Disney: A Cultural Capitalism of Global Entertainment | INA Global

Disney: A Cultural Capitalism of Global Entertainment

Article  by  Alexandre BOHAS  •  Published 24.05.2011  •  Updated 24.05.2011
The Disney group comes closer to the ideal-typical form of the cultural capitalist. With a legendary founder and an accumulation of cinema capital, it developed globally recognized narrations and brand.

Summary

When I began research on the Disney Company, I ran into a veil of innocence which surrounded the firm. This manifested itself in skeptical and amused questions. Indeed, to many analysts of international relations, this subject seemed inconceivable[+] NoteSee: Alexandre Bohas, Disney. Analyse du capitalisme culturel d’Hollywood, thesis defended on December 15th 2007 at the University of Paris 1 Pantheon-Sorbonne.X [1]. In this analysis, I will study the veil of innocence by observing how the common knowledge of Disney played in favor of its economic prosperity and power.

Often neglected for diplomatico-military activities on the world scene, the “structure of knowledge”[+] NoteSusan Strange, States and Markets, 2nd ed., London, Pinter, 1994, p. 119.X [2] must be regarded as a complete dimension of power since it molds people’s practices and collective representations. In this respect, we can draw a parallel with the “soft power of Joseph Nye[+] NoteFor more information on Joseph Nye, see: Soft Power. The Means to Success in World Politics, New York, Public Affairs, 2004 and Joseph Nye’s interview, “Joseph Nye et le soft power”, Inaglobal, October 5th 2011, available on the following web page: inaglobal.fr.X [3]. In this essay, we need to study the fundamental aspect of imageries, universes and knowledge which Hollywood companies diffuse[+] NoteFor an analysis of the current Disney firm, see: Alexandre Bohas, Disney. Un capitalisme mondial du rêve, Paris, L’Harmattan, 2009.X [4].

A cultural capitalism of entertainment

The Disney group comes closer to the ideal-typical form of the cultural capitalist. With a legendary founder and an accumulation of cinema capital, it developed globally recognized narrations and brand. It built itself thanks to the successes of its creations and successful commercial declinations which gave it considerable artistic and financial assets. Whereas many reduce Disney to its parks, productions or by-productions, it is crucial to view it as a complex whole. It is worth noticing that unlike other studios it does not rely upon a much bigger firm such as Columbia within Sony or Universal within General Electric and now Comcast[+] NoteLet’s note that the same phenomenon remains true for Paramount, see: Caroline Nataf, “Paramount: Prisonnière de son patrimoine?”, InaGlobal, January 7th 2011, available at the following web page: inaglobal.fr.X [5]. In addition, it constitutes a content producer while other major studios became cable and satellite access providers. In so doing, the Disney power reflects the force of cultural capitalism founded mainly on the commodification of creative productions.

Nowadays, Disney is based in Burbank and permanently employs 144,000 people with a gross of 38 billion dollars in 2010. It has outstandingly diversified, as its four main poles demonstrate: the Walt Disney Studio (17 % of sales) brings together all the departments directly linked to cinema; Disney Media Networks (45 %) is the unified structure of audiovisual diffusion; Walt Disney Parks and Resorts (29 %) is in charge of the development of parks and resorts; and Disney Consumer Products (7 %) deals with lines of spin-off productions and all the licenses sold in world ancillary markets[+] NoteThe Disney Company, 2009 Year in Review, 2010, p. 1, obtained on the company’s site: corporate.disney.go.comX [6].
 
The Disney firm developments
 
 Source: Alexandre Bohas, Disney. Analyse du capitalisme culturel d’Hollywood, thesis defended on 15th december 2010 - Université de Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, under the supervisition of Mrs Josepha Laroche.

In short, the motion picture company consists first of all in powerful production units (Walt Disney Feature Animation, Pixar, Touchstone Pictures, and Hollywood Pictures). Besides, it possesses a major studio called Buena Vista then renamed Walt Disney studios — which constitutes one of the largest international distribution networks. Despite the specialization of these entities in movies, they are also involved in the television, home video and music spheres. In media domains, the group encompasses one of the three U.S. networks, ABC, which owns a rich channels package including ABC Daytime, ABC News, ABC Sports and ABC Kids. In addition, a large number of thematic programs such as ESPN, Disney Channel, ABC Family, Toon Disney and SOAPnet are internationally diffused by cable. Finally, in 2009 the 11 parks and resorts received globally more than 119 million visitors[+] NoteSee: “Disney Parks See Big Attendance Jump in 2009”, OC Register, 27 April 2009, obtained on the web site: articles.ocregister.com.X [7]. This vast set of diversified and heterogeneous activities holds its coherence and its logic from Disney synergetic strategies.
Back to summary

A Hollywood model of economico-cultural synergies

Global organization of the Disney firm

Source: A.Bohas, op. cit.

The Disney motion picture firm was created in California in 1923. Since it entered the sector after the formation of the major studios, it remained apart in the cinema sector. Indeed, in concentrating on animated films and live action films for children, it never became a fully-fledged major studio in the classic sense; it did not own the complete set of cinematic production, distribution and exploitation assets. While it did not possess movie theaters, its national and international distribution networks were developed later, respectively in the 50s and 90s. Its works and by-productions did not depend on distribution structures. However, the latter turned out to be necessary to capitalize on its successes and maximize the economic profits that they generate. In other words, the Disney hits did not result from the traditionally invoked processes of the studio system.

On the contrary, this success came from synergies operating between economics and culture in the vast domains of entertainment. In fact, it was due more to the programming of attractive narrations on multiple audiovisual supports and in a number of types of entertainment – each reinforcing the other – than from the simple ownership of production and diffusion capacities. Since the 20s, the studio has developed animated pictures which proved to be international successes thanks to original universes, endearing characters – after the fashion of the emblematic Mickey Mouse – and innovative technologies such as the introduction of color and sound. With the release of Steamboat Willie in November 1928, the use of sound in this kind of entertainment provoked international enthusiasm in favor of the famous mouse. Then, in 1932, the Disney company produced the first animated picture in color, Flowers and Trees, which belonged to the Silly Symphonies series. With Technicolor Walt Disney won his first Oscar[+] NoteSteven Watts, The Magic Kingdom: Walt Disney and the American Way of Life, Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1997, p. 64.X [8]. By initiating in 1937 a new type of cinema work – the long animated film – Disney capitalized on a major competitive advantage in a determining manner. With the considerable production cost for the time of 1.5 million dollars, Snow White and the Seven Dwarves was released on December 21st at Carthay Circle and acquired international fame. Nevertheless, these short and long films demanded a number of resources that producer revenues did not cover[+] NoteAll the Box Office figures cited in the study come from the following websites: boxofficemojo.com, the-numbers.com and imdb.com.X [9]. Animation actually required several hundred employees and artists for one work, without counting the fact that distribution and exhibition companies deducted significant revenues from the gross of the film.

This is the reason why Disney took advantage of world recognition of its characters and narratives and developed commercial lines of spin-offs from its first film releases. Under the direction of Herman Kamen, the latter profited from an unprecedented growth. Afterwards, with the expansion of Disney during the 80s, Disney stores were launched. They formed a network of 747 centers in 1999. Besides, activities such as the Mickey Mouse Club were rapidly proposed for children. Gatherings were organized during which kids watched Disney animated pictures together, sang a creed and wore a headband with the famous ears of Mickey Mouse. These clubs organized a true-life experience which constituted a privileged moment for the diffusion of films, derived goods and narrations. In addition, this experience also announced theme parks and a TV show.
 
Non -audiovisual activities of Disney
 
 Source: A.Bohas, op. cit.

A decisive step in the synergetic use of Disney creations took place in 1954-1955 with the use of its universes through cinema, television and attraction parks. Indeed, Walt Disney called on the new medium of TV to collect the necessary funds for the launch of the Disneyland Park. While the Hollywood milieu refused to produce for the small screen, the genius producer concluded an agreement with ABC for programs on the building of a park named Disneyland in exchange of a 35 % stake in the new park. So the success of the program contributed to promote the park in the same way that the Disney Club participated in the success of productions and derived goods. In July 1955, Disneyland Anaheim (California) enjoyed a success which has not faded since. According to Douglas Gomery, the very nature of the studio system changed in the opening days of Disneyland when Disney and ABC linked cinema, television and theme parks[+] NoteDouglas Gomery, The Hollywood Studio System: a History, London, British Film Institute, 2005, p. 265.X [10]. Consequently, the cultural synergies of transnational scope led visitors/consumers/spectators from one activity to another during multimedia declinations of similar narrative universes.
Back to summary

The global constitution of an entertainment civilization

Disney goods and leisure activities have a civilizational dimension. Indeed, they constitute sets of narrative imaginary worlds, entertainment activities and symbolics which are intricated and rooted ideally and materially in the daily life of individuals at the transnational level. They form structuring structures which encourage specific practical knowledge, behavior and uses. Determining socio-economic continuities, they “dictate behavior, orientate choices, implant prejudices”[+] NoteFernand Braudel, Grammaire des civilisations, Paris, Arthaud-Flammarion, 1987, pp. 47, 50, 54.X [11].

As for their ways of acting on socio-economic behaviors, two types can be distinguished: the message itself and the medium through which the latter is conveyed[+] Noteistinction borrowed from the renowned book by Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media. The Extensions of Man,New York, McGraw Hill, 1964.X [12]. First, the company molds collective representations by its audiovisual contents in making audiences sensitive to its symbolics, activities and narrations. In this way, we can even talk of socialization processes. As early as the 20s it has been introducing audiences to young characters whose lives are made of entertainment and play. As children followed by mimetism these narrative figures, this somewhat avant-gardist posture contributed to the promotion of leisure activities. In this respect, some researchers estimate that Disney has encouraged the current culture of youth and the emergence of counter-culture[+] NoteBrode Douglas, From Walt to Woodstock: How Disney Created the Counterculture, Austin, University of Texas Press, 2004.X [13]. Then, the studio also exerts influence over its audiences/spectators/visitors by the medium employed to diffuse contents. By developing its narrations through diversified leisure activities, the attractiveness of its symbols encourages audiences to do activities which they are not used to. For example, in 2010 Disneyland Paris had 15 million visitors, which makes it the first tourist attraction in Europe. However, this sort of leisure is not so widespread in the old world. When the park was built in 1992, other theme parks had very limited numbers of visitors: 0.4 million for La Mer de Sable or Nigloland, 1.8 million for the Asterix park[+] NoteBohas, Disney, op. cit., p. 141.X [14]. In other words, this type of entertainment seemed at odds with European mores and living standards. This is the reason why, despite criticism towards this resort, the exceptional attraction which it has exerted leads to the recognition of the appeal of Disney symbolics. Indeed, this cannot be reduced to the media and financial capabilities of the major studio. It remains essential to underline the attractiveness of its imaginary worlds, the result of an artistic aura and of a long intergenerational socialization process. Nevertheless, Disney cruises attract a lot of families which were previously absent from this sort of trip. In other words, symbolics encourage specific consuming behaviors. Through generations, Disney animated films accompany and favor the emergence of leisure activities in Western societies. They encourage new habits through the attraction which their contents and imaginary worlds produce. As a consequence, perceived over the long term, they have molded mentalities and living standards in many countries. This civilizational dimension of the Disney influence confers upon it a symbolic preponderance over mass consumption markets.
Back to summary

The competitive advantage of a transnational symbolic proximity

The Disney firm succeeded in developing and maintaining on an intergenerational scale a transnational sensitiveness to its symbolics, narrations and universes within its audiences. Thanks to factors that deal with the artistic field such as creation techniques, narrative richness, the maintaining of a magic around its name and characters, Disney has constituted references in the global commercial culture. This economico-cultural advantage does not simply depend on economic strategies but more importantly on the socio-cultural underpinnings of the market which fully act on people’s behavior. What distinguishes an ordinary teacup from one which is branded Disney with the character of Nemo? The latter differs from the former by the cultural and emotional dimensions attached to the brand as well as the young fish. Without considerations concerning the quality, the branded object will be introduced into the market with a higher price than the non-branded one. In addition, this popular figure on an object will even provoke sales. The branded teacup will be sold thanks to the force of the symbol even though the consumer does not need this kind of item. In a nutshell, goods which are derived from creative content generate their own demand. Although all Hollywood major studios managed to generate commercial profits with audiovisual contents, only Disney has maintained through time such a global sense of symbolic and narrative proximity. It has achieved a real cultural heritage status for its name, founder and masterworks. As a result, it organized an enhancement policy of its history and narrative universes with special programs on Walt Disney, periodical reprogramming of its works and the release of sequels. For instance, the emblematic film Snow White and the Seven Dwarves was released in theaters in 1944, 1952, 1958, 1967, 1975, 1983, 1987 and 1993. Then it was sold in 1994 in the form of video and more recently DVD and Blu-Ray. Its universe was used in 1983 for an education-oriented film Snow White: A Lesson in Cooperation while TV shows on the story were broadcast such as The Fairest of Them All (1983) and for the Fiftieth anniversary of its release, Golden Anniversary of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1987)[+] NoteFor more information on Disney productions, see: Smith Dave, Disney A to Z. The Updated Official Encyclopedia, 2nd ed., New York, Hyperion, 1998, pp. 508-509.X [15]. Far from being reserved to American spectators, these TV programs were adapted to foreign audiences by national channels such as TF1 in France. In parallel to this firm policy, a strict control was imposed on the use of its characters. In this respect, Disney is opposed to every use of its creations without authorization. This control stemmed from the loss of value that a disrespectful and degraded use could occasion for these intangible – and most valuable – assets[+] NoteWe can assimilate Disney narrations and characters to intangible assets which refer to non-financial resources that cannot be measured or physically touched. They are created through time and are identified as separated assets.X [16]. This competitive superiority stems from the artistic and emotional dimensions of its commercial culture and so depends on the attractiveness of its creative productions.
Back to summary

A vulnerability to recurrent creativity losses

Disney underwent two major creative crises which affected its profitability and as a consequence its survival as a production entity. They showed the importance of creation for those Hollywood companies whose gross revenues depend highly on their creative capacities. It is possible to identify two periods during which Disney was confronted with a decline: After the death of the founder, the company continued to produce according to the same principles as Walt Disney himself had employed. It did not take into account social evolutions and new generations. With the failure of animated pictures such as Tron (1982), it contemplated concentrating only on theme parks. However, when Michael Eisner came to Disney as CEO, Jeffrey Katzenberg, the new production director, decided to reinvest in animation. Initiating technological innovations and an inspiration from Broadway, the studios enjoyed new found success.

The second period of creative weakness remains the end of the Eisner era in the last part of 90s. Hazardous investments, such as the launch of the search engine Go.com or Disneyland Paris[+] NoteFor more information on these investments, see: Alexandre Bohas, Disney, op. cit., p. 202.X [17], expensive purchases, like ABC, outdated creative visions and film failures brought about enormous financial losses. Although it is easy to make a posteriori opportunity judgments of this or that investment, it is revealing that the three episodes of Pirates of the Caribbean,the largest Disney success at the Box Office with 2.6 billion dollars, were given the green light without and against the approval of Michael Eisner. On the contrary, films announced as the new hits such as Pearl Harbor (2001, 400 million dollars) disappointed audiences as well as critics. In the domain of animation, the release of movies such as Hercules (1997, 250 million dollars) or Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001, 186 million dollars) resulted in large failures. Simultaneously, films produced by other studios like Pixar’s Toy Story II (1999, 485 million dollars) and Finding Nemo (2003, 867 million dollars) were successful in Computer animation[+] NoteOn the rise of the competitor DreamWorks Animation, see: Alexandre Bohas, “DreamWorks Animation SKG or the global triumph of the posture position”, InaGlobal, Nov. 2010, available on the web: inaglobal.fr.X [18]. Often neglected by the theoreticians of cultural industries, the hazards of creativity lead us to reconsider the invulnerability and the power of Hollywood films following the case in point of Disney which even lost its long-established leadership in this sector.
Back to summary

A broken-down monopoly on youth culture

For several generations, Disney has maintained a quasi-monopolistic position over Western youth culture. In this respect, theme parks, derived goods as well as audiovisual contents contributed to reinforce its grip on the entertainment and narrations proposed to young people. They constituted entry barriers to this market. However, this monopoly, based on technology and creative advance, has been confronted with a double challenge from a sectorial and geo-cultural standpoint represented by the success of other companies in these domains, on the one hand, and the lack of recognition of Disney symbolics in rising markets, on the other.

During the first decade of the 21st century, the Disney firm missed the turning point of Computer-Generated technology and lost the creative spirit that characterized it. Indeed, its narrations became increasingly old and tasteless. As a consequence, the whole group suffered from the decline of its notoriety among young generations. Benefiting from Disney’s loss of impetus and inspiration, small firms such as DreamWorks, Pixar or Blue Sky came to enjoy global success thanks to innovative movies. Concerning their characters and universes, they established the figures of Shrek, Nemo and Scrat the squirrel in collective representations and consumer culture. Their wacky style, renewed narrations and technological innovations fascinated their audiences while they contributed to the ageing of Disney characters. For example, the movie Shrek with its “
ugly-cute (affreux mais mignons)” ogres[+] NoteQuotation from Jeffrey Katzenberg mentioned in Frédéric Martel, Mainstream. Enquête sur cette culture qui plaît à tout le monde, Paris, Flammarion, 2010, p. 70.X   [19] and its coward princes appeared as a well-managed parody of Disney and drew attention to the outworn stories developed by the latter. This new universe attracted more spectators with a Box Office of 2.5 billion dollars through 4 films compared to the 186 million dollars earned by Atlantis. Then using the same know-how as Disney, its rival diffused its narrative universes in all the spheres of entertainment with attractions in Universal Studios parks, cruises and derived productions[+] NoteBohas, DreamWorks Animation, op. cit., p. 4.X [20]. As a result, the erstwhile reserved domains of Disney tended to be occupied by rivals. The Burbank company tried to address the issue in acquiring the Pixar studio in 2006. In 2010 this latter produced Toy Story III which became the world’s largest success in animated picture records with a theatrical gross of 1 billion dollars. Disney’s will to regain its lost preponderance also resulted in the acquisition of Marvel whose characters such as Spider Man, Iron Man, and X-Men were used in many blockbusters.
Back to summary

An uncertain penetration in emerging countries

To this infra-sectorial competitiveness, we must add the opening of many potential markets in Asia where middle classes long for leisure and entertainment. In this perspective, Disney is confronted with cultural shocks and radically different consuming behaviors which are related to practical knowledge. Illustratively, advert campaigns for the Hong Kong Disneyland which depicted parents playing with children were misperceived in a Chinese society where parent-children relations remain hierarchical. Besides, promotions ignored the fact that single-child families are the rule. The same park reached attendance targets with difficulty because visitors often did not know the English language and Disney narratives. Some also regret the lack of Chinese culture. All this constitutes as many hindrances to visiting the park[+] NoteAnnual attendance goals were hardly reached in September 2006, one year after the inauguration of the park. 5.2 million people had visited it whereas the initial target was 5.6. See: William Foreman, “Hong Kong Park Misses Visitor Goal”, Orlando Sentinel, 6 Sept. 2006, available on the web at: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/orl-hongkong0606sep06,0,5369380.story.X [21].

 More importantly, the failure of the launch reflected cultural gaps owing to the weak socio-cultural integration in Chinese collective representations. Let’s remark that before distribution structures and economic competition, the question of cultural socialization is fundamental for the prosperity of the Hollywood major studio. As the major studio wanted to accelerate the integration process, it decided to invest massively in the audiovisual sector but also commercially in many Disney stores throughout the country. In 2010, it concluded an agreement with the Beijing government on the building of a new park in Shanghai on the premise that parks functioned as a media of diffusion and cultural molding.
Back to summary
In conclusion, the Disney major remains ideally typical of Hollywood cultural capitalism since its future appears linked to its capacity to continuously renew its creativity and preserve the magic of its productions. Indeed, its prosperity depends on its artistic dimensions and the aura which it generates.

In the long run, the company has managed to maintain narrative universes and cultural references through several generations on the world scene, which explains its economico-cultural domination and its competitive advantage compared with other leisure companies. Yet, the risks taken by this firm should not be neglected as the emergence of other animation studios and the penetration of new industrialized countries prove to be large challenges for its profitability and lasting future.

REFERENCES

  • BOHAS Alexandre, Disney. Un capitalisme mondial du rêve, Paris, L’Harmattan, 2009.
  • BOHAS Alexandre, "DreamWorks Animation SKG ou le triomphe mondial de la posture anti-Disney", InaGlobal, nov. 2010.
  • BRODE Douglas, From Walt to Woodstock: How Disney Created the Counterculture, Austin, University of Texas Press, 2004.
  • BRYMAN Alan, The Disneyization of Society, Londres, Sage, 2004.
  • The Disney Company, Annual Report 2009, 2010, p. 1 obtenu sur le site de l’entreprise.
  • GOMERY Douglas, The Hollywood Studio System: a History, Londres, British Film Institute, 2005, p. 265.
  • MARTEL Frédéric, Mainstream. Enquête sur cette culture qui plaît à tout le monde, Paris, Flammarion, 2010.
  • NYE Joseph S., Soft Power. The Means to Success in World Politics, New York, Public Affairs, 2004.
  • STRANGE Susan, States and Markets, 2nd edition, Londres, Pinter, 1994.

---
Photo credit: The Walt Disney Company' logo
Back to summary
  • 1. See: Alexandre Bohas, Disney. Analyse du capitalisme culturel d’Hollywood, thesis defended on December 15th 2007 at the University of Paris 1 Pantheon-Sorbonne.
  • 2. Susan Strange, States and Markets, 2nd ed., London, Pinter, 1994, p. 119.
  • 3. For more information on Joseph Nye, see: Soft Power. The Means to Success in World Politics, New York, Public Affairs, 2004 and Joseph Nye’s interview, “Joseph Nye et le soft power”, Inaglobal, October 5th 2011, available on the following web page: inaglobal.fr.
  • 4. For an analysis of the current Disney firm, see: Alexandre Bohas, Disney. Un capitalisme mondial du rêve, Paris, L’Harmattan, 2009.
  • 5. Let’s note that the same phenomenon remains true for Paramount, see: Caroline Nataf, “Paramount: Prisonnière de son patrimoine?”, InaGlobal, January 7th 2011, available at the following web page: inaglobal.fr.
  • 6. The Disney Company, 2009 Year in Review, 2010, p. 1, obtained on the company’s site: corporate.disney.go.com
  • 7. See: “Disney Parks See Big Attendance Jump in 2009”, OC Register, 27 April 2009, obtained on the web site: articles.ocregister.com.
  • 8. Steven Watts, The Magic Kingdom: Walt Disney and the American Way of Life, Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1997, p. 64.
  • 9. All the Box Office figures cited in the study come from the following websites: boxofficemojo.com, the-numbers.com and imdb.com.
  • 10. Douglas Gomery, The Hollywood Studio System: a History, London, British Film Institute, 2005, p. 265.
  • 11. Fernand Braudel, Grammaire des civilisations, Paris, Arthaud-Flammarion, 1987, pp. 47, 50, 54.
  • 12. istinction borrowed from the renowned book by Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media. The Extensions of Man,New York, McGraw Hill, 1964.
  • 13. Brode Douglas, From Walt to Woodstock: How Disney Created the Counterculture, Austin, University of Texas Press, 2004.
  • 14. Bohas, Disney, op. cit., p. 141.
  • 15. For more information on Disney productions, see: Smith Dave, Disney A to Z. The Updated Official Encyclopedia, 2nd ed., New York, Hyperion, 1998, pp. 508-509.
  • 16. We can assimilate Disney narrations and characters to intangible assets which refer to non-financial resources that cannot be measured or physically touched. They are created through time and are identified as separated assets.
  • 17. For more information on these investments, see: Alexandre Bohas, Disney, op. cit., p. 202.
  • 18. On the rise of the competitor DreamWorks Animation, see: Alexandre Bohas, “DreamWorks Animation SKG or the global triumph of the posture position”, InaGlobal, Nov. 2010, available on the web: inaglobal.fr.
  • 19. Quotation from Jeffrey Katzenberg mentioned in Frédéric Martel, Mainstream. Enquête sur cette culture qui plaît à tout le monde, Paris, Flammarion, 2010, p. 70.
  • 20. Bohas, DreamWorks Animation, op. cit., p. 4.
  • 21. Annual attendance goals were hardly reached in September 2006, one year after the inauguration of the park. 5.2 million people had visited it whereas the initial target was 5.6. See: William Foreman, “Hong Kong Park Misses Visitor Goal”, Orlando Sentinel, 6 Sept. 2006, available on the web at: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/orl-hongkong0606sep06,0,5369380.story.
Would you like to add or correct something? Contact the editorial staff