Join the conversation

TV is the biggest problem. Most corporate propaganda - esp. for young kids - is broadcast on television. We never had one; the kids are teens now, and they're doing well.

I don't think your tirade is over the top. I work with teenagers, and I am struck by the fact that they feel that celebrity is valuable in and of itself - that Paris Hilton is more interesting than, say, Jodi Foster, even though one of them actually DOES something and the other does not. I'm also struck by the absolute amorality - some would say immorality, and I might too - of the marketing machine; pink cigarettes, sexy underwear for pre-pubescents, reality TV that treats lying, nastiness and deliberate treachery as though these are things to be glorified. No doubt I'm also an out-of-touch fuddy-duddy, but I can't accept that children today are surrounded so inescapably by messages that suggest that hurting others and themselves will lead to popularity and success.

Oh come on.

Kids wouldn't be slaves to popular culture if schools hadn't totally left the battle field to their enemies. Businesses are doing was businesses do best, exciting and engaging their customers. That's way more sophisticated than "corporate propaganda." Schools could learn a lesson from them. Businesses are meeting kids where they are, using new media, social networking, engaging multimedia, etc. Schools, meanwhile, are still teaching like it's 1899.

If students and parents had a CHOICE of where to go to school, maybe the market for schools would be as vibrant as the market for products.

Yes, some of the stuff on TV is "amoral or immoral," but schools just aren't presenting an alternative

Anonymous--You offer a curious vision of choice. Do you propose the Brittney Spears Midriff Academy? The Miley Cyrus School of Looking Hot? Of course schools can do more to engage their students, and technologies offer very promising avenues for doing that. But let's not pretend that schools should always deliver immediate gratification the way the entertainment industry does. If we decide schools have to compete with popular culture on precisely the same terms, then I mourn for our schools.

The fact is that advertising to the 13- to 25-year-old group is so pervasive that many other good things seem to be dying out for lack of oxygen. I wonder, for example, where one could still find a commercial classical music radio station. The commercial station in DC finally migrated to public radio a couple of years ago, because advertisers were so uninterested in its audience. Brahms and Berliosz cannot survive in the radio market.

Siobhan--I agree with your assessment. Some reality television shows really do celebrate awful behavior. It's almost as if they turn morality plays on their head: all the vices on open display, ultimately triumphant.

Doug--We're considering banishing television from the house while we raise our daughter, but I worry that it will be impossible, and perhaps even unwise, to shut out all influences we deem negative. Is it possible to combine moderate exposure to those influences while helping her understand why they may be negative?

Fascinating discussion! I'm just so surprised to hear it here.

You're absolutely right that the Amish don't use TV, but probably what you are looking for is the more liberal "Mennonite" lifestyle. Should I send you a link to the Rod and Staff publishers that cater to this community? LOL Ahhh... I don't know your wife, but I have to wonder what the look on her face would be when she discovers she'll be teaching a class on Godly Maidenhood when your daughter is five. *giggle*

Ok, seriously. The school is in a terrible position in this regard. No fair blaming it on Hollywood types. It can make "dress code," but it certainly seems unwilling or unable to enforce it.

Do you know what they DO enforce here? The no-Mohawk rule. God forbid people think there are punks at the local high school. Kids, you can wear chains, black eyeliner and Marilyn Manson T-shirts, but don't do the Mohawk thing or dye your hair purple!! Eeek!

You know which kids are "public school kids with an attitude" by the fact that they think they're so big and bad that they can sport their little Mohawks during the summer. Yeah, that's true rebellion there, Sid Vicious. I notice that it's gone mid-August when school starts, ya bad boy. LOL

The best way to change the marketing is not to buy the crap they sell. That means saying NO to companies that promote the wrong agenda, NO to stupid rock albums, and NO to little girl miniskirts with "cherries" on them. Good grief.

PS Your daughter will not roll her eyes at you when she is older. Actually Patrick refuses to wear shorts, thinks there should be more preaching on Hell, and holds his hand up so he can't see cleavage when a young girl speaks to him. OUR JOB is to make people like Patrick not feel weird. When they are the majority, you'll see a real change. :]

Mrs. C--

Why are you so surprised to hear this discussion here? Spend any time with public school educators and parents, and you'll hear similar sentiments.

I must admit that I'm personally less disturbed by the Sid Vicious getups--mohawks included--than by the inappropriately revealing clothes marketed to ever-younger children. What worries me just as much is the pervasive message that intellectual achievement is less important than, say, the right jeans or the best makeup. My wife, a high-school teacher, teaches students wearing the heavy eyeliner, purple hair, etc--but they're respectful, intellectually curious, and very good students who value learning.

Yes, it's a good idea not to buy the trash that too many companies sell. But wouldn't it be nice if those marketing to teens exercised a bit more responsibility and did less to amplify and multiply so much of the worst stuff out there. That would make our jobs as educators and parents easier.

I am less disturbed by the Mohawk than the cleavage thing, too. I knew plenty of people who had one when I was a bit younger.

Of course, they weren't *forbidden* then. Now that they are, at least around here, they tend to be sported by people whose attitudes are less than stellar during the summer breaks. It just seems a bit off-kilter to me to enforce a "no purple hair" rule and let some young girl's breasts literally pop out of her shirt (pop!) in school and make like everyone has to pretend that's not happening and they're the ones with the problem if they "notice."

So did we agree on something? I'm looking here. I'm sure we have to agree on something, friend! Somewhere! I think we just did! Score! :p

Comments from a Youth Marketer

My name is Bret Bernhoft and I am a Partner at InsYght Consulting, a Youth Marketing Firm based in Portland Oregon. We are a firm dedicated to the expansion of products and services into the Youth Demographic, those between the ages of 18-30. I have to say that your rant is quite typical of the misinformed and typically brash responses we get on a infrequent basis. You are making incredible generalizations without as lick of fact to back up your sentiments. Your statements are just that, sentiments!

I would say that you are the real danger to children, not Youth Marketing. We work for the purpose of bringing new services and products that consumers want into the marketplace. You seek to spread cynicism and intellectual elitism everywhere your foul mouth can spread it!

It is always fun to see these types of rants, never do you really take the time to understand what you are actually discussing.

Bret--

I asked for feedback, and you sure provided it!

Let me just start by saying that I do hope you don't really think my mouth is "foul," and the fact that I openly titled this posting a "rant" while asking readers for a reality check suggests that I'm open to correction and qualification. I also hope that, as someone who has worked very hard in education non-profits for some time, I'm not a "danger to children." I guess sharp language invites sharp language in return.

As I review your thoughtful website, it seems quite clear to me that you're doing valuable work for great organizations. I would recommend that readers visit your blog postings, some of which are written by your clearly accomplished and thoughtful young interns

But, as for evidence to back up my claims about the media environment in which many young people are growing up.... Isn't there evidence all around us? What about Abercrombie & Fitch catalogues, some of the most prominent magazines for teen-aged girls, junk food marketed primarily to children, tobacco marketing campaigns that appeal to kids, violent video games, explicit music and music videos, ads for how to "hook a hottie," ads that emphasize body image over just about any other personal or intellectual virtue, etc.... Is it "intellectual elitism" to be concerned about this?

You're right--the blog did generalize, and I did paint with too broad a brush. I should have written more about all the negative media influences out there rather than targeting only youth marketing. Apologies for that. By no means is every youth marketing campaign out there a terrible thing--and social media recently have made possible very inventive, socially responsible marketing campaigns. But don't you think parents and schools are up against an awful lot of very negative media influences, too? That just strikes me as hard to deny.

Mrs. C--

I think we may have agreed on something--Chalk up a score for world peace! 

I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often. Margaret 

I'll take an even more old fashioned view. We in education can't compete with youth market in thrills and spills. But we can inculcate a sense of duty. When you walk into a classroom you walk into a sacred place. Show some respect.

I'd push those entertainment industry types' finger wagging to the back of your mind. They're good at selling kids candy; how hard is that? There may be no competing with them, but I don't think that's the point. Options, choice, exposure to smart alternatives, and school as a safe place to nerd out on whatever you want. That's what I wanted from my school. Not a sensational or glamorous education, or one that would give me bikini abs in eight days--just a useful one that helped me uncover and practice talents.

Kids are clamoring for what else is out there beside mainstream infotainment, they just might not ask you directly. Is Teen Voices magazine out of Boston still around? That was a great youth-produced, youth-focused journal. Here in D.C., there are some stellar programs that promote youth empowerment beyond the beauty and cool myth of pop culture.

I love stuff like Alien v. Predator because it's ridiculous and over-the-top. I think kids can/do have the same healthy skepticism about the hype they're being sold.

Thank you for your thoughtful remarks, AvP fan.

I think you're right--kids will clamor for substance--if we get them into the habit of doing so. When you're in the habit, Alien v. Predator are fun, over-the-top diversions. (There are some other teen flicks out there that have me worried.)

All the more important, therefore, to ensure that kids get a robust, broad education in the liberal arts, rather than starvation diet of drill and kill in just math and reading skills. I think it was Diane Ravitch who once wrote that, in the absence of music teachers (for example), Brittney Spears will become the music teacher of choice.

Thanks, as well, for reminding me about all the positive youth media out there.

John--thanks for putting first things first. 

Great discussion.

I had a teacher in grad school that said, "Education is a conversation." It is discussions like this that brings awareness.

I have worked with at risk teens in precollege programs for twenty years and this is the topic that they love to talk about. I remember one girl saying to the group, "Baby, you may not remember me because I didn't market myself to be the perfect Saturday night date. But that doesn't matter because I'm here to learn."

One boy cut out all the brand names on his clothing (yes, he left holes) after we talked about popular marketing strategies.

My concern is for the young children who can not process this information and for the teens who are not a part of our conversations.

I have these conversations at home with my own children. It is part of my parenting responsibilities. But, man, I just would like a little support/responsibility from the media to help me out. Or perhaps the bus driver to change radio stations.

It's such thing lots of school give the lots of advertisements.it's more important that student read some extra books and gain our knowledge about different subject.that is way they improve own study.And in this school teachers is very qualified.And your school provides the lots of facilities to the students.its all things make the student carrier is more perfect.

I've come to the conclusion that a lot of the market/culture that I find distasteful -- particularly the highly sexualized marketing to grade-school (and younger) girls -- is aided and abetted by the adults in their lives.

It isn't just that businesses are giving kids what they've convinced them they want -- I think they've convinced a lot of parents that what they are marketing is "cool." The size 4 "skinny jeans" and "Born to Shop" T-shirts aren't being bought (or even, I would guess, whined for) by 4-year-olds. They are being bought by doting relatives who think 4-going-on-14 is a cute look.

My daughter had a short-lived interest in competitive cheerleading, and I found I didn't mind high school age girls provocative uniforms nearly as much as I minded 4- and 5-year olds in them, and the idea that the parents and coaches thought it was cute and fun.

My sense is that a lot of adults just don't think childhood is all that interesting. Comfortable clothing is dull. G-rated movies are dull. Barney and Elmo are annoying. So by the time kids are six, why not shepherd them along to High School Musical and Spy Kids. Adults have bought into the sexualized consumer culture, too, and Bratz dolls seem a whole lot more interesting than baby dolls.

This isn't the only parenting culture -- there's also the very, very wholesome one marketed in Pottery Barn Kids catalogs. But that seems to mostly come to a screeching halt around age 8, after which it's on to Roxy Girl and Abecrombie.

Okay, I'll admit it, this is a broad-brushed rant and there are really quite a few level-headed, sane parents and kids. But I get the impression from my nearly teen-age daughter that what I see as sanity in her and her friends is exactly what makes them "uncool" in the eyes of her fellow 8th graders.

Rachel--You're right to point out the fact that there's a lot of blame to go around. The pervasive advertising culture affects parents as well as children. Media influences foster impatience with classic visions of childhood. Innocence isn't as fetching as cynicism is these days.

Still, I think there are many parents out there who, like you, are trying to shield their children from all the cultural influences they deem harmful. That's no easy task.