Frommer article full of WDW misinformation

[Another Voice]

It makes her bias come through loud and clear. It's not honest, and I don't like dishonesty in reporting or writing.

I don’t care about whether or not people stay at the Pop Century motels.

What am I interested is the hatred and intolerance that is a growing trend in Disney “fandom” that will, in a short time, really hurt the company. A travel advice writer gives some comments people don’t like, doesn’t price hot dog correctly – and we get pages of people calling her biased, incompetent, dishonest, and a long list of names in a way that is completely out of proportion to the capital crimes she has been convicted of committing.

It’s just extremely interesting the Mouse Correctness has finally seeped from Internet discussion boards out into the real world.

 

[grimley1968]

What am I interested is the hatred and intolerance that is a growing trend in Disney “fandom” that will, in a short time, really hurt the company. A travel advice writer gives some comments people don’t like, doesn’t price hot dog correctly – and we get pages of people calling her biased, incompetent, dishonest, and a long list of names in a way that is completely out of proportion to the capital crimes she has been convicted of committing.

It’s just extremely interesting the Mouse Correctness has finally seeped from Internet discussion boards out into the real world.

Okay, I have been asked to list the incorrections in the Frommer's article, which I did above, yet you still insist on saying this is all about the price of a hot dog.

Where is this "hatred" and "intolerance"? Please list this for us, because those are strong words. I don't see it at all. Wanting a journalist to show some integrity in her writing BEFORE she publishes an erroneous article has nothing to do with how I feel about that person or anyone else, so please don't accuse me of feeling "hatred" or "intolerance" toward anyone, because you do not know me (I hate no one), and that is not the subject at hand.

 

[marivaid]

I don’t care about whether or not people stay at the Pop Century motels.

What am I interested is the hatred and intolerance that is a growing trend in Disney “fandom” that will, in a short time, really hurt the company. A travel advice writer gives some comments people don’t like, doesn’t price hot dog correctly – and we get pages of people calling her biased, incompetent, dishonest, and a long list of names in a way that is completely out of proportion to the capital crimes she has been convicted of committing.

It’s just extremely interesting the Mouse Correctness has finally seeped from Internet discussion boards out into the real world.

She IS incompetent. Biased and dishonest, maybe not - maybe she's just not very bright. It doesn't exactly take a rocket scientist to type disneyworld.com and check prices.
But incompetent ? No question about that.

Let the hot dog go already. That's hardly the only mistake she's made. The first - and biggest,IMO - was telling her "reader" that she'd have to book two rooms.
Telling her it would be more affordable to pay a day at Seaworld and a day at Universal instead of adding 2 days at Disney was another big one.

What takes the cake is that not only did she make mistakes in her original article, after getting probably dozens of emails telling her the same thing she STILL didn't get the information right.

You assume that we're mad because we're Disney fanatics that can't see anything wrong with what Disney does. Coudn't be further from the truth.

The reality is that these days journalists don't research their materials, especially for articles that are only going to appear online.

I've blasted a so-called music expert online just a few weeks ago who wrote that the Bon Jovi's song "Bed of Roses" was the song "Always" rewritten as a way to cash in. Problem is, "B" was released two years BEFORE "A". You can bet that I let that guy know in no uncertain terms that he had no clue what he was talking about.

I don't know about you, but when I had projects to do in middle school I was supposed to do some research first, then start writing. I don't think that asking an author to do the same qualifies as being "hateful and intolerant".
It's called asking someone to do their job well and know their subject, whichever it is.

How sad that we live in the world of National Enquirers and should now expect journalists to be unprofessional.

 

[Another Voice]

You just called her writing "biased" and "dishonest" - implying that she intentionally lied in her piece just to bash Disney. That sure reads like hate from here.

Again - these are examples from just two pages:

I'd be suspicious if I thought the Roadway Inn could afford to pay kickbacks...” - she's willing to tak bribes to write bad things about Disney? How well does the writer know the author?

Just totally incapable of having fun. - a direct, personal attack

Pauline Frommer is clearly clueless. - another direct, personal insult.

She was so snobby. - what is this place, a high school?

Ayone with issues about vacationing at WDW can always go somewhere else on vacation and quit lurking on the Disney forums. - agree with us or shut-up.

The fact that she is still clueless is what bothers me the most... - insult'

Well, that's a matter of opinion, but my opinion is that this a whacked opinion. - now it's agree with us or we'll call you names too!

I could see that this woman was horribly biased against Disney. - direct personal attack.

Yes, we on the Dis, know better. - agree with us because we're better than you are.


The sad thing (or almost hopeful) is that had these postings been made against a member of this board, the moderators would have probably stepped in. But because the author is "outside" and "anti-Disney", these comments flow like Dole Whip in summer. It seems that far from being the kind hearted, magic loving fluffy wonder people that everyone assumes they are, perhaps they ought to look at themselves first.

 

[raidermatt]

Yes, she said a hot dog itself costs $7. She corrected it later. But it was kind of like a genie out of a bottle by that time. The difference between a hot dog alone, and a combo meal is significant, if you are researching overall pricing.

That wasn't my question, but even so I think that's a gross overeaction. Disney's posted price for a Hot Dog is well over $5. We aren't talking about a huge difference. Anyway, her current ariticle UNDER prices a hot dog meal, yet I haven't read a single complaint.

But my question was did it say DISNEY hot dog before? Becaue it now says THEME PARK hot dog (meal).

But then she made a comment about other "motels" that ring the perimeter of the lake around MK.

She mentions motels that are clustered around the gates of Disney World, not the Seven Seas Lagoon. Those aren't Disney establishments. Here's what I believe is the paragraph in question:

If that's too rustic for you, you could try one of Disney's All Star Resorts, but truthfully, only their corporate overlord would give them "stars." They're cinderblock motels, packed with loud school groups for much of the year, that are located farther from the Disney attractions than most of the (often nicer) motels that are clustered around the gates of Disney World. And, at between $89 and $129 a night, they cost about twice as much as those motels.

Not only does she say "gates of Disney World", which is not the same as the lake by the MK, she also says the All-Stars cost twice as much as these motels. So clearly she is not talking about other Disney accomodations.

 

[grimley1968]

Calling someone's writing biased and dishonest, which has been demonstrably shown to be the case repeatedly, is not hate. Any inference that she intentionally lied is yours, not mine. Please don't refer to my words as "hate." I am commenting on her article.

Also, none of the comments others made that you quote are "hatred" as well. Some were ill-advised and maybe harsh, but so was much of Ms. Frommer's article. But I don't consider Ms. Frommer's article, nor anything said in this thread, as "hatred." You can infer all you want from those comments, but that does not make them examples of "hatred", no matter how vitriolic you feel about it.

I live in the south, and I've seen lots of actual real-life examples of real hatred, and I've been to Europe and visited Mauthausen, which contains all too real visual and pictorial examples of the worst hatred of all, so I think throwing around terms like "hatred" and "intolerance" in a thread critical of a badly written and biased article about Disney is a bit over the top.

 

[grimley1968]

Not only does she say "gates of Disney World", which is not the same as the lake by the MK, she also says the All-Stars cost twice as much as these motels. So clearly she is not talking about other Disney accomodations.

She said MK in the original published piece, and something about ringing the lake around it. She edited it, but she should have edited it before it was ever published. This is what I've been trying to say from page 1 of this thread.

And since the article was strictly about Disney, wouldn't it have to be a Disney hot dog she refers to?

Oh, editing to add, there are no resorts, motels, or anything "clustered" around the gates of Disneyworld. Anything offsite is miles away, not "clustered" around the gates, which leads me to think she's still referring to Disneyland, where there are, yes, many, many hotels, motels, and everything in between surrounding that area. Even though the article was edited, this still shows a gross misunderstanding of the layout of WDW, which can really skew a Disney-ignorant tourist's understanding of the way it works staying onsite versus offsite.

 

[minnie61650]

....Yes, we on the Dis, know better. - agree with us because we're better than you are......


.... perhaps they ought to look at themselves first.

Yes, perhaps all of us should be tolerate of others and if someone has views that are different than ours we may disagree but we should be respctful of the other persons views.

Just my 2 cents

 

[YoHo]

The jist of this thread is a bunch of people seeing some minor inaccuracies in and article and then reading in a bunch of stuff that isn't there. Then getting offended when others don't read the same stuff in.

It sure would be nice to have a copy of the article as originally printed. Since it's apparently completely different.

 

[nick262]

The jist of this thread is a bunch of people seeing some minor inaccuracies in and article and then reading in a bunch of stuff that isn't there. Then getting offended when others don't read the same stuff in.

It sure would be nice to have a copy of the article as originally printed. Since it's apparently completely different.[/QUOTE]

(Bolding Mine) I dont care if you think that the in accuracies are minor or if you agree with my assessment or not. But calling a group of people "haters" and "intolerant" is a personal attack on my and the others integrity. As stated before by many of us, WE WOULD HAVE DONE THIS EVEN IF THE ARTICLE WAS NOT ABOUT DISNEY! (not shouting, applying ephasis to make more visual since nobody has seemed to read it before.) You dont know me, you have no idea what my feelings are about Disney.

For you information Voice, I feel alot like you regarding the Disney brand. It broke my heart when they closed The Gallery at Disneyland because I believe that Walt would have really loved it, especial as opposed to what it is going to become. I do not go off and defend Disney offhand regardless of the facts. I have been known to write letters and emails when I have seen something not up to Walts standards. And yes, I have done a lot of research on Walt and pretty much know what his vision was. The reason that I sent the emails that I did, was because I am tired of reporters writing what ever the heck they deem the truth with out research. Since you love the old style Disney so much here, ask yourself this question... Had the article printed been about Walt and the old Disney, and it contained glaring mistakes, intentional or not, and called him a hack, would you not have felt the need to bring the mistakes to the writers attention?

Again, this is not about Disney or drinking their "koolaid" it is about the integerety of the facts in the article, regardless of the subject. You did not even see the original article, but yet you are so willing to jump on us based on the edited version because you think we are part of the "fandom". The gist of the question asked was "I want to take my family to WDW on 1600.00, how do I do that." Ms. Frommer proceeded to give false or misleading information and based on that false or misleading information basically told that person she should go else where becase spending all her time at WDW would be a waste. The woman did not ask about anything other then WDW.

I am not against going to the other parks. I have gone to Sea World in Orlando myself and would HIGHLY recommend it (the one point Ms. Frommer and I agreed on). I have not gone to UO, not because I "hate" it, but because my daughter is four and is not old enough or tall enough for the bigger rides that I know she would want to go on. When she is older and taller we will most DEFINITELY be going, and I can not wait. Until then, it is WDW and SW for us. I am staying offsite for the majority of my upcoming trip because the deal was so good. We will not be spending 24/7 at WDW but futher exploring other attractions as well. We will have car and most likely eat off property.

I am sorry that you feel compelled to call us "haters" and "intolerant", even though you did not read the original piece and you really do not know any of us. I am now going back to the other boards. You can have your board back. I will not stray again, which is sad, because as I said before, we most likely share very simular views.

 

[raidermatt]

She said MK in the original published piece, and something about ringing the lake around it. She edited it, but she should have edited it before it was ever published. This is what I've been trying to say from page 1 of this thread.

Yes, she should have. But I've seen far worse pieces, particularly pro-Disney pieces referenced on these boards, go largely unchallenged. And she did fix it.

And since the article was strictly about Disney, wouldn't it have to be a Disney hot dog she refers to?

She says theme park, and in the preceding sentence she said Orlando area prices were high. So, no, saying "theme park" does not mean it's a Disney hot dog to which she is referring. And I just looked back at the posts ridiculing her at the beginning of the thread and the quote taken from her article said "theme park hot dogs", so no, that was never even specific to Disney.

Apparently there was a little bias among the readers...

That aside, is she supposed to only talk about Disney's prices, or is she supposed to fairly compare them to others? It seems some want her to do both?

Oh, editing to add, there are no resorts, motels, or anything "clustered" around the gates of Disneyworld. Anything offsite is miles away, not "clustered" around the gates, which leads me to think she's still referring to Disneyland, where there are, yes, many, many hotels, motels, and everything in between surrounding that area. Even though the article was edited, this still shows a gross misunderstanding of the layout of WDW, which can really skew a Disney-ignorant tourist's understanding of the way it works staying onsite versus offsite.

Well, if ignorance is her problem, and not willfull misrepresentation or out and out bias, then she REALLY isn't alone when it comes to people posting ariticles on the internet.

Ms. Frommer proceeded to give false or misleading information and based on that false or misleading information basically told that person she should go else where becase spending all her time at WDW would be a waste.

But that's not what she told her. Again, some of the readers seem to be showing more bias than the writer was accused of.

She recommeded that she skip Epcot because of the age of her kids. I've seen that very same advice given by people on the Dis. It's an opinion. She was asked for hers and gave it. None of the inaccuracies in the original version have anything to do with that.


Look, I'm not saying it was a good, or even all that helpful of an article. It had some good pieces of advice, but the problems far outweighed the positives. Certainly my opinion of Frommer's has dropped a few notches.

But she did correct the article, which is more than some reporters are willing to do. She could have left it as it was, and only the die-hards would ever know any better. If this really is all about journalistic intergrity, there's thousands of bigger examples out there.

 

[Another Voice]

1. What interested me about this thread was the level of emotion people felt about what they considered an inaccurate article. This include a good amount of name calling and personal attacks on the author. I have listed many examples from just two pages and I have yet to see a single person retract anything the said.

2. I am also interested at how people here have taken it upon themselves to act as the fact checkers - and the bring their opinions and demands for corrections to both the author and her publisher. Disney now appears to have its own self-appointed Truth Squad. I find that level of devotion to a brand interesting.

3. Some of this interest stems from often being on the receiving end of similar attitudes on this board. Yes - it is hatred and often of a very bitter, personal nature. This includes such pithy comments as "My daughters have more 'Disney Sense' in their pinkies than you have in your whole body" and claims that I have a "hidden agenda" (as if I'm the Karl Rove of The Vast Disney Hate Society). I don't mind the moderators not stepping in, I'm a big boy and can take care of myself. But I've just come to the sad conclusion that respect for others point of view tends to work only in one direction.

4. That this attitude is now spreading outside of the Internet to anyone who writes about Disney should be seen as a distrubing development. If the article included factual errors - Disney is a large and well funded corporation that can look after its own publicity. If they had a problem, they have more than enough resources to fix it. It helps no one if travel writers feel they will suffer the wrath of "fact checkers" eager to rip into them for errors.

5. Lastly, threats to run away rather than defend one's opinion are...

 

[mking624]

1. What interested me about this thread was the level of emotion people felt about what they considered an inaccurate article. This include a good amount of name calling and personal attacks on the author. I have listed many examples from just two pages and I have yet to see a single person retract anything the said.

I will admit that I said that the number of inaccuracies appeared to make her look unprofessional and ignorant on the matter...and ultimately untrustworthy in the eyes of those who would question how "knowledgable" she would be on other travel destinations. No, I will not retract that.

2. I am also interested at how people here have taken it upon themselves to act as the fact checkers - and the bring their opinions and demands for corrections to both the author and her publisher. Disney now appears to have its own self-appointed Truth Squad. I find that level of devotion to a brand interesting.

Ah, so it's not ok to criticize Ms. Frommer for her inaccuracies, but it *is* ok to criticize those who take it upon themselves to find out the facts. That's what I find interesting.

3. Some of this interest stems from often being on the receiving end of similar attitudes on this board. Yes - it is hatred and often of a very bitter, personal nature. This includes such pithy comments as "My daughters have more 'Disney Sense' in their pinkies than you have in your whole body" and claims that I have a "hidden agenda" (as if I'm the Karl Rove of The Vast Disney Hate Society). I don't mind the moderators not stepping in, I'm a big boy and can take care of myself. But I've just come to the sad conclusion that respect for others point of view tends to work only in one direction.

The lack of respect has gone both ways here. You never did seem to acknowledge that when I first pointed that out to you and gave you specific examples just as you gave us examples. It's clear to me that you have not taken the time to get to know any of us, otherwise you might not be so quick to judge everyone here as being "hateful", etc, based on only one thread...while seemingly ignoring the posts that have torn us down.

4. That this attitude is now spreading outside of the Internet to anyone who writes about Disney should be seen as a distrubing development. If the article included factual errors - Disney is a large and well funded corporation that can look after its own publicity. If they had a problem, they have more than enough resources to fix it. It helps no one if travel writers feel they will suffer the wrath of "fact checkers" eager to rip into them for errors.

"Attitudes", "ripping into them", "Truth Squad" "wrath of fact checkers", etc etc...this is not hateful or full of bitterness? We get that Disney is a large enough corporation. That doesn't make people wrong for holding people accountable just because you don't agree with it. I don't get why you take such an issue with this. What is the big deal with people saying "hey, this info is wrong, this is the correct info." If you really believed that Disney has enough resources to fix things, then perhaps it wouldn't be out of place for us to say how you shouldn't be taking issue with things Disney does wrong. Or is it only ok to be a "fact checker" or whatever if we're pointing out the faults/flaws of Disney?

5. Lastly, threats to run away rather than defend one's opinion are...

Well I don't know who is threatening to "run away" but people are probably growing tired of saying the same thing over and over again only to be either ignored or put down because they dared wanted to see something put out correctly. That's just my guess.

 

[hoffman1]

Another Voice, I am most likely the one that you were quoting about saying that she was snobby. I met her. I talked to her for around 10 minutes. I maybe could have found a more polite way to put it but that was my impression of her. She would probably say I am immature and unrefined. That does not bother me and I am sure that it is not bothering her that some people did not like her article. So why is it bothering you so much? Let people vent if they want.

 

[minnie61650]

For the record I did not take the time to read the article until tonight so I do not know what was said in the original article.

Tonight September 28,2007:

From this thread:

http://travel.msn.com/Guides/article.aspx?cp-documentid=423141&page=3


Corrections - September 24, 2007: As several readers pointed out, children under age 3 do not count toward the four-person limit stipulated at certain Walt Disney World Resorts. For Walt Disney World tickets, adult fees apply to children ages 10 and above, not ages 11 and up. Also, while a children’s meal including a hot dog can cost up to $7, an individual hot dog costs less at Disney. Finally, the photo originally used in this article pictured the Matterhorn, a ride at Disneyland in Anaheim.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Those corrections have been acknowledged by MSN

 

[rantnnravin]

Although I've been following this thread with interest, I only just had the chance to read the article.
It must have been edited quite a bit, because I can't find any inaccuracies in the text as published.
In fact, it is a very well-written, balanced piece.

 

[lewdyan1]

Although I've been following this thread with interest, I only just had the chance to read the article.
It must have been edited quite a bit, because I can't find any inaccuracies in the text as published.
In fact, it is a very well-written, balanced piece.

Here's your answer!

For the record I did not take the time to read the article until tonight so I do not know what was said in the original article.

Tonight September 28,2007:

From this thread:

http://travel.msn.com/Guides/article.aspx?cp-documentid=423141&page=3


Corrections - September 24, 2007: As several readers pointed out, children under age 3 do not count toward the four-person limit stipulated at certain Walt Disney World Resorts. For Walt Disney World tickets, adult fees apply to children ages 10 and above, not ages 11 and up. Also, while a children’s meal including a hot dog can cost up to $7, an individual hot dog costs less at Disney. Finally, the photo originally used in this article pictured the Matterhorn, a ride at Disneyland in Anaheim.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Those corrections have been acknowledged by MSN

 

[agnes!]

At this point, 2528 people have rated the article.

agnes!

 

[KKB]

2. I am also interested at how people here have taken it upon themselves to act as the fact checkers - and the bring their opinions and demands for corrections to both the author and her publisher. Disney now appears to have its own self-appointed Truth Squad. I find that level of devotion to a brand interesting.

We MUST be the fact checkers if the author will not be. That is part of an author's job!!! And it is our job as conscious consumers to be alert to inaccuracies.

Scary thought....how much of all the other media out there has such inaccuracies??!! Too bad MORE people are not holding journalists (or government officials...) more accountable.

(on a side bar...at least through No Child Left Behind the government officials are holding teachers accountable...unfortunately they forgot to hold all parents accountable....much less themselves! )

 

[YoHo]

Perhaps if this thread were filled with nothing but unbiased corrections, you might have a point, but it's not, it's filled with as much opinion and bias as the original piece except that she gets paid for her opinion while we do not.

As AV says, Disney is a big company and is fully capable of correcting the author if it feels it's needed. It's in their interest to do so. Yet Disney has said nothing. I wonder why?

Not that you shouldn't correct people when they are wrong, but this thread is 18 page of people acting like she spit in their faces. That's insane.