Very interesting article by Forbes Magazine on Roy Disney/Comcast at:
http://www.forbes.com/maserati/billionaires2004/052.html

These guys strike me as total hypocrites--today, Disney follows a set of deceny standards that seem very relevant and family-friendly, especially in light of the Janet Jackson/SuperBowl flap and all the attention decency standards are now getting.

Then you have Comcast, "likely [to] bring in $115 million a year selling pay-per-view porn. Recent titles:Naked News, Straddle 'Em, Filthy Frank's Real Amateurs and The Sopornos. A Comcast system in Los Angeles lately offers Disney's Finding Nemo at $4--and the porn flick Funny Boners 2 for $12."

It gets better--Roy Disney invests in some pretty un-Disneylike ventures:

"This includes a stake in Australia-based Ansell Ltd., one of the world's largest makers of condoms, with X-rated ads to match. Its various Web sites titillate shoppers with such items as strawberry-flavor sexual lubricants (tagline:"Eat more fruit"). A print ad shows two oiled and buff men in bed, one atop the other, whose wrist is tied to a bed post. Related Web sites offer lusty stories, primers on tantric sex, lingerie for sale and helpful instructions on using lubricants. "

This just bugs me--what would they do to Disney if these guys were at the helm? I just can't imagine that they'll be the standard-bearers for maintaining Disney's family-friendly image all the while they're pushing condoms and porn.

Key point: these businesses are held by Shamrock, not by the Walt Disney Company.

I suppose the writer forgot about the new WDC release, Home on the Range, which is rated PG. A Disney cartoon rated PG....Sounds pretty family friendly to me.:| Disney is far from squeaky clean, and this op piece is so full of holes and is so poorly written that I think Forbes should be ashamed of itself, and they had better be able to handle the backlash. As far as Shamrocks investments- SO WHAT! They are not the WDC; they are a different business entirely, and I could care less if Roy is invested in a business that manufactures comdoms. Actually, I think this is rather funny....

The fact that these are Shamrock businesses doesn't change anything. If Roy's making money from selling edible lubricant, that's messed up and he has to account for that. After Enron and WorldCom and DIck Grasso and the other scandals, we need someone to look up to, and if this article is true, these guys have feet of clay just like the others.

How does selling condoms and edible lubricant make him a bad businessman? Is he embezzling money? Do they practice questionable accounting practices? Is the product of poor quality? Do they market their products inappropriately? Is he paying his employees poorly or treating them poorly?

Did the condom/lubricant company lose money last year yet pay Shamrock handsome royalties/bonuses anyway?

Adrienne

originally posted by Lido
If Roy's making money from selling edible lubricant, that's messed up and he has to account for that
Personally I see nothing wrong with edible lubricant. I'm not saying I wanna see Mickey on a condom or anything, but a completely separate business, held by a company that does not flatter itself to be a family entertainment company (Shamrock makes no such claim) it has no reason to feel shame for promoting safe sex or healthy physical relations.

Wendy: I've seen holes in Forbes articles so big you could fit last decade's Wilson Phillips through it. I don't remember the specifics but Stevie was griping about LaGuardia airport and blaming the delays on the airlines. The item mentioned nothing about the fact that their runways cross eachother or the horrible sunburst design of the terminals requiring tower clearance just to back out of your gate to keep you from backing into another plane. Not a single blurb. No sir, all the airlines' fault. :rolleyes:

The fact that Comcast is one of the country's great distributors of porn is something I had meant to mention in my articles, but never got around to.

Personally, I don't care. As I recently mentioned, I like porn. It would be hypocritical for me to hold it against the companies that make and distribute it. (BTW, Morrigoon, you can already get Mickey on a condom, but I don't think Disney is getting any royalties.)

I don't really care what other businesses Roy invests in. He could live with three Vivid girls and personally own 37% of the Flynt empire and it wouldn't change things.

After 40+ years with the company (and 20+ years of involvement for Gold), there really isn't much indication that Roy Disney is hoping to use the Disney corporation as a conduit for pornography. Though, I did see Ron Jeremy at Epcot once. Perhaps he was Roy's personal guest.

*sigh* This topic is all too familure, having been involved in the sales of edible lubricant and having worked for Disney.

I assure you I kept them entirely seperate as does Roy.

Originally posted by Loric
*sigh* This topic is all too familure, having been involved in the sales of edible lubricant and having worked for Disney.

I assure you I kept them entirely seperate as does Roy.

Lol, Loric:fez:

If this feeble attempt at diversionary muckraking is the best the Eisner team can come up with, then I am embarassed for them. By the way, Lido, did you take the kids to see Bad Santa this year? Produced by Miramax, a subsidiary of the WDC.

Miramax! That's it! I couldn't remember the name of that division. Thank you. I knew there were divisions that dealt with the non-Family stuff.

Nevermind that they also own part of E! Entertainment. Apparently they don't have a say in it, but hey, who's gonna promote "The Anna Nicole Show" as family fun for all?

Adrienne

Originally posted by adriennek
Nevermind that they also own part of E! Entertainment. Apparently they don't have a say in it, but hey, who's gonna promote "The Anna Nicole Show" as family fun for all?


Well, I think it could be fun for the whole family. At least it would convince the kids they need to stay in school. (Could there be any scarier consequences?)

I'd hate being filthy rich.

Originally posted by adriennek
Nevermind that they also own part of E! Entertainment. Apparently they don't have a say in it, but hey, who's gonna promote "The Anna Nicole Show" as family fun for all?


Of course, the majority stake in E! Entertainment is owned by Comcast...

-Jeff

I couldn't care less even if the WDC produced pronography. As long as they are neither marketing it to children, nor displaying it in inappropriate places, it doesn't matter one lick to me.

ummm... corect me if i'm wrong, but doesn't disney own a large part of pay-per-view, and have some control over what is shown on it. pay-per-view has loads of porn.

besides, what does it matter if roy owns stock in edible lubricant. sex is how families are made. without sex, there would be no disney company. nobody said it has to be boring sex.