• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

Theme Park Worldwide

Some of the allegations are serious and criminal offences have potentially been committed. Quite rightly there is a high threshold for convicting people of criminal acts, specifically that the offence must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. I don't dispute that and from that perspective everybody is (and should be) innocent until proven guilty. However I want to consider this from a different angle - instead of talking about criminality, I want to talk about decency and respect for other people.

The significant number of people that have posted their own accounts suggest something is seriously wrong with certain individuals that were associated with Theme Park Worldwide. These are people who are part of the community and as members of the community it's important for everybody to call them out on their behaviour. Even if it does not meet a legal threshold the behaviour could at least be considered coercive and manipulative. Bullying is not a criminal offence but that doesn't mean we should ignore it.
 
Matt. said:
No, he cannot "bubble" with her, unless she lives alone. So he is correct in still socially distancing from her. I agree it'll be interesting to see how he shares a car and hotel rooms with her however...
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. Obviously I've misunderstood the whole bubble thing. Sure I'm not the only one with this government!

In that case, I do wonder what he's going to do going on a trip.

Tim said:
@Spookle15 I really wanted to reply to your spoilers post but I didn't want to detract from the rest of the discussion so it's also in spoilers:

I'm 29 and half the people I know still live at home with their parents. There should be no shame in it, they all have very good reasons and nearly none of them fit the old stereotype. It's normally for financial reasons as housing prices around where I grew up are ridiculously over priced. Two of my friends are married and have kids but they still live in the house the husband grew up in with his parents. You could say they are following the even older stereotype of having 3 generations under 1 roof which only stopped being a common thing about 50 years ago.

The irony is that of the group I was the one that when we were growing up people joked that I'd still be living at home. However the reality has been quite the opposite. I left for Uni at 18, moved out for work at 21, lived with my girlfriend's family for years to make life more affordable and only in the last few years did we managed to get our own house.
From my experience you normally end up living where you do purely because it's where you need to be.

Although I don't think people have been unfair pointing out he lives at home to save money. All they are trying to say is that if TPWW went quite for a few weeks he wouldn't lose his house over it because he's not the sole/main provider.

As you were.
Click to expand...

Thanks a lot for your thoughts, it was interesting to read your experiences. Maybe it's just the people we know, it just seems like sometimes you're made out to feel weird. Definitely think my eldest brother has issues with it sometimes. As I said, at the moment I understand why this has been brought up surrounding TPWW, but it terms of people almost making fun of the fact, it has been mentioned before all this.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tim
Mikw said:
Meanwhile, a theme park vlogger on twitter is apologising for not being able to vlog due to it being made "illegal"

That's not correct, or is it?
Click to expand...

Illegal no, but the land owner can refuse permission to film. And people could use it against them even more so if it's in a predominantly a children's area.
 
SuperMuscleMan said:
Addressing the 'Its a business issue' TP


Thank you for a great post. I too think the parks should have a policy in place as currently they do have a policy that can exclude Vloggers but it's not used by Merlin parks.

What is also interesting is that I have raised the subject at 2 Disney parks this week and both have turned around and said vlogging does not constitute as a commercial activity. However have said that "due to the sensitive nature of this subject and the allegations, we have shared your message with the appropriate Leadership teams. We will now handle this issue internally."

Although it's not perfect I am pleased 2 Disney parks took the time to respond to me. Its not a perfect answer but it's great that they have acknowledged the seriousness of the issue on round one of communication.
Click to expand...

Sorry if I have misunderstood the above, have you contacted Disney specifically about TPWW or just about what is going on in theme parks in general?
 
SuperMuscleMan said:
Illegal no, but the land owner can refuse permission to film. And people could use it against them even more so if it's in a predominantly a children's area.
Click to expand...
I've often wondered how vlogging works in that way, i.e. what is right/wrong.

While I appreciate theme park vlogging is near impossible to control due to the sheer amount of people that pop up as unassuming extras, there have to be some form of rules. I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable as a parent if there was footage of my children out there on the internet without my consent. I wouldn't even like to guess how many unknowing individuals are included on the average vlog.

This is why I'm surprised that parks like Disney, Legoland etc (more family oriented parks) are comfortable with vloggers filming there. There are children everywhere, and I would imagine any sort of vlog of this nature would prove keen viewing to those with paedophilic intentions.
 
Everyone has a mobile phone and takes pictures of the Disneyland castle..... only the person holding the phone knows if they are taking photographs or have pressed the record button.

The no recording policy for vloggers or in fact anyone with a camera would mean they'd have to ban all recordings..... and therefore all mobile phones.
 
Spookle15 said:
Everyone has a mobile phone and takes pictures of the Disneyland castle..... only the person holding the phone knows if they are taking photographs or have pressed the record button.

The no recording policy for vloggers or in fact anyone with a camera would mean they'd have to ban all recordings..... and therefore all mobile phones.
Click to expand...
I get its complicated, but theres a massive difference between a 60 minute vlog that's broadcast all over the world and a few photos and small videos taken on a mobile phone.

Just to clarify, I'm not campaigning for it to be banned, I'm just trying to understand the logic.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
 
My point is if someone of that nature really wanted footage with children in it - and on a quiet day in a theme park vlog that isn't out to film kids, they'll be disappointed - they'd get the footage themselves. The issue here shouldn't be a vlogger with a couple of shots of kids in a 60 minute video, but the ones going there for that reason.

I've just been watching an 8 hours live stream at Disney park from yesterday. Filmed by a teacher and his wife. We're all aware of some rules out there regarding filming when kids are present, as far I know you can't film in most cathedrals if the choir are singing. In that 8 hours many families walked in front of the camera, it was all live and no one asked not to be in it.

I guess the question here is, are the vloggers just capturing children as they walk through a park or are they doing it on purpose? If it's just accidental, then as long as they are open about filming - you can't really miss some of the cameras they use - I don't see an issue. Especially if you could say to them that you'd like that footage to not be shown.

But I agree, it is very complicated.
 
hannypanda said:
I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable as a parent if there was footage of my children out there on the internet without my consent. I wouldn't even like to guess how many unknowing individuals are included on the average vlog.

This is why I'm surprised that parks like Disney, Legoland etc (more family oriented parks) are comfortable with vloggers filming there. There are children everywhere, and I would imagine any sort of vlog of this nature would prove keen viewing to those with paedophilic intentions.
Click to expand...
There's sensible safeguarding and then there's paranoia. Do you honestly believe paedophiles will watch an hour long vlog of Shawn waffling on from Alton Towers just to see glimpses of children in the background?

I would agree that if children are being actively filmed then that is clearly objectionable (and in any case I am sure YouTube would quickly remove such videos), but footage with people innocently walking through the background... I don't see how that can be considered a danger to children. A sense of proportionality is needed.
 
Sorry Spookie, everbody doesnt have a mobile phone.
Simple fact.
And some paedophiles would (and do) get off on watching theme park videos, like they get off on detailed court reports of abuse cases.
Dont underestimate levels of perversion.
There are many levels of perversion sadly.
 
Alsty said:
There's sensible safeguarding and then there's paranoia. Do you honestly believe paedophiles will watch an hour long vlog of Shawn waffling on from Alton Towers just to see glimpses children in the background?

I would agree that if children are being actively filmed then that is clearly objectionable (and in any case I am sure YouTube would quickly remove such videos), but footage with people innocently walking through the background... I don't see how that can be considered a danger to children. A sense of proportionality is needed.
Click to expand...

I've got no idea what paedophiles will or won't do. I don't understand how their minds work at the best of times.

Like I've said, I was only asking because I'm unaware of the rules around it.





Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
 
A great problem with dealing with perverts is trying to understand what they do, it is almost impossible to "get" what they do, their minds seem to be wired differently in some cases.
Looking at it from the perspective of a "normal" person, it is difficult to comprehend their attraction to minors.
Some still insist they are right, and society is wrong in stopping children from being involved in sexual relationships from an early age.
I studied the Paedophile Information Exchange as part of a social work qualification.
Old members of P.I.E are attempting to get involved in the LGBT community, as a repressed social group.
I kid you not.
Needless to say...the LGBT community do not want them anywhere near!
 
rob666 said:
A great problem with dealing with perverts is trying to understand what they do, it is almost impossible to "get" what they do, their minds seem to be wired differently in some cases.
Looking at it from the perspective of a "normal" person, it is difficult to comprehend their attraction to minors.
Some still insist they are right, and society is wrong in stopping children from being involved in sexual relationships from an early age.
I studied the Paedophile Information Exchange as part of a social work qualification.
Old members of P.I.E are attempting to get involved in the LGBT community, as a repressed social group.
I kid you not.
Needless to say...the LGBT community do not want them anywhere near!
Click to expand...
A social group?

Jesus christ.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
 
Yup.
I kid you not.
It was in some of the sunday papers again very recently.
Edit, dont usually advise such, but there is a good, detailed report of their depravity on wikipedia.
Sick nasty pervs, unfortunately, some highly intelligent, with friends in high places.
And the powers that be took a decade to shut them down ffs.
 
Last edited:
rob666 said:
A great problem with dealing with perverts is trying to understand what they do, it is almost impossible to "get" what they do, their minds seem to be wired differently in some cases.
Click to expand...

This is true. Paedophiles actually have more in common genetically with crabs than they do you or I - that's scientific fact. There's no actual evidence for it but it is scientific fact.
 
I know someone was asking about Shawn's European road trip yesterday, apparently he's going tomorrow.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top