That said, I really don't think Disney (finally) getting a Tumblr is really an experiment. It's a very popular website and Disney is honestly a little late to the party on this one. I can't speak on the selection process for the featured photographers, and don't really think Disney owes anybody an explanation on it. There are, however, bios of the people who have work featured on the site. I doubt anybody beyond a select few internet fans even cares.
The issues isn't that DisneyParks finally got a Tumblr. It's the fact that they are blurring the line between corporate message and fan participation. Most corporate social media sites do delineate that the content is the own, or that it is submitted by fans. If it does come from fans, or other outside sources, typically it is provided via a link or repost. But here, the content is provided inline, without a repost, but yet they are attributing the pictures to the photographers participating. If DisneyParks ran the Tumblr, and posted links to Flickr images, or reblogged other Tumblr posts, not a problem with that. In fact, I would think its awesome that they are helping to point out some of the amazing pictures that their fans take on a daily basis.
Now admittedly, I don't see a huge issue if the site stays images only. It's a bit more difficult to push an agenda through images. Now if they start showing images of a working Yeti, or other things in park that we know to be problem 99% of the time, then they have crossed a line.
But normally in a "project" such as this, the host/sponsor says that "We invited so and so to come to our parks to shoot pictures and show things from their vantage point." At least implying that the photographer benefited from a free trip. But here, nothing. I don't need to know that the photographer was put up in the Presidential Suite at the GF, ate at V&As each day, and was given an AP for life, just that WDW footed the bill for a week vacation.
Assuming we are allowing for Tumblr to be considered a blog, the FTC states the following
the post of a blogger who receives cash or in-kind payment to review a product is considered an endorsement. Thus, bloggers who make an endorsement must disclose the material connections they share with the seller of the product or service.
(
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2009/10/endortest.shtm)
Do we think that pictures of the parks are considered to be an a product review? Mommy blogs saying "Disney is awesome" definitely counts as a product review. But does posting an amazing picture of the parks? One could argue that by showing only positive good pictures, its a positive review, while if one searched out things like broken light bulbs, over flowing trash cans, peeling paint, etc, its a negative review. They are dancing around a fine line without disclosing what happened. If they were clearly using these images in a ad campaign, it's a non issue. But this Tumblr isn't explicitly an ad campaign.
I don't begrudge any of the photographers jumping on this offer, even if they weren't given a free trip the self promotion is a huge opportunity. But there is a fine line between fan made and company supported, and sites like that tend to cloud the boundary.
