Tinker Belles and Evil Queens: The Walt Disney Company From the Inside Out (36 page)

“woman’s” picture, and special ads for
Dead Poets Society
were made to air on David Letterman’s late-night talk show, specifically aimed at the person that audience research said watched the program. Since the mid-1980s, the studio has regularly created campaigns for its theatrical releases that feature separate ads written specifically towards a different demographic group. For example, amongst the titles of different ads for the
Aladdin
campaign are “Young Boys/Good vs. Evil,” “Kids Imagine,” “Young Girls/Jasmine’s Dream,” “Moms” and “Adult Sneak Preview.” Each TV spot attempts to create a reading of
Aladdin
that the studio figures will appeal to the specific group that it is addressing. “Young Boys” emphasizes the action sequences in the film, while “Young Girls”

tries to make the film look as if Princess Jasmine is the lead character and Aladdin only a supporting character.17 Such a strategy is also used now by the company to sell its video releases and to promote theme park attendance, with different commercials for kids, teenagers, young single adults and parents. One of the strongest ad campaigns Disney came up with in the late 1980s focused directly on addressing the heterosexual adult male. In a number of TV spots, various sports celebrities were filmed just after a major victory (an Olympic win, the Super Bowl, the World Series) to announce that now they were “going to Disneyland!”

One of the major strategies developed by the company in its effort to target certain audience segments was the “audience reaction” TV

spot. Prior to the 1980s, most of the film industry’s ads merely showed individual clips from the feature accompanied by voice-over narration.

Occasionally, the studios would also create ads that trumpeted the critic’s reviews of the film, much as print ads in newspapers had been doing for decades. Although trying to determine who originated the concept is difficult, Team Disney marketing definitely jumped upon the

“audience reaction” idea in the late 1980s. Since marketing research had consistently shown that “word-of-mouth” reaction created the most powerful incentive for individuals to see a film, these TV spots worked 190

YO U ’ V E N E V E R H A D A F R I E N D L I K E M E

to create a
sense
of “word-of-mouth” by cutting together clips of various

“everyday” people raving about the film.

Of course, these ads were always carefully orchestrated. Rather than catching people who actually paid to see the film as they left the theatre, people were usually invited to a “special screening” specifically so they could be interviewed after watching the film. Just before the interview, the audience would be handed a sheet listing the type of comments the producers were looking for, with the implication that if someone wanted to make it into the final cut of the ad and be a minor celebrity amongst their friends and family, they had better say these things! Even more importantly, though, the ad companies hired by Disney went to specific sections of the Los Angeles area to invite a certain type of individual to these screenings. This usually meant young, handsome, upscale couples or groups of friends—mainly white, but with a few middle-aged couples and a few non-whites to keep it vaguely diverse. In this manner, the audience reaction ads would tell viewers that if you identified (or, more importantly,
wanted
to identify) with this type of audience, seeing this film was imperative! As the strategy was refined, the company could narrow the target focus even further with these “audience reactions.” The aforementioned
Pretty Woman
spot aimed at men was an “audience reaction” ad, with men talking about how “hot” Julia Roberts was in the film.

The increased focus of the company on audience segmentation had to make Disney at least aware of the “gay market,” a concept that arose by the early 1980s. Furthermore, at a point when the studio was attempting to get customers by any means necessary, it is unlikely that they would have completely ignored the possibilities of marketing to this segment. As we shall see, there are indications that they did not ignore it. The manipulation at work in such marketing campaigns inevitably creates an ever-shifting struggle between the public and the marketers over who holds the power over meaning.

BE OUR GUESTS: DISNEY MARKETING TO

HOMOSEXUAL CONSUMERS

In 1986, eight years after Disneyland unexpectedly had to deal with a horde of openly gay men running rampant through the place, the Walt Disney Company, in conjunction with AIDS organizations in Orange YO U ’ V E N E V E R H A D A F R I E N D L I K E M E

191

County, held a benefit at the park to raise funds for AIDS Project Los Angeles (APLA). Not only was the event sponsored directly by the company, but Disney pledged to match the money raised by ticket sales with an equal donation from corporate coffers. The ticket prices for this benefit (and subsequent benefits for the next few years) were higher than normal, thus attracting a “higher-income” crowd, but the success of these benefits started a trend at both Disneyland and Walt Disney World. In the 1990s, the Odyssey Tours travel agency began renting out the park one night a year (usually during the early winter, traditionally a slow period for the park) to hold “Gay Nights” at the park. Although never specifically advertised with such a phrase, the flyers and print ads announced that portions of the proceeds would go to the Aid for AIDS charity, and, judging by the crowds these nights attracted, most people “got the hint.” Similarly, a number of organizations worked together to promote such an event at Walt Disney World but without any pretense; they simply announced it as “Gay & Lesbian Day At the Magical Kingdom That Walt Built.” Before long, the annual event had become an entire weekend of activities in and around the Disney complex: a day at the Magic Kingdom, a reception and party at Pleasure Island and even a buffet brunch with various Disney characters.

Such benefits and events weren’t occurring only at the theme parks at this time. As Joseph Boone recounts, Disney’s theatrical film arm worked together with Matt Sterling Productions for a special screening: Best known for its extensive video collection of gay male porn, as well as sponsorship of numerous exotic theme parties on the Los Angeles gay club scene, Sterling’s company sponsored a “MATT STERLING

PRESENTS A GAY NIGHT” at Disney’s latest animated family entertainment,
Aladdin,
on December 23, 1992, a special screening serving as an AIDS benefit for the L.A. Project Angel Food.18

Many might be surprised to find Disney reaching out to gay audiences.

Yet, a number of factors make such a development in the company’s business strategy understandable. First, the influx of such openly lesbian and gay employees to the company would obviously have its effect on attempting to attract homosexual customers. Roland Marchand, in his analysis of 1920s and ’30s American advertising, noticed that those working in advertising agencies often assumed that their own wants and desires mirrored the rest of the populous, and hence often 192

YO U ’ V E N E V E R H A D A F R I E N D L I K E M E

inadvertently created ads that appealed to their own specific outlook on life.19 While not necessarily having a “gay agenda” (as paranoid religious conservatives might see it), lesbians or gay men working for Disney marketing might tend to create campaigns that they themselves find appealing (and hence possibly appealing to gay or lesbian customers as well). Also, the close friendship that Jeffrey Katzenberg built with Howard Ashman had a profound effect on the executive according to many who worked at Disney during Ashman’s illness, and thus, Katzenberg himself seemed more attuned to gay issues and causes than most Hollywood executives of the time.

Most importantly, when Eisner, Wells and Katzenberg took over the company, they were eager to expand the profit margin to stave off future hostile takeover attempts. While one of the major methods was creating new venues for their product and consolidating control of those venues for maximum profit, the company also worked conscientiously on creating new audiences to consume the product in these new venues. The thoroughness of Disney’s audience research had to have made the gay constituency somewhat noticeable to executives, and in such a tight money crunch, reaching out to this already established fan base would be a quick way to generate sales. Such gestures as the APLA benefit at Disneyland in 1986 would not only win brand-name loyalty by some homosexual patrons, but create a new base for the company’s synergetic marketing efforts. Once homosexual customers went to see
Aladdin,
for example, and enjoyed all the “subtext” within the film, they would be more likely to buy the soundtrack CD and various tie-in collectibles. Furthermore, adult homosexuals would be more likely than children to move beyond the Burger King or McDonald’s “Happy Meal” collectibles and buy the more expensive ceramic replicas of characters, music boxes or original cel artwork from the film.

Of course, companies such as Disney have to proceed carefully when addressing any “gay market,” for fear of alienating their larger customer base of traditional heterosexual families. It is thus imperative to find a method of appealing to homosexual customers that will not disturb other consumers. The AIDS benefits previously described exemplify one such method, with the company not specifically championing “gay pride” but raising money for a disease that can strike anyone. Lesbians and gay men could also read this as much needed support for the number of homosexuals with AIDS, but Disney could promote this as larger than the scope of a homosexual audience. When YO U ’ V E N E V E R H A D A F R I E N D L I K E M E

193

these special nights and weekends were sponsored by various gay-oriented companies, Disney could absolve itself from culpability by claiming that they had just rented the use of the park out to an independent travel agency, and whom that agency brought to the park was none of Disney’s responsibility.

Another effective method used to mask marketing to homosexual audiences is the relatively recent concept of “gay window advertising.”

The term was probably adapted from theorist Judith Williamson’s description of conscious “absences” in ads that she labeled “windows.”

These “windows,” according to Williamson, allow readers to “decipher

. . . the surface, (and) ‘break through’ to the ‘hidden’ meaning. . . . You are invited to slip into it, to enter ITS space, drawn to participate in a

‘discovery of meaning.’”20 Such “windows” were specifically placed by the advertisers to draw the potential consumer into the ad. In 1981, Karen Stabiner reported on advertisers “Tapping the Homosexual Market” for the
New York Times,
noticing what sociologist Laud Humphreys had labeled “gay window advertising.”21 This new marketing approach addressed the gay consumer slyly and without offending the straight consumer (or even letting the straight consumer know that the gay consumer was being addressed). By “breaking through” the ad’s surface, a gay consumer could find the “hidden message” aimed at the homosexual reader. As an example, Stabiner’s article displays a Times Square ad for Calvin Klein jeans featuring a handsome, bare-chested male model staring seductively out at the viewer. The caption in the article points out another advantage to such a marketing strategy—deniability: “The ad agency denies that this billboard was aimed primarily at homosexuals, adding, ‘But you don’t want to alienate them.’”22 In other words, if any straight consumer “caught on,” the company could deny any intentions of “gay address.”

As the Calvin Klein jeans billboard reveals, “gay window advertising” has become relatively common practice in clothing, cologne and liquor ads since the early 1980s. One could find coded gay messages in such diverse campaigns as: Poco Rabanne’s Pour Homme cologne print ads showing a man speaking to his gender-unspecified lover over the phone; Tanqueray Gin’s overly cultured fictional spokesperson Mr.

Jenkins; as well as the objectified male bodies displayed on Calvin Klein underwear billboards and in Levi’s Loose Jeans TV spots. By the late 1980s, an aware viewer of Disney’s TV ads could also find these subtle

“gay windows.” While Disney commonly labels its ads with titles like 194

YO U ’ V E N E V E R H A D A F R I E N D L I K E M E

“Moms” or “Young Boys,” there has never been (to my knowledge) an individual commercial in a campaign labeled “Gay Men/Lesbian Women.” But there have been ads that, when watched, do produce a double-take reaction. A perfect example is the TV spot for
Aladdin
entitled “All Genie-B,” which was produced for Disney by Craig Murray Productions and New Wave Productions. The spot begins with the narration, “When Aladdin discovered the lamp, he found a genie who gave him everything he wanted—and more than he could handle.” In between this narration, the Genie emerges from the lamp to exclaim, “It’s good to be
out of there!
” Immediately after the narration finishes, the commercial presents the Genie acting as the “swishy tailor.” This is the longest clip in the whole spot, emphasizing the Genie as a “queer figure.” Immediately following this clip is a shot of the Genie in the lamp showing Aladdin how to rub the lamp right where his crotch would be, and the next shot shows the Genie transforming into a huge pair of lips, the better to kiss Aladdin with. All through the ad, the song “You’ve Never Had a Friend Like Me” plays in the background. Indeed. This ad might not be labeled “Gay Men,” but it sure reads like it could have been.

Although this particular ad is possibly the strongest example of such “gay window advertising” in Disney’s TV spots, one can find an equally strong example in Disney’s print ads. During the initial theatrical release of
The Lion King,
Disney took out newspaper ads showing various characters speaking lines from the film that seemed to advise customers to see the film. Two of them stand out from a gay perspective. In one, Scar with a fey smile and a raised pinkie in his claw announces that the film is “to die for!” In another, the meerkat Timon pleads, “What do you want me to do, dress in drag and do the hula?!”