bartholomr4
Well-Known Member
Not so sure about how big it will be.....
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Expose reveals WDC control in online fan community
- Thread starter tirian
- Start date
Not so sure about how big it will be.....
SeaCastle
Well-Known Member
It's a non-denial denial. The only thing he disputes with any kind of definitiveness is that Al Lutz didn't write for Miceage during the SaveDisney years, which given that one of the main contentions of the article is that Al Lutz is not Al Lutz is not so much in dispute because "Al Lutz" is writing it anyway.
I can't find in the article where it says Al was comped into anything, so why bring that up. More importantly, he didn't need to be- by all accounts the real Al was unable to do it, so Al or whoever is writing as him could just be fed takes and tidbits.
Kevin doesn't even dispute that Iger and others were sources and that whoever was portraying Al could have promoted those folks. Al doesn't have to be co-opted if he happens to already be towing the line. Kevin's post is far from any kind of categorical denial, if anything it affirms key aspects of it by saying that repetitive writing tics are definitive evidence that Al is Al. And again, that is hardly evidence because any PR person/copy writer worth their salt certainly has the writing skills to ventriloquize someone's writing voice- particularly for which a long and accessible track record of writing is already available.
Also, I don't get the fixation on this common thread of making fun of Zenia Mucha's name as somehow being exculpating for being someone friendly with her. The way that tidbit is invoked makes it seem like a secret handshake.
Frank the Tank
Well-Known Member
Yes, in my personal experience in a different realm (writing about the college sports business and specifically conference realignment over the past decade) is that well thought out forums and blogs that focus on the “inside baseball” can legitimately get the attention of the powers that be.
When conference realignment started kicking around as a news story with the Big Ten announcing that it wanted to expand about a decade ago, I got really frustrated with the sports journalists and columnists that either didn’t understand the multi-faceted long-term financial, TV contract, academic and branding issues involved or, even worse, simply didn’t want to and just wished the story would go away so that they could go back and focus on game stories and the next recruiting classes.
So, I ended up writing about it myself and applied my own analysis based on what I thought the Big Ten’s criteria would be and then evaluated several schools using an index system. One factor that I thought nearly every journalist was missing at the time was that expansion was going to be driven by adding households for the Big Ten Network (along with increasing rights fees from ESPN/Disney) as much as anything else and that the whole point of the exercise was for the league to get *out* of the Midwest... and I emphasized that heavily in the analysis.
I had no inside information, but I wrote it like a legitimate business case combined with a fair amount of pop culture references thrown in (as I know full well that a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down, so the speak). My side hobby sports blog that basically had my friends and family for readers previously suddenly blew up with tens of thousands of readers overnight since it was getting passed around on college sports message boards and blogs across the country. Then, it started getting posted on places like Deadspin and mainstream media outlets. So, I kept on writing on the subject more and the popularity of the blog kept snowballing for the next few years while conference realignment was a major story. (It has died down quite a bit over the past few years, so I don’t write very much any more.)
I thought my writing was all largely for the enjoyment of my readers and, frankly, myself, but then one of the major newspaper journalists covering the conference realignment reached out to me. That journalist said that he/she enjoyed my work a lot, but more importantly, the commissioners of the Big Ten and other power conferences read my work, too. In fact, that journalist said that the Big Ten in particular had several people in their office that would research blogs and discussion forums and provide copies of key pieces and opinions to top executives on a daily basis. A separate mainstream journalist independently stated the same thing to me and that my blog came up in conference emails that were obtained FOIA requests (as they involved public university officials).
The point is that if the Big Ten assigned multiple people to review fan sites (even those without any inside information, much less those that provided leaks) and passed them to the very top of the food chain daily, then you can be sure that Disney does the same thing and probably even more intensively on a wider basis (particularly on a forum like this one where we are legitimately interested in discussing the “inside baseball” and decision-making process of TWDC as opposed to just fan opinions and trip ideas that can be found in a lot of other places).
I also know what it’s like to start getting information from insiders (and many, many, many people who claimed to be insiders but had nothing) since I suddenly had a platform. I’ll just say that you have to do a lot of work to sift through the legitimate insiders with truthful information and the ones that were looking to push personal agendas and actively spread misleading info and/or outright lies. I could go on and on about this, but I’ll stop there for now.
Last edited:
Da Bird is Da Word
Active Member
Is there a link to the other thread people keep referencing? I can’t seem to find it.
MKCP 1985
Well-Known Member
Guys, there have always been people on these forums with multiple accounts. It has been an issue at times when the person does something to earn a ban and then rooting out the duplicate accounts is like pulling weeds.
Why do it? Several reasons including (1) creating an illusion that your posts are enthusiastically supported by others in the online community; (2) lurking while logged in without being observed; (3) protection against being locked out if a post gets you banned; and (4) ego/just to get away with it. There are no doubt other reasons to create duplicate accounts.
This has certainly been an interesting read. Someone might profit to write a short novel about the corporate subterfuge when it all shakes out. I’ve seen some names bandied about in this thread I haven’t heard in years!
Why do it? Several reasons including (1) creating an illusion that your posts are enthusiastically supported by others in the online community; (2) lurking while logged in without being observed; (3) protection against being locked out if a post gets you banned; and (4) ego/just to get away with it. There are no doubt other reasons to create duplicate accounts.
This has certainly been an interesting read. Someone might profit to write a short novel about the corporate subterfuge when it all shakes out. I’ve seen some names bandied about in this thread I haven’t heard in years!
Last edited:
RobbinsDad
Well-Known Member
Ahh Maestro. I'm in tears.
Sometimes people don't post for years, or at all, and forget that they had an old account, or have forgotten passwords, etc so create a new account. But others have duplicate accounts because they're trouble makers.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
With all due respect, if someone accused me of corporate espionage I'd take more time to respond than he did.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
Well, him and the individual (@photomatt) that extorted him on these boards and then did a 180 a few hours later...
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
Well that's a question that @wdwmagic should be able to answer by looking at IP addresses... I'm not asking you to expose identities Steve, but I think given the circumstances it's a reasonable request to see if @WDW1974 and @the.dreamfinder ever shared an IP address.
photomatt
Well-Known Member
Extortion is the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats. I threatened no one, and I in no way insinuated the use of force. I gave another member the opportunity to modify a previous post. I advised them that they should do it, and I gave them a timeline.
The member refused the opportunity I gave them, and then they asked me to post the information I had, which I did.
Get your facts straight. No part of that is extortion, and you really need to knock off your nonsense.
shambolicdefending
Well-Known Member
I'm pretty much a nobody in the world of wdwmagic. But, my biggest take away from all this is that a lot of people sure seem to think really highly of themselves for no apparent reason.
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
Which was weird in that they went from 100% certainty to "oh, never mind, let's not discuss it" in such a short time.
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
It was a threat whether you think it was or not.
photomatt
Well-Known Member
A threat is a statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done.
Is asking someone to revise a previous post a threat? No.
Is advising someone that they should modify a previous post a threat? No.
Is providing a timeline a threat? No.
If you are going to continue spouting your nonsense then at least take the time to back it up with facts. A fact is a fact regardless of whether or not you accept it.
eddie104
Well-Known Member
I wonder will certain posters go back to posting the same way they did or will they take a break and disappear for awhile ?
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
You should take your own advice too.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
We're arguing semantics here, but your post read as a threat primarily because you presented an ultimatum and a timeline for him to take action. While you didn't suggest the consequences there was a clear implication that whatever you wanted him to clear up would be explained by you at that time.
I took a screenshot of the now deleted post but will refrain from reposting it here because the semantics behind whether or not it was a threat are less relevant now. The greater point here that you may be able to help figure out / provide insight into all of this. Clearly something changed in the hours between your post and your retraction. Can you shed any light on that? Did you learn something about a source used in the article that caused you to question the information?
Nice to see you!