greater media/entertainment industry, carefully put together over a long period of time. Not every journalist has the reporting background or an employer willing to assign them to such an expensive and time consuming project. If institutions like The Wall Street Journal or the Times or the like don't want to cover it, it's not going to become a story that matters.

It could easily become a story that matters if he just started his own outlet. Or even just put it all together and out right here.

 

[ItlngrlBella]

In other news, I guess Goldman Sachs did some analysis into Millennial Moms.

In my line of work, that's who I interact/work with (and their kids). I'd LOVE to see that data/research.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Because you're off base on the idea of someone being "bought-off"... that not what likely happened here.

It's exactly what people keep saying. This happens all the time. Interesting language is used and then the concept is denied when someone wants to use more pointed terms.

 

[Funmeister]

Why does @AEfx need to provide proof? Spirit has never provided any proof for any of it, except to say, believe me because of who I am. While I can certainly believe the inside information about new rides/attractions/etc. - except Frozen Ever After - how did he miss that one? - how can I believe the rantings of someone when NOT ONE SINGLE NEWS AGENCY IN THE ENTIRE WORLD has reported any of this. Please provide PROOF as to how this is possible. And to me, this is proof that it isn't anything like what Spirit has stated.

And yet lots of news agencies are reporting on Disney's awful practice of laying off IT workers, and making Disney look extremely bad in the press over it. This is such a minor issue compared to what Spirit is claiming for SDL, and yet no one else is reporting it? C'mon. Really???? Let's get back to reality.

Because he is questioning the information that has already been given.

Don't muddy the waters with other news stories. While you are waiting for your bus please try to focus and stay on topic.

Information was given by Spirit. Some question the validity of the information...fine. He tells you what he wants to validate the authenticity of the information. At that point you have two options.

1. Believe it and move on

or

2. Don't believe it and move on

At this point you (and others) keep rehashing for more proof. Start your own thread on why he is wrong. lol The man stated what he did. He is not trying to convert you to Islam or Christianity or any other club. He stated information. Not sure why you feel he owes you anything more than that. This is a public blog. LOL

I challenge you to start your own thread what you feel are the "facts" and the "truth" and I wish you luck.

 

[AEfx]

Because you're off base on the idea of someone being "bought-off"... that not what likely happened here.

Stop it Dave, seriously.

Bought off (which is one of the things WDW1974 actually said - that he was likely offered a trip) is just a generic term.

Bought off - quid pro quo story trading - I'll touch yours if you touch mine - whatever you want to call it.

Take "quid pro quo" story trading, which I believe was your terminology, and replace the word bought-off with it if that indeed is so bothersome and trouble for you to understand.

 

[Funmeister]

I want the truth to come out, whatever it is.

Ok. I respect that. Then support what he says as truth or research to disprove what he is saying with what you find. Why keep recycling this calling him a liar? It's his thread in a PUBLIC BLOG! Start your own with your own theories. It's all good be Jesus enough with the witch hunt. He doesn't owe an explanation to anyone. Hell NO ONE owes ANYONE an explanation for anything on here. It's a freakin' socail bulletin board (with all due respect to Steve and everything he does here! )

 

[ItlngrlBella]

Here is GS's Millenials report (which I've seen), but can't find a specific report on the " Moms "

http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/pages/millennials/index.html?cid=PS_01_18_07_00_02_15_01

 

[AEfx]

Start your own thread on why he is wrong. lol The man stated what he did. He is not trying to convert you to Islam or Christianity or any other club. He stated information. Not sure why you feel he owes you anything more than that. This is a public blog. LOL

Because you apparently missed the part of the thread where he railed against anyone who was asking any questions whatsoever. It would be absurd to start another thread when all of the "evidence" is right here in this one.

If you don't like my or others posts, use the ignore feature. Like I am now because I don't feel like bothering to even read someone who is simply playing word games and fanning the fires.