News Expose reveals WDC control in online fan community

flynnibus

Premium Member
Yet the guy / girl in that outfit only makes $13 an hour.

Not sure your point... as if you think it's a big pot of money and they aren't getting their share... or oblivious to that putting on a continuous running service 365 days a year takes more than just one person in an outfit.
 

prberk

Well-Known Member
I still want to know who General Grizz and Mouse Merf were!

Those two go wayyyyy back to 2005 and in some cases earlier!

General Grizz was Grizzly Hall. (A reference for old-timers here.)

Seriously, though, I miss General Grizz/Grizzly Hall on these boards. He was a wealth of knowledge even if not a little too worried about the company not understanding its heritage enough. I, for one, mostly agreed with him, though. A mutual friend assures me that he is doing well today.
 

tirian

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
I posted this in the WDC forum, but since it’s rarely visited, here are the links again.

Regardless of personal political affiliations, it’s surprising that the press is starting to ask how much longer Disney can gouge customers (Guests?) and milk IPs that they purchase and pretend are classic Disney.

The Federalist asks about the gouging and IP crock. And even though they don’t say it, I’ll add that considering Iger’s plans to run for political office, he sure is increasing the gap between the “haves” and the “have nots” in the parks.

Here’s the LA Times.
 

MisterPenguin

🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧Fully Pfizered!🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧
Premium Member
I posted this in the WDC forum, but since it’s rarely visited, here are the links again.

Regardless of personal political affiliations, it’s surprising that the press is starting to ask how much longer Disney can gouge customers (Guests?) and milk IPs that they purchase and pretend are classic Disney.

The Federalist asks about the gouging and IP crock. And even though they don’t say it, I’ll add that considering Iger’s plans to run for political office, he sure is increasing the gap between the “haves” and the “have nots” in the parks.

Here’s the LA Times.

The Federalist is not a respected publication outside of its core audience and who cares about some guy's op-ed piece that asks more questions than it answers and cherry-picks a Walt quote?

This is just like when someone posts a video of someone's vlog ranting in a manner that they agree with. Because the vlogger put their opinions on video doesn't make it more valid. Nor does getting one's opinion printed as an op-ed in some print media mean their opinion is more valid. These pieces are devoid of real journalism and scientific polling that would give their opinions some validity.

Let's say there is a film that is most definitely beloved by the overwhelming majority of critics and the audience; however, I hated it.

And let's say I then find the one critic who panned it. Would posting that one negative review validate my dislike of that film and prove it's rotten?
 

DDLand

Well-Known Member
The Federalist is not a respected publication outside of its core audience and who cares about some guy's op-ed piece that asks more questions than it answers and cherry-picks a Walt quote?

This is just like when someone posts a video of someone's vlog ranting in a manner that they agree with. Because the vlogger put their opinions on video doesn't make it more valid. Nor does getting one's opinion printed as an op-ed in some print media mean their opinion is more valid. These pieces are devoid of real journalism and scientific polling that would give their opinions some validity.

Let's say there is a film that is most definitely beloved by the overwhelming majority of critics and the audience; however, I hated it.

And let's say I then find the one critic who panned it. Would posting that one negative review validate my dislike of that film and prove it's rotten?
I think you're claiming they said far more than they actually did. The poster wasn't looking for validation, but instead is observing mainstream (no matter the political persuasion) publications being critical of Disney's approach. Individuals critical of parks management tend to be told that they're in a "minority." It's well understood that the voices on this board don't reflect the "average park guest."

But when mainstream sources start to echo the supposed radicals on a message board, perhaps the radicals aren't so radical after all. And you want to know what's interesting? All the supposed "purists" are after is an experience with good service and show. They want to pay one price at the park gate and get a good value inside without up charges. They also want thoughtful and intentioned original storytelling that supports the message of the parks.

How radical is that?

Honestly it sounds like an idea someone had 60 years ago...
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Top Bottom