News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

[GoofGoof]

But all a scheme that is legal and proven. The Board is the board until invalidated otherwise.. so they are always going to be that legal entity... no matter who influences them or got them elected. So the fact it doesn't look like 'every other' election doesn't matter. What's next, the GOP controls a majority of constituents in a district, so any deals between government and a republican are now invaid because they made a deal with themselves?

Exactly. There is the slippery slope most judges want nothing to do with. Contract law is kinda boring and very much by the book for a reason.

 

[LittleBuford]

And then you have those of us who live in yet another third world - where we look at both worlds that are full of bias, think both are crazy in their own ways, and are largely just stepping back because, frankly, it's a full time occupation to keep up with it all.

No-one is free of bias, least of all those who imagine themselves to be. Acknowledging one’s biases is the first step to guarding against their intrusion into our perspectives and actions.

 

[flyakite]

The attorney for Reedy Creek is shown to be present at all board meetings. Nice to see he was personally involved (if this was not required). He also was a senior attorney for Disney between 2000-2005. Familiar with the corporation.

 

[Disney Analyst]

The BBC does better than others, but I agree - there really as no such thing as unbiased media, and "better than others" is still no where near good enough.

Though with all media outlets, it goes deeper than just how they report on stories - anyone with an even slightly independent mind can at least detect the bias, whichever direction it goes. The really insidious thing right now is the selection of the stories to tell, period. It's what they choose not to report on that is often the most divisive - because instead of multiple biased takes to pick through, many people aren't hearing anything about it at all - and if they do come across it - "oh, that's from a (insert your bias) outlet" and it's completely dismissed.

It's happening across the board across the entire political spectrum, and it's why people feel like they live in two different worlds, because both are at the mercy of biased news. And then you have those of us who live in yet another third world - where we look at both worlds that are full of bias, think both are crazy in their own ways, and are largely just stepping back because, frankly, it's a full time occupation to keep up with it all. There is so much garbage everywhere, almost no one is addressing the actual day to day problems of most peoples lives, it's easier just to let them duke it out because unless you are lockstep 100% with either one, it's generally a futile waste of time as neither side wants anyone who isn't 100% committed to their ideology.

Bias doesn’t bother me as much, it’s impossible to avoid. What bothers me is blatant lies and disinformation.

 

[lazyboy97o]

But all a scheme that is legal and proven. The Board is the board until invalidated otherwise.. so they are always going to be that legal entity... no matter who influences them or got them elected. So the fact it doesn't look like 'every other' election doesn't matter. What's next, the GOP controls a majority of constituents in a district, so any deals between government and a republican are now invaid because they made a deal with themselves?

And in the case of Florida, votes by landholding is not unique. If Universal’s requested district is created it too will have a board elected by the landowners.

 

[Supreme Leader]

Okay, do you have anything other than a hypothetical bribe or payoff to support what you're saying?

Maybe they gave illegal hush money to a p*** star?

 

[Riviera Rita]

The BBC isn't impartial, it only seems that way to people that agree with it. That is pretty much the way all news is. Whether it is done well or not, if you believed the narrative before they gave it you'll think it was impartial. Even when news claims to give both sides of a story they always present one side in a better light. Remember when they pull up those sound bites from experts or whoever, you never know how many others that went the other way were left on the cutting room floor.

I'm talking about BBC news and it has a duty to be impartial and if it isn't, as in the case of Gary Lineker's tweet, you can guarantee that his colleagues backed him up and so did the viewers who agreed with him and very loudly too. Compare that to Fox News, that even now is supporting DJT and still criticising JB and the Democrats even after we all became aware of the texts and emails circulating that showed their presenters absolutely detest DJT, but, pandering to their viewership is more important than fair and truthful reporting.

 

[LittleBuford]

I'm talking about BBC news and it has a duty to be impartial and if it isn't, as in the case of Gary Lineker's tweet, you can guarantee that his colleagues backed him up and so did the viewers who agreed with him and very loudly too. Compare that to Fox News, that even now is supporting DJT and still criticising JB and the Democrats even after we all became aware of the texts and emails circulating that showed their presenters absolutely detest DJT, but, pandering to their viewership is more important than fair and truthful reporting.

While I don’t think any news can be free of all bias, an outlet that at leaves strives for impartiality is going to come closer to it than one that openly embraces a particular ideology. One of the telling characteristics of British TV journalism is that interviews of politicians and political commentators are customarily conducted in an adversarial, devil’s advocate manner regardless of the interviewer’s own stance. The results can be quite dizzying for those unfamiliar with this approach, because the same interviewer will suddenly switch sides depending on who they’re quizzing. Ben Shapiro totally misunderstood what was happening when he was interviewed in this British manner by Andrew Neil a few years ago, storming out and branding the eminently conservative Neil a leftist! In the US, by contrast, you can almost always tell where the interviewer falls on the political spectrum.

 

[Tha Realest]

On the issue in truthfulness in the media, and Fox News, it looks like they may pay a penalty for some pretty egregious “reporting”

 

[MrPromey]

It’s funny when the new board says they represent the voters, when clearly the do not represent the voters they have governance over.

No constituency voted for any of this* so these clowns invoking the will of the voters is the height of absurdity.


*Unless they mean that by voting DeSantis in for another term meant the people who voted for him at large wanted him to take de-facto dictator-like control of whatever he wanted to in our state. I don't even see this as politics at a citizen level because even those who politically align with him should be seriously worried about the way our state government is doing what it is doing. If this guy can do it for things you agree with, you have no legs to stand on by agreeing with his tactics when the next guy comes along and does the same thing for stuff you don't agree with.

 

[thomas998]

For the crime of what?

Reedy Creek was technically a government agency, so if anyone on the board was given anything to influence them it could be considered bribing a public official.

 

[Chi84]

Reedy Creek was technically a government agency, so if anyone on the board was given anything to influence them it could be considered bribing a public official.

If finding bribery is the only way DeSantis is going to get out of this, Disney is looking pretty good.

 

[castlecake2.0]

I doubt anyone on the board would be influenced by a free park ticket, for over 50 years there was never an issue with how it operated

 

[mikejs78]

I don't see the courts ruling against Disney in this contract dispute but it's still possible, even if only remotely.

Maybe, but the biggest thing here is standing. Under the law, the only party who has standing to sue regarding this contract is ... The landowners.

 

[castlecake2.0]

Maybe, but the biggest thing here is standing. Under the law, the only party who has standing to sue regarding this contract is ... The landowners.

Which raises another question of if the cities of Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista have anything up their sleeves in regards to taxation without representation?

ETA I think those residents lease land from Disney so not sure what their fight could be with the district board now

 

[flynnibus]

Reedy Creek was technically a government agency, so if anyone on the board was given anything to influence them it could be considered bribing a public official.

Your proposing a hypothetical that flies in the face of all common sense. The board is already aligned to disney; their outcome of their roles are already decided. There literally is nothing they need to be swayed for. It’s like saying you need to bribe the already interested party.

They don’t need to be told they will be taken care of. They don’t need to do any deal to change their outcome. There literally is no need to convey any appeasement or incentive. All dialogue just needs to says ‘this is best for the interests of the property and the intents the district was setup to do’ - there is zero need to even try to speak to the individual’s futures.

You’re throwing out ‘what ifs’ with nothing to suggest it did happen… and ignoring the probability of it happening.

 

[JD80]

Your proposing a hypothetical that flies in the face of all common sense. The board is already aligned to disney; their outcome of their roles are already decided. There literally is nothing they need to be swayed for. It’s like saying you need to bribe the already interested party.

They don’t need to be told they will be taken care of. They don’t need to do any deal to change their outcome. There literally is no need to convey any appeasement or incentive. All dialogue just needs to says ‘this is best for the interests of the property and the intents the district was setup to do’ - there is zero need to even try to speak to the individual’s futures.

You’re throwing out ‘what ifs’ with nothing to suggest it did happen… and ignoring the probability of it happening.

What if @thomas998 is being paid for by other Disney Fan Sites to add poor posts to this message board to ruin it's discourse? Surely we can get to the bottom of this.

Can we please get all of @thomas998 direct message made public here? I'm sure it's ok if has nothing to hide.

 

[JohnD]

Compare that to Fox News, that even now is supporting DJT and still criticising JB and the Democrats even after we all became aware of the texts and emails circulating that showed their presenters absolutely detest DJT, but, pandering to their viewership is more important than fair and truthful reporting.

CNN and MSNBC are polar opposite. There is a lot of pandering going on. And it isn't as one sided by a single network as you indicate. Just saying.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

CNN and MSNBC are polar opposite. There is a lot of pandering going on. And it isn't one sided. Just saying.

I think you meant Fox and MSNBC, CNN has always been closer to the middle while MSNBC was far left and Fox far right.

Which confirms the posts earlier about the audience dictating bias in the news, CNN is less biased but has a much smaller audience than either of the stations catering to the extremes.

 

[LittleBuford]

I think you meant Fox and MSNBC, CNN has always been closer to the middle while MSNBC was far left and Fox far right.

Which confirms the posts earlier about the audience dictating bias in the news, CNN is less biased but has a much smaller audience than either of the stations catering to the extremes.

I think he meant that CNN and MSNBC are together the polar opposite of Fox.