Disney (and others) at the Box Office - Current State of Affairs

[Disney Irish]

I have no impact on the actual product. I'm just here to discuss it on what we call a "Discussion Forum". It's a fun hobby!

So you aren't actually "making sure" on anything then, got it.

Sure, but you need to tell the "progressive" story for its own sake. Not shoehorn in "progressive" stuff just to virtue signal and stick it to your audience who you apparently dislike and don't trust. (Warning: Just a random comment not referencing any one person, just a broader example based on several leaked Zoom meetings and interviews from both Disney execs, and that hilariously stupid Bud Light exec who got fired after she pulled the Dylan Mulvaney stunt and tanked the entire brand, etc.)

Problem with that is that these days something that is organic and natural to many may seem like virtue signaling and shoehorned to a minority of others. So damned if you do and damned if you don't. Which is why you just have to tell the stories the filmmakers want to tell and let the chips fall where they may.

Which is why I used the wording "not at all promising so far".

I think in two weeks we'll know for sure on Captain America.

As it has a clear run of the theaters for the next month it'll be longer than 2 weeks before we know. Again using the example of Mufasa, if you called it just 2 weeks after release you'd have been dead wrong. Which is why you can't just say after x amount of time we'll know. You have to stick with the entire theatrical run, not just a certain time frame within it.

Is that what's going on with Google now? I've noticed the search results have a different format lately, and this most recent search was a great example of changing results. After getting the first result of "26", I typed it again a different way and got a new number different from the first. Then a third time using past tense gave me something else entirely.

Google has always adjusted their results based on a number of factors including putting paid results to the top. Its why you cannot just rely on a Google search to tell you something, you actually have to do research to know if its accurate or not.

Yikes. What's the punishment for an unclear Google search here? I can't be the only one who occasionally goes to Google when its a topic I'm not naturally familiar with. The topic of "How many Black players are in the NHL" was new to me, so I Googled it.

Is that 3 Demerits? Or has it already gone straight to a First Verbal Warning? I'll want to know for my records.

Or maybe do actual research and not just an 8 second Google search and assume you know everything about a topic.

 

[TP2000]

Or maybe do actual research and not just an 8 second Google search and assume you know everything about a topic.

I still really don't know much about the Black men who have played in the NHL in the past 100 years. But at least I do know now that there have been 110 of them, so far.

Other than that, I made no claims to know "everything" about that topic. I was quite clear that I am not a hockey fan, rarely attend hockey games (but when I do, it's with Lesbians wearing flannel), and I had no idea about it and thus had to go check Google for some more info on it.

I'm sure you've used Google here in your discussions and commentary.

 

[TP2000]

Mostly just trying to point out that TP is an inadequate Googler, which doesn't surprise me.

Quoting for posterity, as this just made my whole day! I needed that one, thank you.

You've inspired me to change my signature line, in fact.

 

[Disney Irish]

I still really don't know much about the Black men who have played in the NHL in the past 100 years. But at least I do know now that there have been 110 of them, so far.

Other than that, I made no claims to know "everything" about that topic. I was quite clear that I am not a hockey fan, rarely attend hockey games (but when I do, it's with Lesbians wearing flannel), and I had no idea about it and thus had to go check Google for some more info on it.

I'm sure you've used Google here in your discussions and commentary.

Yes we know, you went to some game in the 1990s in Portland and think that still represents the NHL fan community globally.

As for Google, even if I use it I do more than just take 8 seconds on whatever results it gives me to form an opinion. I actually research the results, verify with multiple sources, and check to see if those can be verified as accurate. I don't just accept the first result it gives and think that is the answer.

 

[LittleBuford]

Google has always adjusted their results based on a number of factors including putting paid results to the top. Its why you cannot just rely on a Google search to tell you something, you actually have to do research to know if its accurate or not.

Before the introduction of AI Overview, the top result would be a featured snippet of an actual website. That snippet wasn't always correct, of course, but it tended to be more useful than whatever (mis)information is being spewed out now. But yes, I agree that it's never been enough just to rely on a quick search result without bothering to verify its accuracy.

 

[Disney Irish]

Before the introduction of AI Overview, the top result would be a featured snippet of an actual website. That snippet wasn't always correct, of course, but it tended to be more useful than whatever (mis)information is being spewed out now. But yes, I agree that it's never been enough just to rely on a quick search result without bothering to verify its accuracy.

Exactly, most people don't even realize how Google actually curates its results. Especially not even aware that the first results are usually the sites that pay to have their site listed first. So you theoretically could be getting purposely inaccurate information all because someone paid to have that result first. Now you'd hope that Google would be a good citizen and ensure this doesn't happen, but they are a business and make money off it, almighty dollar rules everything.

Bottom line, never just trust the results outright. Research and verify.

 

[TP2000]

As for Google, even if I use it I do more than just take 8 seconds on whatever results it gives me to form an opinion. I actually research the results, verify with multiple sources, and check to see if those can be verified as accurate. I don't just accept the first result it gives and think that is the answer.

Well, when you work from home like you do, there's apparently plenty of time in the day. Enjoy that luxury!

I'm retired, and will be heading to the supermarket soon as my day's big activity, so I can only dedicate about 8 seconds to find out how many Black men have played in the NHL. Only so many hours in the day, unfortunately.

BRAIN SPARK! I just remembered, I attended several (at least two, maybe three?) Ducks games in Anaheim during the 2000's, perhaps even early 2010's. I don't remember much of the game, but I remember who I was with and that I was enthralled with this remote controlled blimp they sent out over the crowd to drop gift certificates to Ralph's supermarket. That was far more exciting for me than the actual games, but I wasn't able to catch one of the gift certificates.

 

[Disney Irish]

Well, when you work from home like you do, there's apparently plenty of time in the day. Enjoy that luxury!

I'm retired, and will be heading to the supermarket soon as my day's big activity, so I can only dedicate about 8 seconds to find out how many Black men have played in the NHL. Only so many hours in the day, unfortunately.

My work location has nothing to do with my ability to know that you don't just trust the Google search results outright. I get more done in one hour than most do all day while in an office setting, all while still posting on this site. So don't play that crap with me, we've had this discussion before and it didn't fly then and it won't now.

Also as someone who is retired you have more free time than anyone on this site to do proper research if you wanted to. So this "only so many hours in the day" crap doesn't fly with me, sir.

 

[Chi84]

My work location has nothing to do with my ability to know that you don't just trust the Google search results outright. I get more done in one hour than most do all day while in an office setting, all while still posting on this site. So don't play that crap with me, we've had this discussion before and it didn't fly then and it won't now.

Also as someone who is retired you have more free time than anyone on this site to do proper research if you wanted to. So this "only so many hours in the day" crap doesn't fly with me, sir.

You’re assuming proper research and accuracy are some kind of goals here.

Doesn’t the fact that this thread has devolved into a discussion about how many black people play or watch NFL hockey point to a different goal altogether?

 

[Agent H]

I didn’t know something was wrong with the google Al I used it all the time should I cease this action?

 

[Disstevefan1]

I didn’t know something was wrong with the google Al I used it all the time should I cease this action?

Yes.

 

[LittleBuford]

I didn’t know something was wrong with the google Al I used it all the time should I cease this action?

Just know that (as with all AI) it can generate incorrect information. It's always best to check a few (reliable) websites to verify whatever it's told you. Contrary to popular opinion, Wikipedia is for the most part a helpful and reliable source, and therefore a good first port of call.

 

[Disney Irish]

I didn’t know something was wrong with the google Al I used it all the time should I cease this action?

No, just be aware that like all things AI generated it is not 100% accurate. Always verify what it gives you with the actual sources it pulls from. Don't take anything provided as being 100% accurate.

As they tell you in school, always research and verify. Think of it like doing a report.

 

[Minnesota disney fan]

I am older than you and was out on the town boogeying my way through the 70's, and I don't remember it being quite as bleak as that.

Off the top of my head, I can think of several major network prime-time TV shows that had very positive and normalized gay representation starting around 1973 or so.... The Mary Tyler Moore Show, Maude, Soap, and I'm sure there were some others.

The references stick in my mind 50 years later because it was done so well then, and presented us as normal and routine parts of society. Sure, there were still a lot of gay jokes and gay double entendre going around in some adult-themed shows, but the early and mid 70's were also when gay folks could be on prime time networks and be shown as just average, normal Americans. It was a huge change, and we were thrilled. After all, you can't go from segregated drinking fountains to President Obama in only two years time; big societal change requires individual steps and subtle progression.

And then of course there's every single damn episode of The Hollywood Squares in the 1970's with Paul Lynde in the center square. That was always a good time!

I remember those shows from the 70's and you stated this exactly as I would, only better lol.
Gays were worked into the shows naturally. Noone thought anything of it. You were right, they were just shown as average people and accepted as such. Now, it seems to be a big deal. I was in high school in the 60's and we had gay kids, and who cared? We all treated each other the same. No one teased them, no comments were made. I guess times they have a changed!

 

[LittleBuford]

I remember those shows from the 70's and you stated this exactly as I would, only better lol.
Gays were worked into the shows naturally. Noone thought anything of it. You were right, they were just shown as average people and accepted as such. Now, it seems to be a big deal. I was in high school in the 60's and we had gay kids, and who cared? We all treated each other the same. No one teased them, no comments were made. I guess times they have a changed!

Sodomy wasn't fully decriminalised in the US until 2003. Gay marriage wasn't federally recognised until 2015. I'm not sure how you can possibly assert that gay people were treated "the same" as everyone else in the '60s. That's just an untenable claim on its face.

 

[TP2000]

As they tell you in school, always research and verify. Think of it like doing a report.

For a casual side conversation on a discussion board? That seems excessive.

I could see if I was making a point about something involved and inherently on topic, like the name changes to the spinner ride in Tomorrowland and why (Which I don't need Google for because I naturally excel at Disneyland trivia; 1956-63 Astrojets, 1964-1966 Tomorrowland Jets, existing ride renamed due to sponsorship complaints, 1967-1997 Rocket Jets, 1998-Present Astro Orbitor. And yes, I'm a huge hit at parties!).

But I'm supposed to not trust Google any longer when I ask a quick trivia question or minor bit of info? And how much follow up time is required for each Google search to verify it's correct? And what tool do you use to double check Google? Is Yahoo! still around?

 

[Agent H]

Sodomy wasn't fully decriminalised in the US until 2003. Gay marriage wasn't federally recognised until 2015. I'm not sure how you can possibly assert that gay people were treated "the same" as everyone else in the '60s. That's just an untenable claim on its face.

To be fair I think he means exclusively in tv shows

 

[LittleBuford]

To be fair I think he means exclusively in tv shows

They also referred to their high school. The whole point of the comment was to contrast the situation today with an ideal(ised) past in which people supposedly didn't care about sexuality.

 

[Disney Irish]

For a casual side conversation on a discussion board? That seems excessive.

I could see if I was making a point about something involved and inherently on topic, like the name changes to the spinner ride in Tomorrowland and why (Which I don't need Google for because I naturally excel at Disneyland trivia; 1956-63 Astrojets, 1964-1966 Tomorrowland Jets, existing ride renamed due to sponsorship complaints, 1967-1997 Rocket Jets, 1998-Present Astro Orbitor. And yes, I'm a huge hit at parties!).

But I'm supposed to not trust Google any longer when I ask a quick trivia question or minor bit of info? And how much follow up time is required for each Google search to verify it's correct? And what tool do you use to double check Google? Is Yahoo! still around?

Well maybe spend more than 8 seconds, like maybe actually a few minutes or god-forbid like 10 or 15 minutes to actually research a topic before just making a snap judgement opinion. When I say research I'm not talking about like spending hours or days learning about something like you're trying to write an actual report. But do some verification and research on the results being given, don't just trust them outright.

By the way, I was putting it into a context the poster could understand, they are 17 after all.

 

[TP2000]

Sodomy wasn't fully decriminalised in the US until 2003. Gay marriage wasn't federally recognised until 2015. I'm not sure how you can possibly assert that gay people were treated "the same" as everyone else in the '60s. That's just an untenable claim on its face.

I believe, and read it as such, that she was discussing her own family and social circle, not the legality of it all.

Hillary Clinton didn't support gay marriage when she ran for President in 2008, nor did Barack Obama when he ran for both his first and second terms. It was only after he was re-elected a second time in 2012 that he declared he had "evolved" on the issue and now suddenly supported gay marriage. During that timeframe, things were going swimmingly for gays and Lesbians otherwise.

I would agree with her recollection on that for the most part. I had a few cases in the 70's and 80's when my bosses had no problem passing me by for a promotion and told me it was because "they wanted a family man" to take the job instead of me. That was code for "We know you're gay, and we like you professionally, but we need to promote family men like Steve instead".

Otherwise, between a bunch of old church ladies who outed me and kicked me out of my family's longtime congregation, most of the 70's and 80's and into the 90's was no big deal for me or my friends. No segregated drinking fountains, no separate waiting rooms, no different schools or neighborhoods, etc. I honestly can't complain, but then I'm not Gen Z.