The Walt Disney Corporation has merely approximately dipped its fingers within everything consumer based. To give you a image of merely how much Disney is involved in our society, here is precisely where Disney has its pes in the door. From Walt Disney studios ( who owns Walt Disney Pictures, Pixar, Touchstone Pictures, Miramax Films ) ; to Walt Disney studios Home Entertainment ; to Disney Theatrical Productions ( who is one of the largest manufacturers of Broadway musicals, including Disney Live Family Entertainment and Disney on Ice ) ; to the music within their gesture images ( including Walt Disney Records, Hollywood Records, and Lyric Street Records ) ( 8 ) . That is all merely within the Walt Disney Studios section of the Disney Corporation. There is besides the Disney subject Parkss and resorts.
Since its first park, Disneyland Park in Anaheim, California opened, the Parks and Resorts section has “ grown to embrace the first Disney Cruise Line, eight Disney Vacation Club resorts ( with more than 100,000 members ) , Adventures by Disney ( immersive Disney-guided travel around the universe ) , and five resort locations ( embracing 11 subject Parkss, including some owned or co-owned by independent entities ) on three continents ” ( 8 ) .
There are besides the Disney consumer merchandises, which “ extend the Disney trade name to ware runing from dress, toys, place decor and books and magazines to synergistic games, nutrients and drinks, letter paper, electronics and all right art. [ Disney ‘s publication company, ] Disney Publishing Worldwide is the universe ‘s largest publishing house of kids ‘s books and magazines, making more than 100 million readers each month in 75 states. Disney ‘s imprints include Disney Libri, Hyperion Books for Children, Jump at the Sun, Disney Press, and Disney Editions ” ( 8 ) . Disney ‘s official shopping beginning is disneystore.com. The Disney shops retail concatenation is owned and operated by an “ unaffiliated 3rd party in Japan under a license understanding with The Walt Disney Company. [ However, ] Disney owns and operates the Disney Store concatenation in North America and Europe ” . ( 8 )
There are besides the assorted media webs that Disney owns or is majorly affiliated with. From broadcast, to overseas telegram, to radio, to publication and cyberspace concern, Disney is tuned into everything. Their keys webs are Disney-ABC Television Group, ESPN Inc. , Walt Disney Internet Group, and ABC owned telecasting Stationss. ( 8 ) The Disney-ABC Television Group is home to the ABC Television Network, the Disney Channel, ABC Family, SOAPnet, A & A ; E Television, and the Radio Disney Network. When it comes to ESPN, nevertheless, with its six domestic overseas telegram telecasting webs ( ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN Classic, ESPNEWS, ESPN Deportes, and ESPNU ) along with ESPN International ; ESPN Radio ; ESPN.com ; ESPN The Magazine ; ESPN Enterprises ; ESPN Zones ( their eating houses ) ; ESPN360.com ; ESPN Mobile Wireless ; ESPN On Demand ; ESPN Interactive ; and ESPN PPV ; the Disney-ABC Television Group merely owns 80 % , whereas a separate company ( The Hearst Corporation ) owns the other 20 % . ( 8 )
So, who is at the top of this money doing consumer machine? His name is Robert A. Iger, and in 2008 entirely he grossed $ 51,072,580 ( 3 ) . A ware hostess intern makes about $ 6.50 per hr. A research specializer, PhotoPass lensman, and guest dealingss hostess makes an norm of $ 10.00 per hr. Manager ‘s brand about $ 29.00 per hr, whereas a drive & A ; show technician makes about $ 23.00 per hr. ( 4 ) Why is it that there is such a spread in wage between employees and employers? What would Karl Marx believe?
With all of the net income the Disney accrues yearly from its huge consumerism, the distribution of its net income amongst its employees is greatly skewed. Marx would state that Disney is working its employees and the Disney has far excessively much extra net income. He would reason that Disney pays its client service employees near to lower limit pay when they are more than capable to be paying their workers a batch more. Disney besides pays its directors and supervisors a little more than who they oversee so they will still lodge up for their foremans and maintain the repression of the workers stable. Besides, those who earn the lower limit paid work may besides be maintaining themselves down by working these occupations because they think they excessively may mount the ladder to success ( category reading “ The Origin and Context of Karl Marx ‘s Thought ” ) . If we were to sort people into Marx ‘s two societal categories, he would depict the top Disney executives as the middle class, and the labourers ( their care squad, retail clerks, park drive operators, eating house employees, etc. ) are the labor.
Alienation can be observed on both sides of the spectrum, whether we ‘re looking at the top executives or the labourers of Disney. In this quotation mark from The Holy Family, Marx says that the middle class and workers are every bit anomic, but experience their disaffection in different ways. “ The property-owning category and the category of the labor present the same human self-estrangement. But the former category feels at easiness and strengthened in this self-estrangement, it recognizes estrangement as its ain power and has in it the gloss of a human being. The category of the labor feels annihilated in alienation ; it sees in it its ain impotence and the world of an cold being ” ( Engels & A ; Marx, 1845 ) . This may be seen that as the Disney executives are alienated, they feel strengthened by this with their ain power, whereas the Disney labourers feel their disaffection as a signifier of impotence.
Marx may besides believe that Disney labourers are alienated for many other grounds. He would state that they are runing things that they, in bend, would ne’er have themselves. For illustration, employees who work at the subject Parkss will ne’er see what it is like to be at the park for leisure, unless it ‘s a free ticket every one time in a piece from corporate. Even so, the ticket has limitations for certain yearss and seasons. Besides, he would state that the Disney labourers necessarily lose control of their lives and egos, in non holding any control of their work. They would ne’er go independent, self-realized human existences except in how the businessperson want the workers to be realized ( category reading “ The Origin and Context of Karl Marx ‘s Thought ” ) .
Within the corporations hiring patterns, Disney is non really unfastened to dialogues. They merely pitch a bundle to you, which the prospective “ cast member ” can either accept or worsen. Marx would likely utilize this modern twenty-four hours analogy, if he could, that Disney is a 750 lb gorilla in the market place and that they know it and are n’t afraid to utilize it.
For its clients Disney is a topographic point of Imagination, thaumaturgy, phantasy, love affair, escapade, inspiration, household, and so much more. These are the feelings we encounter when we experience anything “ Disney ” as a society. Disney ‘s end for its consumers is to be seen as the happiest topographic point ( and merchandises ) on Earth. The Walt Disney Corporation has been a powerful force in making childhood civilization around the universe. Disney ‘s monolithic success is based on “ images of artlessness, thaumaturgy, and merriment. Its alive movies in peculiar are praised as wholesome household amusement endorsed by instructors and parents, and vastly popular with kids ” ( Feng Sun, 2001 ) . Children ‘s imaginativenesss have been the merchandise of Disney for many coevalss now. It ‘s become the ultimate signifier of phantasy, one that ne’er needs to be questioned.
Marx would state that we, as a society, are fools. He would reason that Disney ‘s businessperson doctrine has clouded our heads to see our universe as they want us to see it. The messages of artlessness are truly messages of passiveness, domesticity, and infirmity for adult female ; while messages of escapade and merriment truly hold underlying tones of power, force, and a false impressions of hope in the eyes of our small male childs. In a sense, the Disney Corporation perpetuates the thoughts of accomplishing the traditional “ American dream ” , while these executives know full good that the society they wish to see has been lost to clip for rather a piece now.
Marx would depict the social image of Disney as a secular “ opiate for the people ” ( 7 ) . He would reason by stating that “ this province and this society produce [ vitamin D Disney ] , which is an upside-down consciousness of the universe, because they are an upside-down universe ” ( 7 ) . This significance that the facets to which Disney is fantasy ridden is face-to-face from what our society is. Disney has become an flight for us. He would travel on by explicating that Disney “ is the antic realisation of the human kernel since the human kernel has non acquired any true world ” ( 7 ) . Meaning that Disney is our imaginativeness come to life. Disney is everything we wish could be within our universe in respects to fantasize, and it ‘s everything they wish our value system would be.
So who else could perchance cast some visible radiation on this topic but Max Weber? He would reason with Marx, stating that his ideas of societal stratification do non use to Disney because there are many other occupations that are affiliated with Disney, but non of Disney, like independent contractors that are virtually equivocal to the Disney executives. Weber would most likely believe that what Disney is making is efficient and just because what they ‘ve been making is the most effectual for them. In the societal universe, Disney is all about household. They have been seeking to continue and transfuse the values of the yesteryear within virtually all of their consumer merchandises. For Weber, this has a intimation of value reason. He would believe that Disney executives utilize this bottom line believing. They have weighed the costs and benefits of their picks and have gone with whatever brings them the most net income ( Phillips ) .
However, Weber would explicate that the Disney executives would non use to his traditional reason attack because facets of their corporation are continually altering. From the switch to digital life from linear life ; updating their amusement park drives to suit today ‘s engineering ; and even replying to the calls of society to eventually make an alive movie having an African American princess. They ‘re non lodging with what they ‘ve ever known. Disney is invariably introducing to maintain up with engineering. Socially, nevertheless, Weber would hold with Marx by stating that Disney is lodging to its traditional roots by seeking to continue what they view as good moral values ( category reading on Weber ) .
Weber would besides reason with Marx about how our society works. Marx says that we are all under control by the middle class: seeing our society in the ways they want us to see it. Disney wants us to see our society through the messages they imbed in their merchandises. Weber would state that our society should be value free and to merely “ allow the french friess fall where they may ” ( Phillips ) . Disney is merely making what it wants to make: it is up to us to find what manner we perceive their messages.
Weber would besides state that Disney is a concern bureaucratism: its end is to maximise its net income. He would depict Disney within his thoughts of societal stratification: a combination of category, position, and party ( category reading on Weber ) . These three are independent, yet linked ( Phillips ) . Disney has category in the signifier of holding an extortionate sum of money ; position in the manner that virtually everyone knows of Disney, and it ‘s normally a good impression ; and party in the manner the Disney has enormous power within the market and media ( category reading on Weber ) .
Within certain facets of Disney, Marx and Weber portion similar political orientations and in others they are on wholly separate pages. Both theoreticians serve valid, rational points. There is no prejudice within this research: all thoughts of Disney are nonsubjective and may non be what the theoreticians may see. All enquiries are based on their anterior political orientations.