The interesting thing is that marketing is done by several departments. The Parks have one department, the films another. Films are positioned to a particular audience, so you get the trailers "spun" to attract who they think will show up to a film. The Studio has films they want to push, or an overall corporate initiative (dropping the "S") and everyone rallies around those brand stewards in corporate and have to allow for the premiere in the park, etc. They have to go after missing demographics that they are not getting at the parks and craft campaigns to get those folks. Campaigns get blessed by executives that are not marketers, and I've seen incredibly good programs lose out because they did not set well upstairs. (I'd actually take marketing's side on the word "midway", it seems too long). Tough job. If no one goes to your movie, you blame the marketing, and if it's a good movie then it sold itself. All I'm saying is that there are lots of "cooks" in the marketing "kitchen" and sometimes the best ideas don't always make it to the public. My company works in marketing and brand development and has even done work for Disney at times. Films and theme parks are sold differently. You have to presell the parks, as groups and families plan in long in advance, so it's a harder thing to do.
The philosophy at Sotto Studios is that the marketing people are not the enemy, in fact, you develop the product with them in mind. You want them involved, it would be stupid not to. In fact, it's the marketers that determine how much attendance your ride idea will attract, the "finger in the wind" that determines how much budget you can justify and if the show will get built at all! You need them to love what you propose and believe it will be something they can clearly communicate to the public. Will the public show up for Captain Nemo, Tron, or Avatar? They don't get a bonus for taking big risks with lesser known franchises for what rides cost today. It's a tough sell and you cannot blame them. They have lots of sway. Bob Iger still makes the final call. This opinion based phase has been the source of the occasional conflict between WDI and marketing over the years.
You also don't want to have them promising things the show cannot deliver. You need to see their issues with what you have up front. You may be wrong. There can be conflict, but that's ok. Work it out. After WDI won the battle for the longest name in history ("Indiana Jones and the Temple of the Forbidden Eye"), guests just say "let's go on the Indiana Jones Ride". Comes with the territory. This does not necessarily mean that you drive the idea from demographic data either, but you holistically grow the idea together in a way that their marketing is organic to the project and not an afterthought. The worst thing is that you spring it on them and they slap on a campaign that is completely discordant to what the show is. Usually the process works and they come up with great ideas, or you have a trust where you suggest fun things to them. Indiana Jones is a good example where the WDI team suggested decoder cards and stuff like that and they got ATT to pay for that. In the end, it's a commercial product that has to attract guests. Marketing people are generally very creative and helpful so you want to give them something to build on but they have marching orders too and you cannot deny that. Seamless promotion that that never feels like "selling" is what we're all after. I used to work directly with participant affairs to get the sponsors to kick in with fun show enhancements instead of just putting their name up everywhere. They love that if it's reasonable. On-board Audio Music was added to Space Mountain because of Fedex and drove the system to be on other rides. So you can make it all more coheasive.
As was said earlier, the new Carsland commercial on TV right now is really great. The characters are out there enjoying the land and rides to land our attention, and then you see guests like yourself having a ball on the rides. Perfect.
