LA Times: Imagineering says report of Obama in Lincoln show is "patently false"

[flynnibus]

The USA scene is a different topic. It too could be read that the original letter did not deny adding the scene

It said

Now the rumors are swirling that we are “ruining Walt’s creation.” I’ve heard that we are planning to remove the rainforest, add Mickey and Minnie Mouse, create an “Up with America” tribute, to effectively “marginalize” the Mary Blair style and Walt’s classic (all not true).

The all not true comment could apply to the statement of 'to effectively 'marginalize' the Mary Blair style'.

As I said.. it could have all been very sly wording.

Rainforest has certainly been CHANGED - but was it 'removed', no - its still there in some form. The letter doesn't deny CHANGING the scene.. only removing it.

My .02 is the scene's new implementation is a compromise.. when was that compromised made? We'll never know from the outside until an insider spills.. but I do believe the Letter was keenly crafted to deny reports without being inaccurate itself or revealing what was actually happening. The letter makes no claims that they are not CHANGING the attraction.. just denying certain claims that can be crafted in a specific way to infer one thing while being technical correct to another.

[techskip]

The USA scene is a different topic. It too could be read that the original letter did not deny adding the scene

The all not true comment could apply to the statement of 'to effectively 'marginalize' the Mary Blair style'.

If the entire quote of "all not true" was in relation to "marginalize the Mary Blair style" then the removal or change of the rainforest is a moot point! They are building a USA scene which is a tribute to America. They moved and drastically downsized the rainforest scene in order to make room for the America scene.

As I said.. it could have all been very sly wording.

Many would equate "deceptive" and "sly wording" with lying. When this letter was released, some individuals called Al's reputation into question, banking on Marty. Now I wonder who's reputation will take a hit from this?

Rainforest has certainly been CHANGED - but was it 'removed', no - its still there in some form. The letter doesn't deny CHANGING the scene.. only removing it.

Portions were changed, portions were also removed, and the entire scene was moved from it's original location (which was an entire room) to a new location (which is a fraction of the size). Obeying the laws of physics, that two masses can not occupy the same space at the same time, that means that some of the rainforest is missing and has been removed.

My .02 is the scene's new implementation is a compromise.. when was that compromised made? We'll never know from the outside until an insider spills.. but I do believe the Letter was keenly crafted to deny reports without being inaccurate itself or revealing what was actually happening. The letter makes no claims that they are not CHANGING the attraction.. just denying certain claims that can be crafted in a specific way to infer one thing while being technical correct to another.

I completely agree with this, and I feel the deceptive nature of it will breed mistrust with a variety of individuals. I am curious if LA Times will walk away, or use photos along with the letter and let the public form their own opinions.

[flynnibus]

If the entire quote of "all not true" was in relation to "marginalize the Mary Blair style" then the removal or change of the rainforest is a moot point!

That's Opinion... doesn't change the intent of the words. It can be read different ways and the sentence isn't even well formed itself. Without the author clarifying his words - its all accusations at this time which are inconclusive.

Many would equate "deceptive" and "sly wording" with lying

And many are also not put in the hard situation regarding speaking publicly where every thing you will do is scrutinized and extrapolated. Being ambiguous is not lying... lying is about the intent, not the words. You can lie without stating things that are incorrect, by leaving out other elements. If the intent was to not give specific details about what was happening, and deny the rumor the rainforest scene was being removed all together.. then the words did their job.

I completely agree with this, and I feel the deceptive nature of it will breed mistrust with a variety of individuals. I am curious if LA Times will walk away, or use photos along with the letter and let the public form their own opinions.

Arguing over symantecs does not make headlines... it's an academic exercise at best. The newspapers will go on to mention the change, and talk about the new stuff... not try to get all Investigative Reports about a comment made many months ago.

[MrLiver]

When this letter was released, some individuals called Al's reputation into question, banking on Marty. Now I wonder who's reputation will take a hit from this?

Neither will take any hit. Marty was working on the project and knew what was going on from the inside. You can argue that from your point of view his letter was incorrect, but from his point of view, and from mine, it was absolutely 100% truth. The rainforest wasn't removed, Mickey and Minnie were not added, and nothing is marginalizing the Mary Blair style. The new American scene is being added in the same style... correct? Everything Marty said was true, and he said it in a way to not necessarilly reveal their hand before they were ready.

Al reported that the Rainforest was being removed entirely, and then on the day BEFORE the attraction opened, decided to print a retraction saying that they changed their mind. Al's original info was wrong, but when you're dealing in internet rumors, things get miscommunicated. Hopefully everyone understands that Al is not in a position to know firsthand what is going on and that he is simply just a dealer of information.

Have you been on Small World yet? It looks awesome.

[Uncle Bob]

Neither will take any hit. Marty was working on the project and knew what was going on from the inside. You can argue that from your point of view his letter was incorrect, but from his point of view, and from mine, it was absolutely 100% truth. The rainforest wasn't removed, Mickey and Minnie were not added, and nothing is marginalizing the Mary Blair style. The new American scene is being added in the same style... correct? Everything Marty said was true, and he said it in a way to not necessarilly reveal their hand before they were ready.

Al reported that the Rainforest was being removed entirely, and then on the day BEFORE the attraction opened, decided to print a retraction saying that they changed their mind. Al's original info was wrong, but when you're dealing in internet rumors, things get miscommunicated. Hopefully everyone understands that Al is not in a position to know firsthand what is going on and that he is simply just a dealer of information.

Have you been on Small World yet? It looks awesome.

While I agree that Marty didn't technically lie, due to the clever wording that he used in the letter, I still think it hurts his credibility some. It was quite obvious from the beggining that Marty was not directly responding to the rumors, but making up rumors to deny so that he didn't have to deny the truth. He was playing semantic games, and while you may not see it as a lie, many people will. I haven't been on yet, but I agree from what I've seen in photos, it looks great. But I don't see what that has to do with Marty's rep.

[MrLiver]

While I agree that Marty didn't technically lie, due to the clever wording that he used in the letter, I still think it hurts his credibility some.

Marty was speaking from a different point of view - you may think that he was lying or being subversive, but I don't see that as being the case. There were a lot of mean spirited and hateful things being said toward the Imagineers working on the project, and Marty felt the need to defend himself from the slanderous comments being made.

Of course none of this really matters though. I'm sure that Marty wouldn't really be hurt for a couple people on the internet think he has a credibility problem. You are free to look for Disney press releases as your official source of information.

[Uncle Bob]

In one case he needed to defend himself and his fellow Imagineers because he was hurt by things people on the internet were saying about their design work, but he doesn't care now if the same people attack his credibility? Personally I'd take a lot more offense at being called a liar, than people disagreeing with my design decisions. In fact, I have to deal with people doing so all the time, and I learned many years ago that those things should never be taken personally. In any good architecture school the professors constantly attack you persoanlly when reviewing your work, so you learn not to take those types of personal attacks personally, as well as to learn to properly defend your ideas. Anyway, I'm not saying I think he's a liar, just that I would understand if some people find him less credible now than they had in the past.

[techskip]

That's Opinion... doesn't change the intent of the words. It can be read different ways and the sentence isn't even well formed itself. Without the author clarifying his words - its all accusations at this time which are inconclusive.

I just have to ask... how can you logically separate the "rainforest" or "Mickey" comment but when it comes to "USA" that suddenly applies to the marginalization? Here it is again with a piece of punctuation highlighted

Now the rumors are swirling that we are “ruining Walt’s creation.” I’ve heard that we are planning to remove the rainforest, add Mickey and Minnie Mouse, create an “Up with America” tribute, to effectively “marginalize” the Mary Blair style and Walt’s classic (all not true).

That would be a coma, used to separate thoughts with a pause. It's pretty much an all or nothing... I would venture to say that he is arguing that ALL of the rumors are not true (with respect to Rainforest, USA, Mickey, and Mary Blair).

And many are also not put in the hard situation regarding speaking publicly where every thing you will do is scrutinized and extrapolated. Being ambiguous is not lying... lying is about the intent, not the words. You can lie without stating things that are incorrect, by leaving out other elements. If the intent was to not give specific details about what was happening, and deny the rumor the rainforest scene was being removed all together.. then the words did their job.

Politicians and Lawyers do this all the time... hence the "questionable" reputation some equate to those jobs. Speaking of which had this been a political candidate then "carefully crafted" would be equated with lying... there are plenty of examples of this in the Debate Lounge! I believe Marty's reputation is in this case what seperates "deception" from "lie".

Arguing over symantecs does not make headlines... it's an academic exercise at best. The newspapers will go on to mention the change, and talk about the new stuff... not try to get all Investigative Reports about a comment made many months ago.

I would not expect anything on the front page on any major media outlet. I was referring mainly to the LA Times Blog which originally carried Kevin Blair's letter, the rumors, and Marty's letter. I would be interested to see an article that posted the letters and pictures, then let the public decide. Because it isn't mainstream media the exposure and effects would likely be minimal at best.

[techskip]

Neither will take any hit. Marty was working on the project and knew what was going on from the inside. You can argue that from your point of view his letter was incorrect, but from his point of view, and from mine, it was absolutely 100% truth. The rainforest wasn't removed, Mickey and Minnie were not added, and nothing is marginalizing the Mary Blair style. The new American scene is being added in the same style... correct? Everything Marty said was true, and he said it in a way to not necessarilly reveal their hand before they were ready.

Ummm..."style" and "USA" were two separate rumors. Why is it that everything else is separate, but "USA" is automatically lumped into the "style" section? Is it possible that Marty was wrong, and that they are building a USA, and that some would prefer not to mention that part?

Al reported that the Rainforest was being removed entirely, and then on the day BEFORE the attraction opened, decided to print a retraction saying that they changed their mind. Al's original info was wrong, but when you're dealing in internet rumors, things get miscommunicated. Hopefully everyone understands that Al is not in a position to know firsthand what is going on and that he is simply just a dealer of information.

Al is in fact the dealer of information, but does not disclose when he receives that information. We do not know if Al was privy to the information a month before, a week before, or a day before. You are assuming it was the day before, but have no knowledge of what Al was and was not aware of. It's a different perspective. To you it looks like "Last minute" but to Al it could have been "verifying stories with multiple sources".

Have you been on Small World yet? It looks awesome.

Overall it looks absolutely amazing. The rainforest is a small, sad fraction of it's former self with the majority of the magic sucked out.

While I agree that Marty didn't technically lie, due to the clever wording that he used in the letter, I still think it hurts his credibility some.

I agree

Marty was speaking from a different point of view - you may think that he was lying or being subversive, but I don't see that as being the case. There were a lot of mean spirited and hateful things being said toward the Imagineers working on the project, and Marty felt the need to defend himself from the slanderous comments being made.

Of course none of this really matters though. I'm sure that Marty wouldn't really be hurt for a couple people on the internet think he has a credibility problem. You are free to look for Disney press releases as your official source of information.

Ok so let me try... honestly try... to follow this logic. Marty is so upset over the slanderous accusations that he crafts a carefully scripted letter to quell the rumors BUT he doesn't care what a couple people on the internet think... did I get that right? I would be more inclined to believe he was asked to write the letter, and that he does care about his credibility but only in certain circles. I feel that this will likely affect his fan base, and to some degree his reputation inside and outside the company. Politicians and Lawyers don't lie... they carefully chose their words, it's the perception of lying that gives them a bad reputation.

[timbabbcomedian]

Has anyone SEEN an "Up with America" tribute yet? I just saw a black curtain when I was there.

And the rain forest wasn't removed....it was moved. Parts are missing, sure but if it was REmoved, it would be gone. If you want to say "partially removed," go ahead...but it wasn't removed...because I can still see it.

Adventure through Inner Space was removed...the Tea Cups were moved.

[techskip]

Has anyone SEEN an "Up with America" tribute yet? I just saw a black curtain when I was there.

And the rain forest wasn't removed....it was moved. Parts are missing, sure but if it was REmoved, it would be gone. If you want to say "partially removed," go ahead...but it wasn't removed...because I can still see it.

Adventure through Inner Space was removed...the Tea Cups were moved.

By that standard Skyway was only partially removed because I can still see the Fantasyland station! Rainforest went from an entire room to a small corner, I would say that was a substantial downsize.

[flynnibus]

I just have to ask... how can you logically separate the "rainforest" or "Mickey" comment but when it comes to "USA" that suddenly applies to the marginalization? Here it is again with a piece of punctuation highlighted
That would be a coma, used to separate thoughts with a pause. It's pretty much an all or nothing...

And this is where the sentence is malformed as I said. If it were as you read, there should be an 'and' after the last comma.. yet there is not. This leaves it ambiguous if it is a separate item in the list, or a modifier on the item before it.

Politicians and Lawyers do this all the time... hence the "questionable" reputation some equate to those jobs. Speaking of which had this been a political candidate then "carefully crafted" would be equated with lying... there are plenty of examples of this in the Debate Lounge! I believe Marty's reputation is in this case what seperates "deception" from "lie".

Chosing your words carefully to only expose what you want is not lying. The man isn't answering a question.. he's making a statement which is word for word.. true. This is the reason people make a STATEMENT vs holding Q&A - to specifically control what is said and to what detail. Did Marty hold interviews after this letter and discuss the topic? I don't believe they did. They had a controlled reason of information, which they intentionally did not get specific about the details. Some people read between the lines wrong.

I was referring mainly to the LA Times Blog which originally carried Kevin Blair's letter, the rumors, and Marty's letter. I would be interested to see an article that posted the letters and pictures, then let the public decide. Because it isn't mainstream media the exposure and effects would likely be minimal at best.

Well its been almost a week now.. how long do you think it takes a blogger to form an opinion?

[bfdf55]

The USA scene is a different topic. It too could be read that the original letter did not deny adding the scene

It said

Quote:

"Now the rumors are swirling that we are “ruining Walt’s creation.” I’ve heard that we are planning to remove the rainforest, add Mickey and Minnie Mouse, create an “Up with America” tribute, to effectively “marginalize” the Mary Blair style and Walt’s classic (all not true)."

The all not true comment could apply to the statement of 'to effectively 'marginalize' the Mary Blair style'.

As I said.. it could have all been very sly wording.

Rainforest has certainly been CHANGED - but was it 'removed', no - its still there in some form. The letter doesn't deny CHANGING the scene.. only removing it.

My .02 is the scene's new implementation is a compromise.. when was that compromised made? We'll never know from the outside until an insider spills.. but I do believe the Letter was keenly crafted to deny reports without being inaccurate itself or revealing what was actually happening. The letter makes no claims that they are not CHANGING the attraction.. just denying certain claims that can be crafted in a specific way to infer one thing while being technical correct to another.

I agree to a point about the "move"/"removal" aspect. But there is too much focus on the semantics as opposed to the intent. Whether they WERE originally going to remove the Rainforest scene or not, then decided to move portions, is totally up for speculation. but, as techskip points out, the original was removed from it's original location, to be replaced with a totally different scene. And, as you point out, portions were then inserted in another location.

As for your .02 comment, that I totally agree with.

As I posted in response to techskip in another thread:

"Of course, that whole quote was CAREFULLY worded (remember, Sklar was a company writer) to take the extreme elements of rumors to imply that ALL rumors were false. The issue of the addition of Disney characters other than Mickey and Minnie, which was just as contentious, was ignored. In other words, his letter was written to divert focus and attempt to imply that any rumors should be ignored and that Disney is totally innocent of any allegations leveled based on them."

[techskip]

I agree to a point about the "move"/"removal" aspect. But there is too much focus on the semantics as opposed to the intent. Whether they WERE originally going to remove the Rainforest scene or not, then decided to move portions, is totally up for speculation. but, as techskip points out, the original was removed from it's original location, to be replaced with a totally different scene. And, as you point out, portions were then inserted in another location.

Bold mine... portions... as in not all of it... as in pieces were removed for any number of reasons.

"Of course, that whole quote was CAREFULLY worded (remember, Sklar was a company writer) to take the extreme elements of rumors to imply that ALL rumors were false. The issue of the addition of Disney characters other than Mickey and Minnie, which was just as contentious, was ignored. In other words, his letter was written to divert focus and attempt to imply that any rumors should be ignored and that Disney is totally innocent of any allegations leveled based on them."

And as I pointed out that letter will backfire within the fan community and make people question his credibility on future projects. Now people will constantly wonder "is this real, or is this a carefully crafted comment?". I didn't bother to read between the lines, I read the lines. Rainforest was in some respects removed. USA is being built. They "style" issue will always be a matter of perception, some will see it as fitting and others likely will not. Mickey and Minnie are not being added, other Disney characters are. Incidentally I pointed out that discrepency when the letter was written. People "read between the lines" and several of us were scolded for questioning Marty. We were told we were being too strict, and that Mickey and Minnie referred to all characters... now it appears we were right. I am saddened because instead of standing behind the change, the decision was made to hide it and spin it. Had Marty simply said, "we're moving the rainforest scene, adding additional scenes and characters, plussing the overall look of IASW while trying to be respectful of Mary Blair's style" I would have no issue. Instead we find ourselves debating the meaning of removed and the cryptic order in which his words were chosen. At the very least many consider the letter to be deceptive, which is something not traditionally associated with the reputation of people in WDI.

[MasterGracey]

Has anyone SEEN an "Up with America" tribute yet? I just saw a black curtain when I was there.

And the rain forest wasn't removed....it was moved. Parts are missing, sure but if it was REmoved, it would be gone. If you want to say "partially removed," go ahead...but it wasn't removed...because I can still see it.

Adventure through Inner Space was removed...the Tea Cups were moved.

Considering the Rainforest is now relocated, it's safe to assume that the "Up with America" scene is where the rainforest used to be, just hiding behind those black curtains, or at least getting prepped to move into that space after the holidays.

Remember, that room has ALWAYS been covered by black curtains during the holidays, even when the Rainforest called that space home. This is the first time that the Rainforest scene has been visible during the holiday overlay.

I don't think they took out the Rainforest and relocated it in a corner of Polynesia just so it could be seen during the holidays. America has moved into the small world.