22 ms·

Therefore, it should be noted that they directly, or via tacit gatekeeping, have a huge amount of influence on our public dialog and cultural messaging.

tptacek 14y ago
Marvel, Pixar, LucasArts, ABC, ESPN, A+E, Disney Channel, and associated merchandising. I'm not sure how much "control" over our "public dialog" this really implies. I'm the parent of two very normal middle aged children and, while they're certainly exposed to some of this IP, I'd contest that it has much "influence" over them. Google has much more control over our public dialog than Disney does.
- Firehed 14y ago
  Yet it would seem that Disney has a lot more to lose if IP laws are not kept in their favor, as evidenced by the Life+70 copyright extension they were able to successfully lobby into existence. Google and Disney clearly have two very different set of influences, but to imply that Disney has little control is simply wrong. Ultimately the buck stops with our various representatives, but Disney has some serious skin in the game of keeping the status quo intact. Suffice to say, their "Disney Vault" promotional tactic couldn't exist in a world where (what most people consider) sane copyright laws existed, and I've yet to see an argument that reasonably suggests that kind of behavior is good for our culture.
  - tptacek 14y ago
    I think this is orthogonal to the argument that I responded to upthread. The idea I responded to is that by rolling up so much of our popular culture, Disney has reached a point where it bears some kind of responsibility for vouchsafing our culture. Strong disagree: just like buying OMGPOP didn't reward Zynga with a mortal lock on the market for iPhone games, buying up the most popular media properties won't reward Disney with control of our culture. Disney in reality has much less control over our culture than many other companies, including many other media companies. The fact of their purchasing Lucasfilm doesn't change that. It's alarmist to suggest that owning Star Wars is going to give Disney some kind of undue influence. If anything, it's likely to improve that terribly corrupted and besmirched franchise.
    - bravoyankee 14y ago
      It's an unwinnable argument, but I just wanted to vehemently disagree with you anyway (and I usually do disagree with you). Good day to you sir.
    - bitcartel 14y ago
      Would you be comfortable if Murdoch managed to get his hands on this cultural keiretsu?
      - tptacek 14y ago
        I would not care, because Fox News is already much more influential than Disney is, and would not become that much more so simply by dint of owning some cartoon characters.
        nitrogen 14y ago
        Children are much more accepting of the philosophies implied by what they watch.
        tptacek 14y ago
        All I can tell you is that as a parent, I'm not seeing a lot of cultural signifiers I can trace back to Disney properties. Internet memes have a much greater impact on my middle schooler kids.
        nitrogen 14y ago
        This is just my gut reaction, so treat it with the skepticism it deserves, but I don't think Disney's influence is necessarily visible in behavior. I think it's more likely to be a subtle adjustment to the unconscious Bayesian priors invoked in decision making.
        inDigiNeous 14y ago
        Disney movies & cartoons promote certain characteristics of our culture that are already in effect, so how would you see it anyway? If you weren't really looking deeply at the issue, which I assume (excuse me for assuming) you aren't doing. This is very deep subject which requires lots of analytical thinking and human behaviour understanding. Disney has the power and money to hire whole teams of psychologist to analyze how to very subliminally affect their movies in such a way that the merchandise etc will sell more, bringing more and more cash in their pockets. Take for example Donald Duck (in the cartoons). He is always depicted as a unlucky main protagonist who is being ruled by the rich Scrooge. No matter what he does or how much he works, he never becomes in control of his own life, usually being controlled by the Rich Banker Uncle Scrooge. This tells our children that no matter what you do, you will always be controlled by those who have more money and can tell you to do whatever they please. Not in so direct way, but in a more subtle way it creates a world view that keeps this model in it's current place. But this is not the main point, the main point is that for Disney and these other big companies, money goes beyond anything. This affects deeply their moral values that are put into their products and what motivation is being the driving force behind producing their movies. It's not the great stories, or changing the world, but about money. This is not a good thing, from many viewpoints. They are not focusing on sustainability, but on maximizing their incomes. This is reflected to all those little children who watch their movies or cartoons. Those who own Disney are those with great money in their pockets. They will want to keep us passive consumers who will be hooked into their stories (which many are just copies from folk tales, like the Lion King which a pretty much direct copy from the story of Kimba the White Lion) and sell us Toys & Fast Food. Have you seen the movies these days ? It's all about selling more copies of DVD:s of the latest blockbuster movie to the parents of the children. First creating a need in these children to look up to these movies and characters, then telling them that there are toys, sugar & caffeine filled drinks and fast food available related to these characters, hooking them (literally with caffeine, sugar, fat) to these products and the feelings related to those. Think about it. Really. Do you want Disney to be raising your children ?
- colonel_panic 14y ago
  Google doesn't teach your kids the narrative structure against which they measure their own lives.
  - tptacek 14y ago
    (a) Neither does Disney, (b) Google controls the Internet, which is scarier.
    - code_duck 14y ago
      "Google controls the Internet"? I use a lot of non-Google owned web sites and services. Can you support this assertion?
      - tptacek 14y ago
        Most users of the Internet are dependent on Google to find anything on the Internet.
        eric_h 14y ago
        Nevertheless, you could flip the switch and turn Google off, and people would be able to find things on the internet just fine.
        tptacek 14y ago
        Strong disagree.
        chc 14y ago
        "People" as in "some number of people somewhere"? Sure. But people in general? I strongly doubt it. Hang out with some "non-technical people" (they will often helpfully describe themselves this way for you) while they use the computer sometime. If they didn't have Google, they might be able to get to Facebook, but that would be pretty much the boundary of the Internet for them.
- aik 14y ago
  Do they watch any content from any of those groups/companies?
- evolve2k 14y ago
  I was personally deeply shocked recently, when I sat with my children as they were watching the animated Iron Man series at their grandpas house. This was on Sunday morning TV. The episode was about other 'bad' characters stealing Iron Mans suit. I was alarmed when the dialog turned explicitly to talk of Patents and how evil it was that they were infringing Iron Mans designs. As I continued to watch it dawned on me that the whole episode was just one big propaganda piece. Disneys dialog is present, right beneath our noses. Best link to relevant episode: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armor_Wars#section_5 http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armor_Wars#section_5
  - tptacek 14y ago
    Two responses. (i) Millions of kids saw that episode and went on to pirate movies and music anyways, because kids don't really derive their ethics from cartoon series, just like you & I aren't secretly animated by "Knowing is Half The Battle" from G.I. Joe. (http://www.joeheadquarters.com/joeendings.shtml http://www.joeheadquarters.com/joeendings.shtml) (ii) The particular message you're suggesting Iron Man is "propagandizing" is so anodyne that it was the subject of a whole episode of Arthur on PBS.
    - AutoCorrect 14y ago
      You mean I'm the only one that "Knowing is Half the Battle" animates? Gadzooks!
      - CodeCube 14y ago
        Nah man,when my kids make a mistake (or almost make a mistake), I go out of my way to tell them how they could have avoided it; 9 times out of 10 I end the discussion with, "And now you know ..." before I realize what I'm saying :P
    - a3_nm 14y ago
      > Millions of kids saw that episode and went on to pirate movies and music anyways, because kids don't really derive their ethics from cartoon series The point of such propaganda would not be to ensure that people don't pirate, but to plant the idea that doing so is morally bad, so that lobbying efforts in favor of IP protection laws seem morally legitimate.
- inDigiNeous 14y ago
  What we watch, this is what we become. Even thought you might think that Disney doesn't have great influence over our children or us, think about this scenario: Small kids in front of television or in the movie theater, watching a movie. Thinking inside their young brains, what is happening on the screen. Seeing social interactions of Role Models that are not real, and then thinking "So this is how adults behave". Thinking about how they would re-act in the same situation, then seeing that this "Cool Guy In The Movie Did That" and thinking that "Maybe I should try to do the same thing". Even the most little things in cartoons and movies can trigger this kind of thinking and re-thinking in us, making us believe that "I should be like that, if I want to be cool" or some other situation. We might want to deny this control over our lives, as we all want to be masters of our selves. But this shit gets into our subconsciousness and affects the way we act in real life. We might even not recognize it, as it has been part of our programming from the very beginning of our lives, watching these cartoons and believing shit like "A princess should marry a prince on a white horse". Movies and cartoons have very much influence over behavioral patterns in our life. This Lucasarts & Disney merge is worrying. Add in another great programmer of children, McDonalds, and we have (already) a culture of children who have been raised on cartoon & movie values, fed by McDonalds and educated by a broken education system and adults who don't know better. Disney & McDonalds working together to program and feed our children. A Reality which I wouldn't want to see happen, but is already happening. What can we do ? Ignore them. Create counter-culture. Educate our children ourselves. Free us from this kind of mass programming. Remember, Britney Spears is also part of the Disney empire. Want your kid to look up to this kind of idols, who promote Sugary Cola Drink, Fast Food and Over Sexuality ?
philwelch 14y ago
Fortunately, corporations are pretty shitty at deliberately pushing a cultural agenda. I dare you to find a consistent agenda in any media conglomerate's output.
- afterburner 14y ago
  Sarcasm? I can think of one... EDIT: News Corp was what I was thinking.
  - philwelch 14y ago
    Really? I'm not being sarcastic at all. Please share. EDIT: Despite Fox News, the Fox network broadcasts left-leaning shows like The Simpsons, Family Guy, and American Dad, which regularly mock Fox News. 20th Century Fox distributes a lot of films without any discernable agenda[1], even backing films like Avatar, or the Wall Street sequel. I'm convinced that News Corporation is entirely mercenary in its agenda and only started Fox News because right-wing cable news was a wide open opportunity in the late 1990's. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_20th_Century_Fox_films http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_20th_Century_Fox_films
    - enraged_camel 14y ago
      News Corp, owned by Rupert Murdoch. Koch Industries, owned by Koch brothers. I could go on...
      - ryanwaggoner 14y ago
        Does Koch Industries own any media companies to speak of? Pretty sure they're not a media conglomerate... News Corp is a better example.
        enraged_camel 14y ago
        Like I said in my response to the parent, a corporation does not need to have media outlets in order to have an influence on political discourse. This is especially true for mega-corps with CEOs whose net worth are in the billions.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

tptacek 14y ago

Marvel, Pixar, LucasArts, ABC, ESPN, A+E, Disney Channel, and associated merchandising. I'm not sure how much "control" over our "public dialog" this really implies. I'm the parent of two very normal middle aged children and, while they're certainly exposed to some of this IP, I'd contest that it has much "influence" over them. Google has much more control over our public dialog than Disney does.

Firehed 14y ago
Yet it would seem that Disney has a lot more to lose if IP laws are not kept in their favor, as evidenced by the Life+70 copyright extension they were able to successfully lobby into existence. Google and Disney clearly have two very different set of influences, but to imply that Disney has little control is simply wrong. Ultimately the buck stops with our various representatives, but Disney has some serious skin in the game of keeping the status quo intact. Suffice to say, their "Disney Vault" promotional tactic couldn't exist in a world where (what most people consider) sane copyright laws existed, and I've yet to see an argument that reasonably suggests that kind of behavior is good for our culture.
- tptacek 14y ago
  I think this is orthogonal to the argument that I responded to upthread. The idea I responded to is that by rolling up so much of our popular culture, Disney has reached a point where it bears some kind of responsibility for vouchsafing our culture. Strong disagree: just like buying OMGPOP didn't reward Zynga with a mortal lock on the market for iPhone games, buying up the most popular media properties won't reward Disney with control of our culture. Disney in reality has much less control over our culture than many other companies, including many other media companies. The fact of their purchasing Lucasfilm doesn't change that. It's alarmist to suggest that owning Star Wars is going to give Disney some kind of undue influence. If anything, it's likely to improve that terribly corrupted and besmirched franchise.
  - bravoyankee 14y ago
    It's an unwinnable argument, but I just wanted to vehemently disagree with you anyway (and I usually do disagree with you). Good day to you sir.
  - bitcartel 14y ago
    Would you be comfortable if Murdoch managed to get his hands on this cultural keiretsu?
    - tptacek 14y ago
      I would not care, because Fox News is already much more influential than Disney is, and would not become that much more so simply by dint of owning some cartoon characters.
      - nitrogen 14y ago
        Children are much more accepting of the philosophies implied by what they watch.
        tptacek 14y ago
        All I can tell you is that as a parent, I'm not seeing a lot of cultural signifiers I can trace back to Disney properties. Internet memes have a much greater impact on my middle schooler kids.
        nitrogen 14y ago
        This is just my gut reaction, so treat it with the skepticism it deserves, but I don't think Disney's influence is necessarily visible in behavior. I think it's more likely to be a subtle adjustment to the unconscious Bayesian priors invoked in decision making.
        inDigiNeous 14y ago
        Disney movies & cartoons promote certain characteristics of our culture that are already in effect, so how would you see it anyway? If you weren't really looking deeply at the issue, which I assume (excuse me for assuming) you aren't doing. This is very deep subject which requires lots of analytical thinking and human behaviour understanding. Disney has the power and money to hire whole teams of psychologist to analyze how to very subliminally affect their movies in such a way that the merchandise etc will sell more, bringing more and more cash in their pockets. Take for example Donald Duck (in the cartoons). He is always depicted as a unlucky main protagonist who is being ruled by the rich Scrooge. No matter what he does or how much he works, he never becomes in control of his own life, usually being controlled by the Rich Banker Uncle Scrooge. This tells our children that no matter what you do, you will always be controlled by those who have more money and can tell you to do whatever they please. Not in so direct way, but in a more subtle way it creates a world view that keeps this model in it's current place. But this is not the main point, the main point is that for Disney and these other big companies, money goes beyond anything. This affects deeply their moral values that are put into their products and what motivation is being the driving force behind producing their movies. It's not the great stories, or changing the world, but about money. This is not a good thing, from many viewpoints. They are not focusing on sustainability, but on maximizing their incomes. This is reflected to all those little children who watch their movies or cartoons. Those who own Disney are those with great money in their pockets. They will want to keep us passive consumers who will be hooked into their stories (which many are just copies from folk tales, like the Lion King which a pretty much direct copy from the story of Kimba the White Lion) and sell us Toys & Fast Food. Have you seen the movies these days ? It's all about selling more copies of DVD:s of the latest blockbuster movie to the parents of the children. First creating a need in these children to look up to these movies and characters, then telling them that there are toys, sugar & caffeine filled drinks and fast food available related to these characters, hooking them (literally with caffeine, sugar, fat) to these products and the feelings related to those. Think about it. Really. Do you want Disney to be raising your children ?
colonel_panic 14y ago
Google doesn't teach your kids the narrative structure against which they measure their own lives.
- tptacek 14y ago
  (a) Neither does Disney, (b) Google controls the Internet, which is scarier.
  - code_duck 14y ago
    "Google controls the Internet"? I use a lot of non-Google owned web sites and services. Can you support this assertion?
    - tptacek 14y ago
      Most users of the Internet are dependent on Google to find anything on the Internet.
      - eric_h 14y ago
        Nevertheless, you could flip the switch and turn Google off, and people would be able to find things on the internet just fine.
        tptacek 14y ago
        Strong disagree.
        chc 14y ago
        "People" as in "some number of people somewhere"? Sure. But people in general? I strongly doubt it. Hang out with some "non-technical people" (they will often helpfully describe themselves this way for you) while they use the computer sometime. If they didn't have Google, they might be able to get to Facebook, but that would be pretty much the boundary of the Internet for them.
aik 14y ago
Do they watch any content from any of those groups/companies?
evolve2k 14y ago
I was personally deeply shocked recently, when I sat with my children as they were watching the animated Iron Man series at their grandpas house. This was on Sunday morning TV. The episode was about other 'bad' characters stealing Iron Mans suit. I was alarmed when the dialog turned explicitly to talk of Patents and how evil it was that they were infringing Iron Mans designs. As I continued to watch it dawned on me that the whole episode was just one big propaganda piece. Disneys dialog is present, right beneath our noses. Best link to relevant episode: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armor_Wars#section_5 http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armor_Wars#section_5
- tptacek 14y ago
  Two responses. (i) Millions of kids saw that episode and went on to pirate movies and music anyways, because kids don't really derive their ethics from cartoon series, just like you & I aren't secretly animated by "Knowing is Half The Battle" from G.I. Joe. (http://www.joeheadquarters.com/joeendings.shtml http://www.joeheadquarters.com/joeendings.shtml) (ii) The particular message you're suggesting Iron Man is "propagandizing" is so anodyne that it was the subject of a whole episode of Arthur on PBS.
  - AutoCorrect 14y ago
    You mean I'm the only one that "Knowing is Half the Battle" animates? Gadzooks!
    - CodeCube 14y ago
      Nah man,when my kids make a mistake (or almost make a mistake), I go out of my way to tell them how they could have avoided it; 9 times out of 10 I end the discussion with, "And now you know ..." before I realize what I'm saying :P
  - a3_nm 14y ago
    > Millions of kids saw that episode and went on to pirate movies and music anyways, because kids don't really derive their ethics from cartoon series The point of such propaganda would not be to ensure that people don't pirate, but to plant the idea that doing so is morally bad, so that lobbying efforts in favor of IP protection laws seem morally legitimate.
inDigiNeous 14y ago
What we watch, this is what we become. Even thought you might think that Disney doesn't have great influence over our children or us, think about this scenario: Small kids in front of television or in the movie theater, watching a movie. Thinking inside their young brains, what is happening on the screen. Seeing social interactions of Role Models that are not real, and then thinking "So this is how adults behave". Thinking about how they would re-act in the same situation, then seeing that this "Cool Guy In The Movie Did That" and thinking that "Maybe I should try to do the same thing". Even the most little things in cartoons and movies can trigger this kind of thinking and re-thinking in us, making us believe that "I should be like that, if I want to be cool" or some other situation. We might want to deny this control over our lives, as we all want to be masters of our selves. But this shit gets into our subconsciousness and affects the way we act in real life. We might even not recognize it, as it has been part of our programming from the very beginning of our lives, watching these cartoons and believing shit like "A princess should marry a prince on a white horse". Movies and cartoons have very much influence over behavioral patterns in our life. This Lucasarts & Disney merge is worrying. Add in another great programmer of children, McDonalds, and we have (already) a culture of children who have been raised on cartoon & movie values, fed by McDonalds and educated by a broken education system and adults who don't know better. Disney & McDonalds working together to program and feed our children. A Reality which I wouldn't want to see happen, but is already happening. What can we do ? Ignore them. Create counter-culture. Educate our children ourselves. Free us from this kind of mass programming. Remember, Britney Spears is also part of the Disney empire. Want your kid to look up to this kind of idols, who promote Sugary Cola Drink, Fast Food and Over Sexuality ?

philwelch 14y ago

Fortunately, corporations are pretty shitty at deliberately pushing a cultural agenda. I dare you to find a consistent agenda in any media conglomerate's output.

afterburner 14y ago
Sarcasm? I can think of one... EDIT: News Corp was what I was thinking.
- philwelch 14y ago
  Really? I'm not being sarcastic at all. Please share. EDIT: Despite Fox News, the Fox network broadcasts left-leaning shows like The Simpsons, Family Guy, and American Dad, which regularly mock Fox News. 20th Century Fox distributes a lot of films without any discernable agenda[1], even backing films like Avatar, or the Wall Street sequel. I'm convinced that News Corporation is entirely mercenary in its agenda and only started Fox News because right-wing cable news was a wide open opportunity in the late 1990's. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_20th_Century_Fox_films http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_20th_Century_Fox_films
  - enraged_camel 14y ago
    News Corp, owned by Rupert Murdoch. Koch Industries, owned by Koch brothers. I could go on...
    - ryanwaggoner 14y ago
      Does Koch Industries own any media companies to speak of? Pretty sure they're not a media conglomerate... News Corp is a better example.
      - enraged_camel 14y ago
        Like I said in my response to the parent, a corporation does not need to have media outlets in order to have an influence on political discourse. This is especially true for mega-corps with CEOs whose net worth are in the billions.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]