Spirited News, Observations & Thoughts IV

[EPCOTCenterLover]

I agree. Most bloggers blog to compensate for their inherent low self esteem.

Not always, and no offense taken... but I mainly blog to leave my family a journal of sorts. Something fun to laugh about after I'm gone. You know, my Disney park concept art obsession and my love of Karen Carpenter!

 

[ford91exploder]

So yesterday we have NBC/Universal telling us they'll be increasing additions to their theme parks, spending at least 500 million every year.

Today we have Jay Rasulo saying Disney will be spending between 6 and 8 billion to buy back stocks while simultaneously cutting CapEx and hiring.

That's the ONE DISNEY(TM) I know and love.

Translation - Pumping up executive stock options at the cost of the core business, It's the polite way to do a reverse split. I'd love to see Cramer's take on this on, cue the bears growling.

Disney really feels they are untouchable - well pride goeth before a mighty fall, Right now I'd be looking to see if Disney is chatting with Cedar Fair or Six Flags to get rid of the dog of a business known as 'Disney Parks' As we all know disinvestment goes before a sale.

 

[ford91exploder]

Of course that's why. So what is the discussion about? They have done nothing wrong, they took no oath or pledge to never accidentally or otherwise, deceive the public. If the name of the Blog is CBS NEWS, or NBC NEWS, etc., they have a responsibility (that they probably would ignore for the sake of ratings anyway), to the public to let them know the degree of seriousness they need to take in what is being told. I have never seen any evidence of that being the case with a blog.

And Kevin's disclosure is why he is considered a credible source.

 

[danlb_2000]

My issue isn't with the perks ... it's with the lack of disclosure, the difference between Tom and Ricky (and a few others) is that Tom actually comes right out on his site and says: 'Yes, I am getting either reimbursed by Disney, comped, or getting a special room rates.' Inside the Magic has no such thing, anywhere on their site, and I believe that they are required to by FCC Law.

The same goes for several others ... I see no disclaimer from others who have their own Disney Social Sites, all of which who are claiming to be News Sources for Disney World, and who are selling ad space on their sites ... and it's concerning.

I don't believe FCC rules apply to Internet content.

 

[ford91exploder]

So, to change the subject for a moment or two... @WDW1974 have any insight into this article just posted http://www.themeparkinsider.com/flume/201309/3653/ ?

Thanks for this - Well no surprise here TDO cheaps out again and it's perfectly congruent with Rasulo's announcement

 

[janoimagine]

I don't believe FCC rules apply to Internet content.

It actually does. Read here, and here.

 

[ford91exploder]

Obviously, that was the lesson to be learned here. Good Lord.

Nothing about how but plot and story sucked and the movie failed, Good lord are they REALLY THAT STUPID, the folks at the Cali Grill gathering are Mensa level people compared to that effusion of stupidity from TWDC mgmt.

 

[wannab@dis]

people are upset because he's a fan and isn't negative like half the people on this message board... is that seriously what I am hearing?

Well, actually it's close to a couple of dozen of the same people. They're just a very vocal group.

 

[Nubs70]

Experiments by social scientists have shown that even very low-value gifts work in creating a sense of obligation by the recipient towards the giver. If a site like Touringplans has a policy of not accepting gifts, that enhances its credibility with me quite a bit. But to each his own. I won't try to tell other people who they should believe.

This absolutely true. As a vendor, I hand out low value gifts to those that help me complete my tasks in an efficient manner. A $5 hat saves me $300 in wasted time. The gift creates a degree of loyalty where individuals will restructure their day to help me first.

However, I have other accounts where absolutely no gifts are allowed to guard against any hint of conflict of interest. I waste a great deal of time at this account waiting for others to get around to helping me.

So in summary, low value gifts increases my efficiency.

 

[flynnibus]

My issue isn't with the perks ... it's with the lack of disclosure

That's fine and honest - but is a different subject than the one I was responding to. Disclosure or not will not change the fallacy being hung on that I was responding to.

the difference between Tom and Ricky (and a few others) is that Tom actually comes right out on his site and says: 'Yes, I am getting either reimbursed by Disney, comped, or getting a special room rates.' Inside the Magic has no such thing, anywhere on their site, and I believe that they are required to by FCC Law.

I don't disagree that most of these people are dealing in a grey area. The sad thing is the FTC (not the FCC) rules are never going to be enforced. They just don't have the manpower and motivation to go after activities like this. Just look at the layers of 'paper enforcement' that happen before any real court gets involved with the FTC's enforcement of the FTC act - http://www.ftc.gov/ogc/brfovrvw.shtm

It's nice to have the framework.. but its one of those areas people are going to flaunt because the gains outweigh the risks of prosecution.

 

[danlb_2000]

It actually does. Read here, and here.

The first article is incorrect, this is not the FCC, it's the FTC.

 

[jt04]

Are you saying that you have been banned or that you think I tried to get you banned? Cause if it's the former, I will point and laugh. If it's the latter, I will point and laugh harder as I have never done such a thing.

Yes I am banned. Laugh it up.

Wait. If I was banned I could not write this. Weird.

 

[flynnibus]

Before this goes any further...

Believing that a gift CAN influence a review, coverage or opinion is absolutely NOT the same as believing that a gift will ALWAYS influence review, coverage or opinion.

But when one uses the tidbit to CONCLUDE they are biased/bought/etc.. they have already made the leap from 'can' to 'has'.

If people were saying 'they are suspect' - then your 'can influence' logic is in play. When people say 'they are bought because of the gift' - they are past 'can' and have concluded 'has' been influenced.

and worse, they take that conclusion about the relationship and try to apply it to other cases... so the idea of 'can influence' is abandoned and we go leaping case to case with logicaly fallacies concluding 'because A.. we have B'... all along missing C, D, E, and F

 

[flynnibus]

PLEASE MAN
You must simply stop telling me and others what they think, believe, and conclude.

So you're telling me you like your alternate reality and wish to continue on undisturbed? Ok

Its a clever tactic to dominate every discussion that comes this way.

Buhaha.. 'a clever tactic'. I'll remember that the next time reality strikes... I'll rant 'Those damn clever tactics of the universe again!!'

 

[ford91exploder]

This absolutely true. As a vendor, I hand out low value gifts to those that help me complete my tasks in an efficient manner. A $5 hat saves me $300 in wasted time. The gift creates a degree of loyalty where individuals will restructure their day to help me first.

However, I have other accounts where absolutely no gifts are allowed to guard against any hint of conflict of interest. I waste a great deal of time at this account waiting for others to get around to helping me.

So in summary, low value gifts increases my efficiency.

And I've worked for those organizations in my case government and university , Oddly enough the same rules never apply to those at the top only those who actually work for a living.

Strange how the Cx0 can go to the Superbowl and be in the company 'hospitality suite' but a lowly tech will get fired for accepting a hat, I was quite a bit higher in that food chain but still low enough the gifts rule applied.

 

[scout68]

It actually does. Read here, and here.

FTC Publishes Final Guides Governing Endorsements, Testimonials
Changes Affect Testimonial Advertisements, Bloggers, Celebrity Endorsements

-The revised Guides also add new examples to illustrate the long standing principle that “material connections” (sometimes payments or free products) between advertisers and endorsers – connections that consumers would not expect – must be disclosed. These examples address what constitutes an endorsement when the message is conveyed by bloggers or other “word-of-mouth” marketers. The revised Guides specify that while decisions will be reached on a case-by-case basis, 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. Likewise, if a company refers in an advertisement to the findings of a research organization that conducted research sponsored by the company, the advertisement must disclose the connection between the advertiser and the research organization. And a paid endorsement – like any other advertisement – is deceptive if it makes false or misleading claims.-

 

[janoimagine]

The first article is incorrect, this is not the FCC, it's the FTC.

My mistake, meant FTC, not FCC, typed too fast.

 

[1023]

I have no background in media ethics, so I have stayed out of the sub-plot that derails the news items in this thread. I see no value in defining what is a legit or non-legit source of information. To me, this subject matter buries real content beneath by focusing on a tangential aside. Perhaps those debating off the topics intended in this thread are satisfied to divert attention away from the concerns about the operations of Disney in Orlando.

There are other outlets where one can participate in mockery of others. Those outlets hold no interest for me. To plainly say that "reality" TV and it's ilk are disgusting refuse, is not placing refuse in high enough regard. If that is one's choice of distraction however, so be it. I'll stick with sites such as this one and it's similar brethren.

In an effort to return to topic, I have (in the past) shared my positive observations about the revitalization of the Disneyland resort and the many negative observations about the goings on in Walt Disney World. I have some hope that George Kalogridis will bring some spit and polish back to Florida offerings. Additionally, he may push harder on attraction development and construction for the 43 square mile bubble.

The greatest concern should be that the competition down the road is attempting to leverage away guests by offering a continually evolving and improving product. The pace of their development is to be further increased and their desire to become a stand alone family destination is ominous. The articles posted over the last couple of days spell that all out quite clearly and the tone of the transcript of the conference call all but throws down a gauntlet.

The current observable path at Walt Disney World is short sighted. This path makes short term investors happy but will make long term investors very angry. @ParentsOf4 has posted eloquently along these lines with specific notables pulled from various publicly available sources. The current management is robbing Peter to pay Paul. This can't continue for much longer.

Everyone on this forum can walk the parks and make observations about maintenance, janitorial, and food operations. We can speak to the lack of investment in the three step-children at Walt Disney World. We can form our opinions about our observations and we can gather information from various sources. What we shouldn't do, is insult or characterize unjustly others for expressing an opposing view.

I hope we can disengage from the current excursus and find our way back to the concerns noted above.

*1023*

 

[ThemeParkJunkee]

So, to change the subject for a moment or two... @WDW1974 have any insight into this article just posted http://www.themeparkinsider.com/flume/201309/3653/ ?

So...I am not the only one who reads this site. Interesting articles appearing today re: Potter, Carsland, Halloween parties etc.

 

[scout68]

So you're telling me you like your alternate reality and wish to continue on undisturbed? Ok



Buhaha.. 'a clever tactic'. I'll remember that the next time reality strikes... I'll rant 'Those damn clever tactics of the universe again!!'

- clever tactic employed yet again!
- continues to tell me what I am telling him -
yer a peach