Bloggers and Podcasters need to be controlled

[RSoxNo1]

Doesn't this mean that Lou Mongello should now be barred from any Disney park east of the Mississippi?

This is the comment of the year.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Be very careful what you post. Apparently, if you say anything that could remotely be considered negative about a public figure and how he conducts himself, you might be at risk of being sued for libel or slander or some such thing.

I learned that earlier this year, from some of the preeminent legal scholars who happen to frequent these boards.

You're right, by repeating what is said in a comic book I'm committing slander.

 

[WDW1974]

Mind....blown.
Stomach...turned.

Good thing I didn't eat before hearing that ... at some point, the Celebration Place Social Media Cabal is going to have to address Lou's status.

Or, actually, Burbank will have to. Because this is corporate. It isn't the simple mention of a name. It's the name of a for-profit enterprise that 'covers' Disney P&R and alleges to be independent, appearing in another division of TWDC in what isn't merely free advertising but a bold BRAND building exercise for Lou.

The notion that this could 'just be' a casual friend of Lou's inserting his name is beyond nonsensical and shows a profound lack of knowledge for how media conglomerates operate. IF that happened, mutiple people would no longer be in the employ of TWDC and its subsidiaries. Actually, security would have escorted them out before anyone here saw that issue.

Oh, and I will be back later to discuss the ignorance of the 'jealousy' argument that some of the MAGICal denizens toss out here whenever someone like Lou dares to be questioned. But important call first!
(so y'all have time to prepare)

 

[Skip]

You're right, by repeating what is said in a comic book I'm committing slander.

I'm almost positive he's being sarcastic.

I'm beyond words in regards to the comic cameo. I wouldn't have such a problem with the "Disney Lifestyle Blog Brigade" if they offered full disclosure in what freebies they get when offering their thoughts/reviews. Most websites have a very strict ethics policy that actually prevents its staff from keeping any element of promotional/review materials... for example, gaming website "Joystiq's" policy requires its staffers to offer free promotional materials (such as figurines, art books, Collector Editions, whatnot) as part of contests.

 

[JoeZer]

If I had not been a Disney forums lurker or somewhat familiar with the bigger players in the Disney parks fan community, I would have not read much more in to the use of Lou's name and podcast title that just a radio reporter identifying himself and the radio station he reports for.

Even with my, comparatively, limited exposure to the community, I would have shaken my head at catching the insert and it being used as part of the masses being maligned by J. Jonah Jameson and be done with it. The average comic reader is more than likely not going to be tempted to find out if Lou and his podcast are real.

*Back to lurking*

 

[WDW1974]

Methinks that the people that complain about bloggers getting treated well, are just jealous.

How convenient it would be if that were the truth. But to the mature thinkers here on MAGIC and those who communicate their thoughts effectively, this is a far more complex issue with sweeping implications than can not be answered with that juvenile retort. So much so that rather than beat ... that whatever we do around here way too often (is Avatar happening? is it wrong to steal soda from Disney? how good a singer really is that hillbilly Lee?) ... I'm simply going to import three seminal posts I authored on Social Media and the Mouse in the summer of 2011.

They are meant to enlighten and many online and in the real world found the topic to be quite illuminating. BTW, you do realize that I have a broader audience by posting here on MAGIC than Lou Mongello does, right? You know that dude ... who has a weekly podcast that people know to tune into. He almost broke the 500 viewer mark live at the Fantasyland media party, which happened to be scheduled during his regular weekly podcast time. Doncha all just love the Spirited threads that go on forever with no advanced notice and no website touting them? In other words, people have to seek my stuff out (yet they do). Hmm ... now what's that about jealousy?

 

[WDW1974]

From 6/20/11:

Had an interesting lunch today with an old friend and media industry wunderkind. He is well aware of my online Spirited persona (and as that evil twin WDW1974 on various others sites over the years) and enjoys reading my rantings and ramblings and observations (most of the time, anyway).

He had a very interesting take on the subject at hand.

Social Media is supposed to be all about getting closer to your core. Reaching out and touching them and (oops, about to go all Neil Diamond here) and adding more customers by making a connection.

Folks have criticized me here for calling out folks at WDW Social Media like Thomas Smith and Gary Buchanan for failing to come over here and play (actually, discuss the whole very serious subject in an intellectual fashion) saying they would never do that and it could open them up to legal issues and blah, blah, blah.

The whole point (and what my friend was getting at today, and I felt for a very rare occasion like an intellectual inferior for not thinking of this, or articulating it) is that folks like Thomas and Gary and all the faces you see blogging on The Disney Parks Blog are supposed to be making connections with the fan community. And yet ... they have no online personality. Nobody knows what they're like ... or what they're favorite WDW attractions are and why (since we have a thread going). Perhaps, that's because they love every park and attraction equally, which of course isn't true but would be what the company would like to spin. Because everything's MAGICal and they couldn't possibly have faves because it would also mean there are things they don't like (imagine if Gary Buchanan can't stand MuppetVision or Thomas Smith hates DAK).

Don't want to go off on a tangent too much, but I do feel like a stallion ready for a run ;-)

There are no faces, no personalities, no back and forth with the fans, even on the official site, there's never any dialogue (answering a basic question doesn't qualify). How is this Social Media exactly?

As my friend, who has been advisor to some of the biggest names in media pointed out over burritos, YOU (meaning ME) have an online presence, a personality that transcends one Disney site (his words, not mine). People may loathe me or love me, but they read me, and they know what they're going to get: integrity and honesty. In essence, as my friend pointed out, I am ''engaging in social media in its purest form'' through my posts and the discussions that follow.

Again, where is that in Disney's approach? Where is Thomas Smith? Actually, WHO is Thomas Smith? Let's go higher. Don't want to be accused of picking the low hanging fruit.

Where's Duncan Wardle? (As an aside, my friend likened Duncan's grasp of BRANDING to a tenured-college professor that has no knowledge outside of academia of the real-world application of what he speaks of in a core requirement for your degree).

What does Duncan think? About anything related to TWDC and the parks and the BRAND?

What about Zenia Mucha? She's the head of all corporate communications for the company, writes PR for Bob Iger himself and somehow is listed as the Publisher of D23. Where are her interactions with the fans and the fan community? Make that, with the consumer base?

How is publishing your press releases to the Disney Parks Blog somehow social media?

I dunno, neither does my friend (you don't want to know his IQ), but it seems like The Spirit has more of an online legit social media presence than the talking heads (that say little that the fans don't already know, and they don't bother to acknowledge or engage them) of Disney Social Media.

I really need to get my Spirited tees made ... and those tour guide caps too! ;-)

 

[WDW1974]

From 6/22/11:

Spirit of 74


"Who the {bleep} are these people?"

Let's leave that sit for a bit.

This thread has taken a lot of interesting twists and turns, but I recently talked to a friend at Disney (oh yeah, I still have some) about a variety of things and naturally the whole Social Media/D23/fansite payola topic and I was a bit surprised that Burbank isn't as concerned about how much money is being thrown away (wasted, in my opinion, as you all know) at these 'fanbois/soccer moms/bored housewife' bloggers/podcasters/DVD sellers/IP thieves etc.

Nope. Not saying that isn't a 'concern' just this is Disney where $400 million Test Track knockoffs get built (and there's a helluva rumor concerning that attraction right now), mediocre films (talking TRON Legacy here) have marketing budgets that make NBA contracts look small and millions of dollars in merchandise simply disappears at WDW annually, much before it ever hits a shelf ... so Disney knows how to burn through cash as quickly as the CEO of one of those dubious 'non-profits' that have also flourished of late.

No ... it's just Disney's biggest concern came as a bit of a shock to me.

They want to know who these people are. Literally.

Really.

You see, if you credential a cameraman from an NBC affiliate in South Carolina and he turns out to be a sexual predator, well, that's the responsibility of his employer. ... And he'd likely have been weeded out before even getting hired through a routine background check.

But what if that dude is a podcaster?

That's a question that's been asked.

How many of these folks (many of whom never had real jobs or simply were somehow able to drop a real world existence for a Disney Online MAGICal Lifestyle) have backgrounds that make lily white Disney worry? And what kind of individuals would be 'free' to just do so? How many have been convicted of crimes? How many have simply been accused? How many 'earned' their money in unethical or immoral ways that could reflect poorly on the company? How many have engaged in other activities that would make Disney PR hacks cringe? How many are 'liking' other organizations/causes/websites/products/people that do NOT fit into the Disney BRAND?

A lot, apparently.

Because a lot of these people have MUCH to hide ... it may speak to why many of them have never had or kept real jobs. Just two examples of ' Disney online webmasters/bloggers Gone Wild' that have been uncovered with a little digging include a Mommy who was charged with stealing her child's ADD meds and getting hooked (a felony, btw) and another who has had numerous DUIs, including one that resulted in an accident that injured a child.

Oh, and there was one other disturbing comment my Disney friend made regarding those many bloggers/podcasters invited to the Dream launch. Without the company formally looking into each and every invitee, several were 'known to be' folks with histories of filing claims at WDW in the past prior to their new-found method of gaming the Mouse.

You're TWDC, you REALLY want to be involved with people like that?

As Disney FINALLY begins to look closer with the prying eyes not unlike an employer in present day America, who knows what they'll find.

Understand this is something new in the online world because in real media no vetting is required. It's already been done based upon the journalist's affiliations and accreditations. And, as stated here somewhere maybe 400 posts ago, there is no accreditation body that exists for fan sites, nor could there ever be one ... (if only I could start one as it beats standing out in the heat giving theme park tours for a measly $400-1000 a day, as you know my back-up employment plan ;-) )

Point here is apparently Disney is realizing right now that the 'who?' is more important than the 'how much?' because of how much damage the wrong relationship can cause down the line ... And considering that some of these people (giving a great benefit to many) likely have a lot of baggage that could be too heavy for Disney to carry, it is going to be interesting to see how this is going to play out.

I genuinely feel for some of the D23 reps in Anaheim later this summer because I can already sense they're going to constantly be pulled aside by these folks and asked 'am I all right?' ... 'do I/we have anything to worry about?' ... 'what does (fill in the blank) have to do with whether I am allowed/invited to cover something at WDW?'

Oh ... and the quote that started the post above. That was spoken by a high-ranking exec of TWDC at the Disney Dream launch (I am told sound may even exist of this ;-) ) when surveying some of the 'invited' online folks in the crowd.

Turns out, that's really the key to this whole subject.

 

[WDW1974]

From 7/25/11:

<<I don't even know what to say anymore.>>

Bingo!!!

Frankly, I'm not sure that even I do, which may really be the whole point. Muddy the waters until no one can see a thing, and then they'll go swim elsewhere.

It's all about derailing a train ... a train of thought. And focusing that either elsewhere or simply taking it to the Land of Confusion.

That is the problem folks. That is the hinge on which the door swings. Social Media exists as a method of message control that does not translate well from the individual to the corporate citizen.

There is simply no way of escaping the Big Brother aspect that does more than permeate the medium, it is the very feed on which it survives. Get the message, stay on message, and spread the message.

I have been thinking about the hollow example of the movie reviewer being 'influenced' to write a positive review by being given a free ticket to see the same. How odd that then one does not likewise feel receiving tens of thousands of dollars in Disney vacations and VIP experiences does not influence the blogger/podcaster/recipient ...

To me, this is not a tenable position. It isn't logical.

Much like Social Media is not, ultimately as employed by corporations, a tenable or legitimate medium for communication. It is, now anyhow, largely public relations for the big player as well as the small. And with the increasing presence of the big player, it has devolved quickly into pure -- and,yes, undecorated -- propaganda.

Only, it is clearly propaganda to the trained eye. To the few out there who know and can look deeper. Few of us can, few of us have the time or inclination. But, maybe we should look at an entirely non-Disney example.

Let's say, for the purpose of this post, your neighbor just pulled into his driveway with a shiny new car. We'll call it 'Brand Y'. You congratulate him on the purchase. He tells you all about the wonderful Brand Y in his driveway.

You've known the fellow next door for several years now. He picks up your mail when you go on vacation, takes in the newspaper. He has a key to your house. So, yeah, you have every reason to trust him. And, yeah, you begin to think 'if he's wowed by this Brand Y, why aren't I?'

Well, he tells you all of the many reasons you should be. Hits on all the legitimately good features Brand Y delivers. Tells you why you TOO should drive BRAND Y. Hell, your buddy from next door even links you online to this incredible blog that expounds the virtues of Brand Y and why EVERYONE should be driving BRAND Y.

You look around, you do your own due diligence. You buy a Brand Y for yourself.

Then, you find out about all of the many shortcomings of BRAND Y. And you begin to ask yourself why you bought the darn car anyway. Why did you need to have a BRAND Y ... ?

Only then do you learn your neighbor did NOT buy BRAND Y. BRAND Y was a gift from the company to promote BRAND Y. To sell as many of his 'friends' and 'connections' on BRAND Y. Moreover, because BRAND Y is a powerhouse in the industry, all of the information you had access to online and in your sphere of influence was filtered, edited, censored to satisfy and artificially prop-up BRAND Y.

You had FACTS ... but just the facts BRAND Y wished you to see and in the context the company wanted you to see them in.

Now, not only are you stuck with BRAND Y, you have five years of payments to make on a mistake that was brought about by underhanded, devious means. After all, you were not even in the market for a car. Much less a BRAND Y. You were sold, or conned, by your belief in the 'friendship' you had with your neighbor.

When you enter a BRAND Y dealership, you know you're getting a sales pitch. But when you're chatting with your neighbor at a weekend BBQ?

Given that, given that your neighbor who sold you on a BRAND Y was not a consumer of BRAND Y but in reality a stealth sales agent for BRAND Y, would you not feel taken advantage of?

Really, to all those reading, would you not feel like the dupe, the patsy?

Now, take BRAND Y and replace it with Disney or any major brand.

That is the disease that is Social Media in 2011. To all those lavishing themselves in the Disney lifestyle, a great purge is coming. Companies like and including Disney, as the medium matures, will be looking to strike down the overwhelming majority of these home cooked businesses built on the back of other businesses.

LP.com should survive. Could survive. As someone who has a healthy bit of knowledge in the newer medium and traditional media, I would say it stands a fighting chance. That's why these words appear here and nowhere else. That said, in my educated opinion, there needs to be a most delicate balancing.

<<I want to be on the positive because it makes me happy and it attracts the kind of readers I want to attract and frankly - IT'S DISNEY - and even if they double the price and stop maintaining for six months - yes, it's not as good as it used to be, but it's still Disney and chances are, I'll still love it.>>

To all those reading along, is there really any more that needs to be said? "Welcome to BRAND Y...?"

 

[WDW1974]

Personally, I pride myself in my ability to not be for sale. No part of me can be bought. Sorry. The gripes I pick up aren't about what these sell-outs get, its the deception in taking the handouts then putting themselves out there as unofficial or non-biased. Sorry, if you're on the gifty-list and taking the goodies you've now got a vested interest in being Mickey's toy.

I think we're all for sale to some degree. It's just that most moral/ethical folks will have VERY high prices (lots of zeros to 'buy us'). A week at WDW all expenses paid might ellicit a thank you from me and maybe a nice bottle of wine for whomever arranged it, but it will in no way influence my thoughts/feelings/postings.

Now, take a Mommy Blogger from New Jersey or Kansas or North Carolina, that week at the Poly for her family of four or five means vastly different things to her.

Access to Imagineers/execs/celebs? I don't need to talk to Marty Sklar for five minutes with a publicist sitting there watching every word and giving facial cues when I can simply sit down at the Beverly Connection Soup Plantation and have a meal (as I have). I don't need to get five minutes with Phil Holmes when I've had drinks with Michael Eisner at real 5-star hotels. I don't need to take a photo with an ABC actor when I can talk to them at TV Academy events.

I realize I am not like every other poster here. We're all unique and I have a very unique life, but my point is that I'm not wowed by a Disney press junket in the way someone who has never been to an Emmys or an NBA Finals or a Golden Globes might be.

Disney likes the social media whores because they can be bought off for very little (see: Splitsville: A Night of MAGICal Bowling Unless You Get Stuck on the Same Lane as Lou Mongello).

 

[WDW1974]

But isn't there a certain in-joke here? Great satire? The subject turns to the press being parasites without integrity, and immediately Lou Mongello is named. For WDW Radio. The least trusthworthy, least serious form of press in modern America.
America's press is portrayed as a kind of risible circus. There is a serious issue, and it is being covered by a clown from a theme park radio station.

Spirit could've written the captions above.

If you read this it's actually a dig at podcasters/bloggers and current media. They do call them parasites.

You're missing the point. It may be a 'dig', but it's an injoke. You do NOT get to do what was done without approval of an awful lot of people. Not without suffering consequences.

 

[steamboat wil]

Reminds me of this movie called " The Joneses".

 

[nytimez]

You're missing the point. It may be a 'dig', but it's an injoke. You do NOT get to do what was done without approval of an awful lot of people. Not without suffering consequences.

One hand doesn't always know what the other is doing in these situations - especially in the vast reaches of the Disney media empire.

I may not have your spirited connections. But I don't have a profound lack of knowledge for how media conglomerates operate, either... including this one.

It's entire possible someone in Disney corporate had his name put into the comic to make Lou's dreams come true. Maybe even probable.

But it's also entirely possible this was done as a favor to him from someone at the comic without going beyond that. You might be surprised at how few people it can take to get something like this through the cracks, starting with an editor who didn't think twice about it because neither the name "Lou Mongello" nor "WDW Radio" would mean anything to him/her.

 

[WDW1974]

One hand doesn't always know what the other is doing in these situations - especially in the vast reaches of the Disney media empire.

I may not have your spirited connections. But I don't have a profound lack of knowledge for how media conglomerates operate, either... including this one.

It's entire possible someone in Disney corporate had his name put into the comic to make Lou's dreams come true. Maybe even probable.

But it's also entirely possible this was done as a favor to him from someone at the comic without going beyond that. You might be surprised at how few people it can take to get something like this through the cracks, starting with an editor who didn't think twice about it because neither the name "Lou Mongello" nor "WDW Radio" would mean anything to him/her.

Agreed on all counts.

I have no idea how this came to be. But both your scenarios are quite possible. If it were the first one, then it was at a high enough level that nothing will come of it beyond people talking here and then in the Twitverse and making noise about how Disney is in bed with Lou (when it clearly is ... read the Blog daily). If it's the second, however, and this gets spread around then someone (likely multiple folks) are in a heap of trouble and Disney may in fact start distancing itself from Lou.

 

[Jimmy Thick]

Looks like a lot of people are just plain jealous.

Don't worry little ones, maybe one day Disney will put you all in a comic.

Jimmy Thick- I doubt it, but anything is possible.

 

[sweetpee_1993]

I think we're all for sale to some degree. It's just that most moral/ethical folks will have VERY high prices (lots of zeros to 'buy us'). A week at WDW all expenses paid might ellicit a thank you from me and maybe a nice bottle of wine for whomever arranged it, but it will in no way influence my thoughts/feelings/postings.

Now, take a Mommy Blogger from New Jersey or Kansas or North Carolina, that week at the Poly for her family of four or five means vastly different things to her.

Access to Imagineers/execs/celebs? I don't need to talk to Marty Sklar for five minutes with a publicist sitting there watching every word and giving facial cues when I can simply sit down at the Beverly Connection Soup Plantation and have a meal (as I have). I don't need to get five minutes with Phil Holmes when I've had drinks with Michael Eisner at real 5-star hotels. I don't need to take a photo with an ABC actor when I can talk to them at TV Academy events.

I realize I am not like every other poster here. We're all unique and I have a very unique life, but my point is that I'm not wowed by a Disney press junket in the way someone who has never been to an Emmys or an NBA Finals or a Golden Globes might be.

Disney likes the social media whores because they can be bought off for very little (see: Splitsville: A Night of MAGICal Bowling Unless You Get Stuck on the Same Lane as Lou Mongello).

You're right. I should rephrase. I ain't cheap or easy. The little trinkets, tokens, and morsels that so easily "buy" the attention the mouse desires aren't even close to me. I'm not that easily impressed. Celebs, media hoop-la's, dangling of names, etc. aren't my deal either. The rest of the world may place some people on pedestals but I've never really gotten into that stuff. Of course there's fascinating characters I've read or heard that I'd love to sit & talk or have a drink with but not if it entailed selling of any part of me. That would kill the meaning from the getgo. And, yeah, as a mom there's prob'ly some point at which big opportunities for my 2 boys could bring me to do a lot of things but then, knowing the young men I've labored to rear, they'd kick my butt if I compromised personal integrity on any level for any reason. Ultimately, I don't hold my opinions or rumblings in high enough regard to think anyone would give two sh*ts or a happy meal about what I think or say. I'm just here to amuse myself, I think. Lol!

 

[disneyflush]

em·ploy·ee

[em-ploi-ee, em-ploi-ee, em-ploi-ee]
noun
a person working for another person or a business firm for pay.

pay

1 [pey]
1. to settle (a debt, obligation, etc.), as by transferring money or goods, or by doing something: Please pay your bill.
2. to give over (a certain amount of money) in exchange for something: He paid twenty dollars for the shirt.
3. to transfer money as compensation or recompense for work done or services rendered; to satisfy the claims of (a person, organization, etc.), as by giving money due: He paid me for my work.
4. to defray (cost or expense).
5. to give compensation for.

 

[GrumpyFan]

I don't get it! Why the big fuss? I mean, so what? Lou got mentioned in a comic. Good for him. He's clearly made a name for himself (or at least connections) and his business by doing what he's doing in the manner in which he's done it. So he has a "spin" (if you will) on the way he sees things that's maybe just a little bit off from the reality of apparently quite a few here in this community. Again, so what? This is the path he has chosen to take to promote himself and his business. Personally, I'm okay with it. I like his "spin" if that's what you want to call it. I like his optimism and way of looking at things, but I take it all with a grain of salt and listen not only to his perspective but others' too like Pete Werner over at the other Disney community, who doesn't pull ANY punches whatsoever.

I've wrestled with this myself in my own writings. Do I criticize the very company I love and who I would like to be a part of, or do I paint a pretty picture and pretend that everything is perfect? The answer I've come up with for myself is to try and walk a balance line where I avoid being critical of announcements and attractions being built, and wait until they're actually opened, then I will offer an honest opinion and perhaps a suggestion of how I would have done it differently. If I don't have an opinion on how to improve it, then I try to avoid it altogether.

I think each of us in the community has to weigh this question for ourselves, and how we answer it is really our business and nobody else's. If your particular slant is appealing, then people will listen to what you have to say, if not then you will fade away or have just a small following. Regardless, I think the community has room for multiple views each with their own following.

 

[alphac2005]

Mind....blown.
Stomach...turned.

Ahem, guess the Mouse now has a hands-on rather than hands-off approach to Marvel content...

 

[alphac2005]

BTW, you do realize that I have a broader audience by posting here on MAGIC than Lou Mongello does, right? You know that dude ... who has a weekly podcast that people know to tune into. He almost broke the 500 viewer mark live at the Fantasyland media party, which happened to be scheduled during his regular weekly podcast time. Doncha all just love the Spirited threads that go on forever with no advanced notice and no website touting them? In other words, people have to seek my stuff out (yet they do). Hmm ... now what's that about jealousy?

Whenever you hear a podcast spout about the number of downloads, it doesn't mean much of anything unless we're talking serious numbers. The Marc Marons and Corollas of the world are examples of turning it into a true broadcast with large numbers.

So, PODCAST X had 9k downloads in a week. Well, when I hear that, I think about how I have all my podcasts downloaded to each computer... Well, I've got three of 'em downloading podcasts. I might have listened to a podcast once and now I'm a subscriber, but never have listened to it again... I'm again in the count. As you know, the importance that many of them think they have is actually about nothing in reality.

There is a certain podcast that I used to actually really enjoy about the parks, but as this person gained access and most notably, listeners, his tone has changed... And, no it's not this Mongello. This guy definitely knows the hand that feeds him and walks so carefully in what he says... When I heard him fawning over the premise of FastPass+ a few weeks ago in the "news," I had enough.

Numbers skewing is as ridiculous as ever. NBC loves to hype a show like 'The Voice' with over 100 and something million viewers. Well, yup, that's the cumulative number of the whole season. Once you break it down, not so impressive.