Thanks Ryan, this video was really eye opening and scary at the same time! I watched the rest of the programs. Mr. Rushkoff has a few other programs I plan to watch—all seem interesting.
I shared some of the information with my teenager and we had a nice conversation. The new generation is being raised with a weak set of values making them very vulnerable to the marketing by people who don’t care about their well being. The more aware we are of the tricks being played, the more capable we are of resisting and giving them the tools they need at a young age not to be vulnerable to this kind of marketing.
Thanks again for sharing such thought provoking topics.
The insights of cultural/media theorist Douglas Rushkoff are always contemporary and often prescient. He was deciphering the social codes of the virtual psyche, lifestyle, and marketplace before such concepts were formally identified by the so-called “machine.” TheMerchants Of Cool is a brilliant analysis of the incorporation of youth pop-culture that Ruskhoff created while working as a correspondent for PBS Frontline. This is a very entertaining documentary. You’ll learn a lot too. Let me know what you think in the comments section.
Thanks to auntyevil for permission to use this Photo.
One concept that’s particularly influential in contemporary culture is that of social currency, an abstract exchange value that we’re all unconsciously aware of and have perhaps unknowingly utilized as a tool to gain interactive access to others on a social level. Content is essentially seen as a medium for interaction, not an end in itself, but more importantly a basis for human interaction. A new study was recently published on the “psychology of social networks” and the researchers do an admirable job of piecing together the social puzzle without drawing too many predetermined conclusions. In other words, within an Internet-oriented context, they accept that the network model of human communication can not be studied from a static perspective. The behavior of humans in an online environment does not parallel that of monkeys in a cage, perhaps less due to the complexity of humans than the fact that the virtual cage is always unlocked, permitting us to come and go as we please—as long as we’re never alone of course. Check out this interesting study and please share your perspectives with the Ashworth student community.
Thanks to Karen Geiger for permission to use this Photo.
I really enjoyed Seth Woolf’s response to Deb’s solid commentary on his previous post. Since we don’t yet have our comments section clearly displayed on this blog, I’ve posted this conversation as an original post for everyone to see and engage. What are your thoughts?
From Deb:
Dear Sir — I believe you have missed the point of what Dr. Phil has been trying to achieve. As young people, typically all of us do not realize the consequences of actions. I can indicate to you that as a owner of a company, these kind of posting would stop me from hiring an individual, no so much as their right to participate in such activity, but in that the judgment of said individual is not who I want representing my company. In short…it is that simple and professionally said individuals are limiting their options later in life, as they age and realize that childhood was not meant for public display.
From Seth:
It is perhaps true that I have “missed the point of what Dr. Phil has been trying to achieve” but, if so, it is because I find his aims pointless. I simply feel the cause and effect of this situation has been confused. If employers look down on such technological behavior and confessionalism, I think it says more about their own bourgeoise biases, and less about the quality of the candidates. More importantly, I would also like to counter your claim that “As young people, typically all of us do not realize the consequences of our actions.” This is a sweeping statement about young people, one which I do not follow. For one, I don’t see “young people” as a definable, homogeneous group. I’m 22, am I a young person? What about a twelve year old in Auswitz? What about an eighty year old with the mental capacities of a person one tenth his or her age? Is it for individuals to decide, society, or who? Similarly, I don’t see how a person, regardless of age, could realize all the consequences of his or her actions. Everyone, again regardless of age, must simply act with what information they have at a given moment. (more…)
Thanks to David Zellaby for permission to use this Photo.
I have believed this for the longest time, while I was in school that those dreaded essays topics used by English and Health teachers Junior High and High School are used for identifying potential problem student.
These very personal essay topics:
“What was the saddest day of your life?”
“Describe a family argument, and how it turned out.”
“Write fictional essay of why you would run away.” and other similar essays….
I have always wondered, why they would ask such personal questions? This is not the type of question I would ask someone I barely know, so why would they ask the class? My theory was to weed out those with psychology, emotional, and family problems. I asked a Doctor of Education and his opinion was that it’s designed to find and identify potential problem students. Another rationale is to bring-out the passion in a student’s writing.
In 1991, first period Health Class, I refused to write one of those essays. I just did not do it. One student stated he did not wish to share that information. The health teacher yelled at him. I simply said “I forgot”, and left it at that. I also got yelled at for not turning in an assignment. The topic was “Write a Fictional essay of why you would run away from home.” My thought was, I am not going to run away, I have no intentions to, and I refuse to write such rubbish. (more…)
Thanks to Li Evans for permission to use this Photo.
A recent Dr. Phil episode was all about women posting “inappropriate” pictures of themselves (i.e. sexually provocative or evincing extensive drinking or illicit drug use) on facebook and myspace. Even more than usual, today’s episode exhibited Dr. Phil’s proclivity toward using sweeping generalizations and blatant logical fallacies as the foundation of his analyses, which might better be characterized as arguments, if not Philicies.
The good doctor was especially fond of:
Ad Hominem: “Okay, but you drink and you’re seventeen!”
Appeals to tradition: “You think most people see this as liberating?”
False dilemmas: ”These girls either don’t know what they’re doing, or are making stupid decisions.”
Guilt by association: “You don’t post the pictures, but you do run the facebook group!”
Slippery slope: “You’re not gonna be able to get into any colleges, or get any jobs!”
Biased sampling: “So, you went into a coma after hitting your head from drinking?”
The straw man: “I don’t look at these pictures and see Susan B. Anthony.”
Beyond these simple, generally theory-less critiques, there are also deep, philosophically disturbing problems with Dr. Phil’s contentions. First of all, there is a large thematic and circumstantial problem with Phil’s approach. For one, though occasionally advised guests and viewers to refrain from participating in wild, compromising behavior, his focus was much more on simply restraining oneself from posting pictures of such behavior on popular internet forums. As such, his argument is not, in fact, about ethics, aesthetics, or everyday behavior as such, but rather the mouthings of a tragically unhip Luddite. A Marxist analysis of this strange parsing is very elucidating. If an individual of relatively simple means and power posts such a revealing picture or written omission, it is quite damaging to job prospects, the social order, and even the rituals of courtship. If, one the other, a major corporation or commercial power (i.e. Harpo productions, CBS, etc.) reveals selective information or negatively portrays someone it is not only said to be permissible, it is in fact lauded as being beneficial.
Consider this simple hypothetical: you are an employer combing through candidates to fill a position in your company. You have settled on two candidates. The first, Ms. A, had a strong interview, resume, and references, but she has a picture on facebook of her clearly intoxicated, and vomiting. The second, Mr. B, also had a strong interview, resume, and references, and though he has no facebook account, he did appear on the Dr. Phil show in an episode that focused on spousal abuse. If you had to choose one of these two candidates, you would probably choose Ms. A. Similarly, one could imagine a website where users can communicate with others, view pictures and even movies of dubious social behavior, and learn potentially sensitive information about a variety of people. Is this website facebook or myspace? Yes, quite possibly. On the other hand, it might just as easily be Dr. Phil’s website. (more…)
Thanks to Kena Takahashi for permission to use this Photo.
Most of us are a bit uneasy about the idea that somebody can influence our thinking without our awareness. We are bombarded by enough obvious persuasive messages as it is, without having to worry about messages we don’t even notice.
Although this example is not exactly subtle, and one wonders if it in fact has any effect on behavior, the PETA brick, purchased at the San Diego Padres’ PETCO stadium, spells out “Boycott Petco” if you just look at the first letter of each word.
The study of subliminal messages (messages that are “sub” or below our “limin” or threshold of awareness) has a long history. Back in 1956, social psychologist James Vicary claimed that he could boost sales of movie popcorn and Coca Cola by flashing the messages “eat popcorn” or “drink Coca Cola” during a movie. In spite of Vicary’s later confession that he made up his data, not to mention the failure of scientists to replicate his results, many people still believe that subliminal messages work. Americans spend more than 50 million dollars a year on subliminal tapes for self-improvement, and much controversy has surrounded subliminal or back-masked messages in music.
More recently, Vokey has distinguished between a person’s objective and subjective thresholds for awareness [1]. A person responding to a stimulus at the objective threshold will do no better than chance in identifying its presence, and these stimuli appear to have no impact on behavior. However, a stimulus falling between a person’s objective and subjective thresholds will be detected at better than chance levels, and does appear to have the ability to influence behavior. (more…)
“Children… with major depression were perceived (by 81% of the sample) as somewhat likely or very likely to be dangerous to themselves or others, compared with children with asthma (15%) or those with “daily troubles” (13%).”
and, later:
“…compared with the child with “daily troubles,” the vignette child with depression was more than twice as likely to be assessed as dangerous toward others and ten times as likely to be assessed as dangerous toward himself or herself.”
Now, you lose no money assuming the public at large merely guess at probabilities. So what they think may be right, wrong, both– who knows. But whatever they think, it’s probably important to quote them correctly:
“The issue that was highlighted by this study that was really concerning to us was that Americans have linked depression in youth and violence, particularly violence towards others,” said Dr. Pescosolido [”distinguished professor of sociology, Indiana University.”] [emphasis mine, but, face it, really theirs.]
Well, no, that’s not what the public thinks, at least according to your study. They think that depression leads to violence against themselves, and maybe towards others. Only 9% thought violence towards others was very likely. The majority thought violence towards others was not likely. Right? (more…)
Thanks to Chris Gladis for permission to use this Photo.
Psychology studies that rely on deceiving participants have shown we often have little clue what’s going on in our own minds. But what about in everyday situations where trickery isn’t involved?
Here are four everyday situations - shopping, reading, watching TV and judging other people - and four experiments that show how little we know in each situation about what’s really going on in our minds (Nisbett & Wilson, 1977).
Shopping
For this study researchers set themselves up in a mall pretending to carry out a consumer survey on nightgowns and nylon stockings. Passersby were asked to evaluate what they were told were four different nightgowns and four different pairs of stockings. In fact, all four items were identical.
Quite by accident they discovered a positional effect for the identical goods: people seemed to prefer the item that was on the far right. In fact this effect was really obvious for the stockings. The right-most pair, although identical to the left-most was preferred by a factor of four to one.
When asked why they had chosen a particular item, no one mentioned its position. Even when experimenters suggested to people that the position might have an effect, most participants looked at best very confused and at worst utterly dismissive.
Result: these people didn’t have a clue why they preferred one identical pair of stockings over another.
Reading
In this study participants read a passage from the novel ‘Rabbit, Run’ by John Updike. The extract from the book involves an emotionally charged scene in which an alcoholic mother, while washing her baby in the bath, accidentally drowns and kills her.
Thanks to Jordan Garn for permission to use this Photo.
I have never liked the term “learning disability,” preferring instead to use the term “learning difference.” Is this just more PC-speak? It seems to me that the identification of somebody as “learning disabled” is rather arbitrary. We don’t refer to people as “athletically disabled” or “musically disabled,” and send them to remedial classes. A literate culture cares a lot about verbal and mathematical skills, but in other realities, these talents might not count for much. Should we ever be so stupid as to bomb ourselves, my guess is that the Hell’s Angel is more likely to survive the new world order than the accountant.
We know that many serious conditions have compensatory aspects that keep them in the population, such as the protection from malaria that is the flip side of sickle cell anemia, or the creativity that seems to correlate with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Obviously, not all conditions have such benefits, but it is interesting to consider the ones that do.
Having spent a lot of time with my two favorite people with dyslexia, Mr. F and Karen, I was always dazzled by what they did well. Yes, writing was a struggle, especially for Karen, whose love of public relations plopped her in some exceedingly challenging reporting classes in the journalism departments of her universities. No spell check on lab work? Catastrophe! But these struggles were always offset by some amazing creativity. Karen just had her first-year research project accepted for presentation at the prestigious International Public Relations Conference…do I sound like a proud Mom or what? (more…)
Subscribe to Feed
