WDW guests can tweet Disney for help during their vacation.

wdwtopten

Well-Known Member
Because 1) there's a Disneyland Today account that serves the same role and 2) nobody cares about podcasts. 99% of WDW guests have no idea there's a Wdw today podcast and neither do they care.
Because 1) there's a Disneyland Today account that serves the same role and 2) nobody cares about podcasts. 99% of WDW guests have no idea there's a Wdw today podcast and neither do they care.

Nobody cares about podcasts? Are you serious?

33% of all Americans have listened to at least one podcast.

17% of all Americans have listened to a podcast in the last month.

http://www.journalism.org/2015/04/29/podcasting-fact-sheet/

Also,

"99% of WDW guests have no idea there's a Wdw today podcast and neither do they care."

Well, many of them are about to learn about it because WDW picked a less-than-great Twitter handle for their new service.
 

wdwtopten

Well-Known Member
I'm one of those 99% who had no idea there was a WDW Today Podcast. So the Twitter account name they came up with totally makes sense to me.

The problem arrises when you go to Twitter to search for WDWToday and pull up two accounts with very similar names.

Look, I'm not saying that WDWToday is a bad name per se, and I understand the reason why they likely chose it, but I feel as though they could have chosen something better.

For example, when you search for WDWToday on Twitter, this is what you see:

http://i.imgur.com/lwx8Yh8.png

Can't you see how that would be confusing for the casual WDW guest?
 

HolleBolleGijs

Well-Known Member
Nobody cares about podcasts? Are you serious?

33% of all Americans have listened to at least one podcast.

17% of all Americans have listened to a podcast in the last month.

http://www.journalism.org/2015/04/29/podcasting-fact-sheet/

Also,

"99% of WDW guests have no idea there's a Wdw today podcast and neither do they care."

Well, many of them are about to learn about it because WDW picked a less-than-great Twitter handle for their new service.

That data is too vague to make a point. Many of the 17% of Americans who have listened to a podcast in the last month are probably listening to the same, mainstream podcast (think Serial or Welcome to Nightvale), or a super niche podcast that doesn't get much visibility. WDWToday falls into the niche category, and an average WDW guest who sees it isn't likely to think,"Hm, here's a cool podcast that I've never heard of. Maybe I'll give it a listen." Not after simply seeing a Twitter handle.
 

wdwtopten

Well-Known Member
That data is too vague to make a point. Many of the 17% of Americans who have listened to a podcast in the last month are probably listening to the same, mainstream podcast (think Serial or Welcome to Nightvale), or a super niche podcast that doesn't get much visibility. WDWToday falls into the niche category, and an average WDW guest who sees it isn't likely to think,"Hm, here's a cool podcast that I've never heard of. Maybe I'll give it a listen." Not after simply seeing a Twitter handle.

I was replying to the assertion that "no one cares about podcasts". I think I made my point.
 

jakeman

Well-Known Member
Nobody cares about podcasts? Are you serious?

33% of all Americans have listened to at least one podcast.

17% of all Americans have listened to a podcast in the last month.

http://www.journalism.org/2015/04/29/podcasting-fact-sheet/

Also,

"99% of WDW guests have no idea there's a Wdw today podcast and neither do they care."

Well, many of them are about to learn about it because WDW picked a less-than-great Twitter handle for their new service.
Perhaps he should have said 2 out of 3 Americans do not care about podcast and over 4 out of 5 haven't listen to one in the past month?

Furthermore he could have also said that the entire Twitter following of @WDWTodayPodcast is about 1.5% of the main Walt Disney World Twitter handle. Or, just for icing, noted that @WDWToday has amassed a third of the number of followers in two weeks that @WDWTodayPodcast has managed in 6 years.

You know...if we're going to use numbers and all that...
 

wdwtopten

Well-Known Member
Perhaps he should have said 2 out of 3 Americans do not care about podcast and over 4 out of 5 haven't listen to one in the past month?

Furthermore he could have also said that the entire Twitter following of @WDWTodayPodcast is about 1.5% of the main Walt Disney World Twitter handle. Or, just for icing, noted that @WDWToday has amassed a third of the number of followers in two weeks that @WDWTodayPodcast has managed in 6 years.

You know...if we're going to use numbers and all that...

I'm not sure why you feel the need to tear down @WDWTodayPodcast in order to make a point that isn't very germane.

The point is, when one searches Twitter for WDWToday, this is what they see:

http://i.imgur.com/lwx8Yh8.png

I submit that it is likely confusing to enough people that WDW should have chosen something different.

Perhaps the people who would turn to Twitter to ask questions about WDW are Twitter-savy enough to not get confused though.

Time will tell.
 

Dead2009

Horror Movie Guru
To be fair, if they dont read the descriptions of each Twitter account, that's their own fault on getting confused. It's right there in saying what the account is about lol.
 

PhotoDave219

Well-Known Member
Nobody cares about podcasts? Are you serious?

33% of all Americans have listened to at least one podcast.

17% of all Americans have listened to a podcast in the last month.

http://www.journalism.org/2015/04/29/podcasting-fact-sheet/

Also,

"99% of WDW guests have no idea there's a Wdw today podcast and neither do they care."

Well, many of them are about to learn about it because WDW picked a less-than-great Twitter handle for their new service.

Nobody cares about podcasts, yes
 

LuvtheGoof

DVC Guru
Premium Member
Is that what you think podcasts are? People trying to brainwash you in to thinking a certain way?
Certainly not all of them. Some are just for entertainment. Some to pass along news. We would just rather read myself. Oh, and we don't read via Kindle or Nook or any other method. We read books. We have hundreds in our collection. We are very old school in that regard.

It's just not something that we are into.
 

wdwtopten

Well-Known Member
Certainly not all of them. Some are just for entertainment. Some to pass along news. We would just rather read myself. Oh, and we don't read via Kindle or Nook or any other method. We read books. We have hundreds in our collection. We are very old school in that regard.

It's just not something that we are into.

I'm kind of chilled by the fact that you have switched to using the pronoun "we".

I'm glad you read. But you are aware that authors can pass along opinion as fact and fact as opinion, right? Just because it is written on paper doesn't make it any more legitimate.

And every time you crack open one of these books, you should thank a Phoenician. :)
 

LuvtheGoof

DVC Guru
Premium Member
I'm kind of chilled by the fact that you have switched to using the pronoun "we".

I'm glad you read. But you are aware that authors can pass along opinion as fact and fact as opinion, right? Just because it is written on paper doesn't make it any more legitimate.

And every time you crack open one of these books, you should thank a Phoenician. :)
Sorry. When I talk about reading books, that is mostly for entertainment purposes. Clive Cussler, Stephen King, David Baldacci, Iris Johansen, and Patricia Cornwell are some of our favorites. Books that people write (well, except for Marty Sklar and a few Imagineers!) I avoid, as they are influenced by their point-of-view. I try to look at both sides, and decide for myself. And you are completely correct in that the author doesn't make it any more legitimate. I don't read those, either.

I switched over to we for book reading, as my wife is an avid book reader as well. And she never listens to podcasts either.
 

Master Yoda

Pro Star Wars geek.
Premium Member
I shouldn't laugh at this, but its so true. I never really realized it until I began my customer service job. The look of terror people have on their face when I try to strike up a conversation on the sales floor is amazing. Small talk at the cash wrap, forget about it. Like every person in their mid-20s I love social media, but I hate how with each passing day we grown more and more distant from each other.
I don't think social media has much to do with it. If anything, social media and the internet in general gives introverted people a way to communicate they would not have had in the past.

Personally, I think parents are far too paranoid these days and they shelter their kids way too much. They no longer get the opportunity to learn to interact with others until they are at an age where they worry about the opinions of others. Your average 3 year old thinks nothing about talking to a stranger. A 14 year old that has never done it, not so much.
 

HolleBolleGijs

Well-Known Member
I don't think social media has much to do with it. If anything, social media and the internet in general gives introverted people a way to communicate they would not have had in the past.

Oh I disagree - both social media and the internet in general are at least partially to blame. We are becoming increasingly used to the ability to go online and do basically everything we need to without opening our mouths. Spontaneous face-to-face conversation is harder because we're so used to texting/FB messaging where we have more time to compose our thoughts before responding. We'd rather "ghost" people than defend ourselves or g-d forbid be confrontational even in the mildest sense. Ordering food? Check out Grubhub. Applying for a credit card? Easily done through a website.

AIM (way back when) was honestly the worst thing that ever happened to me from a social perspective.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom