Effects of Coronavirus (COVID-19) On Entertainment & Tourism Industry | Page 187 | Inside Universal Forums

Effects of Coronavirus (COVID-19) On Entertainment & Tourism Industry

  • Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
Status
Not open for further replies.
AMC literally makes most money on the snacks we buy.... that’s why they don’t lose on AMC A list and all that. I think there reasoning behind not enforcing face masks is dumb but if you think about it, most people wouldn’t be wearing masks anyway during a movie because they will be eating popcorn and drinking soda, so I guess either way it’s still a bad idea to be going to a theater lol
 
When 3D movies were big, you could get themed 3D glasses with many movies. I remember seeing the last Harry Potter and getting Harry Potter 3D glasses.

I'm shocked AMC wouldn't see masks as an opportunity like that. Go see Tenet and get an exclusive Tenet mask to wear while you watch. Same for Mulan.

There's a great way to spin this. It's not inherently political unless you say masks are political. My feeling is that AMC is getting way more press coverage for their current stance than if they enforced masks. If AMC required masks, nobody would've cared (outside of the fringe contingent that loves complaining)
 
My feeling is that AMC is getting way more press coverage for their current stance than if they enforced masks. If AMC required masks, nobody would've cared (outside of the fringe contingent that loves complaining)
It’s the “political issue” statement that’s causing the media storm, even more than the policy that isn’t requiring masks.

It’s common to refer to disagreements about policies that garner emotional responses as “political” or “political issues.” The problem is that a lot of them aren’t actually political.

Policies regarding masks during a pandemic are public health. Especially those policies that are developed by private corporations. Decisions regarding the pandemic vary on a scale of “how much are we going to work towards the public well-being.” It’s not political at all.

Arguing that those policies are “politics” is a distancing measure. It’s a way of avoiding accountability by trivializing the decision. Because “political disagreements,” truly political disagreements taxes and legislation, typically (or shouldn’t) fall on a explicitly moral spectrum, there’s no real more about the “right” or “wrong” decision. However, things like public health, civil rights, etc, lie explicitly on a moral spectrum.

People understand if a corporation doesn’t act according to moral expectations. In a capitalist society, it’s somewhat expected for companies to put profits over people. AMC stepped in it by trying to distance and trivialize the issue.
 
My feeling is that AMC is getting way more press coverage for their current stance than if they enforced masks. If AMC required masks, nobody would've cared (outside of the fringe contingent that loves complaining)
It's getting more press coverage because more people support the use of masks than are against it. What happens when workers start testing positive because no one around them is wearing masks? They said they didn't want to get into the politics of it (there is no politics, it's science). By mere mentioning politics, THEY MADE IT POLITICAL.
 
It's getting more press coverage because more people support the use of masks than are against it. What happens when workers start testing positive because no one around them is wearing masks? They said they didn't want to get into the politics of it (there is no politics, it's science). By mere mentioning politics, THEY MADE IT POLITICAL.

Do you have a reliable source for that? I live in a state that requires masks inside, and adherence appears to be about 50/50 unless you are in a building that enforces 100% adherence. If “most” people really support it, I would expect mandated mask areas like mine to look much more masky.

It seems contradictory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fryoj and Mad Dog
He's certainly not the only one
Right. As I’ve said numerous times; there are two main issues why this went political:
1) Trump at the head of the conferences. And Trump v Twitter.
2) The political media covering the conferences and not the science and medicine media. NYT, WaPo and other major journalism sources have a science and medicine team, yet none of them have been in attendance. WTH is Chris Cuomo going to know about viruses and pandemics v CNN’s science and medicine media?

If you find yourself only paying attention to one of those; I’d say you aren’t looking at it unbiased. They both (politicians and media) hold tremendous influence and both seek to divide the country. And they’ve done a pretty damned good job of it.
If “most” people really support it, I would expect mandated mask areas like mine to look much more masky.
Yeah- polls can say one thing; my eyes say another. Should people and do people can be entirely different things. But that’s likely region specific. It might be 10% adherence in Mississippi and 90% in New York.
 
It’s the “political issue” statement that’s causing the media storm, even more than the policy that isn’t requiring masks.

It’s common to refer to disagreements about policies that garner emotional responses as “political” or “political issues.” The problem is that a lot of them aren’t actually political.

Policies regarding masks during a pandemic are public health. Especially those policies that are developed by private corporations. Decisions regarding the pandemic vary on a scale of “how much are we going to work towards the public well-being.” It’s not political at all.

Arguing that those policies are “politics” is a distancing measure. It’s a way of avoiding accountability by trivializing the decision. Because “political disagreements,” truly political disagreements taxes and legislation, typically (or shouldn’t) fall on a explicitly moral spectrum, there’s no real more about the “right” or “wrong” decision. However, things like public health, civil rights, etc, lie explicitly on a moral spectrum.

People understand if a corporation doesn’t act according to moral expectations. In a capitalist society, it’s somewhat expected for companies to put profits over people. AMC stepped in it by trying to distance and trivialize the issue.

Summed it up better than I could. All of this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frogki
Do you have a reliable source for that? I live in a state that requires masks inside, and adherence appears to be about 50/50 unless you are in a building that enforces 100% adherence. If “most” people really support it, I would expect mandated mask areas like mine to look much more masky.

It seems contradictory.

To which point someone might say that your anecdotal evidence could be explained by reasoning that people who support mask use are also the most likely to avoid going to places where masks are recommended, thus reducing their apparent representation in public. To support this, I would present my friend who says he supports mask use but avoids places where masks are recommended. :)
 
To which point someone might say that your anecdotal evidence could be explained by reasoning that people who support mask use are also the most likely to avoid going to places where masks are recommended, thus reducing their apparent representation in public. To support this, I would present my friend who says he supports mask use but avoids places where masks are recommended. :)

Yeah, I get all that- my occupation is data science and machine learning prediction, so I know observation isn’t proof. No argument there.

That’s why I’m curious about a documented and reliable source that showed that most people support wearing masks.

Reliable is the hard part. Numbers I found are all over the place, and highly correlated with the political alignment of the particular source.
 
Will they let people take off their mask to eat and drink? I know many people eat their popcorn and drink their soda slowly throughout the whole movie. I could see people buying food just so they don't have to wear a mask.
 
Will they let people take off their mask to eat and drink? I know many people eat their popcorn and drink their soda slowly throughout the whole movie. I could see people buying food just so they don't have to wear a mask.
Of course that will be what happens....just like the restaurants & bars....Bottom line, the change in policy really isn't much of a real change. People will wear the mask going in....and going out. Everyone will now buy snacks and drinks (more profit now)....The policy is now more politically correct, that's about it.
 
Will they let people take off their mask to eat and drink? I know many people eat their popcorn and drink their soda slowly throughout the whole movie. I could see people buying food just so they don't have to wear a mask.
This is finally a chance for feedbag industry to step up and start manufacturing for humans!
 
Once I get my first unemployment check I’ll be doing my first VOD purchase for King Of Staten Island. It makes me sad, but I’m fine watching movies at home I guess. It’s the big blockbuster films I’ll miss seeing in the theatre.

And this is coming from someone who sees more Indie/independent films than blockbusters
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThemeParks4Life
Status
Not open for further replies.