News Expose reveals WDC control in online fan community

[Sir_Cliff]

Plus, why would Disney purposely bury its brand-new investment just to make an exec look bad? That’s a ridiculous conspiracy to suggest. If the rumors are true that Bob and Zenia did spread dissatisfaction online through MiceAge in 2003, they were only saying what everyone already knew. Eisner WAS destroying the company. In contrast, the problems with SWGE come from Iger’s insistence to use only “his” movies — just like Mickey’s Runaway Railroad must use “his” version of the Mouse running on “his” Disney Channel. Disney wants SWGE to be successful. They’re not going to pay people to bad-mouth it.

IMO, we’re seeing negative reactions because people are truly disappointed, and we’re probably seeing a ton of extremely negative comments because society tends to comment in extremes.

I can't agree enough with this post.

I'm sure elements of what Synder is saying are true, but the overarching narrative doesn't make much logical sense unless there is some large piece/s of information we're all missing. Disney objectively was in terrible shape by the end of Eisner's tenure, to the point where it was being talked about as a hostile take-over target. No-one needed Bob, Zenia, and a puppet of Al Lutz to tell them that. Tanking a multi-billion dollar investment to get rid of an executive Iger could easily fire or demote also makes zero sense. Is the financial or entertainment press really going to be writing critical pieces about Bob Chapek rather than Iger if the narrative of SWGE's failure goes mainstream? It could, though, be the case that other factions within Disney are trying to undermine Chapek for their own reasons.

As for SWGE, it does appear that whether you agree with individual criticisms that something is going on that has led to the opening falling flat. It still strikes me that a large part of the issue is Disney's hubris in thinking that they could raise prices and open the land months before the main attraction would be ready and people would still show up in their hundreds of thousands. People aren't that stupid.

 

[Monorail_Orange]

I can't agree enough with this post.

I'm sure elements of what Synder is saying are true, but the overarching narrative doesn't make much logical sense unless there is some large piece/s of information we're all missing. Disney objectively was in terrible shape by the end of Eisner's tenure, to the point where it was being talked about as a hostile take-over target. No-one needed Bob, Zenia, and a puppet of Al Lutz to tell them that. Tanking a multi-billion dollar investment to get rid of an executive Iger could easily fire or demote also makes zero sense. Is the financial or entertainment press really going to be writing critical pieces about Bob Chapek rather than Iger if the narrative of SWGE's failure goes mainstream? It could, though, be the case that other factions within Disney are trying to undermine Chapek for their own reasons.

As for SWGE, it does appear that whether you agree with individual criticisms that something is going on that has led to the opening falling flat. It still strikes me that a large part of the issue is Disney's hubris in thinking that they could raise prices and open the land months before the main attraction would be ready and people would still show up in their hundreds of thousands. People aren't that stupid.

Let me start by saying I don't know, but I followed both this thread and the original on the DL subforum. There are posters I know on the DL subforum that I have come to trust. Those folks have made it very clear that the Snyder article is vastly fiction. That article might have accidentally swerved into one or two pieces of truth, but the premise is all wrong.

I also would point this out by playing Devil's Advocate: Assuming that the Snyder piece is true, Iger is using the ol' Zenia machine to hammer on Chapek. So how does that benefit him? It does NOT. Why? Because Chapek reports directly to Iger. Iger is just as responsible for Chapek's blunders as Chapek is. So calling attention to his own failure in this was would be stupid. Iger might be cynical, haughty, cocky, and lack a passion for original ideas, but he's not stupid. Ok, so maybe it's another faction working against both Iger and Chapek...but then that would mean they've found a way to use their own machine against them, and then you'd have to believe there was serious loyalty switching happening within the company.

Let me finish this part by saying I'm sure one of the nuggets of truth in the Snyder piece is that TWDC likely has plants on this board to monitor, and also attempt to steer the conversation, it's just not the people singled out by Snyder.

I further agree with your assessment that the largest single reason for SWGE's tepid response is they've found the tipping point on pricing, especially in light of their constant assault on the "Disney Difference," making it less and less different, and ever more expensive quarter over quarter.

 

[_caleb]

I agree, @Monorail_Orange. I don’t think this is an Iger vs. Chapek thing. That narrative doesn’t make much sense to me. I‘m not sure anything in the Snyder article is true, but it did get me to start paying a little bit more attention to the dynamic of the conversation on these boards.

Let’s say you’re a disgruntled former exec looking for revenge. Or a competitor who wants to beat the Mouse. Or someone interested in a hostile takeover who would really prefer a lower valuation. Or a mid-level Disney boss who wants to flex on others and show how adept she is at controlling the narrative. Or even a frustrated pixie-duster who misses the past glory of the parks and wants Mr. Toad’s back. If you were any of those people, mounting an influence campaign against Disney might seem like a pretty good way to bring about the changes you’re after.

I’m really not looking for conspiracies here. I read these boards for fun and insights into WDW. But several of these discussions seem to have changed from organic conversations among fans to an organized campaign intended to influence people’s impressions and opinions.

Maybe it doesn’t matter.

 

[tirian]

I don’t think the people who don’t like SW:GE are pathetic. But I think it’s strange that someone would comment repeatedly—as in, dozens of times—a complaint they read on the internet and then work to convince others that this complaint is the only way to think about the land.

You make a strong point, and it’s equally as disturbing to see all the people who’ve suddenly popped up defending Iger’s business moves and Chapek’s P&R business trajectory.

In both cases, these accounts aren’t discussing their opinions based on facts; the messages are either “I love it and you’re evil” and “I hate it and the world is ending.”

Either the boards are being trolled by fifth graders, we’ve finally attracted the psychologically ill to WDWMagic (which Steve has been able to avoid for the most part), or some CMs/CPs are really overdoing it.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I'm sure elements of what Synder is saying are true, but the overarching narrative doesn't make much logical sense unless there is some large piece/s of information we're all missing. Disney objectively was in terrible shape by the end of Eisner's tenure, to the point where it was being talked about as a hostile take-over target. No-one needed Bob, Zenia, and a puppet of Al Lutz to tell them that.

That was not the main element of the alleged goings on. The purpose wasn’t to drive out Eisner, but to properly set up Iger as an acceptable replacement. The story presents an explanations for why, rather suddenly, influential voices in the fan community supported the naming of Iger as Eisner’s successor. The whole movement against Eisner, including Save Disney, wanted someone from the outside who would clean up a rotten organization. Iger in no way fits that criteria. He was from inside, he was Eisner’s #2 and he didn’t clean house, but was still quickly embraced without much questioning. The latest Al article even references Iger not warranting critique (although Al also praised Rasulo at first). The big story isn’t that Iger took down Eisner but that he manipulated the Disney fan community to love him.

 

[MisterPenguin]

we’ve finally attracted the psychologically ill to WDWMagic

Are you including people who know the maintenance history of each monorail train by color or those who make the background music their top priority? Because, compared to other users around here, they're the sane ones.

 

[tirian]

Are you including people who know the maintenance history of each monorail train by color or those who make the background music their top priority? Because, compared to other users around here, they're the sane ones.

No, but if you do, I’m impressed! I can call those hobbies.

 

[Tom Morrow]

So, you like it. Therefore if someone doesn't like it, they are pathetic? Interesting.

I truly believe that if you're a theme park enthusiast and you found nothing positive to say about SWGE, then you're broken and looking for reasons to hate it. The internet does weird things to the way people think.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

That was not the main element of the alleged goings on. The purpose wasn’t to drive out Eisner, but to properly set up Iger as an acceptable replacement. The story presents an explanations for why, rather suddenly, influential voices in the fan community supported the naming of Iger as Eisner’s successor. The whole movement against Eisner, including Save Disney, wanted someone from the outside who would clean up a rotten organization. Iger in no way fits that criteria. He was from inside, he was Eisner’s #2 and he didn’t clean house, but was still quickly embraced without much questioning. The latest Al article even references Iger not warranting critique (although Al also praised Rasulo at first). The big story isn’t that Iger took down Eisner but that he manipulated the Disney fan community to love him.

To me this is also where the narrative seems too devious to be believable. I would have to read through the articles again, but my memory of reading Lutz and others going back to the alt.disney.disneyland days was not at all that Iger was being positioned as a worthy successor amidst all the undermining of Eisner. The impression I got was that Eisner appointing his spineless underling Iger to succeed him was a copout meant to minimise real change. Why people initially warmed to him seemed to have more to do with Iger making moves like buying Pixar, green lighting DCA 2.0 which involved applying actual theming to the park, bringing Lasseter into WDI, etc.

It seems a very high-risk strategy to me for Iger to feed a movement that sought to bring in a new person from outside as a way of toppling his boss, then once he had mortally wounded that boss to start manoeuvring to change the narrative so that he could head off an outside hire and be the only one left standing. And he's doing that using company employees who at any time could rat him out or otherwise be discovered which would have blown up his entire career. I mean, it's possible, but it's hard to swallow.

On the other hand, if Iger had people feed Lutz and others info to swing the narrative in his behaviour after being appointed, that does seem believable and kind of smart. It also doesn't particularly outrage me, as almost all leaks are coming with some kind of agenda. All we can really do is weigh them against what we see actually happen and form our own opinions.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

To me this is also where the narrative seems too devious to be believable. I would have to read through the articles again, but my memory of reading Lutz and others going back to the alt.disney.disneyland days was not at all that Iger was being positioned as a worthy successor amidst all the undermining of Eisner. The impression I got was that Eisner appointing his spineless underling Iger to succeed him was a copout meant to minimise real change. Why people initially warmed to him seemed to have more to do with Iger making moves like buying Pixar, green lighting DCA 2.0 which involved applying actual theming to the park, bringing Lasseter into WDI, etc.

It seems a very high-risk strategy to me for Iger to feed a movement that sought to bring in a new person from outside as a way of toppling his boss, then once he had mortally wounded that boss to start manoeuvring to change the narrative so that he could head off an outside hire and be the only one left standing. And he's doing that using company employees who at any time could rat him out or otherwise be discovered which would have blown up his entire career. I mean, it's possible, but it's hard to swallow.

On the other hand, if Iger had people feed Lutz and others info to swing the narrative in his behaviour after being appointed, that does seem believable and kind of smart. It also doesn't particularly outrage me, as almost all leaks are coming with some kind of agenda. All we can really do is weigh them against what we see actually happen and form our own opinions.

Zenia is from the political world. You’re not always supposed to see how you may be manipulated by messaging/positioning.

 

[shernernum]

Zenia is from the political world. You’re not always supposed to see how you may be manipulated by messaging/positioning.

Zenia is from the political world. You’re not always supposed to see how you may be manipulated by messaging/positioning.
[/QUOTE

Got to make sure the agenda of the inciting article remains the focal point, don’t you.

 

[_caleb]

So, about that list of posters with corporate sponsorship...

 

[Sir_Cliff]

Zenia is from the political world. You’re not always supposed to see how you may be manipulated by messaging/positioning.

Perhaps. While there may be some truth in it, though, I find it hard to believe that there's not also some attempt to manipulate in your article. The House of Cards scenario that's painted just seems too far fetched. The sock puppet accounts that appeared in its aftermath claiming Iger would be forced to step down in disgrace by the end of the year also suggest something else is going on.

 

[_caleb]

I'm curious about the long-term effects of the "influence campaign." Seems like the strategy:

Short run: Spread the word that SW:GE (and everything else in the parks) is a failure and it's all Bob Chapek's fault. Keep attendance low even through the opening of RotR to get the Board of Directors' and shareholders' attention.

Mid run: Get Chapek out without damaging Iger, then get a new Chairman/CEO/Former CCO heir-apparent to run the parks.

Desired long run: New Parks Chairman comes in and de-Chapeks the parks, gets rid of IP, lowers prices, gets rid of FastPass, and greenlights Horizons 2 and 5 new World Showcase pavilions at Epcot. Iger runs for office.

More likely long run: Board loses its stomach for immersive lands, New Parks Chair has to pull way back on spending and innovation. Universal's 3rd gate takes market share. Ticket prices continue to increase, Tiki Room, Country Bears, and Hall of Presidents all become "special event" paid meet-and-greets.

Maybe I'm missing a key part of the plan? @TP2000? How would you go about this if you were ever involved in something like this? @WDW Pro, what about you?

 

[lazyboy97o]

Desired long run: New Parks Chairman comes in and de-Chapeks the parks, gets rid of IP, lowers prices, gets rid of FastPass, and greenlights Horizons 2 and 5 new World Showcase pavilions at Epcot. Iger runs for office.

De-Chapek? It’s amazing how people blame Chapek for continuing to do what Iger wants.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

De-Chapek? It’s amazing how people blame Chapek for continuing to do what Iger wants.

Iger said from nearly day one of his time as CEO that he wanted all theme park projects to be connected to new/existing franchises going forward.

 

[_caleb]

De-Chapek? It’s amazing how people blame Chapek for continuing to do what Iger wants.

That's what the campaign's messaging seems to be. It's mostly aimed at Chapek, not Iger:

Bob Iger wants to run for president. So when he leaves TWDC, he needs to leave with the image of an amazing, competent CEO who brought the company from the ashes to its glory days. So Chapek needs to take to fault for everything that flopped in the Parks. And Mucha needs to control Bob's image.

Bob Iger missed and/or bungled his chance to enter politics earlier in the 2010's, which is probably why he then wrangled a deal with Disney's Board of Directors to stay on until he was well past retirement age. To his credit, Mr. Iger's strategy of scooping up valuable and relevant IP over the last 10 years to leverage successfully on digital platforms and semi-successfully in the theme parks seems to be smart, at least from the perspective of 2019. But then Bob Chapek blunders his way into the parks and whacks the Billion dollar Star Wars Land off at the knees by cutting out all the actual entertainment and interactivity. Oops!

 

[Ravenclaw78]

That's what the campaign's messaging seems to be. It's mostly aimed at Chapek, not Iger:

Exactly. The sock puppet accounts have all been trying to pin everything that's wrong with everything Parks on Chapek, and the man does not exist in a vacuum. I don't know whether we'll ever know for sure whether the culprit is Iger, someone acting in Iger's interest with or without his approval, or some random backstabbing executive trying to get ahead by forcing Chapek out. Likewise, it's immaterial at this point whether "Al Lutz" was Al Lutz, "Troy Porter", Troy Porter, or a flock of seagulls with keyboards. The article was clearly crafted as a hit piece on Chapek and to absolve Iger and/or someone under Chapek from responsibility for any of the decisions that were made.

 

[WDW Pro]

I'm curious about the long-term effects of the "influence campaign." Seems like the strategy:

Short run: Spread the word that SW:GE (and everything else in the parks) is a failure and it's all Bob Chapek's fault. Keep attendance low even through the opening of RotR to get the Board of Directors' and shareholders' attention.

Mid run: Get Chapek out without damaging Iger, then get a new Chairman/CEO/Former CCO heir-apparent to run the parks.

Desired long run: New Parks Chairman comes in and de-Chapeks the parks, gets rid of IP, lowers prices, gets rid of FastPass, and greenlights Horizons 2 and 5 new World Showcase pavilions at Epcot. Iger runs for office.

More likely long run: Board loses its stomach for immersive lands, New Parks Chair has to pull way back on spending and innovation. Universal's 3rd gate takes market share. Ticket prices continue to increase, Tiki Room, Country Bears, and Hall of Presidents all become "special event" paid meet-and-greets.

Maybe I'm missing a key part of the plan? @TP2000? How would you go about this if you were ever involved in something like this? @WDW Pro, what about you?

If I were going to attempt influence from the outside, it would be through YouTube, not a message board.

 

[Phil12]

If I were going to attempt influence from the outside, it would be through YouTube, not a message board.

But Spirit is not a YouTube master. He is however a very good writer. He is able to use his masterful vocabulary to sway and manipulate unwitting Disney fans into pitchfork wielding mobs. He's done this for many years on several different Disney forums and he knows very well how to attract, manipulate and guide a large audience for his desired outcome. He's clever enough to let the audience think that they are the ones with the ideas and solutions. Spirit knows how to plant the seeds and then cultivate them to create a monster kudzu forest that smothers his intended victims.