Supplementary Post: Disney Is Not an Egocentric Narcissist

I read both of Giroux's articles and responded to them previously on the blog, but certain elements of the articles spoke more strongly to me than I implied in my formal response.  Primarily, Giroux's vendetta against Disney angered me because he seemed determined to find the worst in the company: calling it ruthless, accusing it of manipulating and taking advantage of children, and insisting that it perpetrates antiquated values of gender and race.

The single line that bothered me the most was this one:

"Disney's only goal is to win over the hearts and minds of young people so as to deliver them to the market as both loyal consumers and commodities."

After reading this sentence, I was stunned.  I'll acknowledge that Disney has its flaws: its old films did have offensive views of racism and feminism, and I'm a primary example of a child that grew up buying Disney merchandise just because it has the Disney label.  But how does that turn Disney into promoting "egocentric narcissism, social aggression and hypermasculinity" (another charming line)?

I'll begin by addressing Giroux's argument that all Disney does is try to make money.  First of all, Disney is operating just like any other company.  Every company wants to make money and hide bad press—it's a simple matter of self-preservation.  Disney as a company wants to be alive and well in a couple of decades just like anyone else.  Their marketing is smart, not ruthless.  They know what they're doing, but that doesn't imply that they are a money machine.

Disney has done plenty of wonderful things for children and for society.  Just take a look at some of Disney's many charities: the Disney Worldwide Outreach Program donates to Make-a-Wish Foundation, Starlight Starbright Children's Foundation, Toys for Tots, First Book, and the Boys & Girls Clubs of America.  And no, I refuse to believe Disney does this just for positive press.  Disney is aware of the enormous impact it has on culture and society, and it uses this impact for the good—something I wish Giroux would highlight instead of villainizing its marketing strategies.

Giroux's second stab at Disney is perhaps more understandable.  Looking back at Disney's older films, it's easy to identify insensitive and inappropriate references to race, culture, and gender.  Giroux points out just a few of many examples, which include the misogynistic storyline of Cinderella, the crude references to Native Americans in Peter Pan, and the racially coded language in both The Jungle Book and The Lion King.  Obviously I in no way condone this behavior, but it's important to identify the time and place in which these movies are made.  Looking forward into modern Disney films—Moana, Frozen, Big Hero 6, etc.—one can see a drastic shift in the messages Disney is sharing with young children.  It's unfair to accuse Disney now of something it did fifty plus years ago, especially when it has worked hard to rectify these mistakes.

So no, I do not believe Disney is an "egocentric narcissist."  I do not think Disney is cruel and pretends to love children just to get a few extra dollars.  Giroux brings up some good points about why Disney isn't perfect, but there's no reason to stretch this image and make Disney into the real-life equivalent of Chernabog.  Disney has its faults, and it isn't completely innocent, but I will continue to love it nonetheless.

This is the actual Chernabog, not Disney as Giroux tries to make us believe.