Spirited News, Observations & Thoughts IV

[luv]

I am not outraged. I would totally take free stuff and write reviews if I had a blog and it was offered, but I'm too lazy so that's not going to happen. I would also admit that I did it. To take stuff, write good reviews without mentioning said free stuff, and then act outraged when you get called on it is silly.

It's a debate over the material covered on Disney fan blogs. Silliness would almost be a prerequisite.

Nothing related to those sites could be classified as "Serious." IMO, anyway.

 

[flynnibus]

I mean. Really. This is what it boils down to. The websites posting all of the pluses and none of the minuses I can just about guarantee are getting a "gift bag" "swag" or some sort of pay off (sorry, no matter what you choose to call it, its a payoff) from said company/destination than the ones who tell you what's actually going on.

So you feel WDWMagic is getting paid off because he doesn't post about the minuses in the news or information pages? Something Steve has repeatedly said doesn't happen.

Or is it possible some sites stay out of editorial/commentary/tips and just focus on the 'data'?

Do you consider Allears.net to be paid off? She like WDWMagic focus more on data and less on commentary. You won't find which building is ran over with kids.. or that AllStars is Pop/Cheer central on either of their webpages.

How do you mesh those realities with your generalizations?

 

[flynnibus]

I'm just amazed people here don't know people around them.. that are all positive and gung-ho about something.. and you say 'but what about {lackluster trait}??' and they go 'well yeah, that wasn't so hot... but man this other stuff was awesome' and then continue on about how great something was.

Some people just don't like focusing on the negative... even if it had nothing to do with payoffs or swag or perks. Some people are just wired that way. Those are the easiest types for companies to hitch on to and make into champions... because the person inherently knows how to stay positive.

Insert your closest Apple Fanboy into that example and play it out. You know that person isn't getting freebies from Apple... but they've bought in. They gloss over the negatives and latch onto the positives.

Even without being paid off..

People are more likely to throw their time and effort into things that MAKE THEM HAPPY... not focus on things that make them sad.

Not everyone can be a curmudgeon every day and still put in the energy required to run one of these enthusiast sites. It takes a lot more work to be objective and balanced. Many would rather just focus on the bits that make them happy.

 

[crispy]

So you feel WDWMagic is getting paid off because he doesn't post about the minuses in the news or information pages? Something Steve has repeatedly said doesn't happen.

Or is it possible some sites stay out of editorial/commentary/tips and just focus on the 'data'?

Do you consider Allears.net to be paid off? She like WDWMagic focus more on data and less on commentary. You won't find which building is ran over with kids.. or that AllStars is Pop/Cheer central on either of their webpages.

How do you mesh those realities with your generalizations?

I guess I think of those as "news" sites instead of "opinion" sites. If I want to find out where to get a vegetarian meal or the price of a three day hopper with water park add-on, I will look at AllEars. If I want to know news about what's happening at WDW, I check out WDWMagic main pages. That being said, those two sites have excellent Rate and Review sections where readers can share some of their opinions so you get a good idea of what to see and what to avoid while at WDW. I think those two sites are about as "fair and balanced" as you can get which is why they are the main sites I visit in the first place.

 

[ford91exploder]

I'm just going to ask a couple questions. Isn't payola an up front payment to get things to go the way one wants it too? How is non-guaranteed, previously not announced, after the fact gift giving payola and not appreciation gifts. You don't bribe someone after they have given you what they want do you? And lets say you do opt for the food and drinks instead of the bugs and sunshine, does that necessarily mean that you will tow the company line no matter what?

No because doing real newspaper work requires that one disclose to the reader that you accepted food and drink from the subject of the event and you might go to Bugs-n-Sunshine anyhow if the event was more newsworthy Nowadays they call them press receptions.

It's been a very long time since I have even been remotely associated with a newsroom so I cant say what is acceptable these days.

This is getting boring - we are now battling about semantics rather than the subject at hand.

 

[crispy]

No because doing real newspaper work requires that one disclose to the reader that you accepted food and drink from the subject of the event and you might go to Bugs-n-Sunshine anyhow if the event was more newsworthy Nowadays they call them press receptions.

It's been a very long time since I have even been remotely associated with a newsroom so I cant say what is acceptable these days.

This is getting boring - we are now battling about semantics rather than the subject at hand.

Agreed.

So what's the deal with Uni wanting to add a bunch more hotel rooms? Any more rumors of a third gate? Will any of this actually light a fire under the Disney execs?

 

[Kuhio]

If you were planning a trip to a place you haven't been before (so, you're now the rube. Just play along for a minute, ok?) would you rather

A) check out a handful a websites that come up first on a google search saying how awesome everything about your destination is. How great the pillows are, the pools are the perfect temp, crowds are low and not rowdy, and there's absolutely no problems with anything breaking down ever and everything smells like fresh baked cinnamon buns,

or

B) would you rather check out a handful of websites that come up first on a google search that gives it to you straight? Watch out for the little kids that like to hide and play around the slide at the pool, the food at the diner isn't so great so save your $50 and eat elsewhere, rides that are most likely to break down often or rides that need a fp as soon as you enter the park because they're too crowded... A heads up about the excessive EVC and stroller usage and steer clear of the first parade because the second isn't so packed

I completely agree with this, but I also think that the majority of people who are reading your post -- i.e., the regulars on this forum -- are substantially more thoughtful than the average person, and much likelier to seek out and understand the value of a balanced and thorough presentation of information on something with which they're not familiar.

I sincerely want to believe that intelligent, perceptive people typify the norm. But more and more, especially in recent years, I've gotten the sense that a considerable proportion of the general population lacks either the capacity or the inclination to engage data with any appreciable degree of discernment -- that "rubes" in fact are, or have become, the norm.

This apparent trend is particularly disheartening in the context of WDW and many of the blogs and sites that focus on WDW. The fact that a number of sites that fall into your category "A" are nevertheless popular enough to survive, and even thrive, suggests that there are a great number of Disney enthusiasts out there who, by choice or otherwise, value simplicity and unwarranted optimism over accuracy and nuance.

And the fact that the Walt Disney company increasingly caters to precisely this type of individual -- who would prefer a dumbed-down, lowest-common-denominator vacation -- seems to signal a significant shift in the kind of guest that has traditionally constituted the Disney parks' bread-and-butter clientele. Where this leaves WDW in a generation or two remains to be seen, but it wouldn't be surprising if the company's short-term strategy has long-term consequences that adversely impact the company well beyond its Orlando properties.

 

[Goofyernmost]

No because doing real newspaper work requires that one disclose to the reader that you accepted food and drink from the subject of the event and you might go to Bugs-n-Sunshine anyhow if the event was more newsworthy Nowadays they call them press receptions.

It's been a very long time since I have even been remotely associated with a newsroom so I cant say what is acceptable these days.

This is getting boring - we are now battling about semantics rather than the subject at hand.

I agree, but unfortunately, from what I can see, semantics is the subject at hand because it seems to be the defining factor. I have stated since the onset that this is a non-issue, just like I felt about the Gambling connection. They were topics but both became a way over the top discussion involving pie in the sky scenarios and completely out of reality projections. From what I recall the "subject at hand" that started this was the compulsion to call people whores, mentally ill and suffering from arrested development because they have a likeness for a topic and have accidentally or one purpose, (either one is pretty much the same) gotten some positive response from the organization that they are positively supporting. I see nothing wrong with them being positive if they want and Disney thanking them. It would be like someone saying how good you look in that article of clothing and you saying Thank you. What others gain from that is not measurable and really not even a part of this discussion because we don't know what other (outsiders) get out of it.

 

[flynnibus]

I guess I think of those as "news" sites instead of "opinion" sites

Yet neither are ran by 'journalists' as people have previously claimed you are or need to act like if you report 'news'. Fascinating isn't it?

They both go to show you don't need to be focused on commentary or expose to be credible and perceived as objective. Yet.. people here keep banging on why aren't these other sites that are approved to hate on aren't covering the bad stuff too. Another fascinating quandary isn't it?

The reason some sites are seen as slanted is because they have proven time and time again they gloss over it and paint sunshine and lollipops all the time.. even when readers don't agree with the assessment. To put it simply... they've spun crap as good.. when the readers know its not. Because of personal choice, or being addicted to tinkerbelle's teet... they've proven themselves unreliable as a source of objective review. That's what really matters.

Their opinion is crap - end of story. Such conclusions can be reached about people who've never gotten the freebie.. and they too are just as worthless a source.

I think those two sites are about as "fair and balanced" as you can get which is why they are the main sites I visit in the first place.

I think so too... but largely because they stay out of the fight period. They chose to not be in the game at all.

 

[ford91exploder]

Agreed.

So what's the deal with Uni wanting to add a bunch more hotel rooms? Any more rumors of a third gate? Will any of this actually light a fire under the Disney execs?

Don't think so if the Bloomberg newswire is accurate a 6-8 Thousand Million Dollar (I like the British way better) stock buyback plan instead of investing in the parks and that Carsland has been cut from the DHS upgrade.

Come on WWoHP gave UNI a 20% attendance boost and with Hogwarts Express and Diagon Alley coming online for next spring June officially but I would not be surprised if they complete early, Disney's going to take a MASSIVE hit on Gate revenues next year.

The thing that's lost on Disney is the Harry Potter franchise includes a LOT of adults as well as children, The books sell just as well as they did when they came out. DW and I would stand in lines to get OUR copies at midnight when the books came out. The knock on effect is that the HP franchise has trans-generational appeal not the pre-tween girl demographic which Disney is emphasizing above all else, Not good.

What product does Disney have to compete against that next year Bathrooms, Bands and a kiddie coaster. It's not going to be pretty on Wall St for Disney next year.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

You could always take up exercising again, Mr. Baldwin.

 

[Goofyernmost]

And the fact that the Walt Disney company increasingly caters to precisely this type of individual -- who would prefer a dumbed-down, lowest-common-denominator vacation -- seems to signal a significant shift in the kind of guest that has traditionally constituted the Disney parks' bread-and-butter clientele. Where this leaves WDW in a generation or two remains to be seen, but it wouldn't be surprising if the company's short-term strategy has long-term consequences that adversely impact the company well beyond its Orlando properties.

One more response and then I'm out of this mostly because I'm starting to get bored repeating myself, we are still talking about a theme park, not brain surgery, not moving to a foreign country, not inviting a convicted felon to live with you. It's a damn theme park. I know if I just committed to spend thousands of dollars on a vacation, I don't want to hear about what isn't good unless I ask specifically about it. I want to go into this with nothing but high expectations. A blogger will supply that for them. They don't have to read it, but they will, because, they will hear what they want to hear. Disney has many flaws, I know that. I also know that the good things, the feelings, the joy, the excitement and the overwhelming sense of separation from the real world that many people feel during a trip to a Disney Park, far outweigh anything that the rest can come up with as bad, bad Disney.

They already feel, based on what they are spending, that this will be a top of the line experience, and it will be whatever they expect it to be. Later, when they get like the rest of us, they will be jaded and negative and concerned about e-tickets, and things that used to be. For now they want an exciting and warm fuzzy experience. They don't need right now to know that 20K used to be where Mermaid is now and it was the stupidity of Disney Management that killed it off. It is not of any concern, they never saw it, they don't know what it was like and they simply cannot relate to it. It's all gibberish to them. What the parks were once like, is of no concern to the first time visitor. Why would they care about what once was but is no more. It's only those of us that have been around a long time that even know they existed. The new visitors of today will someday be the "us" of tomorrow. They will be talking about the downhill slide that Disney is on, they will talk about how the stupid management of today is taking away all the good stuff and how the suits they don't know their butt from their elbow. That will be them in 20 years. In the meantime, contrary to popular belief, bloggers are harmless souls that preach the gospel of Disney because that is what they believe in. We can rant and rave all we want, it doesn't change things. It doesn't change that these people get those rewards after the fact, not before, but it is also a disservice to imply that they are intentionally distorting the reality that they see, just to get the goodies. They spend all that time on the (for the most part) non-paying blogs because they love the subject matter. It's the rest of us that see the need to implant evil into it.

I believe like many of you that Disney's short term strategy will create long term problems. But that is not the fault of the bloggers and certainly not because they are involved and getting a free meal. They are not able to physically change what people see when they walk into the parks. And I don't for the life of me understand why anyone should think that new people should be looking up and counting light bulbs that are burnt out rather then taking in the scenery that surrounds them. Everyone should continue the fight for quality, but remember what is considered quality is a subjective thing. One cannot expect people that never saw the before to be able to compare it to the now. It's only the veterans that will be able to fight that fight with any degree of conviction and by all means don't expect Disney to buy your dinner in thanks for you being their PITA.

 

[TalkingHead]

Does he actually feel that he doesn't get his dollars worth at WDW? Does he feel that the parks are stale? Does he care only about headliner attractions? Why do you assume he feels this way. Perhaps he doesn't.

Perhaps he doesn't. Maybe he couldn't enlighten us about why he thinks a WDW vacation in 2013 is a great value? Or whether he thinks Disney is trying to deliver top-notch entertainment/attractions in Orlando?

 

[lazyboy97o]

Insert your closest Apple Fanboy into that example and play it out. You know that person isn't getting freebies from Apple... but they've bought in. They gloss over the negatives and latch onto the positives.

That's because my Mac loves me.

 

[Soarin' Over Pgh]

So you feel WDWMagic is getting paid off because he doesn't post about the minuses in the news or information pages? Something Steve has repeatedly said doesn't happen.

Or is it possible some sites stay out of editorial/commentary/tips and just focus on the 'data'?

Do you consider Allears.net to be paid off? She like WDWMagic focus more on data and less on commentary. You won't find which building is ran over with kids.. or that AllStars is Pop/Cheer central on either of their webpages.

How do you mesh those realities with your generalizations?

Crispy has a good start on it. The owners of this site have openly critiqued disney in threads, they aren't completely wiped bare so nothing like " zomg disney #1 y'all" remains with nothing else.

See post below, it's explained pretty well.

I guess I think of those as "news" sites instead of "opinion" sites. If I want to find out where to get a vegetarian meal or the price of a three day hopper with water park add-on, I will look at AllEars. If I want to know news about what's happening at WDW, I check out WDWMagic main pages. That being said, those two sites have excellent Rate and Review sections where readers can share some of their opinions so you get a good idea of what to see and what to avoid while at WDW. I think those two sites are about as "fair and balanced" as you can get which is why they are the main sites I visit in the first place.

 

[crispy]

Yet neither are ran by 'journalists' as people have previously claimed you are or need to act like if you report 'news'. Fascinating isn't it?

They both go to show you don't need to be focused on commentary or expose to be credible and perceived as objective. Yet.. people here keep banging on why aren't these other sites that are approved to hate on aren't covering the bad stuff too. Another fascinating quandary isn't it?

The reason some sites are seen as slanted is because they have proven time and time again they gloss over it and paint sunshine and lollipops all the time.. even when readers don't agree with the assessment. To put it simply... they've spun crap as good.. when the readers know its not. Because of personal choice, or being addicted to tinkerbelle's teet... they've proven themselves unreliable as a source of objective review. That's what really matters.

Their opinion is crap - end of story. Such conclusions can be reached about people who've never gotten the freebie.. and they too are just as worthless a source.



I think so too... but largely because they stay out of the fight period. They chose to not be in the game at all.

That's why "news" was in quotes.

(I need to quit talking about this subject because I don't really care that much one way or another. I just made a snarky comment about stilettos and found myself embroiled in a bitter blogger battle. Sorry to derail the thread).

 

[ford91exploder]

I believe like many of you that Disney's short term strategy will create long term problems. But that is not the fault of the bloggers and certainly not because they are involved and getting a free meal. They are not able to physically change what people see when they walk into the parks. And I don't for the life of me understand why anyone should think that new people should be looking up and counting light bulbs that are burnt out rather then taking in the scenery that surrounds them. Everyone should continue the fight for quality, but remember what is considered quality is a subjective thing. One cannot expect people that never saw the before to be able to compare it to the now. It's only the veterans that will be able to fight that fight with any degree of conviction and by all means don't expect Disney to buy your dinner in thanks for you being their PITA.

COUNTING DEAD LIGHT BULBS , sums it up neatly for the decline of the parks, A dead bulb is VERY visible when you see the buildings outlined at night and a bunch of them just give the appearance that no one cares about maintenance. Were there dead bulbs in the 'Disney Decade' sure there were, The difference was there was ONE dead bulb and it was replaced the next day.

Now there are dozens of dead bulbs and they stay dead for days on end, It just makes for an overall neglected look which is IMMEDIATELY apparent to even the casual visitor. This is just bad show.

Disney is SUPPOSED to be better than real life - a world where everything is perfect and one can suspend their sense of reality.

 

[Soarin' Over Pgh]

I completely agree with this, but I also think that the majority of people who are reading your post -- i.e., the regulars on this forum -- are substantially more thoughtful than the average person, and much likelier to seek out and understand the value of a balanced and thorough presentation of information on something with which they're not familiar.

I sincerely want to believe that intelligent, perceptive people typify the norm. But more and more, especially in recent years, I've gotten the sense that a considerable proportion of the general population lacks either the capacity or the inclination to engage data with any appreciable degree of discernment -- that "rubes" in fact are, or have become, the norm.

This apparent trend is particularly disheartening in the context of WDW and many of the blogs and sites that focus on WDW. The fact that a number of sites that fall into your category "A" are nevertheless popular enough to survive, and even thrive, suggests that there are a great number of Disney enthusiasts out there who, by choice or otherwise, value simplicity and unwarranted optimism over accuracy and nuance.

And the fact that the Walt Disney company increasingly caters to precisely this type of individual -- who would prefer a dumbed-down, lowest-common-denominator vacation -- seems to signal a significant shift in the kind of guest that has traditionally constituted the Disney parks' bread-and-butter clientele. Where this leaves WDW in a generation or two remains to be seen, but it wouldn't be surprising if the company's short-term strategy has long-term consequences that adversely impact the company well beyond its Orlando properties.

Thank you for the thoughtful reply. In regards to your first paragraph (sorry, iPad doesn't want to cooperate and quote this piece by piece) I agree entirely. However, the people who might be seeking out such information are probably not going to be regulars on this forum. Perhaps I have a unique point of view, as I joined this forum last December, and my very first trip to WDW was in May. Granted, I've been reading this place for years now, but I don't expect that families who are planning their first vacation to WDW would be as dedicated as I was in pursuit of knowledge nd information.

I had a few complications with my trip planning, in regards to health concerns (Mom, who went with me, has severe Crohn's disease and IBS on top of it, I have anxiety issues but who the hell doesn't anymore) and needed more info than just "the cupcakes at xx were the best ever" and "the pools at cowered nice and perfect and great and faaaaaaaab". I needed hard facts, details, because in order to not disrupt my Moms issues, considerations and preparations had to be made. That being said, I wanted the truth, not glossed over details about pretty trees and ducklings. How long can I expect to wait in line for a ride? What kind of restraints does the ride have? In case of emergency, who do I look for to report to? What quick service areas are available in every "land" in case Mom is on the verge of passing out due to stomach pains or cramps? I simply didn't find any of this on the "positive only" sites. However I did find lots of photos, so they weren't a total loss.

TLDR? most "rubes" (and for the record I hate that term) probably wouldn't have gone to the extent I did to find information. I'd like to think that anyone who is dropping thousands of dollars on a vacation is going to do some research and homework. I still hold out that much hope for the human race, even if "lol" is considered a word and I get text messages from grown adults at work who use numbers instead of words, and text because calling is "too much work".... I'd hope that we over generalize people and their intellect here.

And websites too. Look, I'm not saying every website that posts nothing but happy happy joy joy stuff is paid off, but it does make you wonder if there's not a motive behind it. I absolutely love disney food blog, but every single positive review!? Even the "I didn't like this" are glossed over big time.

Ok, this is too long.... But to make it short and sweet... As nice as it is to think that everyone no has been to wdw, and again, if you've never been, and see only the "positive" reviews... Is destined to have a great, magical time... And then they get there and realize the yeti doesn't move, the electrical parade has a crap load of burned out lights, and missing sections entirely, or that splash is down yet again for technical issues, or that the toy story rides their kids are dying to go on have hours long waits, they may not be so happy that they only saw glowing reviews.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

I completely agree with this, but I also think that the majority of people who are reading your post -- i.e., the regulars on this forum -- are substantially more thoughtful than the average person, and much likelier to seek out and understand the value of a balanced and thorough presentation of information on something with which they're not familiar.

I sincerely want to believe that intelligent, perceptive people typify the norm. But more and more, especially in recent years, I've gotten the sense that a considerable proportion of the general population lacks either the capacity or the inclination to engage data with any appreciable degree of discernment -- that "rubes" in fact are, or have become, the norm.

This apparent trend is particularly disheartening in the context of WDW and many of the blogs and sites that focus on WDW. The fact that a number of sites that fall into your category "A" are nevertheless popular enough to survive, and even thrive, suggests that there are a great number of Disney enthusiasts out there who, by choice or otherwise, value simplicity and unwarranted optimism over accuracy and nuance.

And the fact that the Walt Disney company increasingly caters to precisely this type of individual -- who would prefer a dumbed-down, lowest-common-denominator vacation -- seems to signal a significant shift in the kind of guest that has traditionally constituted the Disney parks' bread-and-butter clientele. Where this leaves WDW in a generation or two remains to be seen, but it wouldn't be surprising if the company's short-term strategy has long-term consequences that adversely impact the company well beyond its Orlando properties.

I can not begin to comprehend the misery that WDW will be in two generations time if current trends continue.

I do know that the dumbing down of the past two decades has left Disney to be associated with cheap Princess junk in the dollar store that five year olds return to you with indignation, and parks where the mentally stunted get drunk and get their childrens' picture taken with Toy Story characters.

Back in the old days, when WDW was a middle class instead of no class resort, we would shop for antiques in Liberty Square and at night dine in the Jazz lounge of a paddlewheel steamship in a Southern swamp.
/rant

 

[crispy]

Thank you for the thoughtful reply. In regards to your first paragraph (sorry, iPad doesn't want to cooperate and quote this piece by piece) I agree entirely. However, the people who might be seeking out such information are probably not going to be regulars on this forum. Perhaps I have a unique point of view, as I joined this forum last December, and my very first trip to WDW was in May. Granted, I've been reading this place for years now, but I don't expect that families who are planning their first vacation to WDW would be as dedicated as I was in pursuit of knowledge nd information.

I had a few complications with my trip planning, in regards to health concerns (Mom, who went with me, has severe Crohn's disease and IBS on top of it, I have anxiety issues but who the hell doesn't anymore) and needed more info than just "the cupcakes at xx were the best ever" and "the pools at cowered nice and perfect and great and faaaaaaaab". I needed hard facts, details, because in order to not disrupt my Moms issues, considerations and preparations had to be made. That being said, I wanted the truth, not glossed over details about pretty trees and ducklings. How long can I expect to wait in line for a ride? What kind of restraints does the ride have? In case of emergency, who do I look for to report to? What quick service areas are available in every "land" in case Mom is on the verge of passing out due to stomach pains or cramps? I simply didn't find any of this on the "positive only" sites. However I did find lots of photos, so they weren't a total loss.

TLDR? most "rubes" (and for the record I hate that term) probably wouldn't have gone to the extent I did to find information. I'd like to think that anyone who is dropping thousands of dollars on a vacation is going to do some research and homework. I still hold out that much hope for the human race, even if "lol" is considered a word and I get text messages from grown adults at work who use numbers instead of words, and text because calling is "too much work".... I'd hope that we over generalize people and their intellect here.

And websites too. Look, I'm not saying every website that posts nothing but happy happy joy joy stuff is paid off, but it does make you wonder if there's not a motive behind it. I absolutely love disney food blog, but every single positive review!? Even the "I didn't like this" are glossed over big time.

Ok, this is too long....

That's the blog I was thinking of in my previous post. This post really made the whole blog jump the shark for me.