That's pretty disingenuous. Just last week I went to the Grand Canyon and was able to have a lot of fun with hardly any planning.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
MyMagic+ article from Fast Company magazine
- Thread starter AustinC
- Start date
That's pretty disingenuous. Just last week I went to the Grand Canyon and was able to have a lot of fun with hardly any planning.
I'll let you have the last word, but I find it odd that I was there too. I wonder if we ran into each other.
TalkingHead
Well-Known Member
The final four paragraphs. Excerpts:
That doesn't suggest an ambiguous ending. You're saying the process was an example of successful modern-day corporate collaboration.
Not to mention, this is how your article was promoted at this link, http://www.fastcompany.com/3044922/...illion-attempt-to-reinvent-its-iconic-theme-p
I don't really see this as an ambiguous or even an ambivalent presentation.
WDW1974
Well-Known Member
Hey, relax Princess. I'm not passive aggressive. When I chose to be, I'm flat out aggressive.
I truly don't know why I bother except I think you live for me ... or simply live in the past when you were a carefree brat driving a safari truck on the CP and thinking you were part of the MAGIC of TWDC.
I didn't insinuate an effing thing. I asked very pointed, yet fair questions. This may surprise you, but I've worked as a journalist ... and for news organizations that most lay folks would have heard of, not some new agey tech pub (No, nothing wrong with that at all!) ... I get that Disney only cooperates like they did when they have something to gain. I never accused Austin of leaving anything out, but you just did.
I'm glad you feel that ANY writer isn't open to criticism or questioning ... but I'll keep on with the critical thinking. You keep on with whatever it is that you do ...
WDW1974
Well-Known Member
Yes, I was. But just because you can find out who the guy is and that he has been published before means very little. Brooks Barnes writes for the New York Times, a publication with a bit more gravitas in the world, than FC and he is a flat out wh ore for every media company he covers. And I'm not calling into question his integrity, I'm asking questions that are fair and deserve answers. But thanks for making it about me ... I'll bet Jake and Bob and Joe and Fred and everyone with a one word name here will like your post!
No, it is a lousy analogy. There are plenty of possibilities here beyond either ''Austin is a saintly writer and wonderful journalist and is setting the record straight for us all.'' and ''Austin is a dumb kid that Disney used, maybe even paid, to plant a story to help stem all the negativity regarding their two billion dollar boondoggle.'' Do you get that? It isn't one or the other ... it likely is something in the middle that is much more complicated. But, please, let's not question anything.
I'm sorry, but there is absolutely nothing *tough* about that poster's questions. Literally, *anyone* can look up a patent -- so, I found his comments to be kind of off putting and bizarre, to say the least. This is public information, of which, is readily available in an instant for anyone to find, if they so desire. It's not some ground breaking revelation that could somehow discredit Fast Company Magazine or @AustinC .
On the other hand, I just can't up and google and wiki, six months of *unprecedented* research and observation at Disney World, on a whim. This author provided us with a fascinating glimpse from behind the scenes -- granting readers access to everything Disney -- stemming from leadership to Imagineers to Cast Members to first hand experiences within the parks and from the guests, themselves. As a reader, I find this kind of information to be refreshing, insightful and enlightening.
It's a major embarrassment for some random poster to attempt to discredit the author and this article with something that took literally five seconds to google. The patent guy, @danlb_2000 has done an exceptional job of keeping our online community informed of all the relevant and intriguing patents. The other poster, however, enters this board riding in on your coat tails, but he has brought literally nothing new to the table.
He cannot hold his own weight against posters like @MichWolv , @ParentsOf4, who are also the real deal, IMO. They don't require Mr. Spirit to come in and rescue them -- because these guys truly know their stuff -- you can tell they don't form their arguments from google and wiki. The poster attempts to present himself like he is on their level of expertise, but he is most certainly not, IMO. And, I mean no disrespect to him, I'm sure he is a nice person and all, but that is my personal opinion.
I was offended by his hostile and dogmatic approach toward our new member @AustinC. He posted his little debacle of a question once, which should have been more than sufficient. But, to post it here twice is simply disgraceful and reflects poorly upon our, otherwise, highly intelligent and insightful community, IMO. He could have even sent the author a private message or just ask in another post if the author had an opportunity to read his questions, without posting the whole thing all over again. I was sorely embarrassed when I read his post. I don't want people thinking we're all like that here or anything -- it just looks bad, IMO.
Frankly, I am so glad the author did not answer his questions -- no legitimate journalist would. You are an author and have a huge thread, I'm quite sure you have been presented with off putting and rude questions that you have chosen not to answer, so you can relate to @AustinC on some level.
The rest of your post is okay, I suppose. I don't have any real problem with it, you've made some excellent points. But, I don't get your pixie dust and magical comment. You visit the parks and have fun at Disney World just like I do, the only difference is that I only visit for a week, once a year. This concept of chastising people for having fun on vacation at Disney World doesn't really bode well with me, because you visit Disney World, too. From my observations, there is nothing that excludes you from being a 'pixie duster', as well.
xdan0920
Think for yourselfer
If anything, it's become about the agenda your pushing, not you personally. Which makes sense. Why would you bother with an article from a writer you've never heard of, from a pub you've never heard of, unless you sensed an opportunity to further your side?
Lets stretch the meaning of fair, and say it's okay to ask if the author is a corporate mouthpiece. How many times is fair? How many variations of "are you a Disney shill?" is fair?
Or we can question everything. Like the integrity of a column written by one of Disney's biggest competitors that also happens to read like a bitter take down. Or we can just gloss over that, and move on to heresay and "trust mes" that the article was CENSORED.
Ariel1986
Well-Known Member
This is something that has started to bother me too, thanks for putting into words! God forbid going on vacation and actually enjoying it! How ignorant and idiotic must one be to go and still have fun, with my family at 4 theme parks and 2 water parks- when there's chipped paint, some technical blips and reconstruction... how could I not let this ruin my vacation?! I personally have not had any problems with MM+ or see the horrors some describe. But I don't seek them out either... and if I did, and felt the place wasn't worth it... I probably would no longer go, certainly not often. And I wouldn't laugh if other people still saw the value and chose to enjoy it.
You can see things differently and have the opinion that the parks are overpriced and in disrepair, and they may well be nothing like they used to. But that doesn't mean people are not allowed to still enjoy them, or see them differently, or be ridiculed for doing so.
Last edited:
jakeman
Well-Known Member
Ooo...princess and a brat. You stay classy. It's nice to know that you have a file on me with my former job listed. Who has the obsession again?
You didn't directly ask the question to the author. You wondered out loud if any was going to ask it. A question would have tagged the author and asked him directly, as I demonstrated for you.
No it doesn't surprise me that you worked as a journalist. It also doesn't surprise me that you're no longer one with the way you conduct yourself here.
Since I believe you are trying to paint me as some sort of stalker, let me make it clear, you are entertainment for me. I read you because watching you lurch from topic to topic trying to fend off irrelevancy is humorous. The seriousness that you and your band of merry men take an entertainment company is so completely out of context with real issues in the rest of the world, it's a nice break in my day.
Regarding critical thinking, it takes no more critical thinking to say "I don't believe you" then it does to say "I believe everything". So you're not some wise sage divining tea leaves. You're just a skeptic. Which is fine, but it doesn't mean you're critically thinking.
Critical thinking would not involve questioning the ethics of the author. It would be taking the story as is and aggregate it against the information you already know and come to your own conclusion.
Last edited:
Ariel1986
Well-Known Member
I hate to use the "This" quote but... This a hundred times!
sshindel
The Epcot Manifesto
I've gotta admit something. I'm loving the jouranalistic schwartz comparing contests that are going on here. It's the highest of high entertainment to someone who has little knowledge or interest in journalism. In the day and age where we're as likely to get timely and accurate news from "Broneyboy_316" on Reddit as we are from CNN, the journalistic lines have shifted so much that it's nearly impossible to follow.
I'm also digging on people complaining on this thread getting off topic, when every single thread devolves into discussion of random things like cheesesteaks, peppered with varied levels of joke telling, and the same points getting discussed over and over with no end. Complaining that this thread got off topic is like complaining that an internet discussion compared someone to Hitler. It's inevitable, and only acceptable when you are the one doing the Hitler comparison to someone else.
IMO
Of course it's ok to question the source. It's one of the first things that happens to anyone on these boards when someone brings in information. We get 6 pages of "sources please!!!". This however has seemed to go on longer than usual, and it's odd to me that we're spending more pages questioning someone with named sources who works for a national publication than we do for those that have never once (for good reason likely) given a source. Of course there is some history to some of those posters, and varying degrees of how good or bad their rumors have panned out, but it feels like from following through this post that the author has been questioned far longer and far beyond a reasonable level for someone who's reputation is pretty easily verifiable.
Is there a chance that a reporter was told what the company wanted him to hear? Of course. Just as there is a chance that our insiders have been told what the company wanted them to hear. As some dude on the internet said (Abraham Lincoln??) "Question Everything". I do tend to believe that since the author of this article spent time talking to both current employees as well as past employees with a less rosy picture to paint, it is likely that the article holds a good basis in truth. I also tend to believe that anything that came from a current employee of the company was a crafted response to tell the story they wanted told. It's what every single person in the world does to varying degrees. The old quote "History is written by the victors" holds true here.
Of course we should question the author to some degree, just like we should question each and every person who is putting out information. But I do think that there comes a time when questions are asked and answered, and it's time to move along to other conversation.
So while we're now devolving back into PML vs. Spirit and pals, I think it's likely time to consider this thread mostly dead. I thank the author @AustinC for researching and publishing the story and coming in here to have further discussions with us crazy Disney fans. I thank folks like @WDW1974 and @wdisney9000 for adding the degree of skepticism to add perspective. I thank @jakeman and @xdan0920 for questioning their questioning once it went on longer than it probably should have. And most importantly, I thank myself for being as inoffensive as possible.
Thank you, and God Bless America
I'm also digging on people complaining on this thread getting off topic, when every single thread devolves into discussion of random things like cheesesteaks, peppered with varied levels of joke telling, and the same points getting discussed over and over with no end. Complaining that this thread got off topic is like complaining that an internet discussion compared someone to Hitler. It's inevitable, and only acceptable when you are the one doing the Hitler comparison to someone else.
IMO
Of course it's ok to question the source. It's one of the first things that happens to anyone on these boards when someone brings in information. We get 6 pages of "sources please!!!". This however has seemed to go on longer than usual, and it's odd to me that we're spending more pages questioning someone with named sources who works for a national publication than we do for those that have never once (for good reason likely) given a source. Of course there is some history to some of those posters, and varying degrees of how good or bad their rumors have panned out, but it feels like from following through this post that the author has been questioned far longer and far beyond a reasonable level for someone who's reputation is pretty easily verifiable.
Is there a chance that a reporter was told what the company wanted him to hear? Of course. Just as there is a chance that our insiders have been told what the company wanted them to hear. As some dude on the internet said (Abraham Lincoln??) "Question Everything". I do tend to believe that since the author of this article spent time talking to both current employees as well as past employees with a less rosy picture to paint, it is likely that the article holds a good basis in truth. I also tend to believe that anything that came from a current employee of the company was a crafted response to tell the story they wanted told. It's what every single person in the world does to varying degrees. The old quote "History is written by the victors" holds true here.
Of course we should question the author to some degree, just like we should question each and every person who is putting out information. But I do think that there comes a time when questions are asked and answered, and it's time to move along to other conversation.
So while we're now devolving back into PML vs. Spirit and pals, I think it's likely time to consider this thread mostly dead. I thank the author @AustinC for researching and publishing the story and coming in here to have further discussions with us crazy Disney fans. I thank folks like @WDW1974 and @wdisney9000 for adding the degree of skepticism to add perspective. I thank @jakeman and @xdan0920 for questioning their questioning once it went on longer than it probably should have. And most importantly, I thank myself for being as inoffensive as possible.
Thank you, and God Bless America
Last edited:
flynnibus
Premium Member
You need to separate the idea of discussing Disney as a company and thinking it's about discussing how you personally consume Disney. Just like you can discuss the good and bad choices by the builder of your home with your neighbors or friends... without thinking you are labeling yourself an idiot for living in the house.
This forum is not just about being a CONSUMER of Disney, but many people are interested in the way Disney OPERATES. In the most innocent sense, it starts with many in wanting to know how things work, or be an imagineer, etc.. They want to not just have fun at Disney, but are inspired to want to BE a Disney... BE someone that makes that happen. Then you start exposing and thinking about the decisions that happen behind the magic.. and ultimately that rolls up into 'how do you run a company that does this?'. Add into that people's own industry experience and it becomes a business discussion.. and not just armchair 'what if' imagineering.
The two topics of operations and being a consumer are intertwined because ultimately the company is building products for consumer entertainment... the end-goal of the 'company' side is to succeed at that aim of entertaining people. However, how one builds a beast to do that... isn't always sunshine, rainbows and unicorns.
The process of making magic isn't always a pretty one.
Ariel1986
Well-Known Member
Yet I wasn't responding to the topic of whether people can/want to discuss Disney the company and how it operates. I was agreeing with a previous poster who pointed out how many people who don't come here to discuss those things and are simply here to talk about WDW as the consumer, posters who enjoy the parks for what they are- and who don't see the negatives that others do- are ridiculed and often labelled as woefully ignorant, a pixie duster. I was agreeing and also trying to point out the ridiculousness of that notion that a CONSUMER is not allowed to simply be a consumer on here, and like the product.
flynnibus
Premium Member
I don't agree - I think it has more to do with the topic and it's direction.. and people then creating conflict by mixing both trains of thought in a single conversation. When someone is talking about the staging of the chinese theatre in the park's design... and one come along with "yeah, but we like the hat!" - that is just asking for conflict.
I think most of the chastising you see is when people of one side fail to recognize the intent or perceived value in the other. Instead of recognizing difference, they look to crush anything non-conforming to what they are doing.
Are people critical of other's choices? Sure at times... just like if I lived in a trailer, but had half a million dollars in exotic cars in the driveway.. some might question my priorities. I don't think you find people critical of other people's enjoyment of Disney.. you find people critical of some of the excess or willful ignorance some people demostrate.
We all have guilty pleasures... but accepting them doesn't necessarily make them immune from scrutiny
It's no different than dealing with people face to face...
Ariel1986
Well-Known Member
I need to stop taking the bait and responding on here. I'm not specifically talking to or ignoring your points here @flynnibus I've just been round in circles with this same topic before. We all have our own opinions, and we clash on what we perceive the posting behavior on this site to be.
Apologies to @sshindel for continuing after your brilliant end!
Apologies to @sshindel for continuing after your brilliant end!