I'm working on several articles for a sabbatical this semester, developing some ideas I've had in my head for a long time about the impact of technology on live story telling, and, additionally, the way we're teaching students entering the field. I have in my head that some theatre people harbor an inherent snobbery against non-theatre forms of live entertainment. To me, a wrestling show, concert, corporate event, brand activation, etc is all a part of the same show business that incorporates everything from the busking performer on the street corner to the opera star; all of these forms use live performance to tell a story. Some stories are told purely for the purposes of art; some are for commerce, some are something in between. But I have encountered over the years an attitude, especially from some academic theatre people, that working in these related fields is akin to becoming a mechanic or a plumber (which in my opinion are important and honorable professions). In my own school we had a (fortunately now retired) theatre PhD from another department take one of our best students aside and tell her that she was wasting her time, and should find another area of study because she was heading to a life of "setting up PAR cans in parking lots". That student went on to be a Local 1 member and worked on Broadway. I've also had a number of professor colleagues at other schools tell me privately that they are very jealous of us being able to do a haunted house every year, because their theatre snob led faculty would never even consider a project that was just "spectacle". Anyway, before writing about it, I want to make sure that my perception of the snobbery is still a thing and not some long-dead strawman in my head from long-ago theatre school experiences. Does anyone have recent experiences where a teacher/mentor/public figure/colleague/etc exhibited snobbery about or derision for working in some non-theatre show field?