Disney's Punishment of Honest Media/Reviews

[Casper Gutman]

Again, I don't know whether I'm being naïve, but hasn't it always worked like that? Disney didn't invite travel writers or morning show hosts to the opening of Epcot or Animal Kingdom, for example, because they wanted hard-hitting scrutiny or to give those people or publications a nice treat. They did it because they wanted positive publicity that would convince people to visit WDW. I don't know the extent to which this has changed, but as long as I have been a fan Disney has had a reputation as company particularly concerned with "controlling the message." Now there are these people called vloggers, so they've updated the strategy to harness them as effectively as possible for marketing purposes and those vloggers can play along or resist as much as they choose while viewers also choose what content they prefer.

This is, again, not to deny anything that has been said about the relationship between Disney and the vloggers. It's more a bit of a shrug that I thought all of this was just obvious.

It's obvious to YOU and ME but it isn't obvious to many people - enough people that it is very profitable for Disney to spend so much cash and effort on manipulating vloggers.

And there IS something different about vloggers. Traditionally, news and reviews have come to people through established gatekeepers who, while inevitably biased (they were humans) made some effort towards maintaining actual journalistic standards. When an ABC program puffed up a Disney product - well, that wasn't great (there are real problems with entertainment monopolies and cross promotion), but the connection between Disney and the show were more obvious and there were still some ethical restraints.

Technology has demolished those gatekeepers and a wave of populism has set fire to whatever ruins might remain. There are some positive consequences of these developments, but there are also a HOST of negatives. New sources of information like vloggers hide behind an entirely manufactured persona of "authenticity" which is tremendously powerful and influential in the current environment. They are "one of the people," the source of all real wisdom - "experts" who want to analyze corporate products critically are elitists, drowned out, and as Len's examples show, can safely be blackballed by Disney. Advertising is as fake as ever, but it is more deeply hidden and obscured then ever before, and countervailing voices are far less influential then ever.

We see in this thread people who are absolutely convinced that they cannot be influenced by the media they consume. That's absurd, but it's a widely held belief. Everyone, very much including myself, can be influenced, usually much more easily then we assume. That's why constant vigilance is required when we consume media, and why we shouldn't turn a blind eye when a company, especially one as massively influential as Disney, engages in deceptive practices.

 

[JoeCamel]

I have no idea, but I'm guessing @wdwmagic and @lentesta weren't removed for doing anything unsavory.

Well there was the afterhours incident at the Poly hot tub.....

 

[Lilofan]

Well there was the afterhours incident at the Poly hot tub.....

I would think the Coronado location at the Main Pool would make the news. It can hold up to 20 guests.

 

[mightynine]

I would think the Coronado location at the Main Pool would make the news. It can hold up to 20 guests.

We don't talk about Co-ro-ro-na-do

 

[correcaminos]

They aren't that strict. Pete himself is highly critical. I myself was a mod there for 4-5 years. Granted I myself am not banned there.

They really were strict about those who were critical about a lot of things. They banned simply for posting elsewhere. I have a username there but after there my original one was banned simply for telling them to kiss off for banning who they did. This was 14 years ago almost to the day. Yes Pete is critical, almost to a fault, but he sure didn't allow others to be critical of his site, those wanting what they paid for, or the like.

 

[LittleBuford]

I don't follow any vloggers, but I do watch a number of YouTubers who buy, show, and discuss Disney merchandise. Some of these individuals are very small fry indeed, and certainly not the kinds of "influencers" whom Disney partners with, yet they are almost universally glowing in their assessment. The point I'm trying to make is that some people simply like Disney a great deal and are unlikely to harbour, let alone voice, the kinds of criticisms that others may regard as synonymous with honesty. This is not to deny that Disney pressures and manipulates a number of prominent YouTubers, but I don't doubt that many positive reviews are perfectly sincere.

 

[Rteetz]

They really were strict. They banned simply for posting elsewhere. I have a username there but after there my original one was banned simply for telling them to kiss off for banning who they did. This was 14 years ago almost to the day.

Were is not how it is today. I do know that. Tho when I was banned last year, a lot were alongside of me because they backed me instead of the webmaster overloads.

 

[correcaminos]

Were is not how it is today. I do know that. Tho when I was banned last year, a lot were alongside of me because they backed me instead of the webmaster overloads.

They still won't get my clicks or money earned from said clicks. I've never seen a place like that before which is sad because it started great. It was more honest, but as time went on it was for those who wanted to drink Kool aid. I want honesty from forums, not fearing what I post will be ridiculed for putting Disney down. My friends who remain there are more of lurkers now though I have met people who feel Disney can do no wrong and post info from there. It seems to be similar ish in that way from what I knew. I still love Disney, but there are real issues. Squishing out those negative feedbacks isn't good. I get why Disney would not invite critics to previews but like many things, I don't like shills.

 

[Rteetz]

They still won't get my clicks or money earned from said clicks. I've never seen a place like that before which is sad because it started great. It was more honest, but as time went on it was for those who wanted to drink Kool aid. I want honesty from forums, not fearing what I post will be ridiculed for putting Disney down. My friends who remain there are more of lurkers now though I have met people who feel Disney can do no wrong and post info from there. It seems to be similar ish in that way from what I knew. I still love Disney, but there are real issues. Squishing out those negative feedbacks isn't good. I get why Disney would not invite critics to previews but like many things, I don't like shills.

Oh I agree and while I also will refuse to give them my clicks/views at this point I will say they in their reviews/videos/etc. are typically a bit more honest than others in the blogger community.

 

[ppete1975]

I have no idea, but I'm guessing @wdwmagic and @lentesta weren't removed for doing anything unsavory.

Regardless, I think some people are taking this as an attack on Disney and it's really not that. This is what large corporations do; it's not anything unique to Disney. They have massive PR departments that put pressure on people to avoid negative coverage (and promote positive coverage) as much as they can.

see I clearly missed something, because i didnt hear they were removed... i will have to go through the history of what happened.

If a person's relationships are that transactional, then they've got bigger problems than what's happening at theme parks.

When a corporation gives a "freebie", it isn't really free...it's in exchange for publicity...it's a trade. Something corporations have lost sight of is that they should WANT honesty from those providing them with publicity and feedback because it ensures that they continue to supply a good product and helps them stay in business for the long-term.

True feedback only comes from anonymous surveys (if sent to people with something to lose) or people with nothing to lose.. it will be interesting to see what reviews look like when people pay for the entire 2 days. I found it interesting that some of the vloggers were saying they already had a paid by the vlogger trip coming up (timtracker for one), i really wonder if disney asked them to say that and gave them a free trip, or while the vloggers were there if they were given an opportunity at a greatly discounted trip.

 

[correcaminos]

Oh I agree and while I also will refuse to give them my clicks/views at this point I will say they in their reviews/videos/etc. are typically a bit more honest than others in the blogger community.

I think some are but some bloggers are absolutely sucking up entirely. Probably why I don't read a whole lot of them. Or when I do, I read between the lines. I prefer forums for info as they seem more honest.

 

[ppete1975]

I will say they didnt invite the (as far as I know) biggest star wars youtuber (starwarstheory), who has been openly critical of the whole hotel, galaxys edge, and the sequels. Then again it seemed like they invited mostly the disney vloggers they are safe with.

 

[sedati]

Only 18 more hours left! Looking forward to hearing honest reviews from non-bloggers and vloggers.

What about resellers who figure they can get a free trip and then some by selling the exclusive merch?

 

[ppete1975]

What about resellers who figure they can get a free trip and then some by selling the exclusive merch?

from exclusive merchandise ive seen, the resell market is going to be lacking. Now if they had a figment in a vader costume WATCH OUT

 

[ImperfectPixie]

see I clearly missed something, because i didnt hear they were removed... i will have to go through the history of what happened.

True feedback only comes from anonymous surveys (if sent to people with something to lose) or people with nothing to lose.. it will be interesting to see what reviews look like when people pay for the entire 2 days. I found it interesting that some of the vloggers were saying they already had a paid by the vlogger trip coming up (timtracker for one), i really wonder if disney asked them to say that and gave them a free trip, or while the vloggers were there if they were given an opportunity at a greatly discounted trip.

That would be an awfully big credibility risk...not to mention against that it's against the law to not disclose that you were given a freebie or discounted product.

 

[mergatroid]

What I've noticed about nearly every vlog I've seen on the Starcruiser is that they're different to the average vlog. By that I mean a much larger percentage of it is taken up with allowing the visuals and acting to be the main focus rather than the vlogger themselves. The ones I've watched have majorly consisted of your eyes and ears telling you what to think rather than the person telling you. Most 45 min+ vlogs are 90% footage of different tasks or events without commentary overlapping them, it's refreshing because it allows YOU to decide whether you like what you see. All the things I've seen and thought looked fun, were things that were just filmed without somebody telling me afterwards what to think. By the time I'd seen the First Order arrive I'd decided whether I liked that or not, the persons opinion on it afterward wasn't important to me and that is quite telling.

Of course the guy who posts 20 times a day "This is awful, lol" repeatedly will disagree which is fine, it's subjective. Perhaps the 6 or so videos I've watched were just coincidentally the only ones where 90% of the content was live scenes rather than opinions, maybe there's hundreds of others with little footage and somebody just telling you it's good for 90% of it? But the content out there I've seen appears to show the experience more than usual and the product can be judged by you, rather than the creator being the driving force (no pun intended) behind it with their opinion. They give opinions yes, however I've found at that point that I've already come to my own conclusion on what works and what doesn't. It's a refreshing change in my humble opinion.

 

[ppete1975]

That would be an awfully big credibility risk...not to mention against that it's against the law to not disclose that you were given a freebie or discounted product.

What law are you thinking would be broken? Not to take this topic way off the rails. But if I have a discount code and purchase something and dont say.. oh by the way i used a discount code.. pretty sure I dont have to legally disclose that.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

What law are you thinking would be broken? Not to take this topic way off the rails. But if I have a discount code and purchase something and dont say.. oh by the way i used a discount code.. pretty sure I dont have to legally disclose that.

There's a difference between using a coupon code that is available to the public and Disney opting to give just you, specifically, a heavily discounted product in exchange for publicity. It's the FTC...and I believe the Consumer Review Fairness Act.

 

[Kingoglow]

What law are you thinking would be broken? Not to take this topic way off the rails. But if I have a discount code and purchase something and dont say.. oh by the way i used a discount code.. pretty sure I dont have to legally disclose that.

Here is the one to watch out for. Link to FTC Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.
It is a Federal law so of course it is 12 pages.... If you skip all of the examples provided, then it is not that difficult to get through.

Generally speaking, if a person is being compensated (in any way) to endorse or be a spokesperson for a product, service, etc, then that person must take reasonable steps to tell the audience that their POV was paid for. #ad #sponsored etc would work.

I am picking and choosing some of the fun language in the law. I am not a legal expert, this is not legal advice, and I am not presenting the whole law (see the link above for that).

-Endorsements must reflect the honest opinions, findings, beliefs, or experience of the
endorser. Furthermore, an endorsement may not convey any express or implied representation that
would be deceptive if made directly by the advertiser. [See §§ 255.2(a) and (b) regarding
substantiation of representations conveyed by consumer endorsements.

-Endorsements by organizations, especially expert ones, are viewed as representing the judgment of
a group whose collective experience exceeds that of any individual member, and whose judgments
are generally free of the sort of subjective factors that vary from individual to individual.
Therefore, an organization’s endorsement must be reached by a process sufficient to ensure that
the endorsement fairly reflects the collective judgment of the organization. Moreover, if an
organization is represented as being expert, then, in conjunction with a proper exercise of its
expertise in evaluating the product under § 255.3 (expert endorsements), it must utilize an expert
or experts recognized as such by the organization or standards previously adopted by the
organization and suitable for judging the relevant merits of such products.

-When there exists a connection between the endorser and the seller of the advertised product that might materially affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement (i.e., the connection is not reasonably expected by the audience), such connection must be fully disclosed. For example, when an endorser who appears in a television commercial is neither represented in the
advertisement as an expert nor is known to a significant portion of the viewing public, then the
advertiser should clearly and conspicuously disclose either the payment or promise of
compensation prior to and in exchange for the endorsement or the fact that the endorser knew or
had reason to know or to believe that if the endorsement favored the advertised product some
benefit, such as an appearance on television, would be extended to the endorser. Additional
guidance, including guidance concerning endorsements made through other media, is provided by
the examples below.

 

[mightynine]

FTC rules are guaranteed to cause one thing - me to drink. Hi, I'm mightynine and I'd like to talk about grain alcohol.

(This post contains a paid promotion)