Original Copy, and other (oxy)morons

It's easy to spot the big issues in hindsight, but it's difficult when you're in the middle of them.

On a wrongness scale of 1 to 10, Hitler's Third Reich was a 10.

We can see that now, and we're impressed by the fellow in the picture who perhaps had reservations about joining in with the popular movement.

Most folks followed along with little critical thought being part of their decision to do so.  They became copies of a proffered norm, and participants in extraordinary wickedness.

Noel Jones, in “The Battle for the Mind” offers that once a man accepts the world’s ways, that becomes the character and core of who he is.  We are giving someone else control of our choices and future.  Fitted to the norm, we are no longer an original, but a copy.  We are not in control of our own mind, we are being shaped by something or someone else. It means we are living a scripted role, having 'cut and pasted' the world’s ways and thoughts over our own; we are conformed to the world, a moron (foolish, thoughtless, senseless).

It is better, but not easier.

Are we originals?  How often do we notice the inner conflict that comes with being an original?  Or are we comfortable with what we see.  Truth be told, we're all tainted to some degree.

It's not an easy path, accepting some but not all parts of our culture, supporting some but not all of a candidate's positions, questioning 'fair and balanced' reporting. And how about teaching our kids to think clearly and for themselves, to lead rather than follow.

We face difficult tasks today, and we're right in the middle of it all.  We get to choose, of course, but it will take some deliberate thought and work every day. The hardest question, perhaps, is not 'what am I against' but 'what is my hope for my own character and that of my children'.


A clue to our own battle: a typical day will be marked with occasions where we say to ourselves, "no, that's not what I hope for," and adjusting our behavior.  It may be a television show, a sexually exploitive advertisement, our own anger while driving, a harsh conversation, ....

Everything

As a youngster, I was told with a smile ...

 Things are not as they seem.

    You were born into a world at war.

       Everything you do counts. 

Life is filled with choices; right and wrong are often politically obscured.  Our difficult task, discerning what is right and standing firm.  It requires grace, broad understanding, and an open mind to the thoughts and needs of others, and it requires courage in the face of personal loss.  The world our children will inherit is shaped by our choices.

There is no easy path to what is right and good.

(occasioned by a clash of ethical concerns; not the first.)

A Peacock's Tail Feathers

A Corvette serves the same purpose as a peacock's tail feathers.  True?  Perhaps at least partly true.

A Ferrari or a super lux pickup truck for a guy who never hauls anything, however, is an entirely different matter.  Oops, no they're not.

Opulence, luxury, and excess all may stem at least in part from a need for significance in comparison to others; e.g., fancy tail feathers.  So if we know that, why do we play the game anyway? There's more.

It's unlikely that we would say to ourselves, "I want to look really cool, so I'll spend the extra $30K for a really cool-looking car."  More likely, we'll generate a list of reasons for why this or that more prestigious brand-name item is a better choice than the reasonably priced equivalent.  We justify such choices more on our wants than on our need, perhaps.  Enough isn't enough, more is better.  True?  Yes, that's another part of the equation.  We all do our version of that sort of thing.

A favorite fellow in Spain recounted for us how his stateside sponsors had raised money and bought him a nice Volvo.  He drove it briefly, but noted that it set him apart from the regular folks he wanted to serve; they didn't know what it meant that he had this really exotic (to them) car, but it was a wedge between him and their world.  He sold it immediately and bought a normal, boring sedan for his family and went back to being among those he served.  Interesting choice.
Want a better use for your money?

Interesting Advertising Ethics

Neuromarketing; just a side note on a bizarre practice in the marketplace

Manipulated!!!  I wasn't going to spend any money, but I did!
It's been going on for a couple of decades as advertisers learn how to directly target our unconscious brain processes.  If they can bypass our intended decision-making and trigger an emotional purchase, they win, especially if we intended to pass up the item.

"... techniques used in the ad to override the consumer’s rational decision-making process...."*

That moves beyond persuasion to coercion, of course.  It intrudes well past a reasonable expectation of privacy inside our own heads.  We'll all enjoy the coming court battles, probably on A&E.  

The problem, as always, is that technology and culture change much faster than institutions and government regulation can.

Corporate neuromarketers:

There are more than 90 companies providing neuromarketing services to Fortune 500 companies.  A partial list of entities that appear to be using those neuromarketing services and methods:

• A&E Television 
• Blue Cross/Blue Shield California 
• Olive Ranch
• Campbell’s Soup 
• CBS 
• Citi Daimler 
• Disney 
• Frito-Lay 
• Google 
• L’Oreal 
• McDonald’s 
• Microsoft 
• Nestle 
• Procter & Gamble 
• Scottrade 
• Starcom 
• MediaVest 
• Viacom 
• The Weather Channel

Potential Legal Issues*

The use of neuroscience to enhance advertising appeal raises a number of legal issues in three broad areas:


• Consumer Protection*

As neuromarketing techniques become more sophisticated and arguably more powerful, the industry will likely face increasing resistance from regulators concerned that consumers are being misled into believing they want or need a product they have no use for, or deceived into thinking a purchase arises from their rational choice whereas in fact they are being induced to act based on stimulated subconscious impulse. To regulators, these techniques may cross the line from fair encouragement to unlawful coercion. At least one European regulatory agency has already taken action against a financial services company employing neuromarketing. We expect there will be similar enforcement actions in the United States before long.

... so well received by millions
 ... but it's still just product marketing for sales.

• Privacy Issues*

Some of the more aggressive claims by neuromarketers about the power of their techniques to understand brain function and impact behavior have predictably raised privacy concerns among regulators and the general public. At a time of increased sensitivity to corporate monitoring of consumer behavior, thanks largely to the proliferation of Internet tracking and targeting technologies, the prospect of additional intrusions into personal thought processes has raised heightened concern. In addition to facing scrutiny by European data protection authorities and the Federal Trade Commission, neuromarketers may soon be confronted by the burgeoning privacy plaintiffs’ bar in the U.S., which in the last year alone has filed more than 150 lawsuits alleging that new marketing techniques, such as online behavioral advertising, violate consumer privacy.

• Tort Issues*

The use of neuromarketing techniques to induce purchase of a product which, if misused, could cause personal injury, raises important questions under the law of products liability. It is not at all difficult to imagine product liability claims being asserted, especially by or on behalf of children and other vulnerable groups, that neuromarketing wrongfully induced the claimants to use products that are unreasonably dangerous for them, or to over-consume or become dependent on unhealthy foods or beverages, by overriding their rational powers of self-control. Other tort claims may be advanced under a theory that by penetrating to internal areas of brain function, neuromarketing impermissibly “touches” a protected personal domain giving rise to liability for battery or assault.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission will also have keen interest in neuromarketing techniques that are thought to be unduly persuasive, given the Commission’s mandate to prohibit “unfair and deceptive” trade practices under Section 5 of the FTC Act, particularly when it is used to sell products to children.

* from "Neuromarketing: Legal and Policy Issues" ~ Covington and Burling, LLP

Here's hoping for a full scale legal challenge and upheaval in the industry.  But that's rather unlikely any time soon, isn't it.

So what course might we choose that will let us and our families choose our own values and lifestyle?  Is there a vaccination for advertising vulnerability?

Hint: when your child mentions a brand name they prefer, is that reasoned thinking?

Commercialized Children - Continued

Sex sells.

When children are involved, has the marketing industry crossed a line?

Such practices continue, generally unchanged, with full knowledge and deliberate intent by the industry.

For the right wing conservatives and free market capitalists among us, here's a glass of cold water in the face:

"For the last few decades, critics such as Thomas Frank, Kevin Phillips, David Harvey and many others have warned us, and rightly so, that right-wing conservatives and free-market fundamentalists have been dismantling government by selling it off to the highest or "friendliest" bidder. But what they have not recognized adequately is that what has also been sold off are both our children and our collective future, and that the consequences of this catastrophe can only be understood within the larger framework of a politics and market philosophy that view children as commodities and democracy as the enemy. In a democracy, education in any sphere, whether it be the public schools or the larger media, is, or should be, utterly adverse to treating young people as individual units of economic potential and as walking commodities. And it is crucial not to "forget" that democracy should not be confused with a hypercapitalism."

Among the factors facing the nation, cultural change is being imposed by a powerful and conscienceless marketplace.  We've removed all the guard dogs, and the flock is being mauled by wolves.

The question remains, Can our children be protected?  From Commercialized Children:

Successful strategies:

• Parental involvement, thoughtful access controls along with frequent discussions on the rationale.  Make the strategy a family effort with a good goal for all.
• Parental example of rising above the celebrity and materialistic messages along with thoughtful and perhaps light-hearted discussions about why.  Limit 'screen' exposure for the whole family, perhaps as a collaborative decision.
• Stay focused; use opportunities to point out and discuss how advertising is exaggeration, overstatement, and an attempt to get money, nothing more.  Do the same with celebrity issues, famous for being famous.
• Live on a thoughtful budget, and include the kids in the planning.  Do some discount and thrift store shopping; it can help put brand and style in perspective.
• Be part of a community and church that does a lot of things outside, together, and apart from the 'style' culture.  Sports, ballet, and gymnastics can be great motivators.  Worship and getting together with like-minded folks in church is a great way to refocus on what matters.
• Leave the country.  Go live for a while in the developing world with maybe one television channel and no internet.  Live like the other 80% of the world and learn how survival works.  Okay, that's not for everybody.
• Have a goal; discuss it, write it down, do the work for your own life and for the person your child will become.  It is not a small thing.  

Kids are smart; with help, they can learn how to make their own decisions about such things with objectivity and a good conscience.  

As a youngster, I was told with a smile ...

 Things are not as they seem.
    You were born into a world at war.

       Everything you do counts. 

Commercialized Children

Who gets to shape the way our kids think?
Well, we as parents do, of course.  Is that all?
Then there's school, teachers, and peers, of course, but who is the biggest player in the game?

Who has the right to instruct my kids?  
Who gets to tell them what life choices to make?

Surprisingly, a significant impact is made by industry and child-targeted advertising.  (see:  When Childhood Gets Commercialized, Can Children Be Protected?)

For starters, we have an epidemic of childhood obesity and the related rise in medical diseases such as hypertension and type II diabetes. (Surgeon General's report)  Curious how that happened?

Reputable children’s advocates have pointed to food marketing as a major cause of the shift to unhealthy diets of sugar, fat and salt. They point to the billions of dollars of food marketing directed at children; it is on television, in schools, on the internet, and in the grocery store. 

The critique goes beyond food to include the marketing of violence, unhealthy body images, and materialism. Social scientists and pediatricians have compiled an impressive array of research results about the effect of our consumer culture on children. 

Vocal industry opponents argue that children are suffering from "marketing-related diseases” and that marketers are engaging in a “hostile takeover of childhood.”  

Beyond the products, scholars point out that advertising to children is inherently inappropriate, even exploitative. Research shows that kids can't objectively evaluate persuasive intent, they don't grasp the basis of advertising, and that marketing bypasses cognition and targets emotions.

Children caught up in materialistic behavior
will make 3000 requests per year for
 products and services.

A researcher asked a group of six-year-olds to explain the purpose of advertising and gave them four choices. Their responses are as follows:

• don’t know – 31 percent
• for a break – 33 percent
• for information – 36 percent
• to persuade – 0 percent

“At six years old, children don’t show awareness of advertising’s persuasive intent,” he said. “Most do by eight years old, but ... they still see it as a benefit to the customer and not as a benefit to the seller.”

"Advertising is a massive, multi-million dollar project that's having an enormous impact on child development," says clinical psychologist Allen D. Kanner, PHD. "The sheer volume of advertising is growing rapidly and invading new areas of childhood, like our schools." The advertising industry employs psychologists to exploit things like why 3- to 7-year-olds gravitate toward toys that transform themselves into something else and why 8- to 12-year-olds love to collect things.

According to Kanner, the result is not only an epidemic of materialistic values among children, but also something he calls "narcissistic wounding" of children. Thanks to advertising, he says, children have become convinced that they're inferior if they don't have an endless array of new products.

Can children be protected?

Self-regulation by the media has been counter productive.  The public demand for PG-13 and R rated entertainment soared after the standard's implementation.  Young children (2-12) and children (12+) are increasingly exposed to unregulated sources via cable, satellite, and internet.

Attempts at protective regulation have been successfully countered by industry in the courts and Congress.  The family, community, and church have less of a role in the development of a child than ever before.  Character formation is, at best, a period filled with aggressive conflict between parents and an increasingly intrusive world.

Successful strategies:

• Parental involvement, thoughtful access controls along with frequent discussions on the rationale.  Make the strategy a family effort with a good goal for all.
• Parental example of rising above the celebrity and materialistic messages along with thoughtful and perhaps light-hearted discussions about why.  Limit 'screen' exposure for the whole family, perhaps as a collaborative decision.
• Stay focused; use opportunities to point out and discuss how advertising is exaggeration, overstatement, and an attempt to get money, nothing more.  Do the same with celebrity issues, famous for being famous.
• Live on a thoughtful budget, and include the kids in the planning.  Do some discount and thrift store shopping; it can help put brand and style in perspective.
• Be part of a community and church that does a lot of things outside, together, and apart from the 'style' culture.  Sports, ballet, and gymnastics can be great motivators.  Worship and getting together with like-minded folks in church is a great way to refocus on what matters.
• Leave the country.  Go live for a while in the developing world with maybe one television channel and no internet.  Live like the other 80% of the world and learn how survival works.  Okay, that's not for everybody.
• Have a goal; discuss it, write it down, do the work for your own life and for the person your child will become.  It is not a small thing.  

Kids are smart; with help, they can learn how to make their own decisions about such things with objectivity and a good conscience.

For a cultural counterpoint: in the airport between flights, I met an interesting Middle-Eastern fellow with whom I shared a conversation for perhaps half an hour. His wife and children were with him, but I didn't have permission to speak with them nor were they inclined to join in the conversation with me, being that I wasn't family or community. That's the way his culture works.

Currently, Texas, Arizona, Colorado, Tennessee, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Utah, Nevada, and New Mexico allow advertising on their school buses.  Additional states are considering overturning their long-standing prohibitions on school bus ads in a misguided attempt to solve their budget deficits. That's the way our culture works.

Note:  McDonald’s, the world’s largest fast food restaurant chain, reportedly spends $500 million a year on ads, of which approximately 40% is targeted to children. They serve 60 million customers a day.  (Horgen et al, 2001).   Virtually all children’s food advertising is for junk food, and in addition to child-targeted ads, children are heavily exposed to food advertising nominally directed at adults. (Byrd-Bredbenner and Grasso 1999). Nationwide, schools are reported to receive $750 million a year in marketing dollars from snack and processed food companies. (Egan 2002).