Bloggers and Podcasters need to be controlled

[ddbowdoin]

this is basically how ALL bloggers/podcasters start ...and all have that option of taking their work to the next level, which is ultimately how you start seeing real perks and spiffs back at you.

I used to listen to Beta Mouse every week, hell... the creator was a college classmate of mine. We weren't friends (he was a year ahead of me) but I remember seeing his picture (Henry Work) and I instantly recognized him. He had on a whole slew of guests and it was HONEST discussion. I think a requirement of mine for listening to a podcast is some level of criticism, not everything Disney touches is gold but listen to Lou and sure as hell seems that way.

Even Ricky Brigante is somewhat honest... sure he gets press passes and such but I have heard him over and over criticize certain attractions, themes, menus, experiences etc etc etc and obviously he covers a lot of Uni and their Halloween activities.

To me, the only upside of Lou Mongello is his access. He interviews some amazing people in the Disney family, but other than it his shows are a giant infomercial.

 

[GrumpyFan]

Even Ricky Brigante is somewhat honest... sure he gets press passes and such but I have heard him over and over criticize certain attractions, themes, menus, experiences etc etc etc and obviously he covers a lot of Uni and their Halloween activities.

To me, the only upside of Lou Mongello is his access. He interviews some amazing people in the Disney family, but other than it his shows are a giant infomercial.

Ricky seems pretty balanced. He is honest and provides his own opinion, but he's not terribly critical like some others. Lou on the other hand, is as you say, "a giant infomercial", but I know that and still enjoy his show as well as others who tend to go the other way.

 

[ddbowdoin]

Ricky seems pretty balanced. He is honest and provides his own opinion, but he's not terribly critical like some others. Lou on the other hand, is as you say, "a giant infomercial", but I know that and still enjoy his show as well as others who tend to go the other way.

yeah, I could only take so much. I probably quit a little over a year ago, but I used to listen to his podcasts when he wasn't on Disney payrolls. Now I only look for the unique interviews.

 

[Bolna]

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.

The problem I see is if someone promotes him- or herself as a resource for travel planning without disclosing that he or she is actually funded by the destination their planning resource is for. How do people find out that it is not an independent source, but more or less an advertisement?

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.

First of all: Do you really love The Walt Disney Company? I find that a bit scary. After all it is an entity that has one focus only: to keep its share holders happy. I think many of us love, like and/or enjoy some or more of the products the company produces - the parks, the films or even the TV channels. And I can see how someone could identify with them. And that might also lead to a general interest in other and new products the company puts out.

And I think that being critical is not a bad thing at all. Neither is it always necessary to wait until you see the result of something in the end nor has all criticism be constructive. Being critical helps the person (or in this case entity) to whom the criticism is addressed to to reassess their chosen path - and hence gives them the opportunity to change it. Maybe even before a lot of resources have been spent or the results cannot be changed any longer.

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.

However, your idea of there being a free market of voices in the fan community becomes very distorted once you enter The Walt Disney Company as the one controlling access to a lot of the information, which - if we continue to use the comparison to economics - work like subsidies.

 

[tomman710]

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.

I don't think people are critical of his "style" per se or his success ... I think it is as simple as this ... it's all about the fact that he promotes himself as a "fan" when in reality he is an "employee" ... that should be made clear. It should also be made clear why he is allowed to conduct private tours for profit on Disney property.

Basically, this is not about jealousy, or even hating him or wanting him to go away ... we just want transparency and honesty.

 

[GrumpyFan]

First of all: Do you really love The Walt Disney Company? I find that a bit scary. After all it is an entity that has one focus only: to keep its share holders happy. I think many of us love, like and/or enjoy some or more of the products the company produces - the parks, the films or even the TV channels. And I can see how someone could identify with them. And that might also lead to a general interest in other and new products the company puts out.

Perhaps "love" is the wrong word. I enjoy many of the products Disney produces. I like what the company's goals and objectives are in creating and producing entertainment and media. But, yeah, "love" is a bit much. Sure, they put a big focus on keeping their share holders happy, but show me a publicly traded company that doesn't do this, and you're sure to see a company with a high turnover rate in the upper ranks. As a public company, they have to keep the share holders happy by making lots of money on an increasing basis or else they have to find another job. Sadly, that's how most businesses work these days. Very few actually cling to their original values, they're just out to make the share holders happy.

And I think that being critical is not a bad thing at all. Neither is it always necessary to wait until you see the result of something in the end nor has all criticism be constructive. Being critical helps the person (or in this case entity) to whom the criticism is addressed to to reassess their chosen path - and hence gives them the opportunity to change it. Maybe even before a lot of resources have been spent or the results cannot be changed any longer.

I don't disagree with this entirely. Sometimes a dose of criticism can be helpful, but then sometimes things just need to run their course. Over time, things have a way of correcting themselves. A bad idea for a movie or attraction or even whole park (DCA) has a way of showing itself by virtue of the public's reaction. If it doesn't work, then the public will reject it. I'm not saying we shouldn't criticize anything at all, but I just think criticism of something that's still being developed, planned, conceptualized or even rumored is pretty pointless, but I get too that this drives our discussions.

 

[LambertLion]

I'm a huge Disney fan who takes a moderate interest online. I read the blogs a little, and listen to podcasts a tiny bit. I think I'm similar to the majority of fans/guests. Probably *more* involved than most. From that limited mainstream perspective, I barely have any idea what WDW Radio is, who Lou Whatever is, how Spider-Man fits into this, or what name is attached to which blog.

I suspect that most guests/fans don't give a fig, because they'd never even take a moment's notice. Perhaps favoritism and Lou Whoever are influencing hyperfans and serious enthusiasts, but I have a strong feeling that's about it.

 

[Kuhio]

OK, I just finished reading Amazing Spider-Man #700... it's quite long, and I had a number of other comics that I wanted to get to first.

But I did see the shout-out to Lou (as well as a Jay and Silent Bob cameo a few pages earlier)... it appears in the issue's main story -- the story that ostensibly closes a major chapter in Spider-Man's life by killing his alter ego, Peter Parker. (Well, sort of: Peter has his mind swapped with his enemy Doctor Octopus, then dies while in Doc Ock's body... so, in the end, Peter's physical form actually hosts a villain, and the world at large has no idea that this has happened.)

So is all this a big deal? Yes and no. Most comic book readers will know that this kind of thing happens all the time. Superman died. Captain America died. Countless numbers of sidekicks died. Nearly all of them came back eventually (or were shown to have not actually died), often with very few substantive repercussions to their continuity. By now, many comics fans don't sweat this sort of stuff anymore (although not all fans -- some made death threats against the writer when news of the story's denouement leaked early).

It tends to be a bigger deal to the general public. These types of events -- from deaths of major characters to weddings to longtime heroes being revealed to be gay -- get picked up by major media outlets, so that people who've never purchased a comic book in their life, but who have a general engagement with popular culture, are fully aware of the buzz surrounding these particular storylines.

And to the general public, including millions of people the world over who know Spider-Man chiefly through the movies and animated shows of the last decade, Spider-Man is and has always been Peter Parker -- just as Superman is Clark Kent and Batman is Bruce Wayne. So "killing off" such an iconic character is huge... and even more so when it happens in the last issue of that character's comic book series.

Never mind the fact that the Spider-Man character will still appear in numerous titles, as well as in a brand new, rebooted Superior Spider-Man book... relatively few comics reach 700 issues, so doing so is a feat in and of itself. Ending a popular comic book's run after so many decades of publication would be worthy of note even if the book's last issue didn't include such a controversial turn of events.

It's thus pretty amazing that Lou Mongello got such a prominent shout-out in such an important issue. It's not even an obscure in-joke, like "Lew Mangiello" in a sign in the background might be: it's his actual name, and then a reference to his website/brand for good measure, just in case the reader might be tempted to think that the name was randomly plucked out of a hat as a filler and just happens to be the same as that of a WDW blogger.

I don't know why Lou's name appears, although I suspect that he and the writer, Dan Slott, know each other, and Slott did it as a tribute to or favor for a friend. In that event, it wouldn't be all that surprising that the reference completely went over the heads of the book's editors, who are unlikely to be as familiar with WDW Radio as this site's posters are.

Still, including the reference seems spectacularly ill-advised, coming in such a relatively important issue of the book, and in such an obvious fashion. If it's solely a coincidence that Lou's business happens to center on Disney parks, which are part of the same business empire that owns Marvel... then it's certainly a very happy accident, or a very unhappy one, depending on who you are -- and whether you want to encourage or discourage the perception that Lou is an employee of Disney, and that his words and opinions reflect those of the company's.

 

[Britt]

I'm a huge Disney fan who takes a moderate interest online. I read the blogs a little, and listen to podcasts a tiny bit. I think I'm similar to the majority of fans/guests. Probably *more* involved than most. From that limited mainstream perspective, I barely have any idea what WDW Radio is, who Lou Whatever is, how Spider-Man fits into this, or what name is attached to which blog.

I suspect that most guests/fans don't give a fig, because they'd never even take a moment's notice. Perhaps favoritism and Lou Whoever are influencing hyperfans and serious enthusiasts, but I have a strong feeling that's about it.

I'm reaaaally glad I'm not the only one who has no idea who these people are...lol. I keep coming back to this post feeling like I'm missing something, lol

 

[Gabe1]

If you read the blurbs in order I cannot find this to be a compliment to Lou. To me it reads like a swipe to Lou and all singular WDW media types. I don't believe Disney needs to control the Lou's 'cause I believe they are already manipulating the Lou's to their advantage. A little bit of time, some food here and there and boom major press imprinted on the Web. Disney knows what they are doing. Unfortunately the average Joe browsing the web isn't going to realize the Lou type of review is going to read just like Birnbaum Books.

 

[PhotoDave219]

I'll post the photo when I get home, but Lou Mongello and his show received a nod in the latest issue of Spiderman (Issue #700).

The nod itself is harmless, but it reinforces the preferential treatment that he and others are getting to cover the parks.

Here's a suggestion for Disney - publicize a list of "Disney approved" bloggers as an extension or part of the Disney Mom's Panel. There is deception going on here that is a problem. Part of me wants to stop talking about it and Disney all together because the level of negativity I feel towards the company increases on a daily basis.

I know this forum gets a lot of crap but I'd like to once again take the opportunity to praise Steve for what he does. He has his opinions that he puts on the forums, but the content on his site is thorough and fact based. In a sea of non-sense it's nice to have someone that's doing things correctly.

I'm sorry but no.

We have a freedom of the press and freedom of speech in this country. I may not approve of what they say or do but they have the right to do it.

So you can just STFU right there.

(That being said, Steve runs an excellent site and has always allowed commentors to say what they feel without fear of censorship)

 

[Tigger1988]

I'm reaaaally glad I'm not the only one who has no idea who these people are...lol. I keep coming back to this post feeling like I'm missing something, lol

I had no idea who Lou was before the people here started harping about him.

 

[ddbowdoin]

I'm sorry but no.

We have a freedom of the press and freedom of speech in this country. I may not approve of what they say or do but they have the right to do it.

So you can just STFU right there.

(That being said, Steve runs an excellent site and has always allowed commentors to say what they feel without fear of censorship)

relax pal...

That being said, Steve runs an excellent site and has always allowed commentators to say what they feel without fear of censorship

100% agree on the quality of the site, disagree with the censorship... "The Mom" is quick to delete and lock anything she deems "offensive"

 

[PhotoDave219]

relax pal...

That being said, Steve runs an excellent site and has always allowed commentators to say what they feel without fear of censorship

100% agree on the quality of the site, disagree with the censorship... "The Mom" is quick to delete and lock anything she deems "offensive"

Ohhhhhhh if you think thats the worst that comes out of my mouth, you've never stepped in front of my lens and blocked me during a football game.....

And I know the Mom. We've met. Many years back.

 

[Goofyernmost]

I had no idea who Lou was before the people here started harping about him.

Me too, and I can truthfully say that now that I know who he is I am overwhelmingly consumed by a never ending feeling of who gives a damn. What he does or doesn't do has miniscule affect on my life or decision making process. He's just a name that keeps coming up. If I were to close this post and immediately run into someone that asked me what the name of the guy was that everyone has a massive (something) on about, I would stand proudly and say, "Lou Something". He's a blogger/podcaster that I have never heard of other then on wdwmagic.

 

[draybook]

I think everyone is missing the point. Marvel is killing Peter Parker.

That's Disney's response to Potter Land.....

 

[Captain Chaos]

That's it.... I'm hiring a sky writer putting a message over WDW saying SPIDER-MAN LUVS YOU...

 

[RSoxNo1]

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.

It's even more screwy that - when I'm monitoring our downloads I receive two numbers. Full downloads and partial downloads. Full downloads essentially mean that the page where the mp3 file is stored loaded without incident or interruption. This might happen if you use iTunes and it doesn't time out on the download. That definitely doesn't always happen for all people. So on any given show we may see a few thousand full downloads but several hundred thousand partial downloads. It really is an inexact science.

 

[tomman710]

@RSoxNo1 Good show on this topic, by the way.

One thing I am glad you brought out was how Lou will tell people he doesn't receive anything from the company, yet its pretty well known that he has been comped in a variety of places. I guess his justification is he gets nothing formal but a comp here and there from managers "acting on their own initiative" are just people being "friendly" ...

 

[Lee]

@RSoxNo1 Good show on this topic, by the way.

One thing I am glad you brought out was how Lou will tell people he doesn't receive anything from the company, yet its pretty well known that he has been comped in a variety of places. I guess his justification is he gets nothing formal but a comp here and there from managers "acting on their own initiative" are just people being "friendly" ...

What a joke.
He and his people get comped on a regular basis, and treated somewhat like "real media" by WDW.

I say "somewhat" because they credential them for events and involve them in all the media activities they have.
But...at the same time, they allow him far more access to the property for business purposes than normal "real media".

Ask @Disneyhead'71 if he would be allowed to go shoot video in the MK as part of his job. Bet not...at least not without serious Disney PR approval and monitoring.

As for the comic, approval had to come from way up the ladder, or the writer is likely gonna feel some heat.