Is Disney still a high moral company?

[civileng68]

I am curious as to what the answers to this question may be, so here goes.

Do you feel that Disney is as high morally today as it was in the days of Walt? sure there's more involved with the company as time goes on but morally are they better or worse?

The reason I ask is because last night Jay Leno made a joke at Disney because ABC (Disney owned) has a show called "Wife Swap" that will be showing shortly (if not now, I just have no interest in anything of that sort). Even Leno (who is in hollywood) made the comment that Walt would roll in his grave.

I was just wondering what the opinions were on this subject.

Debate on my fellow mousekateers!

 

[Stinkbug]

I don't think a show like that is morally right, but I also think that Disney is just as morally right as it ever was.

Granted, Walt would have never sanctioned such a show.

 

[pisco]

I'd sya that there is no doubt that the current incarnation of the comapny is quite different from the one that Walt oversaw. But you can't dimiss that fact that the country as a whole is quite different from the one Walt lived in. As for the core company, or the Disney "brand" if you prefer, I don't see any major changes. It attempts to create entertainment that can be enjoyed by the entire family.

However, the descision to turn the company in to a major media conglomerate meant that there was no way that this preference for family entertainment was going to be able to be maintained within all divisions of the company. How much "family-friendly" product can realistically be sold in a year? Clearly based on the shows and movies that are successful, the market for more adult oriented entertainment is far greater than that for family oriented entertainment. So to be a successful company it is necessary for Disney (through it's subsidiaries) to produce such entertainment.

By trying to become huge players in Hollywood the company has had to make coprimises. The only way this will ever change is if there is a large-scale divestiture of non-core assets. I personally feel that this would be the best long-term move for the company. By getting rid of the properties that have nothing to do with the core brand (such as ESPN, ABC and Miramax) Disney can re-focus on what makes them great and what they are best at, creating family entertainment.

 

[KUNZEWORLD]

Not sure about morals but i think he would be rolling if he saw all the crappy make-a-buck sequels that they're cranking out!

 

[careship]

The "wife swap" wasn't actually put out that way. The show was where moms switch and have to take care of the other moms family for 10 days. Of course, marketing has changed it to sound more immoral then originally supposed to be...who knows...the show may be nasty too. I was interviewed to be on that show and it wasn't "wife swap" back then. I decided after the interview and speaking with the producer etc, that I could never put another poor mother through my 2 boys. Why? Because they said if we switched moms could they have permission to please play practical jokes on her and I knew then they'd make her life living he double hockeysticks. The concept was to see what it would be like to walk in another mothers shoes. The grass is always greener on the other side type deal.

 

[barnum42]

I don't think any huge corporation bothers with morals. The fat cats at the top don't care who they hurt to increase bottom line profit and line their own pockets.

 

[monorailmike]

I don't think any huge corporation bothers with morals. The fat cats at the top don't care who they hurt to increase bottom line profit and line their own pockets.

Well put! And very true. I have heard of, and actually know CMs who were fired for rather thin/questionable reasons. One thing in common was that they were full time with benefits. Lo and behold there is a hiring spree to fill positions with part-time people. It is obvious that they caried out the terminations so that they don't have to pay for the benifits. Rather cold, as one of their victims is a single mother who desperately needs the medical coverage. To think that managment at Disney has any morals is nothing but a joke!

 

[lebernadin]

Well if this is to become a good conversation, i think what first needs to be agreed upon is:

1) What does everyone consider "good morals" to be?

2) What is everyone's perception of the state of the company before Walt passed?

Unfortunately i don't think we'll ever come into agreeance on either of those, as varying secular and non-secular angles will always be at odds.

If this were a board consisting of all Protestants, agnostics etc who could first agree on question 1 as a whole, then we could examine question 2 and how the company has changed up to this point. But its obvious there's a good number of religious people on these boards, and of different denominations, and i think it would be too difficult to come to agreeance on a central set of morals.

I think, at best, we could examine the company on a case-by-case basis and interject where each of us are coming from.

 

[careship]

I would assume that good morals would mean things that are consistent with families. Family values....those are pretty close no matter the religion or lack thereof I would assume. Yes I know I should never assume. I think really it shouldn't be about morals....it should be about things considered to be family oriented and can be enjoyed by all. Each situation or TV show etc should be looked upon on a case by case basis. Is it the swearing? Is it the se#ual innuendo? I think Disney/ABC/Buena Vista etc needs to return to that. Like the PG13 situations last year with the movies PotC & Haunted Mansion....anyone remember that? It was the first time they would be using the Disney name on a PG13 film......they made a decision that stepped up to the times without the feeling of invasion of the families. It's late I know making sense is lost but I would hope you can get the idea.