Spirited News & Observations II -- NGE/Baxter

[the.dreamfinder]

I've been going to WDW for 32+ years and I don't think I've ever watched one of their 'planning videos'. If its anything like the stacy crap they show on the resort channels.. I doubt I missed anything.

They were really awesome in the early/mid nineties. Quality dropped off by 1999/2000.
Maybe I might pop that in for reference before watching the new one. Does TDR still have English language planning videos?

 

[WDWFanDave]

I wanted to have a group screening with MAGICal members so we could take it apart and get drunk together.

As bad as you think it is, trust me, it is much, much worse.

If I were someone looking to take my first WDW trip (and didn't have KIDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!), then I would be making plans to go elsewhere after viewing it.

I was praying for a Stacey Aswad appearance!

My six year old likes to watch them. I can tolerate listening, and using my WDWMAGIC app while it plays in the background.

Adding alcohol...hmmm...I can definitely see that it would dramatically improve the experience.

Hey-is that what they were thinking when they decided to offer adult beverages at 'Be Our Guest'...make FLE better?

Anyway-glad to have you back, and sincere positive wishes for an enjoyable time away!

 

[luv]

I've been going to WDW for 32+ years and I don't think I've ever watched one of their 'planning videos'. If its anything like the stacy crap they show on the resort channels.. I doubt I missed anything.

You missed some great ones in the 90s, but now you're missing nothing. I can't believe anyone sees those things and think, "OMG, we just HAVE to go!"

They are snoozefests now. And, as mentioned, they ask you questions and then send everyone the same thing.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

Alan Horn at CinemaCon: 14 films a year, 8 of them tentpoles.

 

[PhotoDave219]

I recently watched the godawful 2013 Disney vacation planning DVD. For a second, we'll forget that I ordered the DL 'version' and stated that I would NOT be traveling with any children because well, the dirty little secret is it appears that they no longer produce more than one DVD for all the USA Disney Parks and you can skip and choose what you watch. I guess it would be too expensive for a media company the size of TWDC to produce maybe 5-6 versions that highlight what the potential guests are actually interested in.

I know the people at the production company who used to produce the old Planning DVD. I cannot go into any details other than the current product was noticed.

 

[Genie of the Lamp]

Disney and LucasFilm announced today that they promise a new Star Wars film will come out every summer:
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/04/17/star-wars-movies-2015/

Rollout will start in 2015 with Episode VII

Edit: http://www.deadline.com/2013/04/cin...rategy-highlight-alan-horns-disney-vegas-act/

 

[ChrisFL]

Does TDR still have English language planning videos?

They had those?

I want one!!

 

[Nemo14]

I just came across this article about the press coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, and thought it interesting in relation to the previous ethics discussions here

 

[dhall]

Nope - the entire post is hidden and you never see it unless you click the 'show ignored content' link at the bottom of the thread view. It's a perfect balance of removing temptation while allowing viewing if necessary

i've found that the forum software hides <Ignored Member> from you even when others quote them -- you see the reply, but if they've quoted <IM>, the quote is deleted from the reply. If the reply is the first message in a thread that triggers an email notification, that notification is the only leak -- you can see <IM>'s reply in the email.

 

[flynnibus]

i've found that the forum software hides <Ignored Member> from you even when others quote them -- you see the reply, but if they've quoted <IM>, the quote is deleted from the reply. If the reply is the first message in a thread that triggers an email notification, that notification is the only leak -- you can see <IM>'s reply in the email.

There is 'leakage' anytime the IM is the last one to reply in a thread (in the thread listings) too. I don't use email notifications at all anymore on the forum - the alert system is superior IMO.

 

[PhotoDave219]

I just came across this article about the press coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, and thought it interesting in relation to the previous ethics discussions here

I know, I saw. Its the New York Post. I'm not shocked by anything they do.

 

[Darth Sidious]

I don't believe Disney is interested in selling P&R at this time. BUT ... a spin-off could be something that is being considered ... much like another division of the company!

Woah, spinoff as in new company that manages only P&R or another additive division that say is just for WDW?

 

[Nemo14]

I know, I saw. Its the New York Post. I'm not shocked by anything they do.

but it's still unethical, no matter what the intent

 

[The Empress Lilly]

I just came across this article about the press coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, and thought it interesting in relation to the previous ethics discussions here

That's right, that's not right. If you want to refrain from 'shock photos', then blur a bit out. Else you get sloppyness in your reporting. Unclarities.

As to it's relation to previous discussions about ethics, I don't think it is as unethical as calling an employee a liar and a cheat based on what you read on an internet forum, without - media ethics 101 - doing proper research, or - media ethics 102 - giving the subject opportunity to be heard. Which led to the entirely preventable libel debacle in this thread.

 

[Darth Sidious]

I know, I saw. Its the New York Post. I'm not shocked by anything they do.

I think all of the mainstream media outlets in general these past few days have shown they aren't very good at reporting news. They are only good at propagating. Look at today CNN had to rescind headlines as well. Granted the situation was chaotic but The NYP is garbage. My personal experience with them is firsthand knowledge of their deceptive reporting and distortion. They even had a cover photo of a man's last seconds before being hit by a subway.

Edit: the photo doctoring was The Daily News... The other garbage paper here in NY.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

but it's still unethical, no matter what the intent

Yes, deceit is unethical. However, ethically, I think that intent is crucial, in combination with openness.

For example, if you are a children's publication, and present yourself as such, then there is nothing unethical about removing adult content from pictures, provided you make clear you do as much. In fact, in such an example it could be argued that not removing it would be unethical. You want to teach children about the world, not traumatise them. Ethics is never black and white.
Personally, I prefer the clarity of black boxes or blurring over photoshopping, which always has a certain air of suspicion about it and doesn't belong in a quality publication.

Adult quality press does not alter (news) photographs.

 

[PhotoDave219]

but it's still unethical, no matter what the intent

Well, Thats a complete given. You dont alter photos.

And this isnt the venue I'm going to have this conversation in with the savages we have on these forums....

 

[PhotoDave219]

I think all of the mainstream media outlets in general these past few days have shown they aren't very good at reporting news. They are only good at propagating. Look at today CNN had to rescind headlines as well. Granted the situation was chaotic but The NYP is garbage. My personal experience with them is firsthand knowledge of their deceptive reporting and distortion. They even had a cover photo of a man's last seconds before being hit by a subway.

Edit: the photo doctoring was The Daily News... The other garbage paper here in NY.

Oh, right. I care for neither and I refuse to work for them both.

Not to rehash ethics, but any deception if wrong, especially visual deception. Gotta be true to the public.... even if the guy has no legs.

 

[asianway]

Well, Thats a complete given. You dont alter photos.

And this isnt the venue I'm going to have this conversation in with the savages we have on these forums....

Savages, great way to put it.

Since my only foray into journalism was HS yearbook, is cropping ok? Not being a jag, serious question. The more I think about it that could really change the context. Blurring, black boxing, that's seems black and white to me.

 

[luv]

I just came across this article about the press coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing, and thought it interesting in relation to the previous ethics discussions here

I agree with the guy who said (something like) if you think it's too grisly, don't publish it. But don't edit it. You might as well just make up stuff in photoshop.