6 ms·

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 s

by 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 ?
- jellicle 14y ago
  Really? tectonic made all those arguments in one sentence, huh? Or did you just invent that? Every American sits and stares passively at ABC television for about 6 hours per week, every week. It's totally silly to suggest that that could have any effect on culture though, right?
  - tptacek 14y ago
    Yes, I think it's pretty silly to suggest that the average 6 hours of ABC television consumption is providing Disney with much control over our culture. ABC is led by the culture, not the other way around; that's why it (sort of) makes money for Disney. Think about it with an analogy. Google is more valuable than Facebook, despite the huge amount of time people spend engaged with Facebook, because Google's users come to the site with a task that inherently equates with purchasing intent. It is possible to capture a great deal of people's attention without changing their decisionmaking process. I dispute that there are many judgements people make that use Disney media properties as a resource. The Internet is already a far more influential force on our culture than any mass-media property is.
    - nitrogen 14y ago
      I think you underestimate the effect of repeated subtle messaging thrown into an otherwise innocuous storyline. If it wasn't effective, Coca Cola wouldn't have paid to have their product barely visible in the background of a scene in War of the Worlds, for example.
      - tptacek 14y ago
        I don't estimate it highly, you're right about that. For your specific example, consider some other factors besides the intrinsic effectiveness of ambient product placement: (a) Coca Cola employs many thousands of marketing people who must, to justify their salary, come up with venues to feature the Coke brand. (b) Mass marketing is notoriously terrible with metrics, so it's not an extraordinary claim to suggest that maybe Coke is investing in some marketing that doesn't much help it. (c) Coke's business model has as much to do with its distribution system --- the fact that they can get a Coke into the hands of virtually any person on the planet in minutes --- as it does with its brand. (d) Copyrights and trademarks mean that motion pictures need to acquire the rights to feature many (in a Spielberg film, perhaps all) of the brands shown on screen, which creates a venue in which major brands like Coke are consulted as a matter of course simply because either they or their competitors need to be shown simply to create verisimilitude.
- cpher 14y ago
  I think I agree with this. In my experience with my 4- and 5-year-olds, the concepts/images they retain are completely character/personality driven. E.g. they love individual characters, but the larger messages are completely lost. I don't think pop cultural references started appearing until the Shrek series, which included a bunch of funny, adult pop culture references. I think they did this for a really simple reason: to make it easier for parents to take kids to the movies, and still get some laughs. Throwing in pop culture references makes the parents laugh, but kids pay no attention--they love the animation, expressions, sounds, etc. And parents are more likely to sit through repeated viewings because of this. My kids get their "bearings" from their Judeo/Christian upbringing, both at home and at school. That is their "culture", not the characters they see in Disney movies. Looking over the list of recent Disney movies, the themes I pick out are "individuality, loyalty, determination, perseverance." All of which are reflective of our culture, and all of which fly completely over the heads of small kids.

by Firehed 14y ago

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 ?
jellicle 14y ago
Really? tectonic made all those arguments in one sentence, huh? Or did you just invent that? Every American sits and stares passively at ABC television for about 6 hours per week, every week. It's totally silly to suggest that that could have any effect on culture though, right?
- tptacek 14y ago
  Yes, I think it's pretty silly to suggest that the average 6 hours of ABC television consumption is providing Disney with much control over our culture. ABC is led by the culture, not the other way around; that's why it (sort of) makes money for Disney. Think about it with an analogy. Google is more valuable than Facebook, despite the huge amount of time people spend engaged with Facebook, because Google's users come to the site with a task that inherently equates with purchasing intent. It is possible to capture a great deal of people's attention without changing their decisionmaking process. I dispute that there are many judgements people make that use Disney media properties as a resource. The Internet is already a far more influential force on our culture than any mass-media property is.
  - nitrogen 14y ago
    I think you underestimate the effect of repeated subtle messaging thrown into an otherwise innocuous storyline. If it wasn't effective, Coca Cola wouldn't have paid to have their product barely visible in the background of a scene in War of the Worlds, for example.
    - tptacek 14y ago
      I don't estimate it highly, you're right about that. For your specific example, consider some other factors besides the intrinsic effectiveness of ambient product placement: (a) Coca Cola employs many thousands of marketing people who must, to justify their salary, come up with venues to feature the Coke brand. (b) Mass marketing is notoriously terrible with metrics, so it's not an extraordinary claim to suggest that maybe Coke is investing in some marketing that doesn't much help it. (c) Coke's business model has as much to do with its distribution system --- the fact that they can get a Coke into the hands of virtually any person on the planet in minutes --- as it does with its brand. (d) Copyrights and trademarks mean that motion pictures need to acquire the rights to feature many (in a Spielberg film, perhaps all) of the brands shown on screen, which creates a venue in which major brands like Coke are consulted as a matter of course simply because either they or their competitors need to be shown simply to create verisimilitude.
cpher 14y ago
I think I agree with this. In my experience with my 4- and 5-year-olds, the concepts/images they retain are completely character/personality driven. E.g. they love individual characters, but the larger messages are completely lost. I don't think pop cultural references started appearing until the Shrek series, which included a bunch of funny, adult pop culture references. I think they did this for a really simple reason: to make it easier for parents to take kids to the movies, and still get some laughs. Throwing in pop culture references makes the parents laugh, but kids pay no attention--they love the animation, expressions, sounds, etc. And parents are more likely to sit through repeated viewings because of this. My kids get their "bearings" from their Judeo/Christian upbringing, both at home and at school. That is their "culture", not the characters they see in Disney movies. Looking over the list of recent Disney movies, the themes I pick out are "individuality, loyalty, determination, perseverance." All of which are reflective of our culture, and all of which fly completely over the heads of small kids.