Lou Mongello & Jim Hill - WDW Knowledge Kings?

[Syzygy]

Touring strategies aside (Len T rocks that department!) - both Lou Mongello and Jim Hill seem to be the Top 2 authorities of WDW knowledge/history (not directly affiliated/employed by Disney).

Between these two, which one knows more about ride history and ‘insider information’? [If they were to compete in a friendly head-to-head Parks knowledge “Disney Off” (à la Dance Off), who would win?]

Also, is there anyone else on the scene who can complete with their level of Disney Parks knowledge/history?

 

[OKW Lover]

How about Jim Korkis?

 

[lentesta]

Touring strategies aside (Len T rocks that department!)

Ha! Thanks.

 

[Dan Murphy]

Lou

 

[helpmejenny]

How about Jim Korkis?

This!!! Lou and Jim make a dynamic wdw knowledge duo....

 

[Mister Skellington]

I really enjoy Lou M's podcast.He seems like a genuine Disney fan!
(Len dont worry you get plenty of play time with the unofficial guide podcast as well!) I really enjoyed the last one BTW!

 

[Pixiedust34]

I trust Lou's information, and he does give a wealth of information!

Jim does know a lot, but I take what he says about park changes with a grain of salt.

Deb Wills (All Ears) and Josh (Easy WDW) are two others who know a lot about WDW.

 

[chrisw127]

I don't think it's so much who knows more, because theyr'e both obviously incredibly well-informed, but rather what they do. Jim has been a journalist most of his adult life (he got his start in the Army) so he does more investigating and offers more opinions, often negative, than Lou does. He's sometimes wrong and he gets slammed for that, but you have to give him credit for putting himself out there. Lou is more of a super fan. I've never actually heard him be critical of the company. Both have their fans and detractors, it just depends on what you're looking for. I enjoy them both but I don't know that I would compare them.

Interestingly, Jim was once famously banned from giving tours in Disneyland while Lou is allowed to do them in the Magic Kingdom.

 

[WDSearcher]

I don't think it's so much who knows more, because theyr'e both obviously incredibly well-informed, but rather what they do. Jim has been a journalist most of his adult life (he got his start in the Army) so he does more investigating and offers more opinions, often negative, than Lou does. He's sometimes wrong and he gets slammed for that, but you have to give him credit for putting himself out there. Lou is more of a super fan. I've never actually heard him be critical of the company. Both have their fans and detractors, it just depends on what you're looking for. I enjoy them both but I don't know that I would compare them.

Interestingly, Jim was once famously banned from giving tours in Disneyland while Lou is allowed to do them in the Magic Kingdom.

Didn't Lou do them in cooperation with Disney, though? As in ... he asked first and planned them with Disney input? That could be the difference.

Plus ... Jim Hill has always had a kind of love / hate thing going on with Disney. And he's got a spotty record for accuracy. I could see Disney not necessarily wanting Jim to be doing tours that appeared to be company-sanctioned if the information wasn't going to be Disney-vetted for accuracy or attitude or whatever.

And really ... Disney's house, Disney's rules.

Totally agree with your assessment, though, particularly with "I don't know that I would compare them". They really aren't doing the same thing.

 

[SDSorority]

I don't think it's so much who knows more, because theyr'e both obviously incredibly well-informed, but rather what they do. Jim has been a journalist most of his adult life (he got his start in the Army) so he does more investigating and offers more opinions, often negative, than Lou does. He's sometimes wrong and he gets slammed for that, but you have to give him credit for putting himself out there. Lou is more of a super fan. I've never actually heard him be critical of the company. Both have their fans and detractors, it just depends on what you're looking for. I enjoy them both but I don't know that I would compare them.

Interestingly, Jim was once famously banned from giving tours in Disneyland while Lou is allowed to do them in the Magic Kingdom.

Yeah I've always wondered why Lou can still give paid tours but Jim can't.

 

[Jennasis]

Lou FTW!

 

[asianway]

Yeah I've always wondered why Lou can still give paid tours but Jim can't.

He plays ball, as previous posters said he is never critical, so they turn a blind eye....

 

[bytheblood]

Jim Hill makes up a lot of stuff, too. Just keep that in mind. Lots of wishful thinking gets reported as fact.

 

[WDSearcher]

Yeah I've always wondered why Lou can still give paid tours but Jim can't.

See post right above yours for a possible answer to your question!

 

[jrtoastyman]

I agree with those that don't really put them in the same category, even though they are both brimming with Disney knowledge. One is a Superfan (Lou), the other is a Supersleuth (Jim). Seems to me that Lou is almost an extension of Disney, in that he really isn't critical of anything they do, and you sort of get the sense that his anecdotes and stories are "Disney-approved" (at least tacitly). Jim, on the other hand, is not at all afraid to be critical or tell stories that Disney might find embarrassing. If Disney wanted to leak something that they wanted to get into the public without making an official announcement or wanted to raise a test balloon to see how the public reacted to something, I'm pretty sure they'd call Lou before they'd call Jim.

I enjoy listening to them both, and they are obviously both highly knowledgeable about all things Mouse, but I sort of see them fulfilling different roles in the Disney news and history arena.

 

[WDSearcher]

I think my biggest problem with Jim Hill (and his not being afraid to be critical or tell stories that Disney might find embarrassing) is that so many of his stories aren't sourced. I get that a lot of what he expounds on comes from sources inside Disney/WDI who probably would prefer not to be named and that Jim maintains their anonymity so that they will continue to provide info, but when you don't know where the info is coming from, it's hard to know whether it's got any legs. You never know if what you're getting is the POV of a single bitter Imagineer who had a project turned off or if you're getting something with a bit more weight behind it. Everything is presented as having pretty much the same level of validity. Jim's very much a guy who subscribes to the "it's better to ask forgiveness than ask permission" model.

It makes for interesting reading, but it's sometimes like the old game of telephone -- by the time Jim's heard it from his source, who heard it from someone who saw part of a memo after a meeting they weren't at, there's no way of knowing where the actual "fact" is in it all. From Disney's POV, I can see how they might prefer that type of info to not be given such a wide and loud voice.