Bob Chapek's response to Florida's 'Don't Say Gay' bill

[Communicora]

I feel we'll get told off for drifting off topic, but I agree with all of this! The impression is very much that the parks are being run by people who would never willingly visit them and so come up with all kinds of over-complicated systems that I'm positive sound great in their internal pitches in terms of maximising revenue, addressing complaints about over-crowding and long lines, avoiding the need to build so many new attractions, etc. However, no-one really seems to be thinking through the practicalities of what any of this means for those paying to spend a day in the park.


Also agree and was actually thinking about this when the new DVC tower for the Polynesian at WDW was announced; Is there anyone responsible for signing off on these things who would even recognise let alone care that a mid-rise apartment block doesn't fit with the rest of the resort? It seems to me an explanation for the wild swings in quality of new projects as, at the executive level including Chapek, no-one really knows what they're looking at beyond the numbers.


The more you think about it, the more strange a choice Chapek seems for the CEO job. He doesn't appear to have any great feel for the creative aspects of the company, not even the parks which he was in charge of running let alone film and television. It is also becoming increasingly obvious on issues including this one that he isn't good at cultivating the personal relationships and good will being the CEO of Disney requires. Would be interesting to know how obvious this latter aspect was before he was elevated to CEO and what exactly the logic was behind the choice.

The strange thing is that he went on annual trips to WDW while he was growing up. That definitely wasn't the norm for people in the midwest back then.

It's interesting that he seems out of touch with both the parks and the film side of the business. I wonder what qualities he has that we aren't seeing that made him a compelling choice for the CEO role.

 

[MrPromey]

There are plenty of threads for that topic. We’re discussing something else in this thread.

I meant it as a weak attempt at levity.

What I've seen in these 78 pages is very little actual discussion and most people talking past each other with differing opinions and close to zero chance of anyone changing anyone else's mind.

Even if someone does, what kind of victory is it?

While some of the "discussion" is still closely talking about Disney's place in all of this, a lot of people seem to be using that as just a jumping off point for a bigger set of political and social topics that are beyond discussions of Disney.

It just seems to me that a forum on a Disney fan site is a rather pointless place for anybody to be trying to win the battle of hearts and minds on this sort of issue and I expect some of the rifts forming in this thread will end up carrying over into the rest of the forums going forward. (as has already happened with COVID talk over the last couple years)

But whatever. If this is the place where people want to put their efforts - a place where it will have no impact whatsoever on the actual issue, carry on I guess.

 

[Californian Elitist]

I meant it as a weak attempt at levity.

What I've seen in these 78 pages is very little actual discussion and most people talking past each other with differing opinions and close to zero chance of anyone changing anyone else's mind.

Even if someone does, what kind of victory is it?

While some of the "discussion" is still closely talking about Disney's place in all of this, a lot of people seem to be using that as just a jumping off point for a bigger set of political and social topics that are beyond discussions of Disney.

It just seems to me that a forum on a Disney fan site is a rather pointless place for anybody to be trying to win the battle of hearts and minds on this sort of issue and I expect some of the rifts forming in this thread will end up carrying over into the rest of the forums going forward. (as has already happened with COVID talk over the last couple years)

But whatever. If this place where people want to put their efforts - a place where it will have no impact whatsoever on the actual issue, carry on I guess.

Thanks, we will carry on.

 

[brb1006]

So what happened to the Cast Member Walkaround that was planned yesterday?

 

[sedati]

Having been on this forum a long time I've often come to the conclusion with may posters that, "Theme parks may not be for you!" or "Long-form narrative storytelling may not be for you!" etc.

One great thing about America is that it is a "melting pot." So, if you are a (metaphorical) picky eater, then "America may not be for you!"

 

[Disstevefan1]

Having been on this forum a long time I've often come to the conclusion with may posters that, "Theme parks may not be for you!" or "Long-form narrative storytelling may not be for you!" etc.

One great thing about America is that it is a "melting pot." So, if you are a (metaphorical) picky eater, then "America may not be for you!"

For me -
The United States of America is the greatest country on the planet.
I love the Biergarten buffet in EPCOT.

I am ready to get flamed for my views.

 

[DisneyHead123]

The problem is a large percent of the population see it as a parental rights bill, and if Disney continues on this path those people will start to question why a company like Disney wouldn’t support parental rights.

From a moral perspective I don’t disagree with you but from a business perspective it’s insanity to enter politics. Even if they only alienate 10% of the right that’s millions of guests a year, and many on the left won’t think they went far enough so they’ll probably lose a few million of them also, I’m sure some will argue they won’t be missed but the board won’t see it that way, and they’ll fire upper management and replace them in a second with people who know better than to enter politics and alienate guests.

I disagree with a lot of what Chapek has done but I actually feel a little sorry for him on this one. Any decision he made was going to blow up in his face on a heated topic like this.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

I do think that is an example of more clever corporate lobbying that could have been the model for how to respond in this instance. Disney can reasonably say that they have huge investments in Florida and are in the process of moving more of their employees to the state, but this kind of legislation (and politics) is creating an environment that makes many of these employees feel unwelcome and thus creates problems for these plans. Beyond this legislation, that would also be a call to tone down this kind of base-driven politics as it's getting to the point of having economic consequences for Florida in the service of, if we're honest, preparing the way for a DeSantis presidential campaign. Disney can also plausibly say that they're not taking a partisan stance: just look at what their employees are saying publicly and you can imagine the internal discussions.

The only issue is that, if I remember correctly, Disney did actually dangle the threat of not filming in Georgia whereas, come hell or high water, they are moving their employees to Lake Nona and the politicians in Florida know this. So, Disney has no real leverage here because they are not going to close WDW nor are they going to pause future investment. They're 'pausing' political donations, but I'd wager those who support this bill judge the campaigning value of the legislation as far more valuable to their chances of re-election than what Disney was giving them.

In short, it's a mess. They may start trying to make amends in other areas such as restoring the same-sex kiss in the new Buzz Lightyear film, but as regards Florida they have probably only made the politics for this kind of thing more attractive by playing the role of the 'woke' corporation in public statements that politicians know will not be backed up by any actions.

I think they could have still used the Lake Nona campus to put pressure on Florida, all without picking a side.

“We have a long history of inclusion and have a very diverse staff, we have committed to bringing 2000 jobs to Lake Nona but if this law prevails we’ll have to reconsider future expansions of the campus as it will make it difficult to retain our valued and talented staff.”

It’s similar to the Iger Georgia comment, it doesn’t pick a side but shows how it could make doing business in the state difficult for Disney and result in job losses for the state. It’s how a smart CEO applies political pressure without getting political.

 

[John park hopper]

And how did Georgia suffer long term

 

[TP2000]

So what happened to the Cast Member Walkaround that was planned yesterday?

Apparently not much of anything.

 

[Skywise]

How is it not a "total escape" when you go the parks? Seriously any kind of issues about the companies politics(and it has always been involved just look at it's copywrites and tax breaks) you have when you go into the Magic Kingdom YOU are carrying them in, nothing going on in the Park reflects it. That is unless you encounter @EricsBiscuit , who will be proudly wearing all his Trump merch, and you will have to take it up with him for breaking your "politics free" reality.

I'd like to continue riding Splash Mountain, myself

 

[Sir_Cliff]

I think they could have still used the Lake Nona campus to put pressure on Florida, all without picking a side.

“We have a long history of inclusion and have a very diverse staff, we have committed to bringing 2000 jobs to Lake Nona but if this law prevails we’ll have to reconsider future expansions of the campus as it will make it difficult to retain our valued and talented staff.”

It’s similar to the Iger Georgia comment, it doesn’t pick a side but shows how it could make doing business in the state difficult for Disney and result in job losses for the state. It’s how a smart CEO applies political pressure without getting political.

I agree, though I think the fact Lake Nona is still in fairly early stages of construction would make it ring hollow if they said they were still going ahead with the move but may reconsider expansion plans after that campus is finished in 2024 or whenever it is supposed to be done. I think they really would have had to put the move they are doing at the moment on the table rather than some hypothetical one in the future.

 

[Club Cooloholic]

I'd like to continue riding Splash Mountain, myself

Well they are just redoing it not getting rid of it. Like they did with Maelstrom. Was there an anti troll agenda there? They also did it to TOT in DL. Was there an anti Rod Sterling political agenda?

 

[thomas998]

I'll attempt to get this back on track to focusing on Disney rather than the bill itself.

Fence-sitting clearly wasn't in Disney's best interest here and it backfired big time. They tried to offend no one and ended up getting attacked by everyone.

And it's not all that surprising; Disney publicly acts like it's pro-LGTBQ+ rights, including profiting off raindow-adorned merch every Pride Month. To then try to stand on the sidelines on a bill that was energized LGTBQ+ civil rights groups in a state where Disney has massive political clout -- of course that's going to be seen as hypocritical.

I think it's part of a larger trend of activists calling out what they see as performative, insincere support from corporations. Maybe 10 years ago putting out some rainbow Mickey ears or something was seen as meaningful support for LGBTQ+ rights. Now allies, activists, and a company's employees expect corporations to do more.

Chapek didn't see that, and I think it's another sign that he doesn't understand his employees and he doesn't understand Hollywood. I can't remember Iger ever having a PR fiasco last this long on a politicized issue.

BTW, "staying out of politics" is itself a political stance.

Staying out of politics is not a political stance, a political stance is either supporting one side or taking action agaisnt one side. I have friends that will not comment about controversial things or who they support in an election. That is not taking a stance it is refusing to take one, I know that some will make donations to various campaigns so they do have a preference but they are making a conscious decision not to signal to the world what it is.

Disney jumping on the rainbow mickey ears was just one of many mistakes they have made. I doubt that at the time they felt any strong feeling for or against the gay pride movement. I suspect the decision to sell the rainbow ears was based solely on the profit someone projected.

That act was stupid because it is what has now led them to this position where one side they gave support to when it made Disney money is counter to another side that they also make money from. Disney would be much better off simply stating that they have no opinion and no stance on any political thing. Sure it will upset some groups that feel they have been abandoned by Disney, but being abandoned will cause less longterm negativity than actively supporting a group. Eventually if they remain neutral like Switzerland, all groups will just ignore them when these things pop up.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

That act was stupid because it is what has now led them to this position where one side they gave support to when it made Disney money is counter to another side that they also make money from.

Supporting a group doesn't mean they are "against" anyone else.

Unless one thinks supporting the LGBT community is somehow an act of opposition against who exactly?

Therein lies the difference between groups. The LGBT community has always been about equality, never about taking anything away from anyone else. Whereas the other side wants the world to revolve around them and erase anyone they don't like.

Hence we've seen comments in this thread where someone won't see Lightyear because there's a lesbian in it. The artists who have spoken up to say they want to see more diversity in Disney's media at no point suggested that Disney no longer include depictions of heterosexuals.

 

[DisneyHead123]

Regarding various posts on Disney staying neutral - I think the problem with that is that the Overton Window is very different in different parts of the country. There is no inherently 'neutral' stance, there are only norms that appear neutral when compared to local norms and culture.

 

[JohnD]

Anyone see this?

Video shows teacher leading preschoolers in anti-Biden chant

A California private school has apologized to parents after a teacher shared a video of her leading preschool students in a chant denouncing President Joe Biden

abcnews.go.com

For every crazy teacher on the left there’s a crazy teacher on the right, as long as teachers are humans we’ll never get away from “activist” teachers who can’t leave their personal agenda out of the classroom no matter what laws we pass.

I lean right and this is just pathetic and sad. This is why we can’t have nice things.

I saw it and am in complete agreement with you. That has no place in the classroom - left or right.

 

[TP2000]

...Disney would be much better off simply stating that they have no opinion and no stance on and political thing. Sure it will upset some groups that feel they have been abandoned by Disney, but being abandoned will cause will longterm negativity than actively supporting a group. Eventually if they remain neutral like Switzerland, all groups will just ignore them when these things pop up.

Agreed. But Disney caused much of this themselves when they suddenly felt the need to add "Inclusion" to their 60 year old 4 Keys training program. Even though the concepts of the Courtesy Key and just following the Golden Rule should have covered Inclusion. But nope, they had to go woke and add an Inclusion Key, even though they did it sort of half-butt and vague.

That opened a pandora's box for employees to demand more and more political activism from the company.

And again, the Inclusion Key seems vapid and pointless. I mean honestly, the company founder said a very famous speech that is still engraved in bronze at the entrance to their park. How the heck do you get more inclusive than this welcoming opening statement at Disneyland's debut???

"To all who come to this happy place, welcome!"
-Walt Disney, July 17th 1955, Disneyland Grand Opening Ceremony

 

[Angel Ariel]

Agreed. But Disney caused much of this themselves when they suddenly felt the need to add "Inclusion" to their 60 year old 4 Keys training program. Even though the concepts of the Courtesy Key and just following the Golden Rule should have covered Inclusion. But nope, they had to go woke and add an Inclusion Key, even though they did it sort of half-butt and vague.

That opened a pandora's box for employees to demand more and more political activism from the company.

And again, the Inclusion Key seems vapid and pointless. I mean honestly, the company founder said a very famous speech that is still engraved in bronze at the entrance to their park. How the heck do you get more inclusive than this welcoming opening statement at Disneyland's debut???

"To all who come to this happy place, welcome!"
-Walt Disney, July 17th 1955, Disneyland Grand Opening Ceremony

Speaking as a parent of a child with disabilities - inclusion isn’t words. Inclusion requires action.

Words on a plaque are just words. Explicitly adding inclusion to their training for cast members is actions.

It may seem like a small distinction, but I didn’t myself really understand the huge difference until I had a child for whom I have had to fight to be included and have experienced how easy it is for people’s lack of awareness to result in exclusion (whether intentional or not).

 

[JohnD]

The problem is a large percent of the population see it as a parental rights bill, and if Disney continues on this path those people will start to question why a company like Disney wouldn’t support parental rights.

From a moral perspective I don’t disagree with you but from a business perspective it’s insanity to enter politics. Even if they only alienate 10% of the right that’s millions of guests a year, and many on the left won’t think they went far enough so they’ll probably lose a few million of them also, I’m sure some will argue they won’t be missed but the board won’t see it that way, and they’ll fire upper management and replace them in a second with people who know better than to enter politics and alienate guests.

“The problem is a large percent of the population see it as a parental rights bill”

Because that is what it is. Introduced, debated, and passed as such. Gee, I wonder how a large percentage of the population viewed it that way?