Disney’s Smoking/Vaping Ban -A different take- Shrewd Business Move or Nefarious Plot? Some of both?

[Ed Collins]

First off, this thread is not going to debate smoking and/or vaping personal stories, positions, etc etc. This thread instead is looking at the reasons why Disney chose to ban smoking and vaping.

First, Disney’s reason taken at Face Value, is simply because it wanted to, no specific reason is given beyond the vague general statement of for “everyone’s” benefit. However, some have reported that Disney has hinted at crowd reduction but has not outright stated this.

This is gutsy, Disney is rolling the dice, and it appears the public, by and large, are ok with this. Yes, smokers are outraged, so are the Vapers, but mostly there is general acceptance with a significant portion of people in support of the ban thinking it is for health reasons.

Think about that for a couple minutes. The public has just supported a major corporation enact what is in essence a wholesale ban of millions of people for no specific reason.

Before the argument comes back, saying people can just quit, or not do so for a day, or some version thereof, please research what physical addiction actually is, and take it as what it is, nothing less or more. As a R: For most smokers, this is perceived as a nearly impossible task. I’m going to leave it there, you are welcome to your own opinion but let’s not debate about it here.

What worries me is what this means. Disney just effectively removed millions of potential guests, who most likely have lower incomes (feel free to check this, but I believe that it is a economic reality that smokers often make less money). So it can have more of the kind of people it prefers to visit its parks.

It did this without scientific evidence or medical reasons, just because it will be better for everyone.

I don’t know if I am ok with this. Sure, I’m not a fan of the smoke, I quit 10 years ago. Full disclosure, I do vape, but going a full day isn’t an issue for me.
I’m concerned about the ramifications. These are broad, millions of families can no longer have full reunions because of the millions of smokers. That weird uncle, the cool cousin, aunts, grandparents, whomever it may be who smokes or vapes. Those real people are no longer welcome inside Disney Parks. Does this scare anyone else? These are family members, why are they excluded without justification?

Another thought is if this ban goes into effect and is lauded, wouldn’t Disney use the same method to address overcrowding? What group would be next? What would stop them from banning the exposure of tattoos? Denying purchase of packages based on credit score?
How about anything not specifically mentioned by law as protected. Are you ok with that?

Even the remote possibility scares me. I hate to lean on the slippery slope fallacy but this is historically how discriminatory policies explode into acceptable behavior.

 

[MikeNamez]

 

[hiimdoug]

I’m mostly a lurker here on the DISboards, however, this post, in particular, inflamed me a bit because its characterizing those who are pleased with the ban as somehow for Disney discriminating against people groups.

Couple of my thoughts:

1) You’re conflating the ban of a practice vs the ban of the people who take part in that practice. There is no ban on smokers, and it sounds like, to the best of their ability, Disney is trying to accommodate those who need a smoke break by providing them an area, outside the parks and away from the crowds, to do so. Everyone can still come to their family reunions.

2) There is a plethora of peer-reviewed research (*see below) showing that there is no safe amount of exposure to SHS. Disney is well aware of this, and probably views SHS as a legal liability on their part.

3) Disney is not using this as a means to lower crowd levels. Disney LOVES the high crowd levels. The references to overcrowding and the ban are because there are no longer any places in the parks that are “away from crowds”.

4) If Disney really is concerned about the amount of people in the parks, they have a much easier and more profitable way to limit the crowd levels, its called raising the price of a ticket.

My final thought is this, as a father, with a wife and 4 kids, who spends thousands of dollars directly on Disney Parks related activities each year, I am their target audience, their bread and butter. My father took me as a kid, and instilled a love for the parks, and now I am doing the same with my kids, and so on. This is exactly what Disney wants. In all my years going to Disney, I have only ever directly complained to Disney about one thing, the SHS. This is the only thing, that if it got worse, and not better, that would likely ever deter me from bringing my family (and likely tens of thousands of dollars) to Disney year in and year out. I am grateful that Disney has made the decision to stop smoking in the parks.

Disney’s ban on smoking is ultimately for one reason, their bottom line, with the two main contributors being customer satisfaction and legal liability.

* The Disboards did not allow me to post a link to a research paper from the NCBI supporting my claim but you can find it by googling "SMOKING AND SECONDHAND SMOKE: Study Finds No Level of SHS Exposure Free of Effects"

 

[Ed Collins]

Wonderful, thank you for the well thought out reply.

I’m glad you are inflamed, you should be. I’m not surprised you think I’m mixing of ban of practice with ban of people, however those with a significant physical nicotine addiction are incapable of stopping for several hours without health consequences. We like to put on our rose colored glasses and tell people to quit smoking but this is not a simple thing.

The fight to quit smoking costs lives, far more than it should. The current research supports this, and is currently turning against wholesale bans and shocking anti-smoking propaganda in order to create environments where the addiction can be handled in a loving family supportive way instead of the ridicule and ostracizing that is the current social norm. You can read about this at the American Cancer Society.

This however, while interesting, isn’t the issue. You are right about second hand smoke, there is absolutely no safe level, but this is not true for vaping, in fact Disney itself uses the same chemicals (except nicotine) to create effects with vapor and/or smells. This is safer than most air, according to multiple CDC reports.

Using medical and scientific evidence to support bans on smoking and vaping (*misrepresented by the scary inaccurate name e-cigarette) has become an untenable position. The scientific evidence simply doesn’t support this stance anymore and all the current rhetoric focuses on scare tactics, big words, misrepresented numbers, and logical fallacies. Disney obviously understands this, especially since it felt the need to include this generations cause of evil, vaping. To make certain it didn’t get caught up in the changing scientific information and avoid litigation, they chose to avoid using anything health related as a reason.

Don’t get me wrong, smoking is bad, it kills, and so does secondhand smoke. This is fact. As is evidenced by the hundreds of thousands who die every year.

You’re right, this is about money. The parks are overcrowded now and the only way to make more money is to have fewer people spending more money so you can get back to the same crowd levels but still have a higher spending rate. Only way to accomplish this is to discourage lower income guests from attending and have more higher priced special items, events, etc.

Right now I’m reminded of a famous poem by Martin Niemöller, “First they came for”.

This ban is wrong, so wrong that it is indefensible unless you strongly believe that the bottom line is the priority, not families, not health, not kindness, just money.


Remember Disney did not cite health as a reason in any way shape or form.

 

[hiimdoug]

Ed, I still think you're conflating a few issues here. Again, Disney has not banned smokers. They have banned smoking inside the parks. And, as the Disney Parks Blog post indicates "Designated smoking areas will be available outside the entrances of the areas listed above and at Disney Springs in Florida. For guests who have room or dining reservations, smoking areas are also available at Disney Resort hotels.", meaning smokers who have a need to smoke (for whatever reason) can still do so, on Disney property, with little-to-no extra inconvenience to the smokers than the current situation with smoking only available is designated areas.

Disney (and me for that matter) is not asking anyone to stop smoking either. As I have stated a few times now there will still be designated smoking areas (just not in the parks and away from the vicinity for non-smoking guest). While I'm sympathetic to the plight of those who are trying to quit, and the health perils that might be involved in that endeavor, this has little to no baring on the discussion as Disney is not and has not banned smokers, just smoking in the parks.

As for their motives, Disney is publicly traded company, that is profit seeking. They are not a charity, a church, or a government entity. As a shareholder myself I am quite pleased with their current strategy to maximize profits and I believe they are doing so in a very ethical manner, and as it seems most shareholders are in agreement. Disney is only going to be able to offer what they offer if they continue to create a product and service that consumers are willing to pay for.

Ultimately, I'm sure there are thousands of families, like myself, who have complained to Disney Parks about the SHS. And at the end of the day, families make up the bulk of the nearly $20bln annual revenue that Disney Resorts and Parks takes in. So if you continue to want Disney to offer the best most innovative theme parks in the world (which I do) than meeting the desires of those who make up the bulk of park revenue should be top priority.

 

[Magical2017]

I chose "not ban anyone" because smokers are not banned. They simply cannot smoke inside the parks.

 

[Ed Collins]

I do not think you really understand what a physical addiction is. For some, going more than a couple hours will start creating adverse health conditions. This is not like skipping your morning coffee, or favorite breakfast roll. I’m some cases, these health conditions can cause permanent damage or, rarely, be fatal. So while not all have such an addiction, some do, most however will start to have withdrawal symptoms that will increase within an hour or two. Saying that they have areas outside the park like it’s some sort of panacea is ignorant at best. The Magic Kingdom has its security area start at the transit center, so it could be over an hour just to get inside the park from security on certain days.

This is effectively a ban on people due to the nature of the action.

This could be solved by allowing them to use some sort of safer alternative to smoking than doesn’t have any secondhand issues, if only something like that existed, oh wait, that’s banned too. Sure, there are gums, patches, pills, etc, but the side effects are atrocious.

I’m not defending smoking but the sheer level of ignorance, intolerance, and vitriol leveled is outrageous. What do people tell their kids when Grandma cannot go to the magic kingdom because she’s a smoker or vapes and simply cannot go without as long as required.

 

[hiimdoug]

Disney, to the best of my knowledge, has not stated where the new designated smoking areas will be, but most likely they will be located in the same spots that all the pre-entrance smoking ares are already located (being that they are already outside of path of any park guests).

Using the MK as an example, the pre-entrance smoking area is equidistant from the hub of MK to the other current in-park designated smoking areas. So on average, 1/3 of all walks to the designated smoking area will be no longer than they already are, and the furthest a guest will have to walk is an additional 400m than they would have had to prior, so maybe, worst case scenario, a 5-10 minute walk (mind you many lines in the MK can last 60-120 minutes).

As to your point about the "sheer level of ignorance, intolerance, and vitriol leveled" (apparently by pro-banners against smokers?) being "outrageous"; the initial thrust of your original post was to questions the reason behind the ban. You went on to state that there is a "nefarious plot" to "remove" millions from the parks to address the supposed problem of overcrowding, specially targeting "lower-income" smokers. You also asked to not discuss our personal feelings on smoking but instead stick with the discussion on why Disney chose the ban. Because of this, in my response, I tried to stick to the topic of why, and try and explain why the "nefarious plot" theory doesn't make any sense.

Like I said, whether or not I am sympathetic to the plight of someone who has a nicotine addiction has no barring on the answer to why Disney chose this ban. At the end of the day, for Disney, it comes down to customer satisfaction, legal liability, and the bottom line, and the majority of customers simply do not want to be subject to second hand smoke (or the aerosol emission from vaping).

 

[maxiesmom]

I do not think you really understand what a physical addiction is. For some, going more than a couple hours will start creating adverse health conditions. This is not like skipping your morning coffee, or favorite breakfast roll. I’m some cases, these health conditions can cause permanent damage or, rarely, be fatal. So while not all have such an addiction, some do, most however will start to have withdrawal symptoms that will increase within an hour or two. Saying that they have areas outside the park like it’s some sort of panacea is ignorant at best. The Magic Kingdom has its security area start at the transit center, so it could be over an hour just to get inside the park from security on certain days.

This is effectively a ban on people due to the nature of the action.

This could be solved by allowing them to use some sort of safer alternative to smoking than doesn’t have any secondhand issues, if only something like that existed, oh wait, that’s banned too. Sure, there are gums, patches, pills, etc, but the side effects are atrocious.

I’m not defending smoking but the sheer level of ignorance, intolerance, and vitriol leveled is outrageous. What do people tell their kids when Grandma cannot go to the magic kingdom because she’s a smoker or vapes and simply cannot go without as long as required.

It is not a ban for the simple fact that smokers can enter the park, and exit to smoke when they so choose. It isn't as if before you could walk around smoking, you couldn't. Smokers still had to walk a ways to a specific area. Which is what they still have to do. Only difference is that area is outside of the park gates.

 

[Magical2017]

This is effectively a ban on people due to the nature of the action.

[/QUOTE]

I don't feel that it is a ban.I think it is a huge inconvenience and will make a lot of people unhappy. People who are paying a lot for a destination that, in the past, accommodated smokers by having DSAs inside the parks. I also think people who do continue to go to Disney will get used to it at some point. Parks like the San Diego Zoo do not allow smoking even in the parking area, yet attract millions of visitors. I do realize that you cannot compare the two in the same way, as WDW and DL are multi-day parks and many people save for a long time to go. Many also spend a lot of time planning FP and ADRs. However, I do think that there will come a time when it won't feel like a huge issue because it will become the norm. For those that disagree, they can speak with their wallets by visiting other destinations.

 

[Amanda999]

Smokers aren't banned. Smoking is.

Banning smoking isn't new or specific to Disney: In 2004 Massachusetts banned smoking in "schools, restaurants and bars, taxis, private offices, and other places of work." Many MA towns/cities have even stricter no smoking laws (no smoking anywhere the public is allowed, e.g.). I know it is a very, very difficult addiction to alter, but every smoker I know adjusted to the new law.

 

[Kaleidodad]

For some, going more than a couple hours will start creating adverse health conditions. This is not like skipping your morning coffee, or favorite breakfast roll. I’m some cases, these health conditions can cause permanent damage or, rarely, be fatal.

This is absolutely the worst of the many wrong points you are putting forth as part of your "different take".

"...I award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul."

 

[Ed Collins]

I understand completely, there is no method of having a discussion when the basic issue is simply ignored.

Ethically the defense is laughable.

D- You can’t do that here, go over there.
S- Why?
D - because I said so.
S - but some of us can’t do that
D - I’m being understanding by providing that spot.
E - Go D! We love you! Thank you for telling them that!

You can keep bringing up secondhand smoke but that was not a reason cited by Disney. They never said anything specific other than the loud booming voice of authority, you do that there, not here. Every thing else is being manufactured by people defending them.


Reduced to its simple form-

Group can no longer do something they are physically dependent on inside area A (where everyone wants to be) Must go to area B, (who ever thinks you can get outside the secure area at magic kingdom in 10 minutes, I really needed the laugh), which is not defined yet.

Reason given by Disney - None

Reasons given by people defending this move - I hate them, I hate what they do, medical, ignorance, or money. Oh and apparently questioning Disney invites some rather interesting things.

Sorry . That is what it is.

 

[Magical2017]

What do people tell their kids when Grandma cannot go to the magic kingdom because she’s a smoker or vapes and simply cannot go without as long as required.

I would use this as an opportunity to talk to my kids about addiction and how it can impact our lives.

 

[maxiesmom]

Disney has had people for years now going to Area B. Area B has simply moved to outside of the park. That hasn't changed.

To keep is stupid simple: Smokers are still welcomed in the parks. They are not allowed to smoke in the park. Smokers and smoking are not the same thing. Smokers are a people (who are still welcomed with open arms) and smoking is an action (which is still allowed outside of the park gates).

Also, doesn't change the fact that the intent of all your posts seem to be to sir the pot. I'm sure you know you are wrong and everyone else right. That is ok.

 

[hiimdoug]

You can keep bringing up secondhand smoke but that was not a reason cited by Disney. They never said anything specific other than the loud booming voice of authority, you do that there, not here. Every thing else is being manufactured by people defending them.

Your original post was asking why Disney has instituted the ban in the first place. Being that Disney hasn't given a full detailed explanation we are left to only think of reasons ourselves. Your reasons of a "nefarious plot" to ban "low-income smokers" seemed quite mislead, so I offered a few more logically sounds reasons, one of those being SHS, which is something I personally have complained to Disney about and know of others who have as well.

I understand completely, there is no method of having a discussion when the basic issue is simply ignored.

Ethically the defense is laughable.

D- You can’t do that here, go over there.
S- Why?
D - because I said so.
S - but some of us can’t do that
D - I’m being understanding by providing that spot.
E - Go D! We love you! Thank you for telling them that!

Logic dictates that they are doing this for customer satisfaction and liability reasons, and not your "nefarious plot" theory.

Group can no longer do something they are physically dependent on inside area A (where everyone wants to be) Must go to area B, (who ever thinks you can get outside the secure area at magic kingdom in 10 minutes, I really needed the laugh), which is not defined yet.

I said an additional 10 minute walk. It's approx. 500m from MK hub to the designated smoking area, and 2.5mph walking pace, that's a 7 1/2 minute walk. And last I checked (its been a few months since i've been in the parks) but Disney doesn't stop you on the way out.

Reasons given by people defending this move - I hate them, I hate what they do, medical, ignorance, or money. Oh and apparently questioning Disney invites some rather interesting things.

I've given multiple reasons why this move is justifiable and others have as well, and none of them have been anywhere close to what you're saying in this quote. Let me know if I'm missing something.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I don't personally think all the cities that have smoking ordinances regarding inside smoking or smoking period on premises, designated feet from the entrances, increased purchasing ages, etc do it for nefarious reasons.

I'm beginning to wonder if truly some people still live in smoke havens and never venture out to places that do have rules surrounding smoking.

 

[Ed Collins]

I was hoping to debate the possible reasons for this action. No one wants to criticize Disney.

I’ve been told I’m a liar, a pot stirrer, and some other things which are not appropriate for a Disney Park.

The only reasons I’m supposed to consider are secondhand smoke, it’s not a ban, money, and personal attacks.

Second smoke I already tore apart, would be acceptable if it did not include vaping. Secondhand smoke kills, no question, makes sense, but why was vaping included? There is simply no such thing as secondhand vape. Unless you don’t believe the CDC. I think that they are fairly credible. Also, if you ride virtually any Disney dark ride, you are exposed to vape, guess what a fog machine is, the same exact thing. So that can not be a reason. Doesn’t stop people from saying over and over.

It’s not a ban.
It’s a ban on smoking, Disney bans things and people, no selfie sticks, no drunks, no people who cannot or will not go more than an hour without smoking. Go ask a smoker what they think, will they leave the park every time they need a smoke? When the choice presented most will respond with a resounding no.This comes down to semantics, something that effectively removes something unwanted without actually specifying the target is what is going on, historically this is referred to as “effectively” banning whatever or whoever.
Additionally, claiming a 10 minute walk? I wouldn’t stand behind that. Sure, if you aren’t using a walker, wheelchair or other mobility device and there weren’t any crowds. However you neglect the trip back, which includes security screening. 30 minutes at best, from near the entrance, if you’re lucky.

This argument is further muddled by the slow random disappearance of smoking areas and some are less than trusting that the spots outside will remain nearby. Disney hasn’t even said where the initial ones will be, and I highly doubt these will stay put.

Money is interesting but marred by the insistence of including shs as part of the reasoning.

I only implied it may be a nefarious plot, no argument here however points that finger at Disney other than it’s basically using “I say it is, therefore it is so.”

I am particularly fearful of Disney’s rabid fan base, scary! Thankfully I never play for points. If I can get someone to actually think, I’ll be happy. Call me names, whatever, sticks and stones. I didn’t think there was so much hatred aimed at secondhand smoke, it’s not healthy, no wonder most smokers die alone, ostracized from their families. The American Cancer Society has a point on compassion or lack thereof.

 

[Ed Collins]

This is absolutely the worst of the many wrong points you are putting forth as part of your "different take".

"...I award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul."

I would accept any proof that I’m wrong.Nicotine addiction isn’t fatal, but it’s not the only chemical that is addictive in tobacco products like cigarettes. I also said rarely, but it’s proven that cold turkey cessation has caused death, often indirectly, or whatever cessation method has a side effect or interaction.

 

[Countrywife45]

I went to Disney smoking anywhere I wanted. I went to Disney smoking in a designated spot. I went to Disney after I broke a 30 year pack and half day smoking habit (FYI, Not Fatal) and I am going to Disney again. No one dies over a smoke.....you can go to Disney or not go to Disney, free country, free choice. But if you want to go to Disney you will find a way and if you want an excuse to not go again, you will find a way. Disney said outside. As have many other places/goverments. Outside it is... Disney attendance is not mandatory for any of us.