Disney's Punishment of Honest Media/Reviews

[Sirwalterraleigh]

And yet, The Dis was invited to the full 2-day experience? So doesn't that kind of invalidate the perception that you can't criticize Disney too hard for fear of not getting invited back?

First rodeo, eh Cowboy?

 

[World_Showcase_Lover007]

Not everyone out there consuming YouTube is savvy enough to realize that these reviews were part of a quid pro quo arrangement and not unbiased; which is typically what one would expect from a Media Event.

Agreed. While people don’t equate vloggers with news reporters, we tend to believe something when a person stares in a camera and says it to our face. Especially when the lay person sees a blogger at Disney World pop up on their Facebook newsfeed. They think they are out having a genuinely good time.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

An observation - To get the best experience, you can't be passive and just watch, you must get involved with the missions and make it a point to interact with the cast members.

This is the problem in this review for Disney…

A lot of people paying the price won’t be keen on this.

Except that is exactly how Disney is advertising and pitching this. If you do even 5 minutes of research, all over the place they say that you are a part of the experience. It certainly shouldn't be a surprise to anyone wanting to book a stay.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Except that is exactly how Disney is advertising and pitching this. If you do even 5 minutes of research, all over the place they say that you are a part of the experience. It certainly shouldn't be a surprise to anyone wanting to book a stay.

Right…but that’s not the economics of the place.

How many adults with means really want two days of group games and scavenger hunts?

…we shall see

 

[LuvtheGoof]

Right…but that’s not the economics of the place.

How many adults with means really want two days of group games and scavenger hunts?

…we shall see

Very true, and time will tell. I just hope that people willing to plunk down that kind of money will do the proper research beforehand. DW and I are giving it some thought, but will wait and see what happens over the coming months before deciding.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Very true, and time will tell. I just hope that people willing to plunk down that kind of money will do the proper research beforehand. DW and I are giving it some thought, but will wait and see what happens over the coming months before deciding.

Well you and I agree that people should come prepared…

What’s It take? An hour of research (you can fit it in during lacrosse practice)?

But experience tells me it won’t happen to the scale you’d think.

What’s going to make that heightened is the more they charge in the compound, the less people will prepare. Because humans believe price = service. Exactly the opposite they’re taking it across the board.

 

[Brad Bishop]

Can't disagree with most of that to be honest, a pretty fair assessment. One thing I stand by on 90% of the vloggers content I saw from the comped event was the pictures spoke for themselves. We'd been told for months by many that this was a disaster, an embarrassment, awful and how the guests will be demanding refunds upon arrival. However virtually all the vloggers had long unedited shots of large parts of the ships and many long clips of the actors performing.

It became abundantly clear that the idea the inside was themed to a level of a Chucky Cheese playpen was completely debunked, as was the notion that there were no characters or meaningful story lines and things to do. All of a sudden we could SEE that it wasn't as many had 'guessed' and sold as fact. You could see it wasn't like people had said and the vloggers opinion meant so much less than normal as you saw for yourself.

Whilst it's a valid point that a vlogger has reasons to lie or embellish, a small number on here deep down knew that this was far better than they had hoped and went into overdrive on the "We can't believe what the vloggers say" to postpone the inevitable truthful reviews which followed pretty much following the media ones. If you watched most of the videos from the vloggers and muted their opinions, you were still left with a fun (yet overpriced to most) event to see and judge yourself. Most of the commentary at the end when they gave their views was already redundant as we'd already realised this wasn't like many on here had said.

The reviews I heard were all very positive (, Len Testa, etc.

The odd thing is that there have been more cancelations.

$5000+ is a lot to spend for not even two days. You can do a lot of fun, interesting, worldly things with $5K+. That may be where the disconnect is. If I handed an average person $5K and said, "Go on vacation". That $5K can get you to France, UK, Africa, South America - wherever and for a longer time than <48 hours. That $5K can open the doors to some really neat experiences.

I'm wondering if it's like the price pops it into the next level to where you just think differently.

For example, let's say Chevrolet made a $150K car. It seems super nice and goes fast and all that. You'd definitely have Chevy lovers drooling over it. You're top-end people, the ones who could afford it, would probably look at it and think, "Why would I buy a Chevy when I could buy a Rolls Royce, Bently, Lambrogini, etc.??" While this Chevy may have all the bells and whistles, if I'm going to spend that much, I start feeling dumb spending that much on a Chevy.

That could be where Disney is with this.

The other thing I thought of, with the good reviews from Len Testa, WDW NT, Dis, etc. was:
- they kind of have to go (it's their business)
- while they're spending their money it's more like they're spending their business' money.

That's a different outlook than someone who has to make a choice about what to do with $5K+ which could very well be 2-3 years worth of vacations, depending on what they do. They don't get to write it off as a business expense. There's no real need to go, because it's not a part of their business. It's just a different mindset.

 

[JIMINYCR]

I agree…there’s a lot of naivety here…

But you can’t put vloggers in the category of “reporters” at all. They literally started trying to make money off playing. At the end of the day…right or wrong…that is a fact.

I wasnt putting them in the same category, sorry if it came across as that. Guess I should have separated the two reporting factions more. I was only alluding to how unbiased those who report once were and bloggers should follow suit.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I wasnt putting them in the same category, sorry if it came across as that. Guess I should have separated the two reporting factions more. I was only alluding to how unbiased those who report once were and bloggers should follow suit.

Understood

 

[Sir_Cliff]

Travel reviews seem tricky because you can't give out free review copies as you would a game, film, book, album, etc. The in-person trip is a heck of a freebie and a considerable expense for the company.

This got me wondering whether there is much precedent in the travel world for companies inviting "reviews" as has traditionally happened with movies, books, music, etc.? For example, do cruise ships or resorts typically send out free vacation packages to publications on the expectation that a "critic" will offer an objective review of their product?

I honestly don't know, but my experience of travel coverage in the mainstream media is generally glowing coverage with a short acknowledgment somewhere that the author/reporter was the guest of whatever company or venue is being reviewed.

 

[Goofyernmost]

I wasnt putting them in the same category, sorry if it came across as that. Guess I should have separated the two reporting factions more. I was only alluding to how unbiased those who report once were and bloggers should follow suit.

Sure, but if they do utilize that posture there is no legal or moral problem of Disney stopping their particular gravy train. Positive promotion is the reason why Disney spends thousands of dollars to wine and dine Vloggers. If they don't realize that Disney is doing that then Disney will take that "entertainment" money and just spend it on advertising where they have complete control over content. In other words Vloggers will be on the outside looking in. Chances are that those that habitually are negative to do not take anything from Disney, but rely on the real experiences of us common folk and Disney cannot touch them. But, they will have to be good and sellable on their own.

 

[OrlandoRising]

The other thing I thought of, with the good reviews from Len Testa, WDW NT, Dis, etc. was:
- they kind of have to go (it's their business)
- while they're spending their money it's more like they're spending their business' money.

That's a different outlook than someone who has to make a choice about what to do with $5K+ which could very well be 2-3 years worth of vacations, depending on what they do. They don't get to write it off as a business expense. There's no real need to go, because it's not a part of their business. It's just a different mindset.

By that logic, wouldn't you be saying that anyone who reports on theme parks at any professional level can't be trusted to give a honest review?

Disney paying for the trip can certainly be seen as a conflict that would taint the review, because of the potential pressure, explicit or implicit, to review it positively. The same conflict does not arise when they're not paying for the trip out of their personal checking account.

 

[BeentoallDParks]

I can't help but remember that as long as they produce coverage of it, every Disney vlogger and blogger (including Len Testa and ) will be allowed to write the price of the Galactic Starcruiser off their taxes as a business expense.

 

[UNCgolf]

Disney paying for the trip can certainly be seen as a conflict that would taint the review, because of the potential pressure, explicit or implicit, to review it positively. The same conflict does not arise when they're not paying for the trip out of their personal checking account.

That conflict doesn't arise, but not having to pay out of personal funds does still affect the review.

It's only one unconscious bias of many, though (it's not really an unconscious bias but I'm drawing a blank on the right term, and that gets the point across).

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

By that logic, wouldn't you be saying that anyone who reports on theme parks at any professional level can't be trusted to give a honest review?

Disney paying for the trip can certainly be seen as a conflict that would taint the review, because of the potential pressure, explicit or implicit, to review it positively. The same conflict does not arise when they're not paying for the trip out of their personal checking account.

True…but every travel blogger/site has an unsaid, hidden pressure.

They only become popular if people use them for reviews, prep or entertainment. So while not “on the company dime”…more travel with happy people is the path to success, is it not?

 

[Brad Bishop]

By that logic, wouldn't you be saying that anyone who reports on theme parks at any professional level can't be trusted to give a honest review?

Disney paying for the trip can certainly be seen as a conflict that would taint the review, because of the potential pressure, explicit or implicit, to review it positively. The same conflict does not arise when they're not paying for the trip out of their personal checking account.

I wasn't saying that they couldn't be trusted. I think you're misapplying the logic.

Normal park stuff? I think they're fine. I think that they can relate between spending their own money vs spending their business' money.

For the Starcruiser, they:
- pretty much had to do it to stay relevant. They're going to spend the money no matter what. THIS is not quite the same as "going into a park for a day".
- as such, they were going to have to spend $5-6K for a room. This is a business expense for something that they pretty much have to do.
- They didn't "feel" the expense, or even see the expense, as other, normal people would have because: 1) they have to go and 2) they have to spend the money 3) their business will pay them for this experience (and they get to write it off on taxes as it's a business expense but I don't think that played into this much at all)
- they'll still have other -real- vacation days. This was "work" for them.

That's an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT experience than someone:
- who saved up $5-6K for a vacation and now has many options
- who doesn't have to spend $5-6K to do this
- who is paying for it out of their own pockets.
- who will be limited by this expense (one they spend $5-6K on this, they're not spending it elsewhere... That's different from a business expense)

So, no, I don't think they are the same nor do I accept your premise of "..by that logic." I thought I had spelled it out in my earlier post but it looks like I needed to clarify.

It's a bit the same as if you were to compare a car reviewer's approach to everyday cars, which we all pretty much have to buy vs them buying a Ford F-450 Lariat via their business. That truck would, largely, be out of most people's budget. It's not their "go-to" truck choice, even if it is nice and powerful. Their go-to, by the numbers, is a Ford F-150.

...but if you had to buy one for your business, where your business is paying for it (so you can write it off in different ways), and you can justify it (because you need it to haul something), then that is a completely different take on buying the vehicle vs your average consumer who just wants a truck and the F-150 is there but the F-450 looks REALLY nice and is likely out of your price range. You don't have to buy it. Your business doesn't depend on it. You're just average Joe who wants a truck.

It's two different perspectives on the same purchase. I think Len Testa summed it up nicely with, "Do everything else in the world, FIRST.. and if you're still looking for something else.. THEN go do the Starcruiser."

I'm not saying it wasn't a fantastic experience. It sounds like Len had a blast on it and FULLY prepared for it. I'm saying there's a difference in perspective between:
- I gotta buy it for my business
- I don't have to buy it. Sure looks nice, though!

 

[Disstevefan1]

Hehehe. I think I got mistakenly quoted here. All I said was I'm surprised people would mistake vloggers for actual media members because of the use of a term for early access events.

Can we trust media members? They may have agendas and/or report as instructed by their boss or their organization.

We even have to take what the paying customers say with a grain of salt., no one wants to say, that sucked and I wasted $6K.

I guess all we can do for ourselves is to take in all the information and choose for ourselves.

In the end, if the $6K is a real financial strain for a family, its probably best to use the $6K to vacation where you can get the most for your money, even its still in WDW, just not the Star Cruiser.

 

[sedati]

By that logic, wouldn't you be saying that anyone who reports on theme parks at any professional level can't be trusted to give a honest review?

Disney paying for the trip can certainly be seen as a conflict that would taint the review, because of the potential pressure, explicit or implicit, to review it positively. The same conflict does not arise when they're not paying for the trip out of their personal checking account.

A positive self-paid review could be seen as trying to get back into the company's good graces and back onto the schmoozefest list.
A negative self-paid review could be seen as having an axe to grind if it comes from one who has been kicked off the party train and been vocal about the nefarious practice (only after being ejected of course.)

 

[TikibirdLand]

A positive self-paid review could be seen as trying to get back into the company's good graces and back onto the schmoozefest list.
A negative self-paid review could be seen as having an axe to grind if it comes from one who has been kicked off the party train and been vocal about the nefarious practice (only after being ejected of course.)

Like a lot of insiders here, I think there's a track record with reviewers you need to follow. Once you measure reviews with stuff you've actually done, you can better judge the critics. No, it doesn't have to be with the Starcruiser. But, you know if they praise the wonders of Triceratops Spin, you might be looking at "pumper". If they say the Tiki Room stinks and is a snooze-fest, you can CERTAINLY mark them off your trusted list!

History counts.

 

[TikibirdLand]

But, you know if they praise the wonders of Triceratops Spin, you might be looking at "pumper".

Why does that sound like the start of a Jeff Foxworthy monologue?