Popular Culture Meets Psychology

Human Trafficking, Popular Television and Depraved Culture

Lawrence Rubin, Ph.D. — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:53:03 +0000

Ripped from the Headlines! Who can forget that voiceover announcing an upcoming episode of Law and Order, the gritty urban television crime and punishment drama that spawned a billion dollar annual income stream for NBC. Nor are we soon to forget Detective Lenny Briscoe, aka recently departed actor/entertainer Jerry Orbach, standing over New York's most recent corpse, sipping coffee and offering commentary that often bordered on the sardonic. And just when we thought that Lenny and the squad wore out their welcome, along came the spinoffs-Law & Order, Special Victims Unit; Law & Order, Criminal Intent and Law & Order, Trial by Jury. Gripping and disturbing, one and all!

Did America and the world tune in simply to see the latest form of brutality that the wirters could contrive? Were we mesmerized by the witty banter between the police officers, detectives and attorneys as they attempted to zero in on the criminal(s)? Or did we hold our collecitve breath in anticipation of the meting out of justice to the depraved. Was there a sense of vicarious vigilantism as these ne'r do wells met their fate or a sense of outrage when the bad guys got off scott free because of some clever legal maneuvering? The shows were intelligent, fast-paced, evocative, painful and often deeply disturbing-for the very reason we are drwan to them...becasue they were indeed ripped from the headlines.

And then came Crime Scene Investigation (CSI). Set at first in Las Vegas, the show soon morphed into CSI Miami and then CSI New York, and it too generated a fortune for its parent network, CBS. Every week, there was not one but three opportunities to follow the intrepid, oftentimes brilliant and occasionally predictable investigators, laboratory technicians and morticians, as they attempted to provide a glimpse into the minds and motivation of the most heinous, perverted and disturbed among us.

And perhaps that is what compelled me to write this posting, because at the moment, I sit at the edge of my couch awaiting the third installment of the long-awaited CSI Mega Crossover Event, or CSI, MCE if you will. And it took no less than Human Trafficking and organ theft to get and hold my attention. Human trafficking! The multi-billion dollar global industry that capitalizes upon women and children, and capitalize is a poor choice of words here because this practice is about the buying and selling, the raping and killing, the torturing and brutalizing of the vulnerable! And if we are to believe that these, and other crime shows are indeed ripped from the headlines, then Human Trafficking is also about the theft and selling of human organs.

Why exactly does television have to use this most despicable act of human depravity for ratings, and will any part of the proceeds from the revenue generated by this trilogy go to the fight against human trafficking? Have they simply run out of new ways to shock and horrify us? Certainly, we should just turn off our televisions, but we don't...and we won't.

Truth be told, I am glad to be a part of the audience who possibily for the first time has become aware of human trafficking. I have been motivated to learn more about this heinous practice and can and will carry the message to others-not necessarily to watch the televsion show-which I am sure will be marketed as a 'special edition'...but to become aware. This is art, not imitating life per se, but art as a communicative and self-reflective medium, one that shines back the light of truth, but also the inescapable darkness within that truth.

For insights from social sicentists into this truth, please look at a recent report by the Department of Health and Human Services on human trafficking, and in particular, at a review of the social science literature by Heather Clawson, Nicole Dutch, Amy Solomon and Lisa Grace entitled Human Trafficking Into and Within the United States: A Review of the Literature.

Take a look, but please continue looking beyond the sensationalistic and dramatic, to the real and the ubiquitous.

Farewell to a Popular Culture Icon You Probably Never Even Heard Of

Lawrence Rubin, Ph.D. — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:01:14 +0000

Every field of professional study has its giants; those who by virtue of their vision, creativity, tirelessness and dedication create meaning where none may have previously existed. The fields of psychology and psychotherapy certianly have their share of luminaries, each of whom has strengthened our foundation of human understanding-Freud, Jung, Skinner, Rogers, Bandura, Yalom, Seligman, White, Minuchin-the list is long, and growing!

When you think of popular culture, who comes to mind-a particular performer, actor, sports star, director? We, the consumers of all things popular tend to focus on the products rather than the producers. But in the case of Ray Browne, I am referring to a man who (with the help of Russel Nye) built and legitimized an entire scholarly discipline-Popular Culture Studies; created a professional association-The Popular Culture Association and established a flagship scholarly journal-The journal of Popular Culture.

Traditionally, testimonials are offered by those who best knew the decesased. I only met Dr. Browne a few times. So, I offer you the opportunity to know him. Please take a moment to visit the Popular Culture Library on the campus of Bowling Green State University, listen in on an interview Dr. Browne gave to Americana, the Journal of American Popular Culture, take a tour of the Popular Culture Association, and read a stirring glimpse into the life and accomplishments of Ray Browne written by the Washington Post.

I was honored when Psychology Today offered me the opportunity to blog about popular culture and psychology and I believe in the importance and relevance of all things popular as well as the valuable synergy between the two disciplines. I have contributed to the Journal of Popular Culture and was recently appointed area chair of the newest division of the Popular Culture Association-Psychology, Mental Health and Mental Illness in Popular Culture, and look forward to the 2010 Annual Convention of the Popular Culture/american Culture-and in these small ways to continuing the work of Ray Browne.

Balloon Boy-Media Fueled Domestic Terrorism

Lawrence Rubin, Ph.D. — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 01:07:26 +0000

In Florida this week, and across the nation, eyes turned not to the sky for a runaway balloon purportedly carrying a 6 year old boy. Instead, and once again, we held our collective breath to learn of the fate of an innocent child, seven year old Somer Thompson in this case, whose lifeless body was found in a Georgia landfill, far from home and those who loved her and were terrorized. This is a real tragedy, not a mock perversion of tragedy contrived for media attention. If indeed, the family of the 'so-called' ballon boy conspired to sensationalize, and in so doing, capitalize upon a frightening and terrifying circumstance, than I believe this to be an act of media-fueled domestic terrorism that preyed upon the fears of parents and all those who work with, care for and about children. How frightened so many of us were to hear that a helpless child might be rocketing through the skies aboard a runaway balloon headed toward inevitable death.

I feel badly for those among us who who worried for the fate of this little boy who was subsequently found to be hiding. I feel angry over the betrayal that was perpetrated by this family, and given credibility by a media consumed with story at the expense of fact. I am embarrassed that in a society where real horror is perpetrated on our smallest members on a daily basis, and in a world where poverty, hunger, disease and war take the lives of millions of children, that we have to contrive horror.

I grieve for the loss of Somer Thompson and cry for the pain of those whose lives she touched, and all like her who perish needlessly. And I revile the machinations of media, such a potentially powerful force for good, that would allow circus and folly to hold a nation hostage and benefit from this terrorism.

Perhaps this blogpost is too passionate and too personal, written more from the perspective of clnician and parent, than from that of a social sicentist. It is certainly not grounded in the solid scientific fact or theory that you have become accustomed to in my previous posts as well as those of my esteemed colleagues. Hopefully, they will help us to better understand the mentality of those who who prey upon their fellow citizen and the malignancy of amorality that eats away at our consumate body politic.

I don't believe reality TV, partiuclarly that which commodifies human suffering and exploits children is the culprit per se; however I do believe that it has been utilized in the service of terrorism...right here at home.

How Sweet it Is!

Lawrence Rubin, Ph.D. — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 01:26:54 +0000

On the way to school this morning, my eleven year old daughter reminded me that for some people, Halloween marks Satan's birthday. Ever scouting the horizon for a useful metaphor, I pondered long and hard, and in the process recalled my visit to Target the night before. I remember standing in absolute awe before the Halloween section-which included a few plastic pumpkins, an aisle or two of costumes and row upon row upon neatly-ordered row of candy. Far more candy than I could squeeze into the widest setting on my cell phone camera and more varieties than I ever imagined existed. To name a few-Wonka Giant Chewey Nerds, Laffy Taffy and Fun Dips; Hershey Kisses with Smores, Almonds, Pumpkin Spice, Caramel and Candy Corn flavoring; Candy Corn Autumn Mix, Puffy, Regular, Chocolate Covered and Tangerine; M&M's in all possible colors (especially orange and brown); Mini Butterfingers, Rollos, Three Musketeers, Snickers and Krackel bars; and of course 50, 55, 80, 87, 100 and 250 piece Combo Packs...and this exhausting list of seductive sugary doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of hard candies, including lollipops, sucking candies and other non-chocolate confections.

In that moment, I think my VBSL (vicarious blood sugar level) skyrocketed. And the VSBL is in no way related to more serious and scientific sugar and carbohydrate-related indices of metabolism such as the GI (glycemic index), GL (glycemic load) and II (insulin index). If refined sugar is the enemy and one of the major contributors to a range of serious and very costly (both to the individual and society) health problems including diabetes and obesity, then perhaps halloween is indeed Satan's birthday.

According to the National Confectioners Association (NCA), "sales of chocolate, non-chocolate and gum confectionery [in 2007 was] approximately $28 billion at retail per year." And if that's not enough to get your cavities screaming, consider the following statistics in that same year.

•More than 2.3 billion pounds of sugar at a cost of $672.9 million.
•More than 759 million pounds of cocoa beans at a cost of $664.1 million.
•More than 1.39 billion pounds of corn syrup at a cost of $173.3 million.
•More than 1.04 billion pounds of milk and milk products at a cost of $500.4 million.
•More than 320 million pounds of peanuts at a cost of $149.7 million.
•More than 70 million pounds of almonds and other nuts at a cost of $205.8 million

However, in the spirit of health consciousness and community mindedness, the NCA offers the following 'nutritional' information about candy (they don't go quite as far as a 'black box warning', or offer a statement such as 'eat candy responsibly' or 'if symptoms of hyperglycemia persist for more than four hours, call your physician'):

•Less than two percent of the calories in the American diet are supplied by candy.
•A one-ounce piece of milk chocolate contains about the same amount of caffeine as a cup of decaffeinated coffee.
•Some candies, such as lollipops, candy canes, gummi bears, gum drops, licorice twists and sour balls do not contain fat or cholesterol. What's more, many of these candies are relatively low in calories. A cup of candy corn, for example, has fewer calories than a cup of raisins.
•Not all saturated fats raise blood cholesterol levels. The form of fat found in chocolate, cocoa butter, does not raise blood cholesterol levels. That's because cocoa butter is derived from plants, cacao trees; whereas other types of saturated fats are derived from animals.
•Most people are not allergic to chocolate. A recent study showed that only one out of 500 people who thought they were allergic to chocolate actually tested positive.

So, as I have become inclined to asking in my blogs, "What does this have to do with psychology?" Quite a bit!. To start with, consumers have conflicting sources of information regarding the effects of candy consumption. And, in the face of conflicting information from (seemingly) credible sources, decisions may may be based upon the most salient characteristics, which in this case falls on branding, marketing and advertising claims of the candy manufacturers. In this context, and once again drawing from the work of Michael Pollan,

Americans pay a great deal of attention to highly advertised brand names (Hershey's, M&M's and Cadburys, to name a few)
Americans are bombarded with multimedia commerical asdvertisements for food, and candy in particular- as the result of massive marketing campaigns
With regard to food, Americans' purchasing and consumption patterns are heavily influenced by external factors and influences such as time of day, celebrity and non-celebrity branding, packaging, immediacy of sensory stimulation and cultural messages such as 'Halloween is the time for candy' and 'Christmas is the time for spending' and Valenitnes Day is the time for flowers' as opposed to internal cues, which in the case of food and candy would be hunger.
We love our little animated M&M television characters, plush toys, leather jackets and stores (yes, there are M&M stores in New York, Las Vegas and Orlando-they are called M&M World)

On the other hand, equally impressive monies are spent on research designed to convince us that candy, and chocolate in particular, may not be as harmful as was previously thought-and perhaps even healthy. Such is the case with the swirl (pardon the pun) of findings around the importance of sensory pleasure that candy provides and the potential health benefits of chocolate in enhancing cardiovascular health and influencing immune functioning.

So, what by Satan's firey horns shall we tell our trick-or-treaters? And what wisdom can the parents of our little (and perhaps not so little) ghosts, goblins (and Freddy Krugers) carry with them as they march into Target, Walgreens, CVS, WalMart, Sam's Club and gas stations everywhere? Actually, the NCA has some interesting and potentially good tips for those who will buy (and eat) candy. See Americans Playing Tricks with Treats this Hallowween.

In the final analysis, my contributions to the how-to's and what-nots of halloween candy purchasing and consumption are

caveat emptor (that goes for scientific research as well as candy)
everything in moderation
candy tastes good

Here is a homemade Halloween candy treat.

What do Frosted Mini Wheats, Mick Jagger and Superheroes Have in Common?

Lawrence Rubin, Ph.D. — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 19:16:26 +0000

What do Frosted Mini Wheats, Mick Jagger and Superheroes have in common? Hmmmm!!! Ok, I'll cut to the chase. They have all been around for decades, they are each heavily branded cultural icons, they make loads of money, but most importantly their sustainability and longevity rely directly upon massive marketing campaigns and continual re-visioning. So what exactly is this blog post about, you may ask?

It is about the inherent psychological deception and predatory marketing practices of the American food industry as it sells, among a multitude of other products (that aren't necessarily good for us), breakfast cereal in the guise of health food. And to make matters worse, and much like many of those other drugs which purportedly heal illnesses and afflictions that we don't even know we have (until we see the television commericals), breakfast cereals, and Frosted Mini Wheats in particular, have made very powerful implied claims that a hearty helping of their product will enhance your child's focus. And we all know how many parents out there in television land worry about ADHD and would give anything to improve their child's focus in school, at home and on the playground. In one fell swoop, Kelloggs, by promising that their product will energize as well as enhance childrens' focus, has laid claim to both the health-enhancing and implied medicinal value of Frosted Mini Wheats. Who needs Adderall, Ritalin, fruit and vegetables, when a heaping bowlful of cereal will do.

I remember the first time I saw one of these commericals, and thought to myself as a parent, psychologist and pop culturist, "parents (a primary target of childrens' food advertisements) are going to think this is actually health food and that it is medicinal." And just as Direct to Consumer Advertising (DTCA) of psychotropic and erectile dysfunction (ED) drugs have brought legions of consumers to their physicians with requests for specific medicinal enhancements, parents would now be flocking to the stores to buy their children this miracle substance, convinced they were doing the right thing. And since a good deal of food advertising directed at children is for candy, snacks, sugared cereal and fast food (see Kaiser Family foundation), kids would now be asking their parents specifically for this wonder food and others like it. Witness the transformation of breakfast cereal commericals into public service announcements (PSA's)

Breakfast cereals have grown up with American children since the early part of the 20th century, and with the recognized advertising power of television, their manufacturers have used name and face recognition to pedal their wares. Did you know that George Reeves (aka Superman) advertised Kelloggs Frosted Flakes and that Nabisco, makers of Shredded Wheat, parlayed the fame of Rin Tin Tin to do the same (take a look at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wo9VTZXfRI as well as http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xWepMwjWJg). More recently, Kellogs and General Mills battled for the rights to picture Olympic sweetheart swimnmer Michael Phelps on their cereal boxes.

This practice of using named stars to advertise breakfast cereals is dwindling, and in response, manufacturers are jumping on the 'nutritionism" bandwagon. Michael Pollan has written extensively and intelligently on this topic. If we can't entice them to the shelves with the promise of vicarious heroism...and heroes (who are fewer and fewer in number anyway), we'll convince them that this stuff is healthy and medicinal. Wasn't it H.L. Mencken who said "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste [and gullibility] of the American public.

Well, Kelloggs got its comeupance, when it was recently sanctioned by the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) for making false claims about the health and [implied] medicinal value of Frosted Mini Wheats. I don't believe that the small financial penalty crippled the giant, or made a dent in the popularity of the brand, but it was a stern warning to those who would prey upon our children...and us.

But what's next, a Black Box Warning on Cocoa Puffs, a voice-over shooting machine gun disqualifiers on Captain Crunch commericals, or perhaps small print on cereal boxes saying something like "if signs of increased focus last for more than four hours, please contact your child's pediatrician"?

Please see the recent posting by PT blogger Christopher Peterson on Michael Pollan's work and nutritionism (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-good-life/200906/you-cant-savor-nutrient).

The Lingerie Football League (LFL)-Very Popular Culture

Lawrence Rubin, Ph.D. — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 15:07:23 +0000

The Lingerie Football League. Where do I begin?

In their never-ending attempt to draw the attention (and dollars) of the American public, PayPerView aired the Lingerie Bowl in 2004 during half-time of Super Bowl XXXVIII. Grimy, sweaty, full contact, seven-on-seven football featuring the most jaw dropping and scantily-clad women. Brilliant!! A mere five years later, with the creation of the Lingerie Football League, we are witness once again to the painful yet enduring legacy of anti-feminism, the sexualization of women and the commodification of sex-all in the name of sport. The very names of the teams: (Eastern Conference) Philadelphia Passion, Chicago Bliss, Miami Caliente, New York Majesty, Tampa Breeze and (Western conference), Dallas Desire, Denver Dream, LA Temptation, San Diego Seduction and Seattle Mist conjure up images way too steamy to discuss on a Psychology Today blog post.

But that's the adult (and psychologist) in me talking..how boring! The adolescent in me says, "holy crap..is this a great country or what?" Why trouble myself sneaking Penthouse out of the corner convenience store or hacking into an Internet porn site when all I have to do is switch on lingerie football, female mud wrestling, roller derby or beach volleyball. I can't wait until I am old enough to smoke and and drink."

In no way do I question the physical and athletic prowess of these magnificent women of the gridiron or that of the mudpit, roller rink and volley ball court. I fully acknowledge that each and every one of them is a dedicated, highly competitive,health-conscious athlete, who is committed to her sport...and clearly able to kick my aging butt. But, unfortunately, my aging butt is connected to an aging sense of morality and capacity to see the bigger picture. And how do I teach that bigger picture to my own adolescent children and young clients when they are awash and adrift in a culture that profits in every way from this kind of testosterone-driven sexual spectacle. And I wonder how this will impact the athletic aspirations of our youngest female athletes? And what about the girls out there who want to play football, and come to believe that the only way they can do so, and be valued for it is to do so in their underwear? Lot's of questions to ponder the next time you tune and turn on to an LFL competition.

Take a look. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UHb-5PSaNs

But also, please take a look at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrRtJY28ps8 which is a clip of Mary Pipher, author of Reviving Ophelia: Saving the Selves of Adolescent Girls.

Going Viral

Lawrence Rubin, Ph.D. — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 21:44:07 +0000

I met with my IT guy this afternoon in a vainglorious effort to to link my Facebook Fanpage with my Twitter and MySpace accounts. My goal...to achieve virality! That's right, virality. A century ago when infectious diseases reigned supreme, virality meant something entirlely different, and in a bad way-a very bad way. It meant that a handshake, a cough, a sneeze or some seemingly innocuous and completely unplanned and inadvertant or accidental physical contact, could lay waste to thousands of other people all over the world. Sort of an apocalyptic butterfly effect. Virality was the enemy.

Today; however, it is the hope of every entrepreneurial and entertainment wannabe, cyber-fanatic and just plain old run-of-the-mill freakazoid (I use this term lovingly) to go viral. With the click of a mouse (and a fair share of Internet and social networking savvy), tens of thousands, if not millions of people can watch you brush your teeth, know the contents of you alimentary canal, appreciate your thoughts, listen to your music, feel your pain and/or think about YOU. In short, through the miracle of the Internet, we need never be alone! And if we are lucky; and yes it does happen, we may be discovered and claim our 15 minutes of fame.

What is it about the possibility of going viral that so entrances us? Is it simply the next big thing to want to be the next big thing? Or does the real appeal of virality lie in the sense of connection afforded by being linked-in, friend-requested and twittered? Is virality an antidote to the lonlieness, isolation and disenfranchisement that is often associated with depression, dysthymia and social anxiety. Or is it a reflection of the painful and poignant 'anomie' that is a by-product of our seemingly normless society that sociologist Emile Durkheim spoke about. Is it an electronic plague that threatens to further deepen the divide between us?

Maybe it is simply the knowledge that "we got people" that gets us through the night. At any moment, our Facebook page can light up with birthday wishes, we can receive a tweet from a new friend on the other side of the world or 68,345 people will watch the family dog fall over backwards while sleeping. It is no surprise that some of the more popular television commericals link branded products with virality. The Verizon guy, who used to wander across the planet asking "can you hear me now" is now accompanied by an army of peoploe, ready to listen and serve. He is no longer a loner seeking connection but an ambassador of interconnection. Similarly, the H&R Block advertising campaign assures you that they too can provide you with people. Death may be an isolating event, but taxes doesn't have to be.

Is "going viral" a good thing...a bad thing...both or neither. Is it a socially sanctioned (and ocassioanlly well remunerated) form of exhibitionsism? Is it collective voyeurism, one step below America's Funniest Home Videos on the social networking food chain? Maybe in the final analysis, it is the newest incarnation of the American Dream of connection, opportunity and hope?!

Please visit some of the fascinating PT blog posts that address this phenomenon including "Going Viral" by Dennis Rosen and "Author Bill Wasik on Viral Culture" by Carlin Flora.

Reverend Billy and the Church of Life After Shopping

Lawrence Rubin, Ph.D. — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:29:34 +0000

I am a Jew, working in a Catholic University who is looking into the possiblility of attending a Unitarian Church with my family in the near future. While I am pretty comfortable in my personal spirituality, I am searching for a brick-and-mortar place to nurture my family's religious growth.

I must admit; however, that I regularly pray at the Church of Consumerism. So, here in front of you, and God, and Reverend Billy of The Church of Life After Shopping. I confess that I am a sinner of the worst sort! I have coveted my neighbor's Itunes library...I have worshipped American Idol....I have stolen music (when I was younger of course, in case the RIAA is monitoring this blog)...I have gone to the mall on the Sabbath...I have placed money before God. I am the worst of the worst and deserve no mercy. I should burn in a Chuck E. Cheese Restaurant for eternity (during a Sunday 2-for-1 birthday extravaganza) for all the evil I have wrought upon myself and others.

Over the last few years, Reverend Billy has made quite a splash by taking his Church to the streets where he protests rampant, self-destructive, mindless and Earth-killing consumerism with rituals, chants and demonstrations aimed at retailers and their followers. These include California Guided Meditation trips to childhood in order to exorcise the spirits of stuffed Disney toys, a group chant to liberate and re-empower the nipple-less Starbuck's Mermaid, creation of Commerical Free Zones in consumer meccas such as Times Square, and "Shop-Lifting" exercizes designed to open a spiritual channel between third world producers with first world consumers. He encourages consumers to unite against destructive free-market capitalism that leads us bleary-eyed to mega-stores, sales and the Internet where we pollute our lives and the planet with things, things and more things. His raucous theatrics combine the best of burlesque and Broadway with frenzied evangelism. His message is clear, there is life after shopping, but you gotta want it bad.

Problem is, not many of us want it bad enough to stop. We shop till we drop....binge on unecessary items and objects...fill our closets, draws, oversized SUV's and lives with textiles, electronics, vehicles, foods, and useless ephemera because it feels good.

Can psychology and psychiatry help? Or must we admit that we are powerless in the grip of this societal plague and turn to the Church of Life After Shopping for salvation. Shall we treat this seeming disease as a bona fide addiction, bringing to bear all the power of modern medicine and the science of Addictionolgy? In an intriguing, intelligent and insightful Psycholgy Today blog by April Lane Benson entitled "To Buy or Not To Buy", we are invited to consider the prevalence of compulsive shopping and ways to combat it...much in the same way as we do with other seemingly uncontrollable and self-destructive behavior; ie., gambling, eating, substance abuse and kleptomania. She challenges us to fill the spaces inside ourselves with acceptance, appeciation and worth...not things. Please read her blog..it will enlighten.

In a similarly authoritative and fascinating Psychology Today blog enttitled Revolutionary Recovery: Healing the Addicted Brain , Psychiatrist Harold Urschel invites us into the inner workings of our nervous system to consider how the brain of an addict differs from that of a non-addict, and how sound psychological, behavioral and medical treatment, inclusing medication, may help. Imagine, a drug for over-shopping. It would have to be powerful enough to over-ride the pleasure, memory and sensory centers of the brain, not to mention the choke-hold that retailers, advertisers and credit card companies have on us.

The debate over the origin and cure for addictive behavior will no doubt rage for years to come, while more and more succumb...to drugs, to food, to gambling and to shopping. Reverend Billy will entice us into re-conceptualizing unbridled consumerism as a mortal sin, the repurcusions of which will be no less a total 'shopocalypse."

In the meantime, I sit here, contemplating whether or not to walk over to the mall to purchase a $300 pair of Bose Noise Cancelling Headphones for my iPod which now has almost 3200 songs on it, I pause to reflect. If, perhaps, out of the blue, Reverend Billy appeared in front of the Apple Store with full choir and regalia, I might not enter into the devil's den. If he could truly convince me that I was sinning against people and the planet, then perhaps I would relent. If he convinced me that a higher power had a plan for me and that buying those oh-so-wonderful headphones would not elevate me, then, sure, I might go to Target and buy a lesser pair, or even attend an outdoor concert.

Perhaps, I will do neither, and go ahead and buy the damn things, go see Confessions of a Shopaholic at my local theater, buy an oversized/refillable popcorn and large Coke in a non-recyclable cup as I thumb through psychologist Barry Schwartz's "The Paradox of Choice: Why More is Less and sit back with and listen to my iPod.

Wasn't it Billy Joel who sang "...I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints."

America, It's Your Turn to Blog-tificate on Popular Culture

Lawrence Rubin, Ph.D. — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 20:14:42 +0000

Maybe not the most important blog ever, but certainly the most meaningful, because it is about you..I do shamefully confess that I put the image of Chuckie up to grab your attention...

I am privileged to be a Psych Today Blogger. I have found the experience wonderfully stimulating. With each posting, I have had the opportunity to explore fascinating, challenging, topical and entertaining ideas and experiences. And from time to time, readers post equally stimulating and thought-provoking responses.

But, therein lies the rub. These have been my thoughts and experiences, not yours. And although I blog about popular culture (which is created and lived by us) and psychology (which is about us), these are the lone meanderings of a pop-culture-meets-psychology junkie.

I would love the opportunity to explore and blog-tificate on topics that are of interest to you in the course of your daily life-an advertisement, a tv/movie/news personality, a song, an object of daily consumption, something on the Net.

You pick, I'll blog!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Can Our Youngest Music Thieves Learn Morality

Lawrence Rubin, Ph.D. — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 18:38:52 +0000

I love my iPod...like no other object I have ever had or will have, and I am not embarassed to say so. With the flick of a finger, I can start a daily musical feast with Brian Hyland's "Itsy Bitsy Teeny Weeny Yellow Polka Dot Bikini", gorge myself on Meatloaf's raucous debut album "Bat Out of Hell", sit back and loosen my belt to a Gregorian Chant, and wash it all down with the sweet sounds of Tchaikovsky's "Serenade for Strings." All I need do in order to prepare for this lavish musical feast is to pay Apple a few bucks to download these delicacies into my iTunes library. You can only imagine the rapture I felt when my 15 year old son showed me-with a series of quick clicks of his mouse and a dizzying array of URL's-that he could download those same songs from the Internet FOR FREE!!!

Free, thought I?! My eyes rolled back in my head as I licked my lips. Mozart's 41 symphonies...the Beatles' complete songbook, Michael Jackson's music videos, and every single 60's hit could be mine. But just then, I remembered that I was no longer a teenager (damn, I hate when that happens). I am a father of a teenager who I am trying so hard to civilize, and perhaps even prepare for the world. I was, at the same time, cognizant of stroking him for his technological wizadry and helping him to understand that filling his electronic iTunes library with copyrighted music, and then sharing it with friends was illegal. I was also aware that if I came down too hard on the side of government, laws, and fairness to others, that he would quickly drift into that glazed and dissociatively stuporous look he takes on when I pontificate in the name of parenting. Yet, I did not want to let this potential teaching moment pass.

In my effort to help him better understand the illegality (and potentially crippling legal and financial effects this could have on him and our family), I knew that I was facing formidable barriers. Legendary Swiss Psychologist Jean Piaget suggested to us that young teens, because of their cogntive immaturity, cannot focus on intentionality when making moral decisions...they judge the correctness of their acts based upon consequences- a no harm no foul perspective). Harvard psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg believed that teens may eventually develop the ability to internalize societal and parental standards for behavior, but this could take more time than I fancied. Past president of the American Psychological Association, Albert Bandura believed that the process of moral learning could be ushered along through observational learning. And finally, Guggenheim Fellow Elliot Turiel, Professor of Cognition and Development, believes that in the course of moral development, we come to differentiate between moral rules (respecting other's rights) and social conventional rules (appreciating rules of social conduct).

I took this all to mean that while my son had a good shot at understanding that what he was doing was wrong, genetics, evolution and neurological development might set limits on just how far and how fast he could internalize a moral compass. In addition, he was the product of a media-driven and media-obesessed culture, where heroes and role models fall from grace by the hour, and the impllicit message to our youth is, if "you don't get caught, you ain't wrong." How could a few downloaded songs hurt the recording industry? How could they find out about it? Is this really as bad as robbing somebody at gunpoint? Are they really going to come after me? All of my friends do it, and they haven't gotten caught, so why can't I? These I thought were all valid questions for someone wrestling to reconcile inner and outer codes of conduct, the latter of which are not always clear.

I seized the opportunity to challenge him to research (along with me) concepts such as 'fair use', 'monopoly', 'copyright and copyright infringement' and 'anti-trust'. We talked, we argued, we surfed the Net. Additionally, I contacted an intellectual freedom/copyright attorney as well as my private AT&T/Apple tech guru (and waterfall climber) Jason Pruitt. My son and I read about lawsuits brought by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), against music thieves both great and small, and how indeed his pirating behavior could be tracked directly to his own computer. In an effort to move my son a little further along the moral highway, so that one day perhaps he would make the right decsions for the right reasons, I challenged him.

I came away a bit richer from this experience...morally, parentally and personally. I seized a moment with a teen...my teen...to listen, learn and teach. I believe that I grew, and pray that, in some small way that he did too.