Is Disney's stronghold on kids as dominant as it used to be though? When I grew up in the eighties Disney cartoons were pretty much the only animation we got here in Sweden, and there was a ritualised watching of both the saturday "Disneydags" show and especially the once-a-year showing of "Kalle Ankas Jul", which often could attract upwards of 50% of the country's population. Both have had steady drops in audience in recent years as rival broadcasters and rival media have taken over. Of course, one could argue that the whole ideology-perpetuating corporate media machine conveys the same message, but that's not quite the same thing.

Plus, I thing we need to give kids more credence than to think their whole imagination can be shaped by one company, or one medium, or whatever. But that's a whole different story.

What piffle.... the analysis in the video is like a report for 10th grade social science assignment...

Thanks for the clip, Lisa, looks like a very useful analysis. I included it in a post of my own today. Not that I've done anything more that would satisfy some, it seems--OP Minded, what would you add to the analysis in the video to raise it to a higher grade level, beyond mere piffle?

So whats the worst thing that young girls can consume? Barbie, Disney, or Bratz? Seems like there's no good option. Dora the Explorer??

I think they're taking Disney a little too seriously, (Hell they used one of the few STRONG female characters who had a personality to show how 'sexualized' the female characters are. Meg was suppose to look like that since she was modeled after a vase from that time period too!) yes they're a company, a large one. But the group who made that seems to forget, there are OTHER cartoon companies out there, Nicktoons, Cartoon Network, probably more unknown channels too!

We all grew up on a variety of those, not just Disney holding us by our ears. I grew up on Looney Toons, Disney's Hercules, Teenage mutant ninja turtles, Indiana Jones, Back to the future and a lot more mixed media ranging from R rated movies to G movies. Those shaped how I thought all of them.

Even if I love Disney its not dominating my life nor did it totally shaped my imagination. I watched a multitude of things all of them together and my personality made me. A strong woman with a stubborn streak, a dirty mouth and love for art.

Hey, there's anime, too. Although it comes with its own set of problems wrt sexism and other issues.

When I grew up in the 80's the hottest series here (I'm Spanish) were Candy Candy, Heidi, From the Apennines to the Andes, Anne of Green Gables and such, plus Speed Racer, Ulysses 31 and Mazinger Z. Then in the 90s we got Sailormoon, Ranma 1/2, Saint Seiya, Lupin III and a lot of sports series like Captain Tsubasa.

Now I am a rather hardcore otaku. Ah well.

Anyway, Hayao Miyazaki is the perfect anime director for those whho have been raised in the Disney tradition, and I'd recommend any of his films (but parents should check the movies first before showing them to young children, because some of them like Princess Mononoke have a certain amount of violence and others have a strong anti-war message which means they do have war scenes and they may be scary)

... for instance, the explanation about what Beauty and the Beast means is beyond ridiculous. The woman interviewed relates it to an abusive husband!... there is not a single kid who thinks that way.
The real moral for the story is "beauty is only skin deep", not "be nice to your wife-beater husband if you know what's good for ya..."

Kids may not think that way OP, but does that mean they don't internalize the basic message. Because the basic message is that Beast couldn't become something other than a monster on his own. She *had* to teach him. This plays out in the cultural narrative of girls liking bad boys partly because they like to think they can 'tame' them. How are these two things different?
And a 10th grader who can see these underlying connections and call them for what they are should be proud of themselves.

I think the analysis of Beauty and the Beast was spot on and particularly surprising. That is (and always will be) my favorite Disney movie, but the message is undeniable, and I'm sure I've either been influenced by it or gravitated toward it because of my own emotions. I have a very large apologetic streak for people who are verbally abusive, especially men, because the second they show that "prince" inside, particularly if it's authentic and not a ruse, I almost feel compelled to nurture it.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if that perspective came from Beauty and the Beast. The same way Pocahontas overlooks John Smith's racism and denigration of her people (sure, she corrects him...but after one song the problem's solved). And Ariel has no problem leaving her world and family for a guy. I mean...I know you can read into things what you'd like, but it's not a good message for anyone, especially little kids, to hear that you should sacrifice your own beliefs in order to get the guy...

I watched the entire documentary. At first, it made some sense, pointing out how Disney uses women with identical body-type, etc. It soon deteriorates into an unfocused mess. There's no mention that other companies are writing about identical princesses, as well. It pins a lot of social stereotypes perpetuated in other outlets on Disney.

It seems some people have missed the point of what a documentary is. Mickey Mouse Monopoly only talked about Disney because it was a documentary critiquing Disney. A fifty minute documentary could not possibly hope to talk about all of the company's making children's movies so it chose the biggest and most well known one. Makes sense to me.

que cosa?

If you grow up on Disney EXCLUSIVELY, yes, it may have an impact on you. However, if you grow up watching a multitude of works, I'm not sure if the argument still stands. Every 'text' has its message and subjective way of portraying things, and I don't think you can ever make something that is completely objective in every way. I also think that would be very boring. 
What shocks me more is the 'our only objective is to make money' memo. Makes me shudder...