Nude 'Tweens Should Not be Disney Branded: The Sequel

[merlinjones]

A few months back we had a long, long thread, now closed, that led-off something like this:

>>The Vanessa Hudgens nude picture scandal is a case-in-point of why Disney should rebrand their tween material (and relocate that programming) to ABC Family. One of these days something on a Lindsay or Paris scale will happen and create a major scandal. Though there is good money to be made here, there is no reason to call it "Disney."

Why risk all that hard-earned brand trust and goodwill for parents and families on teenage whims?

Classic Disney programming should return to the Disney Channel while the tweens move-in together over at ABC Family.

"Walt Disney" should be Walt Disney, the finest in family entertainment. And never the tweens shall meet.<<

http://micechat.com/forums/showthrea...ght=tween+nude

Now we have a new episode in the series:

Miley Cyrus 'Embarrassed' by Photo Spread
15-Year-Old Says She Thought Photographs Would Be 'Artistic'

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/...4736358&page=1

Where is Ludwig VonDrake when we need "Disney" entertainment?

[DisneyMan4Ever]

The picture from Vanity Fair I have no problem with. I think it is just a way to give people something to complain about. I'm sure there have been other people doing this kind of shoot and because of who she is that is why it is a big deal. She has her life and shouldn't have to make every decision she does thinking about everyone else. Let her live her life and if parents have children that are fans of her and they see these pictures just have a talk with them. When I start seeing pictures of her drinking and doing drugs then I think it will be time to say ok something should be done, but compared to most of Hollywood she seems like a pretty sensible child that will undoubtedly make mistakes. So I say just cut her some slack.

[Goofy Daddy]

The description of the photos sound quite artistic IF the main subject wasn't a 15 year old...then it becomes pretty creepy.

IMO it doesn't do anything to the "Disney Brand" in my mind. I have no problem separating Miley Cyrus the D-channel star from Miley Cyrus the person who makes her own choices.

I know someone will wave the banner of "what example she sets" for others but I am of the mind that if PARENTS are doing their job properly, then kids would not blindly mimic the actions of any TV/Movie/Sport personality to "be cool".

"Why risk all that hard-earned brand trust and goodwill for parents and families on teenage whims?"

The days when the studios "owned" their stars are long gone. You are also selling the intelligence of parents and families short with that question IMO. I am intelligent enough to know that Miley Cyrus works for Disney on a TV show and some related entertainment, and I realize that when she is not in front of the cameras and on the set that she is an individual, not a walking Disney representative. Those days are over in Hollywood in which the star is "part of the studio".

Again, just like the last thread on this subject, it boils down to business logic and current entertainment trends vs. emotional nostalgia and a perceived attachment between the brand and the individuals who work for it. Ludwig and friends were fun in their day but IMO they could not carry a line up during prime time like the tween shows currently do. The current (huge) popularity of the tween programs makes it worth the risk that some of them might do something dumb during their "off hours". The next tween star is available to replace the old one (for ex. Lindsay Lohan) when their behavior reaches a level bad enough for disassociation. Profit wise (business wise) it makes sense to be a part of the tween TV market. Classic cartoons, while fun and nostalgic for us dedicated and long time Disney fans, should have their place in the line up to be sure, but they don't have the strength IMO to anchor the programing, especially in the prime time slots, where as currently the tween programs do.

[Sorcerer's Apprentice]

The description of the photos sound quite artistic IF the main subject wasn't a 15 year old...then it becomes pretty creepy.

IMO it doesn't do anything to the "Disney Brand" in my mind. I have no problem separating Miley Cyrus the D-channel star from Miley Cyrus the person who makes her own choices.

I know someone will wave the banner of "what example she sets" for others but I am of the mind that if PARENTS are doing their job properly, then kids would not blindly mimic the actions of any TV/Movie/Sport personality to "be cool".

I agree!

[merlinjones]

>>IMO it doesn't do anything to the "Disney Brand" in my mind. I have no problem separating Miley Cyrus the D-channel star from Miley Cyrus the person who makes her own choices.<<

Walt Disney felt differently. Annette was asked not to show her navel in the "Beach Party" movies - - and Hayley was asked not to smoke in public or star in "Lolita." It was considered that actors/personalities represented Disney while under contract and being sold to the public as a Disney product. They influence millions of children though their actions - this you can't deny.

Besides, Vanity Fair is a major media outlet and studio PR vessel. Disney and Miley's family and reps would have had full control over image approval. Annie Liebowitz works for Disney too, making those celebrity Princess posters. It sounds like someone in the PR system made an exploitation "mistake" or wanted the press. There is no way these shots could just sneak through as an "oopsy."

[astrologic]

The description of the photos sound quite artistic IF the main subject wasn't a 15 year old...then it becomes pretty creepy.

IMO it doesn't do anything to the "Disney Brand" in my mind. I have no problem separating Miley Cyrus the D-channel star from Miley Cyrus the person who makes her own choices.

agreed.

[Goofy Daddy]

Walt Disney felt differently. Annette was asked not to show her navel in the "Beach Party" movies - - and Hayley was asked not to smoke in public or star in "Lolita."

I'm sure he did. First, Walt has been gone for four decades. Second, as I already said, the days of the studio "owning" the star are over.

They influence millions of children though their actions - this you can't deny.

Nor do I try to deny it, but as I said previously (are you reading the stuff? ) It is not Disney's job to provide guidance and decide on role models for for my or any other kids. That's my job and the other parents' job! parents need to teach their kids that even celebrities are human and that their talents should be praised and enjoyed and their mistakes should be learned from not emmulated. If kids use the negative actions of celebrities (Disney or otherwise) as examples how to act, then the parents have not done their job...I wont blame the studio/team/celebrity for it.

[Disney Wrassler]

What Goofy Daddy said.

[ALIASd]

Where is Ludwig VonDrake when we need "Disney" entertainment?

Uh oh, I think he was standing over there next to Mickey.

I love classic Mickey, but to kids today, classic Mickey is meaningless. They want modern Mickey, but what is that? If you just keep it in the past, it typically doesn't survive the present.

Robert Iger
Fortune Magaizine
April 11, 2008
http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/11/news...tune/index.htm

The photo in question looks like a kid slouching slightly in a prom dress. Next.

[FrumiousBoojum]

I'm sure many of the original Mousketeers need this equal treatment. After all, there was that Playboy centerfold...

[GhostHost2]

I'm glad we're back to bashing tweens.
"Tweens, why did it have to be tweens?"
Anyway, you would think these tweens would have common sense. This picture from Miley shows a greater lack of intelligence than Vanessa Hudgens. At least Vanessa Hudgens intended for her photos to remain private. Miley knew what she was doing was going to be seen by millions of people and make headlines; and she used the worst excuse ever: "You can't say no to Annie, she's so cute."
If I ever have kids, they won't be looking up to the dip**** tweens on the Disney Channel. What ever happened to real (most are fictional) heroes for kids to look up to:Superman, Lone Ranger, Indiana Jones, Davy Crockett, and Batman. I realize those characters are still around and popular (except for Davy Crockett and Lone Ranger), but kids don't freak out about them like they do over these stupid Disney Channel stars.

[Goofy Daddy]

IMO it is silly to place the blame on Miley, or at least only on her. I have no proof, but also no doubt in my mind that these pics were taken with the full approval and perhaps encouragement of her father, her agent, and disney as well.

Being a 15 year old starlett I would bet that she would defer to their encouragement and ideas in cases like this.

[merlinjones]

>>I'm sure many of the original Mousketeers need this equal treatment. After all, there was that Playboy centerfold...<<

Twenty years AFTER the fact, not DURING the Mickey Mouse Club... You can't see the difference?

[k_peek_2000]

Yay, Miley Cyrus looks like a heroine addict. I knew she would one day!

[M.S.Fighter]

The whole thing that I heard about the Miley picture is that she thought it would be of course "artistic". The other thing is that her dad had to step away from the photo shoot for a prior engagement. I am sure that if he was there, he wouldn't have allowed it. But I have to agree that I really don't think that she was thinking what Disney would say about the photo or what her 'tween fans would think. I believe that Miley should have at least asked the parental units about the pic before Vanity Fair decided to print it and put it in the mag.