More Disney Fun with Social Media (pics included!)

flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
BrightImagine said:
And any sort of freebie should count as compensation.

This seems like common sense to me... why it's a basis for attacking Spirit I don't know.
Click to expand...

And on the topic of the thread.. when we are looking at a DISNEY created feed... who should Disney be making disclosures about?

When you see a byline on an article in a newspaper... what sort of disclosure are you looking for regarding the person being the source the article? Is the author a freelancer? A contractor? An employee? Unless done under Editorial - isn't it assumed the article is published under the authority of the publication we are reading? Does the employement status of the author come into that much question?

This tangent about blogger disclosure doesn't apply to Disney's own feeds... this is a DISNEY feed, not 3rd party.
 
dreamfinder

dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
flynnibus said:
When you see a byline on an article in a newspaper... what sort of disclosure are you looking for regarding the person being the source the article? Is the author a freelancer? A contractor? An employee? Unless done under Editorial - isn't it assumed the article is published under the authority of the publication we are reading? Does the employement status of the author come into that much question?
Click to expand...

If I'm reading an article at nytimes.com or cnn.com, I assume those to be written by and responsible for, NY Times and CNN respectively. This feed isn't hosted at any known Disney URL, but rather on a 3rd party hosting site (Tumblr). If I read a CNN article on someone Tumblr, yes I would questions why it was there and what the purpose of it was. Typically media organizations are fiercely protective about their property, and driving eyeballs to their properties, not others.

flynnibus said:
This tangent about blogger disclosure doesn't apply to Disney's own feeds... this is a DISNEY feed, not 3rd party.
Click to expand...

Except that outside the fact they have a few small references to DisneyParks, they lack the typical Disney legal speak. Plenty of unofficial fan sites have links back to the WDW, DLR, etc. So having a single link back to DisneyParks isn't unheard of on a 3rd party site. Pretty much everything else in the disney.go.com family has numerous links to other properties, physical and virtual. At minimum, a Copyright Disney buried on the bottom. I would hate for them to claim copyright on the works produced by the photographers, but I'm really surprised that Disney Legal let them get away without some disclaimer saying that the photos were copyright the individual photographer, but the subject matter was copyright Disney. This has none of that. Hence my blathering about them dancing on the line between corporate and personal. It is easy to see how someone can easily mistake that feed for one run by a 3rd party. Fine, lets drop the blogger disclosure, but get them to fully claim ownership of the site. And heck, make the site load properly instead of having to scroll through a given image to see the whole image at once.
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
dreamfinder said:
If I'm reading an article at nytimes.com or cnn.com, I assume those to be written by and responsible for, NY Times and CNN respectively. This feed isn't hosted at any known Disney URL, but rather on a 3rd party hosting site (Tumblr)
Click to expand...

Tumblr is just the location/host - you don't assume Tumblr owns all the content in all the feeds do you simply because it's at tumblr.com instead of dreamfinder.com do you? Do you question a blog because it uses wordpress instead of something homegrown? Or how about company pages on Facebook? Or Twitter? See a trend here? The format/location is a compromise participating companies accept - they don't get to pull the full experience/benefit of that format/location into their corporate domain.

And as you said, when you read the content from the site, you assumed the content was approved by the site curator. That's exactly what's happening here and why addition 'clarification' is not only unwarranted, but over the top in expectations.

The rest of your issues while I can understand to an extent.. are gripes about Tumblr... not this Disney site itself.

Look at some other examples...
http://tmagazine.tumblr.com/
http://life.tumblr.com/
http://today.tumblr.com/

People forget.. Tumblr is a micro-blogging site - it is not intended to be a full weight website with all the elements you may expect from a corporate site.

dreamfinder said:
Hence my blathering about them dancing on the line between corporate and personal. It is easy to see how someone can easily mistake that feed for one run by a 3rd party. Fine, lets drop the blogger disclosure, but get them to fully claim ownership of the site
Click to expand...

Compare the examples I listed above and see if your same concerns of ownership apply there as well...
 
CBOMB

CBOMB

Active Member
Atomicmickey said:
Do you have some idea who the brand advocates are here, will you be willing to name names?



Can you or will you name those members that are doing that? And how do you know that they are?



Can you please give a specific example where this has happened, where the company has actively sought to shut down a website? Do you have documentation of this activity?




Being paid for what they do sounds fair to me. Though as a creative I have sometimes done work for free that has given me a different benefit than money.

And finally, you have specifically called out Lou Mongello as a "hidden employee" or "contractor" for TWDC.
Could you please list the other sites that you have knowledge that they are being paid by the company
to espouse their views?

I really am interested in sorting this all out, and knowing more about what I'm reading on all the sites
that I visit. This, I assume, is your point, correct? That we would know the motivations behind the
news and info that we get? That we can sort out the 'paid shills' from the fans? Can you help me do that?

I'd like to see this all move from innuendo to actual documented facts, that's all.

I hope this all reads as dispassionate and non-confrontational, and not hostile in any way. I'm truly curious
about all of this, and I don't hold a negative opinion of you, WDW1974, so nothing
personal. I suppose I'm more steps removed from the situation than a lot of people here,
so I don't know specifically the incidents, websites, and people that are being discussed.
I'd like to, so that I can better understand what I'm reading.
Click to expand...

You need to understand that if 74 or a couple of other people here start naming names "The Mom" would be on that post like a duck on a June bug. The post would be removed. Just ask "The Mom".
 
Atomicmickey

Atomicmickey

Well-Known Member
CBOMB said:
You need to understand that if 74 or a couple of other people here start naming names "The Mom" would be on that post like a duck on a June bug. The post would be removed. Just ask "The Mom".
Click to expand...

Well, they've already named Lou Mongello. Repeatedly. A search back shows that they've
named someone named Ricky Brigante, Deb Wills, and Tom Corless.

So, interesting. Maybe not. Depends on if it's hearsay, or documented fact, perhaps.
 
CBOMB

CBOMB

Active Member
Atomicmickey said:
Well, they've already named Lou Mongello. Repeatedly. A search back shows that they've
named someone named Ricky Brigante, Deb Wills, and Tom Corless.

So, interesting. Maybe not. Depends on if it's hearsay, or documented fact, perhaps.
Click to expand...
I won't comment about Lou, Ricky or Tom. Those are all well know folks. Deb Willis runs a great Disney site. I'm sure most of the folks here on Steve's site have visited Debs site on numerous occasions. Naming those people is very different than pointing out people in this forum that are paid to disrupt discussions. A very big difference.
 
Atomicmickey

Atomicmickey

Well-Known Member
CBOMB said:
I won't comment about Lou, Ricky or Tom. Those are all well know folks. Deb Willis runs a great Disney site. I'm sure most of the folks here on Steve's site have visited Debs site on numerous occasions. Naming those people is very different than pointing out people in this forum that are paid to disrupt discussions. A very big difference.
Click to expand...

Gotcha. So, you know for a fact there are people here who are paid to disrupt discussions?

Cool. Hi, people who are paid to disrupt discussions!
 
K

Kuhio

Well-Known Member
CBOMB said:
You need to understand that if 74 or a couple of other people here start naming names "The Mom" would be on that post like a duck on a June bug.
Click to expand...

I've never heard this expression before, but I find myself to be quite enamored of it.
crown.gif
 
unkadug

unkadug

Follower of "Saget"The Cult
Isn't a Tumblr an unbreakable glass?


EDIT: The opinions that I state are my own opinions and not those of any company foreign or domestic.

;)
 
K

kittybubbles

Active Member
CBOMB said:
I won't comment about Lou, Ricky or Tom. Those are all well know folks. Deb Willis runs a great Disney site. I'm sure most of the folks here on Steve's site have visited Debs site on numerous occasions. Naming those people is very different than pointing out people in this forum that are paid to disrupt discussions. A very big difference.
Click to expand...

If folks are paid to disrupt discussions, I'm pretty sure they are committing a crime. I work for a company that (I'm pretty sure) is a larger company than Disney. Every now and again I must acknoledge that I am aware of our Social Media Policy. It basically tells me that if I am to comment/join a discussion of one of our products or services, I need to mention who I work for and that my opinions are my own and not those of my employer or I might face criminal charges.
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
kittybubbles said:
If folks are paid to disrupt discussions, I'm pretty sure they are committing a crime. I work for a company that (I'm pretty sure) is a larger company than Disney. Every now and again I must acknoledge that I am aware of our Social Media Policy. It basically tells me that if I am to comment/join a discussion of one of our products or services, I need to mention who I work for and that my opinions are my own and not those of my employer or I might face criminal charges.
Click to expand...

That means your employer will come down on you for speaking on their behalf. If they hire you to do it they can't then sue you over it. There is nothing criminal about hiding your identity on a blog or website.
 
RSoxNo1

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
Atomicmickey said:
Right. I'd just like to know who they are.
And, WDW1974 seems to be plugged into reliable information. So, I wouldn't
doubt what he says.

So, let's take a different tack. Here are some sites I go to.

Which are unreliable because they're being paid off, and which aren't?
Who are the social media whores in this list?

www.wdwmagic.com
www.************.com
www.orlandothemeparknews.com
www.wdwinfo.com
www.wdwtoday.com
www.jimhillmedia.com
www.allears.net
www.laughingplace.com
www.blueskydisney.com
www.disneyreport.com
www.wdwfanboys.com
www.stitchkingdom.com
www.thedisneyblog.com
www.screamscape.com
www.
www.mouseplanet.com
www.micechat.com
www.imaginerding.com
www.************.com
www.disneytouristblog.com
www.touringplans.com
www.intercot.com
Click to expand...
Can I be a social media ?
 

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

Back
Top Bottom