Why the Hatred Towards Meg Crofton and Jay Rasulo?

[YoHo]

The Generic You is still an insult.

Bicker has in this thread called a large group of DIS posters Dishonest. Liars if you will.

The very idea that someone can get away with calling people liars simply because they don't name specific names is offensive to me. Yet I'm sure Matt and DB who have the courage to make their claims To His E-face will be the ones to suffer for it.

Have the courage of your convictions. You think I'm intellectually Dishonest? You think Matt's intellectually Dishonest?

Then say it to our faces and if that gets you booted off the board, well, you know you were saying it in your head even as you were typing generically. So you probably weren't meeting the TOS in spirit anyway.

I'd rather be called a liar to my face. At least it's then an honest emotion.

 

[bicker]

Of course it's true to form.

So we've both accused each other of being "true to form", and now the whole thread is a meta-discussion of finger-pointing -- talking about other DIS members instead of talking about the topic, contrary to DIS standards.

Why don't you just present your perspective, instead of attacking me personally? I haven't attacked you personally, and I won't. Just stick to the topic and stop making personal attacks.

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

Phillip, raidermatt offered some good advice if you're really looking to understand the other POV and this is coming from someone (me) who defended Disney and Eisner vigorously until late last year.

Meg Crofton does not have the credentials to do the job she's been asked to do and Rasulo is a bufoon (based on most of his accomplishments). Disney had one great person groomed for advancement, Matt Ouimet, and he flew the coup when Iger was named big cheese - Was his departure coincidence? I think not, I think the writing was on the wall.

Sick of it or not it makes no sense to bash people who only want Disney standards to be what they were founded on "To exceed the guests expectations" not being just a little better than the rest.

 

[raidermatt]

So we've both accused each other of being "true to form", and now the whole thread is a meta-discussion of finger-pointing -- talking about other DIS members instead of talking about the topic, contrary to DIS standards.

A meta-discussion which you of course started with comments about crumudgeons, pot shots, dishonesty, attacks without merit, etc, etc, etc, and I agree, it is contrary to DIS standards.

Why don't you just present your perspective, instead of attacking me personally? I haven't attacked you personally, and I won't. Just stick to the topic and stop making personal attacks.

My comments to you are regarding your statements and positions. These are not personal attacks, which is why I have never received so much as a warning from a moderator. The difference, as YoHo said, is that I am not hiding behind the classic "generic you" e-defense. I did address your statements and positions, which is completely within the rules both by the letter of the law as well as the spirit. You name call and make blanket statements about groups of people and claim innocence because you didn't name a name. This is of course is within the letter but not the spirit of the rules.

For example, I could say that there are large numbers of posters who support Disney blindly because they lack the capacity to think for themselves.

Like your posts, I would not have violated the personal attack rule because I didn't name a name, but there sure would be some people irrititated because they would know who I was directing the attack at.


I have presented my perspective to the op. I did so because I gave him the benefit of the doubt that he is sincere in wanting to gain an understanding. If he, or anybody else who really wants to discuss the question of why some criticize Disney management, or what those criticisms are, want to discuss I and others continue to be ready to discuss.

I know, however, where you (bicker) stand, and you have already stated many times in this thread and others that those on these boards who are critical of Disney's management have no substantive basis for their opinions. There's only room for one side in that discussion.

 

[Another Voice]

It's rather funny actually. I guess there are people that feel spending twenty years typing in their basement makes them more "qualified" than those who spent 20 years actually working for Disney.

Those of us who have worked for Disney - those of us who made the company what it is today (for better and for worse) - actually feel rather sorry for the Internet cheerleaders crowd. Despite all their claims to "know the magic" and "know how to be happy", they've never known the thrill of pointing at a ride or a movie and saying "I helped make that". They'll never know the fear of waiting for an audience to laugh the in right spots, nor will they ever know the joy of hearing an entire theater full of people react to something they've created.

Disney is hard - it takes work and pain and suffering and hardship - all to get a smile from a little child. But the twinkle in the eye, the shy little laugh, the lesson that will last them a lifetime - I gladly suffered all that I had to for that bliss. People who say that we've "forgotten how to be happy" haven't the foggiest idea of what we've felt; it's a shame their own lives can not be filled with the knowledge they've spent time bringing joy to other people, rather than selfishly seeking it only for themselves.

People who are just on the sideline never understand that. All they know is second hand. They can sit and watch but they can not participate. They'll never, never know the pleasure of creating. They'll never understand the difficult decisions, the horrible choices sometimes involved. They'll never know how the fine line between creating something that is good, and pander after money. And by not knowing that difference, they'll never know the real magic behind Disney.

Call me a "curmudgeon", call me unqualified, dismiss my opinions and all my statements and keep hurling names. I don't really care. People that know nothing and only nod their head in agreement don't add anything to the creative process. It's the people who have learned, people who have gone through the painful process of trail and error that add value to the process. Anyone can wave a pom-pom; only few people can move an audience.

 

[DisneyKidds]

AV, if it's any consolation, 20 years ago certain people would have been defending YOU from their basement, regardless of whether that laugh came at the right time or not .

To those of you who question the need and validity of the criticism, take a step back and look at it in relation to your own beliefs.

Disney is supposed to be about happiness and good things......

Ok, fair enough. Walt Disney created Disneyland because he strived for happpiness and good things. Despite what Bicker believes, he strived to bring about happiness and good things for entire families by providing entertainement in a, dare I say, better way than anyone had before. Unique, creative, with heart, soul and incredible story. Built on Traditions and uncompromising principles. Not only was Disneyland built in such a way, but Walt took on the Florida Project to provide himself and his company an opportunity to improve upon the mistakes and shortcomings of what was so lovingly created in California. Oh, and while Walt was doing all of that, he singlehandedly revolutionized the animation industry. Yes, the Disney many people fell in love with was very much about happiness and good things, but that happiness, those good things were achieved in very unique ways.

Yes, today's Disney is still a wonderful place. Yes, some incredibly good things have been added to the happiness, even in recent years. However, those who criticize have valid reason to question whether the methods employed by today's Disney are likely to create more happiness and good things that Bicker can talk about in the internets in his 70th year on line. You see, not only is Walt Disney Animation dead, but so are the Traditions of old, much of the uniqueness, and the uncompromising principles that made Disney a great Company once upon a time.

Yes, Disney does a lot of things to make money nowadays. The Company will survive and do that for many a year to come. However, very little of the current money making efforts are based on creating anything, much less creating something unique and awe inspiring as was the way of old.

So, when you wonder why the criticism, ask yourself if the Walt Disney Company would be what it is today if the types of decisions being made today were always the norm. Ask yourself if the Walt Disney Company of today is as good as it could have been had those Traditions and uncompromising principles been adhered to. Ask yourself if the Walt Disney Company of tomorrow will be as big and bright as it might otherwise have been if it were a place that Walt could have looked down and smiled upon.

We may not agree with the visions we individually conjure up when asking ourselves those things, but at least look at the crumudgeons POV from that perspective and challenge yourself to be a little more critical. That isn't a bad thing you know.

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

That's it???

 

[Alicnwondrln]

bicker rocks
i love your thoughtful and thoughout reponses
they are great !!

 

[disneyphilip]

DisneyKidds, the uniqueness, old traditions and uncompromising principles are actually still with the company, even if you don't feel it. They'll NEVER die.

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

And DisneyKidds, the uniqueness, old traditions and uncompromising principles are actually still with the company, even if you don't feel it. They'll NEVER die.

Please tell us how these things are still with us ... Or is it just "in spirit" you're talking about?

 

[raidermatt]

Very well put.

Uh, Phillip, I don't think you completely caught the drift of AV's post.

And DisneyKidds, the uniqueness, old traditions and uncompromising principles are actually still with the company, even if you don't feel it. They'll NEVER die.

Ok, forget for a second what you or I think about Disney's current or past management.

How can we say ANY company will NEVER change its principles or guiding philosophies? How do you know that the people running a company, or the future people who will run that company, will NEVER change those things?

 

[DisneyKidds]

DisneyKidds, the uniqueness, old traditions and uncompromising principles are actually still with the company, even if you don't feel it. They'll NEVER die.

Why thank you. That well thought out, reasonably argued, well supported post just makes me feel so much better.

Seriously, you are going to have to do better than that, unless what you mean is the unique things created 25 to 50 years ago are still with the company, that the things created in the past under the old Traditions and uncompromising principles are still with the company....because then I agree. It just might be impossible to beat that out of the company. However, I don't think we can be satisfied to run on the fumes of the greatness that was created back when the company had a soul.

If you think that Walt's Traditions of Safety, Courtesy, Show and Efficiency are still guiding principles for management and more than just an old class that new hires have to take you are going to have to convince me. If you think that Story and Show are still so important to the company that they will invest extra money on something that won't generate a dime of added revenue just to improve the Show and make the customer experience better you are going to have to convince me. If you think the demise of Imagineering and Disney Feature Animation is somehow in the best long term interest of the company you are going to have to convince me. If you think selling off the land Walt was so careful to acquire is a good thing you are going to have to convince me. If you think anyone in current management is thinking about how the decisions they are making today will impact the company when the 100th anniversary rolls around you are going to have to convince me. I'm sorry, but your warm and cuddly, one line, I love puppy dogs and rainbows responses just aren't cutting it for me.

I love WDW. Still a great place to vacation. Still adding some good things hear and there.......and I can happily acknowledge that. However, that does not mean all is well with the Walt Disney Company, not in light of it's history and what many feel it should be. So let's talk intelligently about the good AND the bad and see where it leads us...........

 

[disneyphilip]

Paging Bicker, paging Bicker, paging Bicketr...

 

[DisneyKidds]

Forget Bicker. Let's talk about you. Bicker's 'management is right, they are the professionals and this isn't nineteen whatever whatever' responses aren't going to move this conversation anywhere for me. A few rounds of butting our heads against a wall, followed by some generic insults and a polite flip/wave off isn't what I'm looking for. You may not have 20 years experience on the internet, but you have been on this site for at least five years. You must have some Disney history. Maybe you've even learned a little about Walt, and how Disney was born and was grown? Heck, even if you haven't it's never too late to learn. So lets talk about you....what you know....what you see.....what you think. Let's do that and keep an open mind and maybe there's a thread worth pursuing here. IMHO, calling on Bicker to be your champion isn't going to help you see more of what lies beneath the surface when it comes to what the Walt Disney Company was, is and might become.

 

[disneyphilip]

No! Instead, let's forget about me and talk about Bicker, hoping that he posts in this thread again soon.

 

[bicker]

These are not personal attacks

I disagree, solely on the merits. Those comments didn't address the topic, but addressed words. I see no sense in continuing to discuss this issue as long as you continue personal attacks on me.

You name call and make blanket statements about groups of people and claim innocence because you didn't name a name. This is of course is within the letter but not the spirit of the rules.

I address the issue, discuss the topic, and post my opinions. I don't name-call. I don't need to claim innocence because I've done nothing wrong.

For example, I could say that there are large numbers of posters who support Disney blindly because they lack the capacity to think for themselves.

You could, and then let the readers make up their own mind. Perhaps that's the point? Do you attack me personally because you're afraid that what I write rings so true that your counter-arguments will fall on deaf ears?

I know, however, where you (bicker) stand, and you have already stated many times in this thread and others that those on these boards who are critical of Disney's management have no substantive basis for their opinions. There's only room for one side in that discussion.

Incorrect. I make a very compelling argument, true, but you should feel empowered to defend your position instead of complaining about being unable to effectively do so.

 

[DancingBear]

Okay, then, let's get off the "He called me a name! NO, he called ME a name!" game. I think this is a great start to a discussion:

If you think that Walt's Traditions of Safety, Courtesy, Show and Efficiency are still guiding principles for management and more than just an old class that new hires have to take you are going to have to convince me. If you think that Story and Show are still so important to the company that they will invest extra money on something that won't generate a dime of added revenue just to improve the Show and make the customer experience better you are going to have to convince me. If you think the demise of Imagineering and Disney Feature Animation is somehow in the best long term interest of the company you are going to have to convince me.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Gee, does anyone else find this even remotely interesting?

Here we have a thread that, despite a couple of ugly tendrils leading off into nothingness, has some real potential to do more than just scratch the surface of the cheerleading/crumudgeoning that sometimes takes place regarding discussion of Disney operations, management and policy.

Here we have, in the face of some fair and reasonable questions that are on point in exploring the need to be, and validity of being, critical of Disney management, Bicker’s fan club paging him, clamoring for him to return, to ride in on his white horse and address those questions, defend their positions and assure them that their faith and trust in Disney management is neither blind nor misplaced.

So when their champion returns does he address the valid questions at hand? Does he deliver cogent arguments that acknowledge the substance of the questions while dispelling the supposed myth that things are amiss, comforting his fellow fans with compelling arguments that show that all is, indeed, right with the World?

No. Quite the contrary, he avoids the high road and the questions at hand and chooses to follow one of those ugly tendrils to nowhere and simply……………..Bicker.

 

[raidermatt]

bicker, this isn't Oz. Saying the same untruths over and over while you click your heels together three times won't make them so.


Phillip, you've received your answer from bicker. If you, or anybody else, wishes to address any of the comments or questions made in respose to your post, clearly people are waiting to discuss the topic in a sane and rational manner.

 

[Another Voice]

Meg Crofton is receiving so much criticism because she appears to be unqualified for the job in the opinion of so many people. To all the world this looks like a power play by Jay Rasulo – appoint weak field managers and consolidate power all unto himself.

Walt Disney World is a show. The “magic” of Disney is they took everyday businesses – amusement parks, retail shopping, hotels – a brought a theatrical mindset to its operations. Just as a good theater production can transform a couple actors and a few painted flats into a living, breathing world filled with characters you’ll remember for a lifetime, Disney was able to create places that same emotion impact for people to actually walk through and live in for a day or a week.

The experience of walking through the Magic Kingdom is the same experience as you get when you loose yourself into a movie. You forgot about the projector and the screen and the kid throwing popcorn next to you – the movie itself becomes reality.

The illusion is extremely difficult to pull of. Think about how many bad movies get made for every good one; think about the number of parks that try to be like the Disneyland yet don’t achieve the same result.

To successful run a Disney park takes skill and it takes heaps of experience at running shows. The management has to be master storytellers first, brilliant showmen/women second, third, fourth, and fifth, It also takes a tremendous amount of hard work – the kind of work that only people with a true passion can put into a place.

Disney is a personal company; it has to be run by someone who loves it as much as the fans & the guests do.

That is Meg’s problem. She’s never run the show before. She ran Human Resources – a department so filled with problems that it can be subject of another thread. To be blunt, Meg has never had to worry about maintain the guests suspension of disbelief, she’s only had to worry about getting the right number “lava los manos” signs in the restrooms.

Yes, it’s possible she could be up to the task – but being the head of Walt Disney World is not really an “on the job training” type of position. She is responsible for the safety of 20 million people a year, for the majority of cash flow within Disney, and for the job security of over 50,000 people. That’s not a small thing. No one would ever take the head of HR from General Electric and expect them to manufacture jet engines. Yet Jay thinks he can.

People who have worked in Disney understand this. People who worked in entertainment understand. People in their basements, not so much. That’s why the quality of one’s discussion is more important than 20 years of quantity. People that don’t understand the business, people that don’t have experience with the business may choose to be the anonymous cheerleaders, but their opinion has no weight.