Post: Controversial Cover
Controversial Cover
Newsweek's Feb. 12 cover features Paris Hilton and Britney Spears -- with an accompanying article called Girls Gone Wild.
The author's write: "Allow us to confirm what every parent knows: kids, born in the new-media petri dish, are well aware of celebrity antics. But while boys are willing to take a peek at anyone showing skin, they're baffled by the feuds, the fashions and faux pas of the Brit Pack. Girls, on the other hand, are their biggest fans. A recent NEWSWEEK Poll found that 77 percent of Americans believe that Britney, Paris and Lindsay have too much influence on young girls. Hardly a day passes when one of them isn't making news."
This article angered at least two of Common Sense Media's bloggers, Dr. Lamb and Dr. Brown, the authors of Packaging Girlhood.
They write on their blog: "Raina Kelley and Kathleen Deveney (the authors of the article) do just want marketers and the media want them to do, which is blame the parents, blame the girls.
Parents can feel oh-so-superior to 'other parents' who buy their daughters Bratz lunchboxes and allow them to watch MTV, until they wake up and discover that these messages about teens gone wild are everywhere and a 'just say no' approach won't work."
At Common Sense Media, we've had many discussions about the fame of Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, etc. -- and we've been concerned about how to explain celeb behavior (like Lohan's rehab stint) to our kids. We've tried to help parents learn to use these incidents to talk about the tough stuff with their teens.
You can, for example start by explaining the facts about underage drinking: The earlier that kids start drinking and doing drugs, the higher the incidence of alcoholism. And the more alcohol ads kids see, the more they drink.
We've also pointed parents to some of our expert resources, such as our guide to turning media into teachable moments. And we recently released a survival guide for parents: Keeping Kids Healthy in a 24/7 Media World, which is full of practical tips and some startling statistics (such as, watching a lot of sexual content on TV and listening to sexually explicit music lyrics increase the chances that a teen will have sex at an earlier age).
But Dr. Lamb and Dr. Brown raise an important question: How can parents raise healthy girls in the current media environment -- when their role models are constantly fighting, getting arrested, needing help, acting mean, and dumb, and materialistic. Is there a way to do this without shutting off their email accounts and throwing the family's television sets out the window?
Anyone want to talk strategy?
There are 4 replies to this post
Date: February 9, 2007
I agree with Deveney and Kelley--it is seductive to point a finger at other parents because it might you feel superior for just a minute, and it also allows you to believe that you're doing all you can by simply limiting your child's TV viewing or refusing to allow her to see PG-13 movies. But clearly the corruptive messages are pervasive, and this isn't enough. In order to make changes that will truly enable our daughters and sons to have the role models they deserve, society must begin to hold actresses, models, sports figures and other celebrities to higher standards.
Within the current environment, as parents we do need to stand firm with our children in conveying the messages that we want them to receive because despite what they see in the media, what they live at home and school will impact them powerfully. This particularly means role modeling healthy behavior ourselves, and being involved in our kids' social lives, rather than peripheral to them. Time and again we learn that kids with active, involved parents will fare better, be less likely to get involved with drugs, alcohol or other negative behaviors than those whose parents are less involved. This is one of the principal ways to fight the media jungle encountered by our kids every day.
Dr. Susan Bartell
Link: http://www.girlsonlyweightloss.com
Date: February 9, 2007
Hi Dr. Susan, I think you mean you agree with US, Lamb & Brown, who were criticizing the authors of Newsweek. Those were OUR comments not Kelley and Deveney's.
I also wanted to add a comment about the elevation of boys "above all that" girlfighting. This happens time and time again. Boys are not moral exemplars with regard to fights among friends. It's just not true that girls gossip, fight with each other, etc. and boys do not. Boys don't even do it all that differently. Look at all the hip hop music by guys that diss other rappers. It's a cliche to say that girls catfight and boys are clueless. I'm the mother of two sons, and while the lack of emotionality that the culture tries to instill in boys may make them back away from more emotional confrontations, that's not the same as being clueless, above all that, or even confrontation-less!
Link: http://www.packaginggirlhood.typepad.com
Date: February 9, 2007
Hi Sharon, Yes, you're right, really sorry!! I agree with YOU!! about them :) Re. your comment about girls vs. boy fighting--I see the same in my practice, boys can be just as viscous and mean as girls and often, it flies under the radar of parents, teachers and others because they are so primed for the stereotype that girls fight and tease and boys don't. Boys can be verbally abusive, tease just like girls. Actually, lately, the issue of girls physically fighting--more like boys--and posting it on utube has been in the media a lot--which is very interesting, in light of your prior comments--I've been wondering a lot about how amazing it is that kids are so compelled to have their fights viewed--even at the risk of being caught. Susan
Date: February 15, 2007
…”Angered at least two of CSM’s bloggers?” Yep. Make that three. Thanks for the heads-up, team.
Dr. Lamb & Dr. Brown are spot on target by putting Newsweek under fire for their latest celebrity cover story shenanigans. I completely concur with Packaging Girlhood’s insights about the Newsweek piece pushing off accountability onto parents despite media-drenched saturation and 24/7 pervasiveness.
When Newsweek uses words like “complicit” to describe parents’ entertainment enthrallment, I want to shout, what's this 'we' Kimosabe? I could give a flying fig who’s dating whom, or what ET clip shows the latest crash-n-burn celebrity fry case!
Painting parents with generalist brushstrokes in an editorial 'we' chaps my hide and is sloppy journalism.
Further, Newsweek has serious testicular fortitude to call parents 'complicit' when they chose to run 'hot' celeb photos under the guise of news!! Face it, a youth photo, “star” graphic or any illustrative art just wouldn't have had that celeb punch to spike newsstand sales. They went for a capital C in complicity using the celeb+cashola cover photo formula.
Finally, Dr. Susan’s mention of the ‘fight phenom’ (kids trying to create their own celebrity via digital video escapades) is a VERY disturbing trend we just covered here yesterday: http://www.shapingyouth.org/blog/?p=286
It’s not even about girls joining the fighting fray, it’s ANY gender scrapping for celebrity that is universally painful. Sites like PSFights.com voyeuristically rating brutal content is media driven mayhem pure and simple.
If Newsweek thinks this is a ‘parent-managed’ issue sans media ‘complicity’ they need to hit ‘rehab’ right along with the celebrity posse.
Link: http://www.shapingyouth.org