Disney fires Chapek, brings Iger out of retirement

You mean gems like this?

Or this one that intentionally makes it seem like there was an attraction incident when in reality it is literally about Tron/Railroad crossover audio

I'm sorry, but RRR>>>Inside the Magic.

I just despise ITM. What on earth makes someone publish clickbait like that, when you can just as easily make legitimate news reports?
Just the other day there was a headline something like “Beloved Disney Attraction to Close, Fans Bid Fond Farewell” with photos of a rapids ride. I didn’t click but comments revealed it will close for winter refurbishment as always. Sheesh.

They usually get to the actual facts after a few paragraphs of "Millions of tourists visit Walt Disney World every year" "Guests experience thrilling moments on XYZ attraction" that are there strictly as filler.

Mulfinator:

I'm sorry, but RRR>>>Inside the Magic.

Hell, I'd go as far to say Chance Toboggans > ITM

Cedar Point chicken tenders > ITM

People gotta clickbait

Sort of related, I commented on this Facebook page yesterday that posted a link to a clickbait article.

My comment:

The best thing the internet has given us is the unnecessary expansion of article headlines (that are often cut off because they don’t fit on the page). Years ago, the 22-word headline “We Bet You Didn’t Know This Small Town In West Virginia Was Home To The Oldest Five And Dime Store In America” would have been the terribly inadequate “America’s Oldest Five and Dime”. What an incredible time to be alive.

I showed it to my wife with feigned disappointment that it had zero "likes," and she said "your humor is too cerebral for their target audience." Point taken.

Oddly enough, it got one "like" while making this post.

In journalism school, you learn how to be precise with your words to be clear and brief. Historically this was because you had limited space on a printed page, but the constraint was good for readability.

The algorithms also reward this nonsense. Every one of those ****ty "articles" from the bloggers are loaded with keywords and pointless exposition, and Google and Facebook fall for it everytime.

I get so mad when I look up a recipe and it starts with three pages of “Pasta was invented by Mario Pasta in 1851.” Followed by three more pages of “My grandma used to make me pasta everytime I died.”

Just tell me the freakin’ oven temperature.

ApolloAndy:

Just tell me the freakin’ oven temperature.

There are subscription-based websites if that's what you're after.

A while back I unsuspectingly clicked an ITM headline and immediately hated myself for it. Now it shows up in my Google news feed every day. I feel like I've been infected by something. One thing I've noticed is that every one of their headlines is about something negative. If you've crafted a site or blog to celebrate amusement parks, yet all you do is complain, aren't you doing it wrong? Or maybe you're doing it right. I don't know anymore.

I'm sure they get a ton of organic search traffic, since we all inevitably end up there at times. But do they have a regular audience? Beats me. I'm sure they're making a buck.

Bakeman31092:

If you've crafted a site or blog to celebrate amusement parks, yet all you do is complain, aren't you doing it wrong?

I don't think the hardcore Disney folks know how to do anything else.

Along the same lines, I saw a post from one of the blogs about the WDW railroad reopening today and the first comment was something like “lol it will have the longest line ill pass.” These are people that thrive on being unhappy.

Back in the day of news print there was (and I suppose still is) a job called Headline Writer. They are the ones who looked at the content and (more importantly) the space available on the page and came up with an appropriate headline. The reporter has little or no control over what attention-grabber goes in front of their work. I reckon a career or at least a day’s sales figure could be affected (or ruined) greatly by a headline alone. And if you ever thought a newspaper article seemed disjointed or incomplete it’s because those that have the job of setting the columns would trim and edit to fit whatever space was allotted to the page. Once again the writer has already handed it off and has no control over it.
I just looked this up and The Google shows a lot of what they call “Headline Generators” available. I’m not sure how that works but if I had to guess I’d say it’s a device that grabs buzz words or content and creates a headline or title. Anyone know? It would be awesome if you could set it with varying snark factors. 1 for Truth, 10 for Clickbait and whatever in between.

Yes, writing for the inverted pyramid. The deeper you go, the less important the details.

I haven't thought about the "Inverted Pyramid" writing style since my college journalism classes

My issue with Disney is not with the parks, but their stance on physical media. I know many of you out there will say "Just watch it streaming". Well, streaming sucks...on so many levels! There is a massive community out there (including me) that enjoys owning physical media. It's not going away. It is actually still pretty strong. With "most" studios restoring older movies on 4K UHD. Disney is NOT one of them. And since they bought FOX, they are tons of great back catalog titles that fans want and cannot have now that Disney owns those properties. If they don't want to hassle with them, why not license out the title to 3rd party companies that specialize in physical media? There are some major players out there that are considered boutique labels and buy the rights to titles and release them. I know Warner Bros, Paramount and Universal all have done this. They do a lot of their own work but some get licensed out. But if it's a FOX or Disney title, and NOT Marvel or Star Wars, it is not coming to 4K, unless you're James Cameron.

Sorry about the rant. But I really hate Disney because of this! there are so many movie I would like to own but cannot, because they are under the Disney banner now. There is still money to be made with physical media and they are neglecting it.

I'm torn on streaming. On one hand the quality is certainly less than a physical copy unless you have phenomenal internet. Plus you actually own what you are paying for. On the other hand the convenience and cost are clearly in favor of streaming. We currently have both Hulu and Disney+ for just $5 per month. At those prices I could only buy 3-4 physical titles per year.