Disney Imagineering Testing Dragon

[WDW1974]

Settle down. I'm not talking about going to a Disney event and shouting down the speaker at a public event. Generally, however, "real" media given access at an event like this has a chance to have some real conversations with key people.

You can have a rational conversation about legitimate criticism without it being a "cheap stunt" or having it backfire - especially if you are a member of the real media with a legit track record of providing fair coverage. More importantly, you have to have an audience - a Disney exec will be more tolerant of questions from an NY Times or USA Today reporter because they really, really, really want to be in those large-circulation publications.

But they won't be nearly as patient with a mommy blogger and her audience of hundreds.

THIS!

Big difference between a pro reporter and Lou Mongello or even Deb Wills (someone I like and respect) and Mommy Blogger No. 6543.

 

[WDW1974]

It's not about patience but actually getting an answer that actually says something.

@Rasvar was dead on

You do NOT get answers worth having, answers that say something, if all you do is allow the subject to spit out talking points. That IS what the blogging community do.

Have you listened to some of them conducting 'interviews"?

Cringe-worthy stuff.

 

[WDW1974]

I agree with this. That is also why these press events are 100% fluff. They are designed that way. It's the same reason politicians have "Town Square" meetings where they can screen the questioners instead of having an open press conference with the media that is covering them. It is why you have D23. It is why Disney owns so many media outlets. Mike Wallace would have a hell of time getting going these days. People always thought they could use him to get their version out since it was a powerful way to get it out(even though it rarely worked). But no one would try to deal with a Mike Wallace now. Hire a PR firm. Develop a message and get it out. Then depend on those who support you to spread the message. I understand what you are saying about purchasing coverage. Your darn right they are. That just makes it even harder.

What does it say about today's society that folks from Walt Disney to Mike Wallace would never have gotten anywhere had they been in their prime in 2012? Seriously.

Companies should not be allowed to control the narrative today, but they can and do. It's sorta like the three Prez debates where I don't believe one question that was asked of either candidate was answered with anything more than talking points. I would have loved to see the moderator stop them immediately and say 'That's very nice Mr. Obama or Mr. Romney, but the question was ...'

Now, I get why that sadly wouldn't happen. But to allow execs to use you like toilet paper is not the role of a reporter.

It just seems impossible to get anything hard from these events. The real question is, does that change if the big media stops covering these events or does Disney just use its manufactured network?

Trust me, I'm not defending Disney on this. Trying to get through the wall to real info is a royal pain in the tuckus.

The big media presence at these events is a fraction of what it was just a decade ago (I know, I was a regular in the 90s and early part of last decade). Part of that is the economy and cutbacks in newsrooms and part is Disney's desire to wine and dine the whores.

 

[Gabe1]

What does it say about today's society that folks from Walt Disney to Mike Wallace would never have gotten anywhere had they been in their prime in 2012? Seriously.

Companies should not be allowed to control the narrative today, but they can and do. It's sorta like the three Prez debates where I don't believe one question that was asked of either candidate was answered with anything more than talking points. I would have loved to see the moderator stop them immediately and say 'That's very nice Mr. Obama or Mr. Romney, but the question was ...'

Now, I get why that sadly wouldn't happen. But to allow execs to use you like toilet paper is not the role of ab reporter.



The big media presence at these events is a fraction of what it was just a decade ago (I know, I was a regular in the 90s and early part of last decade). Part of that is the economy and cutbacks in newsrooms and part is Disney's desire to wine and dine the whores.

Traveling to Disney for decades now, I remember when I could read a book and get a real review and advice. Then I would read Birnbaum for the woo woo fluff and pictures, 'cause in those days, only that tour book had pictures. Now I have to search the forums, whittle through the posts, throw out the Rah Rah Cheerleaders, toss the Grumpy and land in the middle of the posts to get an objective opinion.

The best part is when I hear a podcast and they have a strong opinion and later it bites them in their media tuchus. I've seen media forum posts edited (though theirs don't show edit) and achieved podcasts modified to not leave a trace. I've migrated here because I generally don't need to stick my finger down my throat as I read breaking news.

 

[flynnibus]

You do NOT get answers worth having, answers that say something, if all you do is allow the subject to spit out talking points. That IS what the blogging community do.

Have you listened to some of them conducting 'interviews"?

Cringe-worthy stuff.

I don't listen to their stuff. But that doesn't change anything. I didn't say you let them control it. But at the same time you can't just blurt out anything. Just because you ask doesn't mean they'll say anything of substance. The key is to get them to open up or get comfortable and say more than they should.

People forget.. This isn't the witness stand - they don't have to answer everything asked. They can just talk around it and move on

 

[flynnibus]

But, I'll play along. Show me where one of these people have gotten "an answer that actually says something."

Play along with what? Where did I say they did? Don't confuse things to think I am defending some of these writers. I said the key was actually getting an answer that actually says something - and you don't get that by ambushing-blindsiding a guy in a press event.

I think some people watch too much tv and think this is 'law and order' and you're gonna trap the guy on the witness stand and he's gonna fold and spill it all.

The pr-trained guy isn't gonna say anything more than he set out to say in the first place. You need far more than just simply asking the question to get past their defenses.

Just asking - isn't gonna get you an answer of merit. And blindsiding someone at the press event isn't likely to get to the soft side where they say something they shouldn't have. You'd put them on defense and they'd clamp down and say nothing at all if value. And then you're blackballed.

You need to be far more sophisticated to get the good stuff

 

[nytimez]

Play along with what? Where did I say they did? Don't confuse things to think I am defending some of these writers. I said the key was actually getting an answer that actually says something - and you don't get that by ambushing-blindsiding a guy in a press event.

I think some people watch too much tv and think this is 'law and order' and you're gonna trap the guy on the witness stand and he's gonna fold and spill it all.

The pr-trained guy isn't gonna say anything more than he set out to say in the first place. You need far more than just simply asking the question to get past their defenses.

Just asking - isn't gonna get you an answer of merit. And blindsiding someone at the press event isn't likely to get to the soft side where they say something they shouldn't have. You'd put them on defense and they'd clamp down and say nothing at all if value. And then you're blackballed.

You need to be far more sophisticated to get the good stuff

I think you and I have different definitions of "ambush" and "blindisded."

You can't possibly "ambush" someone when you've been invited to ask questions - especially when the questions are about things that are publicly visible and widely discussed. Nor should anyone be "blindsided" when those questions are raised.

This is not sophistication (although it is certainly beyond the sophistication of the mommy bloggers). This is not Law and Order. This is basic Q&A stuff.

 

[flynnibus]

I think you and I have different definitions of "ambush" and "blindisded."

You can't possibly "ambush" someone when you've been invited to ask questions - especially when the questions are about things that are publicly visible and widely discussed. Nor should anyone be "blindsided" when those questions are raised.

BS - these types of discussions are always predicated on discussing a specific topic list. If I ask you for an interview to discuss the new openings... you accept.. and during the interview I start coming at you with questions about something completely from left field.. that's a blindside and you are gonna get the stink-eye and there is nothing garunteeing they will actually answer the question with any substance.

If I get invited to discuss your new book.. and then take the meeting to decide to instead start laying into you about rumors of infidelity.. you are no longer welcome.

And in the case of this event.. This is more likely Disney 'offering' interview slots to specific people. Disney is the one setting the agenda, and picking the invitees. If the agenda is the new attractions, and then you come in asking why they are cutting EMH hours instead of expansion topics.. you're done.

It has nothing to do with what is 'public' or not. There are protocols here.. and you can't just ignore them and expect to stay on the 'participating' list. There is also a large element of 'who needs who' when it comes to how challenging a person can be. Many people may have 'one shot' to do it.. and if you actually are gonna get something out of your attempt.. you need far more setup and manipulation than simply taking the first time you get face to face with a VP thinking you're gonna play Chris Matthews and unleash uncomfortable questions.

 

[nytimez]

BS - these types of discussions are always predicated on discussing a specific topic list. If I ask you for an interview to discuss the new openings... you accept.. and during the interview I start coming at you with questions about something completely from left field.. that's a blindside and you are gonna get the stink-eye and there is nothing garunteeing they will actually answer the question with any substance.

OK, it's absolutely clear you have no idea what you're talking about.

It's true that the interview subject would LOVE to control the interview and set ground rules for questions and never have to answer anything they don't want to... but it just don't work that way out in the real world. Nor would any journalist worth his salt accept what you appear to think are spoken or unspoken ground rules for interviews and press events.

Mommy bloggers, however, would be happy to play along.

We can go back and forth all day on this, but I won't - so I'll let you get last word. What you're suggesting, however, is dangerously close to the Sarah Palin idea that any question you don't want to answer - or any question you answered, but immediately regret answering after - is some form of "gotcha journalism."

And, who knows, that school of thought may eventually drown out real and thoughtful discussions and interviews. But for now, I am going to hold out hope that journalism may be on life support... but it's not dead yet.

 

[flynnibus]

'time and place'... and even journalists play by those rules.

There is far more to prying the juicy answer than simply asking the question. 5 minute 1-on-1 interview slot during a PR event isn't where you're gonna break your story.

You keep acting like all it takes is the balls to ask the question - There is far more to it than that... because they have no motivation to actually answer it how you want. That's what you need to coax out of them.

 

[djlaosc]

Companies should not be allowed to control the narrative today, but they can and do. It's sorta like the three Prez debates where I don't believe one question that was asked of either candidate was answered with anything more than talking points. I would have loved to see the moderator stop them immediately and say 'That's very nice Mr. Obama or Mr. Romney, but the question was ...'

Now, I get why that sadly wouldn't happen. But to allow execs to use you like toilet paper is not the role of a reporter.

Maybe they should hire Will McAvoy.

 

[ULPO46]

Yeah i remeber a article on the Orlando Sentinel's Daily Disney. According to a spokesperson it was a one time deal stint for the opening of the new Fantasyland Expansion.

 

[Rasvar]

What does it say about today's society that folks from Walt Disney to Mike Wallace would never have gotten anywhere had they been in their prime in 2012? Seriously.

Companies should not be allowed to control the narrative today, but they can and do. It's sorta like the three Prez debates where I don't believe one question that was asked of either candidate was answered with anything more than talking points. I would have loved to see the moderator stop them immediately and say 'That's very nice Mr. Obama or Mr. Romney, but the question was ...'

I agree, it disgusts me to no end. I could go into the politics of media consolidation and the blurring of the lines between news and entertainment but it doesn't really add anything of substance. I considered a run at journalism a few years ago but everyone I knew and respected told me to run away and run away fast. Pretty much, I wasn't getting in the door because I was not going to blow smoke you know where. It is a sad state of affairs. I respect the journalist who try but It is hard to cut through the cacophony.

 

[asianway]

That's what many of these folks are. Fans. From what I gather by his anti-WDW Press and Publicity quotes, Scarlett's new BF wasn't credentialed for the event and feels he should have been because the folks in Anaheim were dumb enough to fly him out to the Cars Land event.

But if you read enough of the tweets, then you see a pattern of hostile, vile, sometimes obscene, often passive aggressive tweets that should scare Disney away from these folks for good.

That's certainly interesting, it indicates they may be using some modest screening techniques.

One thing I noticed, this weekend was the D23 Magic & Merriment event, and I dont think I saw that a single one of the local judgment proof bottom feeders attended. Of course, at $250 maybe that's part of the attraction, a blogger free zone.

 

[nytimez]

I agree, it disgusts me to no end. I could go into the politics of media consolidation and the blurring of the lines between news and entertainment but it doesn't really add anything of substance. I considered a run at journalism a few years ago but everyone I knew and respected told me to run away and run away fast. Pretty much, I wasn't getting in the door because I was not going to blow smoke you know where. It is a sad state of affairs. I respect the journalist who try but It is hard to cut through the cacophony.

I've been asked to speak a few times to aspiring journalists. Each time, I've suggested they aspire to something else.

 

[RSoxNo1]

What does it say about today's society that folks from Walt Disney to Mike Wallace would never have gotten anywhere had they been in their prime in 2012? Seriously.

Companies should not be allowed to control the narrative today, but they can and do. It's sorta like the three Prez debates where I don't believe one question that was asked of either candidate was answered with anything more than talking points. I would have loved to see the moderator stop them immediately and say 'That's very nice Mr. Obama or Mr. Romney, but the question was ...'

Now, I get why that sadly wouldn't happen. But to allow execs to use you like toilet paper is not the role of a reporter.



The big media presence at these events is a fraction of what it was just a decade ago (I know, I was a regular in the 90s and early part of last decade). Part of that is the economy and cutbacks in newsrooms and part is Disney's desire to wine and dine the whores.

The sort of thing that frustrates me is when no one will admit that the Tangled Restrooms are Tangled Restrooms. I've listened to imagineers and executives talk about that area and none of them have referred to it as a bathroom. It's a "way to improve guest comfort". It wasn't until Ricky Brigante interviewed Phil Holmes at the press event that Phil said somewhat lightheartedly, the pathway would ease congestion in a high traffic area and it will be the best themed bathrooms in the parks.

Part of the problem is the "reporters", the other problem is how guarded Disney is about things that are relatively insignificant. Every answer is filtered and anyone that's going to talk to the public has been coached to a point where nothing of value is going to be said.

 

[WDW1974]

I don't listen to their stuff. But that doesn't change anything. I didn't say you let them control it. But at the same time you can't just blurt out anything. Just because you ask doesn't mean they'll say anything of substance. The key is to get them to open up or get comfortable and say more than they should.

People forget.. This isn't the witness stand - they don't have to answer everything asked. They can just talk around it and move on

Agree largely. You shouldn't go in and turn it into an adversarial situation. At the same time, you have to be targeted and on point if you are trying to get substance. And that is no guarantee either. But one surefire way to not get anything of substance is to cede power and not even attempt a real question.

A balancing act to be sure.

But I'd trust Brooks Barnes of the NY Times for example to be able to get a quote that is meaningful from Tom Staggs more than I would Lou Mongello.

 

[WDW1974]

OK, it's absolutely clear you have no idea what you're talking about.

It's true that the interview subject would LOVE to control the interview and set ground rules for questions and never have to answer anything they don't want to... but it just don't work that way out in the real world. Nor would any journalist worth his salt accept what you appear to think are spoken or unspoken ground rules for interviews and press events.

Mommy bloggers, however, would be happy to play along.

We can go back and forth all day on this, but I won't - so I'll let you get last word. What you're suggesting, however, is dangerously close to the Sarah Palin idea that any question you don't want to answer - or any question you answered, but immediately regret answering after - is some form of "gotcha journalism."

And, who knows, that school of thought may eventually drown out real and thoughtful discussions and interviews. But for now, I am going to hold out hope that journalism may be on life support... but it's not dead yet.

'time and place'... and even journalists play by those rules.

There is far more to prying the juicy answer than simply asking the question. 5 minute 1-on-1 interview slot during a PR event isn't where you're gonna break your story.

You keep acting like all it takes is the balls to ask the question - There is far more to it than that... because they have no motivation to actually answer it how you want. That's what you need to coax out of them.

I don't know how to be clearer than I've been, but both of you are quite correct (at least in what I quoted above).

It's not a simple thing.

I remember interviewing a top exec of TWDC a long time ago. The exec had a handler, but decided he wanted to speak to me away from said handler and told me some wonderful things that were 'off the record' but were things that I was able to use in a different way. ... You have to walk a tightrope to be sure, but you can get real answers to real questions even at Disney's junkets.

 

[WDW1974]

That's certainly interesting, it indicates they may be using some modest screening techniques.

I believe they have started to do some 'modest' background checks as well as real value checks ... But I do love the out and out whining on numerous Twit feeds with the intent of getting Disney's attention.

What a waste. That passive aggressive BS isn't gonna score anyone a place on the coveted list!

One thing I noticed, this weekend was the D23 Magic & Merriment event, and I dont think I saw that a single one of the local judgment proof bottom feeders attended. Of course, at $250 maybe that's part of the attraction, a blogger free zone.

Not at all surprising. These folks are largely working to lower middle class. The ones with some money are just plain cheap. These folks have come to believe that they should be lavished with freebies and they aren't dropping $250 easily.

I wonder how many of the folks who got free cruises have turned around and paid for an actual DCL voyage? I wonder how many Mommy Bloggers who gush over the GF after spending a free week there on Disney will turn around and pay for even a night there with their own dollars?

That's one of my biggest issues with these folks. They try and convince their followers that they should spend their money on whatever Disney is selling, yet they won't do the same. What does that tell you?

 

[wedenterprises]

Disney reads the forums eh? (wrings hands)... In that case my message for your weekly powerpoint is: Re-theme TSMM (Disney intern, that stands for Toy Story Midway Mania) to fit into DHS better (that's Disney Hollywood Studios...in Florida) .

My eyes hurt from rolling them.