We are all well aware that corporate sponsorship goes hand in hand with Walt Disney Theme Parks (Coca-Cola is still going strong). Creating an attraction is expensive, as is general maintenance and upkeep. We saw the potential of it in Disneyland, with Monsanto sponsoring attractions such as "Adventures Thru Inner Space" and "The House Of The Future." An equally parasitic relationship, with Monsanto wanting to put their name on an attraction so the world will know "Monsanto," and Disney going along with the ride to secure funding for said attraction.
 |
| I hear they're doing great things. |
We view things differently today than people did 50 years ago, not surprising. When we think of corporations today, we think of greed, dishonesty, lack of empathy, and a billion other negative adjectives. 50 years ago, the cynicism and distrust of corporations weren't at the level we have experienced now, so I would imagine that the average park guest at Disneyland who walks past "America The Beautiful," presented by AT&T, is not giving them the finger for being a large corporation.
 |
| Because we liked to see progress, back when AT&T meant progress. |
Corporate sponsorship is more or less still existent in Disney Parks, not to the varying degree that it once was back in the 1960s all the way throughout the late 90s, but it is still there. Siemens has a stake in attractions at Epcot and Disneyland (Spaceship Earth and It's A Small World, respectively) and Chevrolet is with Test Track, but the majority of attractions are without sponsors. One might ask if this is a good or bad thing; do we really want to sully the image of a Disney attraction with a company plastering their corporate logo on every square inch of a ride they have a stake in? Yes and no, but mostly yes.
 |
| I really don't mind it at all. |
Corporate sponsors act as a "checks and balances" system for Disney. Without them (in the early years of Walt Disney World) the rides would be cheap and uninteresting, as the Walt Disney Company was suffering financially in the 70s and early 80s. They needed sponsors to help maintain the rides to keep them presentable for the public, and in the late 70s, were needed to develop new ideas and technologies to showcase in the burgeoning EPCOT Center. It was also Walt's dream to partner with major industries and use their cooperation to help build his future city. Under the direction of Card Walker, corporations like Exxon, Bell System, Sperry/Univac, Kodak, Kraft, United Technologies (to come later), GE, GM, American Express, and Coca-Cola were present to sponsor the rides, albeit with some input on showcasing their company to the public, but also keeping with the theme of forward thinking and new ideas, which we were ready for in the 80s. In the era of a new way to space travel, and all the new ideas and innovations in energy, agriculture, communication and transportation, EPCOT Center embodies the ideals of truly remarkable thinking.
 |
| Disney and NASA partnership in the 80s? Talk about an unstoppable force. |
The ideas presented in these attractions were dry and outdated by today's standards, and as Disney has a penchant for entertainment, they were tied down to their corporate benefactors, who wanted to keep the tone informative, as well as entertaining. Walking that fine line proved to be disastrous, as EPCOT Center suffered in its first few years. The public wanted Mickey Mouse and his cadre of furry friends, not this so-called "info-tainment." EPCOT Center became an example of class field trips and learning, and not until 1986 (after the Eisner inauguration) that we got any sort of E-Ticket attraction of any kind, in the form of Captain EO.
 |
| And what an E-Ticket that was. |
EPCOT Center stayed on the straight and narrow path, retaining its wonder and excitement of what lies ahead in the future, and all the great things we are discovering. Wonders of Life and Maelstrom gave us a reason to stay in the park, with attractions that are thrilling and fun, but the message EPCOT Center was sending out was pure hope. Since the park was bound by their sponsors, it would be hard for Disney to change rides without consulting them. As time and progress and technology progressed, or at least the rest of the world caught up with the technology EPCOT Center was producing, it became outdated quick. Now it was time to ride out the clock until 1994, when the majority of the corporate sponsorship contracts were about to expire. Seeing this as a way out of being bound by corporate restrictions, Disney and/or the sponsors did not renew the contracts, and in a way they were free. The sponsors were not bound by obligation to Disney to help maintain the rides, and Disney was allowed to update attractions with their characters and ideas, instead of being bound by their sponsors. And in some cases, the sponsors needed to know how to play ball with Disney and let them do whatever they wanted, but still have their name attached.
 |
| I doubt Nestle had any objections in letting Disney create the ride without any of their input. |
As years passed on and rides became outdated and sponsors knew they needed to up the ante, so began the tumultuous 90s that paved the way for very lackluster and novelty attractions, using broad comedy strokes to paint the picture of the tone that the Walt Disney Theme Parks would adopt in the coming years. Comedy and lightheartedness juxtaposed with a convoluted message vaguely tying in with the theme of the ride. Universe of Energy moved to a lighthearted approach with popular entertainers of 1996, in an attempt to make energy fun, which lends itself to a contradiction of its intent. The idea of the Universe of Energy is to understand where energy comes from, how we use it, and ways we can conserve or find new ways to harness other potential energy sources. Ellen's Energy Adventure doesn't so much tell us of any new technologies or improvements in the search for new energy ideas, but rather tells us what's out there, how much we have left of it, and a cop out answer that supposedly solves the energy crisis, with brain power being the only energy source that will never run out.
 |
| If this ride didn't have air conditioning or being able to sit for 37 minutes, it'd be the worst ride at Epcot. |
This is an example of the sponsor changing from Exxon to Exxon-Mobil and Disney wanting to go for more commercial appeal, and working together with this new sponsorship to change a great attraction. Horizons, on the one hand, was destroyed because there was no sponsor to step in and say, "This ride is fine as is, it showcases our product, and an attraction refurb would be to costly." Claiming structural issues (maybe), with Disney unchecked by GE, the ride was gone and so were the many dreams and memories of people all over the world.
As Disney came out of the economic slump of the 80s and back on top (especially now with the success of the animated films and owning the rights to our favorite childhood memories), corporate sponsorship wasn't as necessary as it once was. Now with most contracts expired and Disney picking up the bill, there is no stopping their enterprise of synergy and cross-promotion. Disney doesn't have to answer to any other higher authority. They are not bound by their corporate benefactors anymore. They have created a one-stop shop entertainment empire, fulfilling dreams and wishes for anyone who comes across them, and the need for satisfying a curious or intellectual craving we might have is now all but obsolete. Just as the wonder of exploring the world of communication with SMRT-1 became outdated, so did their desire to make us wonder or dream anymore. The grandeur and epic scope of Epcot is now laughable, and is indistinguishable from any other theme park.
These are different times, when the site of a space shuttle launch, or the sheer magnitude of a Circle-Vision 360 film wowed and dazzled us, now the general consensus is that we'd much rather see a Disney cartoon mascot or a Disney Princess than whet our appetites for the wanting to explore our lives and the world we live in, and try to make it better through advances in various fields. There is so much yet to explore in our world and beyond, and yet we look to the television screen to see what's coming next to Disney World.
