Reading Response: Team Rodent Part 2

It is no secret that Carl Hiaasen despises Disney. With one look at the title, one can tell that this text will not be a praise of Disney, but rather a criticism of the large company. Like the word choice in the title, Hiaasen uses provocative, aggressive diction to portray his negative view of Disney. In doing so, he is highly convincing. After reading Giroux's articles about Disney I was not convinced that the company was ruining the country, however Hiaasen is very persuasive. While I will never stop being a fan of Disney entertainment, how the stories are told in Team Rodent surely opened my eyes to issues occurring underneath the magical surface of Disney.
The most shocking situation Hiaasen mentions is that of the Disney community Country Walk, "a subdivision of gabled upscale houses and condominiums in southern Dade County" (Hiaasen 53). These houses were built by Arvida who were previously owned by Disney. What is shocking is that a hurricane came through and completely tore apart this area, more than any other area with identical weather conditions. When looking into it, investigators and engineers "found ample evidence of sloppy construction practices" (54). Houses are used as protection and shelter, yet Disney and Arvida failed to provide that. Hiaasen's incorporation of this occurrence was wise because Disney, his target, stripped ordinary people like the audience, of their basic needs, not to mention how little every homeowner got for compensation. This was just the first moment I felt shocked in the second part of the text.
Hiaasen's aggressive tone really drills in his view and persuades the audience to take his side. For example, when discussing the opening of the Animal Kingdom, the author clarifies what Disney aims to create at their new park: "Animal Kingdom is inhabited by real wild animals--not robots, not puppets, not holograms, not cartoons, but living and breathing creatures that (unless Disney starts tranking them) will eat, sleep, drool, defecate, regurgitate, sniff each other's crotches, lick their own balls, and occasionally even copulate in full view of tourists" (69). This is a highly provocative clarification and his word choice here is so casual that it serves to compare what is natural to all of the unnatural things at Disney. Wildlife, and everything Hiaasen lists them doing is natural to our world, yet Disney is "a sublime and unbreakable artificiality" (80). Thinking about this makes me aware of how unhealthy it is to get all of your entertainment from fake, unnatural sources, one of the many reasons why I am more hesitant about Disney now.
While I do think Hiaasen's aggressive tone works most of the time, I also believe he hurts his argument by currently wishing ill will on people. He states: "Now, in my lifetime I've seen many tourists so poorly behaved they deserve to be eaten alive by something" (80). Similarly, he notes: "A rhino scandal would have been dandy" (78), because it would have created so many problems for the company. His negativity and harsh wishes towards the company decreases his credibility because it suggests extreme bias. If an audience picks up on bias then the may be more distrusting when reading facts or stories. Although this could be a reason not to trust Hiaasen, I do trust him enough to acknowledge the underlying issues within Disney and how much we all probably do not know.