Commercialism is Kidnapping Our Brains Without Our Consent

Image courtesy Koninklijke NKBV/Flickr.

Every February the Banff Festival of Mountain Films World Tour comes to Ellsworth, Maine, near where I live; it’s a highlight of the winter for us. We love watching the best films of the several hundred submissions in Mountain Sports and Mountain Culture, and without fail, unless I am traveling for work, I attend all the nights of the tour. As I did this year.

As usual, there were amazing films, showcasing incredible athletes and powerful stories. But this year there was a new, unexpected, and dismaying shift toward commercialism. The festival is sponsored by many companies. Common among them are National Geographic, along with companies that produce outdoor gear and clothing, trail bars and other foods, etc. The sponsors receive a good deal of publicity. They’re featured in the program and on the visually stunning and powerful opening festival film that introduces the tour. If you attend the festival, you can’t possibly miss the sponsors.

Commercial Overkill

This year, however, there were more product placements than I’d ever seen before. One athlete – a trail runner – was filmed repeatedly talking to the camera in one outfit or another with Salamon plastered all over it. Another – a snowboarder/base jumper – was filmed numerous times driving her Nissan, with Nissan painted on the hood in huge letters; Nissan painted across her snowboard; Nissan on her helmet. Her friend and fellow adventurer wore a Red Bull helmet. In another film, we watched an athlete packing his trail bag with Clif Bars and regularly saw him in his hat sporting a Clif Bar patch.

As if this weren’t enough, the festival hit its commercial rock bottom with the showing of the film “Petzl Roc Trip China,” a beautifully choreographed film of rock climbers coming to a remote area of China to climb its gorgeous walls and arches. The film was produced by the rock and ice climbing gear company Petzl. Petzl’s name was everywhere, including – shockingly – in the music. A Chinese man appeared several times in the film singing “Petzl, Petzl, Petzl.” Had Petzl funded this gorgeous film and left itself out of the title and singing, including its name only on the opening and closing credits, I would find myself feeling quite positive about this company. Instead I left planning to avoid Petzl products from now on.

It bothered me that Banff was willing to bring such films on tour, and in so doing seemingly embrace the encroaching commercialism of their otherwise amazing festival. I understand that athletes, especially those in sports that are not lucrative, may need sponsorships; but Banff could limit the commercialization in their own festival. There were almost 400 submissions in this year’s festival. Twenty-eight films were chosen to go on tour. It’s hard for me to imagine there weren’t films just as worthy of airing that weren’t advertisements for companies and their products. If Banff doesn’t say no, then the commercialization will not only continue but likely increase.

What’s the Harm?

Every time I go to a national theater chain and pay for my $8-10 ticket and then have to sit through photo advertisements and commercials, I am stunned by our willingness as citizens to accept this. Every year it gets worse. Now it has spread to a festival like Banff.

Some may wonder what’s the harm? Petzl created a beautiful, creative film about climbing in China. Petzl makes climbing equipment. No big deal. So what if Red Bull is being advertised on a climbing helmet or hat? Who cares if Nissan has its name front and center in scene after scene of a mountain sports film?

This is why it’s a big deal: We’re all being branded, and it’s happening younger and younger. We are losing the ability to discern our needs from our desires and base our desires on our deepest beliefs and values, rather than on others’ manipulations and influence.

They’ve Come for Our Brains (and Our Money)

Recently I taught a week-long course at a middle school in rural Maine. Half the kids in that class live in homes without television in a state without billboards. Every single one of them lives in a home that composts. Almost half raise chickens. This is not your typical class of American children. Yet when I tested their commercial knowledge, asking them if they could recognize companies by their logo or the first letter in their brand, they were experts, just like kids across the U.S. Most would have gotten an A+ had they been tested on their brand knowledge. (Feel free to test yourself in my TEDx talk, Educating for Freedom.)

They also thought that they were unaffected by advertising; but this simply isn’t true. Companies don’t spend millions and sometimes billions of dollars for ineffective marketing strategies. We are all affected. Advertising insidiously shapes our desires and habits, often without our consent.

Speak Out to Change the World

It’s one thing to submit to commercials when, in exchange, you are receiving free programming (as with much of television and radio), but If you don’t want to be subjected to endless commercial messages when you pay money for your entertainment, speak out.

Your voice matters.

Only we citizens can stop this tide and, in the process, protect our children’s ability to choose based on their true desires, not their manufactured ones.

~ Zoe

Zoe Weil, President, Institute for Humane Education
Author of Most Good, Least Harm; Above All, Be Kind; and The Power and Promise of Humane Education
My TEDxConejo talk: “Solutionaries”
My TEDxDirigo talk: “The World Becomes What You Teach

Like my blog? Please share it with others, comment, and/or subscribe to our RSS feed.

Conformity ≠ Uniqueness

Image courtesy Asha ten Broeke via
Creative Commons.

I’m a big fan of The Daily Show and The Colbert Report, which I watch online because I don’t have a TV. One of the benefits of watching TV shows online is few commercials, but there are some. Recently, I’ve seen a series of ads for Dr. Pepper. The ads feature crowds of (mostly young) people wearing identical red shirts, most of which say “I’m one of a kind.”

As I’ve watched these commercials I’ve found myself wondering whether the irony is intended, cynical, or comic. Did the ad company that created the commercials realize the doublespeak they were producing, a creepy sort of mind control they seem to portray? Or did they actually believe that because Dr. Pepper is a different flavor of soda than most (“one of a kind” as their current slogan goes), that conformity in pursuit of uniqueness makes sense and would make sense to viewers?

Do viewers catch the irony? I sure hope so.

If not, there’s always humane education and its media literacy activities to the rescue. Let’s make sure that our kids know how to parse an ad, recognize doublespeak, and break free from others’ efforts to manipulate them.

~ Zoe

Zoe Weil, President, Institute for Humane Education
Author of Most Good, Least Harm, Above All, Be Kind, and The Power and Promise of Humane Education
My TEDxConejo talk: “Solutionaries”
My TEDxDirigo talk: “The World Becomes What You Teach
My TEDxYouth@BFS “Educating for Freedom”

Like my blog? Please share it with others, comment, and/or subscribe to our RSS feed.

Reach and Teach: Media Literacy

Image copyright Institute for Humane Education.

I was excited when Reach and Teach, a peace and social justice learning company, shared my new TEDx talk, Educating for Freedom, taking the ideas in the talk about media literacy and analyzing ads a step further. Here’s a brief excerpt:

“When you see an advertisement for a store that’s offering the VERY LOWEST PRICES, for example, taking some time to think about how that store manages to get things at such low prices could provide a great lesson in suffering, cruelty, and destruction.

Lower prices might make you happy, but what damage do they do to get those low prices? Child labor? Slave labor? Bankrupting suppliers by making them sell the store products at a price lower than it costs to produce? ”

Read the complete post.

~ Zoe

Zoe Weil, President, Institute for Humane Education
Author of Most Good, Least Harm, Above All, Be Kind, and The Power and Promise of Humane Education
My TEDxConejo talk: “Solutionaries”
My TEDxDirigo talk: “The World Becomes What You Teach
My TEDxYouth@BFS “Educating for Freedom”

Like my blog? Please share it with others, comment, and/or subscribe to our RSS feed.

iSchool? Why There’s No Technological Fix to Ailing Education: iPads for Kindergartners is Not a Good Idea

Image courtesy of  Ian Eure
via Creative Commons.

For my blog post today, I’m sharing a recent post I wrote for Common Dreams, a progressive news site. Here’s an excerpt from “iSchool? Why There’s No Technological Fix to Ailing Education: iPads for Kindergartners is Not a Good Idea“:

“At a recent conference, I met a woman who was ecstatic about the new Auburn, Maine program which is providing all Kindergartners with iPads. At first, I thought she was joking. While the goal sounds positive – to better teach these children so they will more easily and readily learn their letters in a district where approximately 40% of third graders have not achieved literacy standards – after watching some news reports and reading some articles about the program, I found myself quite troubled. 

“… Instead of rushing to use technology with five-year-olds, we must first seek to understand why so many children are struggling to read at a standard proficiency by grade three. Is it a failure of technology, a failure of teaching and schools, a side effect of other variables (perhaps too many computer games and too much TV watching), a combination of these, or something else entirely?”

Read the complete essay.

For a humane world,
Zoe Weil, President, Institute for Humane Education
Author of Most Good, Least Harm, Above All, Be Kind, and The Power and Promise of Humane Education
My TEDx talk: “The World Becomes What You Teach

Like my blog? Please share it with others, comment, and/or subscribe to the RSS feed.

The Story of Stuff: Toxic Cosmetics

The Story of Stuff website continues to create short, animated films about the hidden effects of our everyday purchases. This one, on cosmetics, examines the toxic ingredients in our personal care products. Take a look, and then check out the other films at storyofstuff.org:

Zoe Weil, President, Institute for Humane Education
Author of Most Good, Least Harm and The Power and Promise of Humane Education
My TEDx talk: “The World Becomes What You Teach

Like my blog? Please share it with others, comment, and/or subscribe to the RSS feed.

Changing Behavior in 1.5 Minutes

Check out this commercial:

Yes, this is an advertisement. Readers of my blog know the power of advertising. At the Institute for Humane Education we offer free activities for educators to download, and some of these activities focus specifically on learning to analyze ads. Ads are powerful. Even the best critical thinkers often become strangely brainwashed by the messages they receive through commercials.

So what if ads – those extraordinary, brief agents of what some might call manipulation, others mind control, others just “influence” — were deployed for the good? What change could come from them?

You may actually cry during this 1.5 minute ad. You might actually change a simple behavior, or someone you know might. Pass it on.

Zoe Weil, President Institute for Humane Education
Author of Most Good, Least Harm

Like my blog? Please share it with others, comment, and/or subscribe to the RSS feed.

Conscious and Conscientious Commitment to News

My friend Gregg Krech, who is the director of the ToDo Institute, told me recently that he and his wife had decided to take a short vacation from the news. When this “vacation” was over, they decided to approach the news in a different way. From now on, he said, they would listen selectively and conscientiously and make a commitment to act upon any disturbing news they heard. They had missed the news about the floods in Pakistan during their news hiatus, and when they returned to selective listening and learned about the floods they immediately made an effort to help people in Pakistan.

I thought this approach to the news was marvelous, but in my work at the Institute for Humane Education, I don’t feel like I can personally take any sort of hiatus from the news, much as I sometimes I long to. The endless and relentless exposure to catastrophes, problems, challenges, atrocities, etc., is dizzying and sometimes numbing. There is no way do to enough and more often than not, outside of educating, I end up doing little.

But most people do not need to listen to the news all the time in order to do their work and be a good citizen, and in fact, they might be a better, more helpful and engaged citizen if they listened less often and responded with more engagement when they did.

If you find that you are becoming numb to the bad news that bombards you, perhaps you should try Gregg’s experiment. Maybe it’s time to pause and replenish and then come to the news with attention, compassion, wisdom, courage, and commitment. Try it for a week. See what happens. Can you maintain a commitment to do something to make a difference each time you do expose yourself to the news. Are you a better citizen this way? I welcome your thoughts and responses.

Zoe Weil
Author of Most Good, Least Harm and Above All, Be Kind

Like my blog? Please share it with others, comment, and/or subscribe to the RSS feed.

Fiji Water Fad Yet Another Reason We Need Humane Education

In my talks and workshops I do an activity called True Price in which we examine a product, food, or article of clothing and ask a few questions about it. The questions include:

1. Is this product a want or a need? The purpose of this question isn’t to condemn the satisfaction of our desires but to become aware of what are wants and needs so that we make choices accordingly.
2. What are the effects, both positive and negative, from production, use, and disposal of this item on ourselves, other people, animals, and the environment?
3. What systems perpetuate the existence of this item?
4. What are MOGO alternatives to this item?

During my MOGO talks, I usually bring three items: a conventional cotton T-shirt, a fast food cheeseburger (well, a plastic version that can travel!), and a Fiji brand water bottle. Often I invite the audience to vote for the item they’d like to analyze, and often they pick the Fiji water bottle. I’ve gathered some statistics on bottled water in general (and Fiji in particular) which I share, encouraging the audience to seek out the validity of these statistics on their own.

This week, Mother Jones published an article on Fiji water written by Anna Lenzer.

I’m quite critical of bottled water in general, and Fiji water (transported halfway across the globe to get to Maine, where I live) in particular, and I think that bottled water is only a MOGO choice in certain situations (e.g., when traveling overseas where local water may be contaminated, during emergencies and power outages, etc.). So I was prepared to find this article reinforcing my already formed beliefs. Yet I was surprised by how much I hadn’t known and how much worse the situation is than I’d realized, and I urge readers of this blog to read the Mother Jones article.

What shocked me most was how deeply entrenched the Fiji brand has become — how fully it has forged its celebrity status, and how easily we are all duped by greenwashing and promises of health and goodness. I remember feeling similarly when Ben and Jerry’s ice cream became a paragon of virtue simply because it was more socially responsible than other companies that were also producing frozen dessert. That an ice cream company, producing a high fat, high cholesterol, energy-intensive dessert that also contributes to animal suffering would ever receive such accolades and become the dessert of choice for every good cause and socially conscious consumer, dumbfounded me. Same with the Body Shop, which was lauded for not testing on animals and for using fair trade ingredients, while it produced more and more expensive and unnecessary personal care products (foot cream?) in small plastic containers that mostly wind up in landfills and incinerators. But I digress.

Fiji water, it seems, is the water of the stars, and the hype around it — including that buying it helps the environment — defies common sense. Meanwhile, actual Fijians don’t have access to their own aquifer that the American company uses exclusively to bottle expensive water that Fijians can’t afford. Instead, Fijians often lack clean, accessible water at all.

As always, I come back to humane education. We must raise a generation that can think. That can evaluate critically and not be so susceptible to advertising and hype. That relies on a combination of common sense, pursuit of knowledge, and an abiding value to do the most good and the least harm in relation to everyone.

I will continue to bring my Fiji water bottle to talks and schools, armed now with more information from this expose in Mother Jones, and I’ll continue to invite my audiences to become critical thinkers and creative solutionaries for a better world.

~ Zoe

Image courtesy of mariettaki via Creative Commons.

Like my blog? Please share it with others, comment, and/or subscribe to the RSS feed.

The Susan Boyle Phenomenon

I’ve been curious, delighted, and dismayed by the media response to Susan Boyle’s instant notoriety after performing on Britain’s Got Talent. Her performance has generated over 60 million views on YouTube, , and she’s become the new singing sensation. But most of the conversation has been around her appearance. Even Talk of the Nation, a radio show that usually covers meaningful issues, devoted a segment to her looks. Recently, the New York Times had an article analyzing the reasons why her looks are such a topic and assessing stereotypes and human psychology. At least now we’re delving into the phenomenon, rather than taking part in Boyle-bashing based on looks.

My curiosity revolved around the speed at which one woman’s unlikely success became an international phenomenon. As someone who’s trying to gain media attention for efforts in humane education and the MOGO principle, and who has come to realize just how difficult this is, it’s remarkable to watch what can happen when someone becomes a media sensation overnight.

My delight revolved around Susan Boyle’s success based on talent, not on beauty, wealth, youth, or whom she knew.

My dismay revolved around the overwhelming focus on her appearance, including the specificity of the critique. There was an inordinate amount of attention paid to her frizzy, greying hair and bushy eyebrows, which infuriated me. She is being criticized for leaving the hair that grows on her body alone, instead of buying products to change it and removing parts of it to meet conventional standards of beauty. Listening to a debate on the media about what sorts of makeover would be appropriate, I found myself alternately shifting from outrage to wonderment. Is this really what we care about? Is this really the topic of the day? With all the pressing issues of our time, we readily turn our attention to the grotesquely unimportant: Susan Boyle’s physical appearance and what she should do about it.

I keep wondering what we could do to generate this kind of attention for humane education and MOGO living. Every idea that could generate media attention seems ridiculously gimmicky and lacking in integrity. So dear readers of this blog, any suggestions for creating a media phenomenon for MOGO?

~Zoe

Image courtesy of ITV.

Compassion and Kleenex®: Marketing to Our Higher Selves

Waiting for my plane to board a couple weeks ago, I was watching CNN at the gate and was amazed to see that advertisers are now linking compassion with products. As a humane educator, I’m used to analyzing ads with students, asking the question, “What deep need or desire is the ad trying to fulfill?” Usually, students point out power, wealth, love, sex, beauty, esteem, etc. But on CNN, a Kleenex® ad that kept replaying was linking compassion towards others with facial tissue, and then mocking such behavior:

(Can’t play the video above? Watch it here.)

To meditative music we witness a western monk right an overturned baby turtle, place a beached goldfish back in a stream, and rescue a spider. Then he blows his nose into a Kleenex® tissue while the announcer says that Kleenex® kills 99% of bacteria. “That’s right. Kills.” The compassionate monk is startled. The commercial ends.

What are we to make of this? After just finishing Buy•ology by Martin Lindstrom, I’m newly aware that sex in advertising doesn’t really sell products the way we thought it did. Maybe compassion does; even when you then joke about it. I actually think this is a good sign. There are new books and new studies linking our happiness with kindness toward others (I write about this in my new book, Most Good, Least Harm), and while this Kleenex® ad may be snarky, it’s presumably based on the assumption that we humans want to be good; we want to be kind; we aspire to do more compassionate acts.

Whether this ad will make you buy Kleenex® brand facial tissues is another story, but I’m glad to see our highest selves targeted by ads instead of just our fear and greed.

Your thoughts?

~ Zoe

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 427 other followers