Ron Bishop, Ph.D.
Drexel University



The media play a key role in sustaining that
level of confusion.
What do the media suggest we should ask of
ourselves when it comes to food?
What do the media suggest we should ask of
food when it comes to food?



Nowhere in our mediated world is a lack of
scale more pronounced.
Nowhere else is moderation as a theme more
absent.
Nowhere else do we rely more on the alleged
expertise of alleged medical professionals with
“Parker Brothers” diplomas.







We eat too much and diet too vigorously.
Our kids are all obese.
They’ll develop an eating disorder if they see
even one thin celebrity.
We spend hours at the gym, when we’re not
monitoring the content of their food.
We deconstruct every meal we’ve ever eaten.
We excitedly watch Guy Fieri being excited.
We’ll ask our doctor for gastric bypass surgery.





For folks who just eat a well-balanced diet.
For folks who eat foods with demonized
ingredients.
For folks who treat themselves to a Cinnabon
now and then.
For folks who (gasp!) don’t shop for totally
organic products at Whole Foods.
For folks who don’t treat every midcourse diet
correction as an epiphany.


Be afraid, be very afraid, be very constantly
afraid.
The volume of the argument becomes the
argument.

Despite little evidence that all this obsession
markedly improves our health.






Remain convinced that weight and appearance
“reveal something desperately true about
ourselves” – Hillel Schwartz, Never Satisfied.
But we had to be taught!
We’ve made narcissism the norm – with the
media’s help.
We make “the endless debut.”
An unattainable ideal + our yuppie work ethic.
It’s all about “chronic restrained living.”




Life on the “privatized landscape.”
A personal defeat not to be perfect…or perfectly
purple (Neil insisted on the Barney reference).
Banish and pity is easier to grasp.
Do we really need a food “manifesto” – or even
a set of “personal policies?”


Possibly Important Observation #1: The media’s
depiction of food-related behaviors is based on
a simplistically linear model of media effects.
You have to be a zealot…

Possibly Important Observation #2: Folks in the
media have abandoned the idea that their
shows can/should edify as they entertain.



It’s food as competition…
Food as endurance contest…
Food as ministry…





Theater takes the place of outreach.
Media insist we be curious.
All about self-expression, not sharing.
A “spectacle of change.”
We’re used to the “freak show” being in town.






You think politics are polarized…
Meal’s value is in what it doesn’t have.
What are the demands we make on food?
Adventures in expectancy confirmation.
Eating carries too much moral baggage.
Let’s play “Anatomy of a Freakout!”







Stories should have consistency.
Unwitting victims
Cause us to tap our reserve of intertextual
references.
We’re not right or lying.
Learn about the disease from the media,
develop the symptoms, and then contact the
media.
Anecdotal data wins!
Disease is a better story.

A scare can continue forever if you…



Tap into current cultural anxieties
Train some media-savvy advocates.
What we’re dealing with here is the Availability
Heuristic.







The image of a source in the minds of a receiver.
Depends on us – our attitudes.
Three main dimensions: competence,
trustworthiness, good will.
Always a gap between real and perceived
credibility.
We talk a good game when it comes to credibility.
Our judgment depends on relevance.
Other possible dimensions: composure, sociability.





To have authority, you need legitimacy and
dependence.
Gives stability to the relationship.
Accepting authority signifies “a surrender of
private judgment.”
Over time, the thought of not having an
authority there becomes terrifying.
We can’t bear the disruption.

We sometimes forget the competence part.





Social authority: control of action through the
giving of commands, direction.
Cultural authority: construction of reality by
defining fact and value.
Social authority emanates from people, cultural
authority from products of intellectual activity.
Don’t have to exert cultural authority to have
impact.
In tumultuous times, we’ll more likely accept
an authority’s definition of our needs,
interpretation of events.






Free and fertile exercise of the mind.
High value on debate and discussion.
Let’s ask the “impolite question…”
How can it be that some believe we’re under
attack by “the intelligent, educated culture?”
The demise of the idea that pursuing
knowledge is a good thing.
Treat the hacks as experts, the experts as
eggheads.





Congratulating the zealots for their savviness.
Rigor is a dirty word.
Just add that idea to the pile over there…
Turns out we’re not big fans of sacrifice, hard
decisions, long patient struggles.
My “gut” indeed has shit for brains (now that’s
a t-shirt).



Any theory is valid if it sells books, gains
ratings, sells units.
Anything can be true if someone says it loudly
enough – and often enough, on enough
platforms.
Our respect for how hard it is to make
nonsense fly validates the nonsense – so teach
the controversy!





We become obese because we eat too much,
move too little.
We run, we diet, we head to the gym – and
America gets heavier.
“Medical orthodoxy” blames us. It’s the
“original sin.”
Does the evidence support this assertion – and
are we getting it all? No…and no.
We blame prosperity and our “toxic
environment.”





Too much money, too much food that’s too
available, too many distractions, no need to be
active.
An “obesigenic” environment – yikes!
If not gluttony, then sloth; if not sloth, then
gluttony.
Makes a great book or TV show.
What if we just thought of obesity as a form of
malnutrition…hey, what fun is that?




Eating less and exercise do not
cause sustained weight loss.
We see that thin people are
more active, and assume that
we can exercise more without
increasing our appetite.
The media have helped us
forget…you burn more
calories and you’ll be
hungrier.
And what about the “exercise
explosion” so many of us have
been part of?




Along comes Jean Mayer,
pioneer of the “sedentary
lifestyle” riff…
We’re inert! Modern
conveniences have made
us soft!
Took on the look of a
moral crusade.
Had political influence.


Health reporters buy this…doctors buy this.
Report – generally – to this day that exercise is
the key to weight loss.


“[N]o longer any difference between
developing the habit of pretending to believe
and developing the habit of believing.”
- Umberto Eco (whose writing I still
can’t understand…).
We believed at one time that regulation of fat
tissue was the key element…no more.





Louis Newburgh (right)
comes up with the
“perverted appetite” idea.
It’s a mental state, not a
physical disorder.
“Overindulgence and
ignorance.”
It’s a lack of willpower!
Blame the victim!



Label
Regulate
Intervene

Solutions must be…



Personal
Private
Apolitical

“Theories that disease are caused by mental
states and can be cured by will power are
always an index of how much is not
understood about the physical terrain of a
disease.”
 - Illness as Metaphor, 1978





Pay attention to how we name, describe, and
mythologize disease and illness.
What do we think happens when someone is
sick as opposed to what really happens?
How do we describe the patient and that
experience?
Do we believe that a person’s character can
cause disease?
Is perfect health boring?







PBS and commercial television
News and entertainment = infotainment
News and advertising = advertorials
Entertainment and advertising =
“commercialtainment”
Journalism and blogging
Truth and lies = “truthiness”
Citizen and consumer = “Cisumer?”

Some boundaries not defended.





Increased involvement of commercial entities
in creation of media messages
Make sure you have a positive “programming
environment.”
Media texts have to persuade us to be receptive
to the ads.
Editorial is there to enhance promotion.
Content is carefully monitored; advertisers
usually get to check it out first.


Corporate executives are pretty conservative,
not particularly intrepid.
They fear losing even one customer, let alone
causing a boycott or angering an activist group.






Skilled at “putting on the costume” of a media
producer.
Call it the “Donny Deutsch” Effect
Elevation of goods and values of mass
production to realm of truth.
Characterize the market as the world of facts.
What’s excluded from this version of reality?
Have to be satisfied with “phantom
objectivity.”





What’s to become of the “public sphere?”
The market model doesn’t cut it: it’s
undemocratic, reproduces inequality, is
amoral, and doesn’t meet our social or
democratic needs.
The market likes “truthiness!”
The market likes our era of “overwhelmingly
brazen deception.”
The market likes life in the “reality-based
environment.”

Should bug us for two reasons:


1. The media provide citizenship resources.
2. The media enjoy special legal protection.






Media aren’t the powerful
agents they think they are.
But they are important
factors in the pursuit and
portrayal of truth…huh?
We confuse visibility with
power.
Media’s power is at best
“modest.”
And they don’t fight back.
The “media circus” theory.




Is choice such a great thing?
Images rule, intellect drools.
What’s the state of science education?
Make sure you cover resurgent
fundamentalism.





An advocate for their client.
Goal is to craft and maintain a positive image
for that client.
Goal is to relate client’s views, ideas, products
to the public through reporters.
Gain publicity for their client.
Deal with crises that arise in which their client
is involved.





They manage the flow of information about
their client to the public and the news media.
Act as a buffer between the news media and
management or officials – the “spokesperson”
role.
Skilled PR folks know how to write news – or
at least copy the journalist’s style.
An increasingly blurred boundary between
these spheres.
A supplement to the reporter’s work!

You need to know that…
PR people are generally quite skilled.
 They’ve learned to manage you by providing a
steady stream of information.
 You and your colleagues are outnumbered – about 4
or 5 to 1.
 Companies are spending gobs of cash developing
message management and crisis management
strategies.
 Your colleagues may bitch about what “hacks” PR
people are, but it’s an essential relationship.


And finally, a definition to consider:

Public relations is the “management of
communication between an organization and its
publics.”








Front groups
Teach doubt
Establish a controversy!
Attack the critics
We’re victims too!
They’re all flag-burning hippies!
Expose funding sources
Truth squads






Complementary copy
Adjacencies
Direct pressure
Deference
Burial
Prescreening



Demand for Story Summaries
Monitoring Editorial Content
Advance Copies






Story softening
Story steering
Stories about advertisers
Interviewing advertisers only for positive
stories.
Using advertisers as experts.
Giving heads up (heads ups?) to salespeople
about stories.

A veteran journalist like Jim
Lehrer says:

“I’m not in the judgment part of
journalism. I’m in the reporting
part of journalism. I have great
faith in the intelligence of the
American viewer and reader to
put two and two together and
come up with four. Sometimes
they’re going to come up with
five.

“Best I can do is give them every
piece of information I can find
and let the make the judgments.”

The Washington Post’s Ben Bradlee
says about calling out liars:




“By the seat of their pants, they keep
the lies out. It’s one thing if you know
it’s a lie. Then you can keep it out. “
“Just don’t run it” – even if it’s the
President. Only then…
“You would assign a special story to it
and say when the President said A, he
flew in the face of – there are lots of
little euphemisms you can use – of
much of opinion, which says the
opposite.”
“And you can highlight the
controversy. That seems to me to be an
intelligent way of doing it.”









Reasoned discussion and open exchange.
Where it happens: the public sphere.
Myriad pressures
Conflict or consensus?
The public isn’t just a mass.
It’s not just the marketplace of ideas.
Public sphere is inclusive, not exclusive.
Build debate on arguments, not packaging
As David Bowie once asked: can it be?







Doesn’t buy the “informed citizen” bit.
We’re too damned busy; life is too complicated
as it is.
We don’t do serious discussion.
Hazy impressions and stereotypes work just
fine, thank you very much.
Press was supposed to help, but news isn’t
truth.
The “public” is a delusion.
Public opinion is an irrational force.









Democracy just needs a few tweaks.
We all have something to contribute.
We’re capable of making our own decisions.
Have faith in our ability to learn, to grow.
We lead private lives, but we don’t/can’t live
separate lives.
Public opinion emerges as we discuss, inquire.
We’ll be just fine if politicians, schools,
communities do their jobs.
Information AND art.
Experts are substitute for our best judgment.



The “Paradox of Plenty”
“Conflict” between science and other belief
systems.
Frame food and diet-related issues as political
concerns.



Federal “check off” programs.
Super-aggressive public relations efforts.
And when all else fails, sue the critics!





Nestle’ defuses criticism of how it promoted
formula in developing nations as a substitute
for breast-feeding.
Wanted to counter anti-formula activism.
And to persuade officials, doctors to accept
their marketing practices.
Even though formula use causes infant
mortality in these nations to increase.
We’ve known this since the 1930s.


Give out samples, dress “milk nurses” in white
uniforms, convince health professionals to
advice moms to use it.
Target folks who can’t read through word of
mouth, billboards, picture books.

Activists boycott – don’t buy Nestle’ products
until they stop promoting formula use.

Nestle’ goes on the offensive:







Attack the boycotters as commies!
Issue position paper in which they argue moms can’t
produce enough breast milk, question evidence
linking formula with higher infant mortality rates.
Pressure delegates to WHO/UNICEF meeting.
Persuade U.S. to dissent from Code developed there.
Create Nestle’ Coordination Center for Nutrition in
Washington, DC.
Attack boycotters in in-house newsletter.
Gather intelligence on advocacy groups.

Forms “independent” Nestle
Infant Formula Audit
Commission (NIFAC).





“Collects” and “evaluates”
complaints about Code violations.
Finds Nestle’ is complying –
shocker!
This despite never addressing
poverty as root cause of formula
misuse.
Activists keep citing Code
violations – but by now MSM
isn’t interested, public believes
Nestle’.
Groups withdraw from boycott.





Nestle’ agrees to stop promoting to docs and
hospitals – and agrees to put warning labels on
products…
And then starts placing free formula in
maternity centers.
Back comes the boycott.
We finally sign the Code in 1994; but Nestle’ is
on to marketing to pregnant women, not
moms.
And then they play the AIDS card.




Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation
Term developed in the 1980s by two U of
Denver law professors.
Suits brought against individuals, the press for
disparaging corporations, executives, even
public officials.
Folks will cite copyright or patent
infringement, defamation, civil rights
violations.

So what’s the problem – or the frequency,
Kenneth?
A public policy controversy goes private.
 Moves to a private judicial forum.
 Debate shifts from the corporation’s actions to those
of the folks being sued.
 Previously outspoken people clam up.





The “McLibel” case.
Oprah and the Texas Cattlemen
George Ventura and Chiquita
Akre and Wilson, FOX, and Monsanto






You’d think McDonald’s wouldn’t engage a group
of penniless animal rights activists.
Just how difficult is it to defend a libel suit in
Britain?
Two-and-a-half year trial; 180 witnesses, 60,000
pages of transcripts.
Mixed verdict for the activists.
Press has a field day; a low point in company PR.
Attention hasn’t completely gone away.
But…it showed how far a food company would go
to stifle criticism.




13 states now have agricultural disparagement
laws.
In TX, can’t say, write, or publish that a food is
unsafe unless claim is based on scientific
inquiry.
In SD, can’t say accepted agricultural practices
make food unsafe.
Most laws require the critic to prove truth, a la
British libel law.



Winfrey: How do you know for sure that the
cows are ground up and fed to other cows?
Lyman: Oh, I’ve seen it. These are USDA
statistics. They’re not something we’re making
up.
Winfrey: It has just stopped me cold from eating
another burger!




Cattle prices drop by 10%; Texas Beef Group
files $10.3 million class action against Oprah.
“Get in there and blow the hell out of
somebody,” one says.
Press calls it example of “mad litigation
disease.”
O says she was acting in viewers’ interest.





Judge didn’t rule on constitutionality of FD
laws.
Jury clears Oprah; a “smashing legal victory.”
HSUS takes out full-page ad in NYT.
Cost Oprah more than $1 million to defend
herself – I don’t have that kind of scratch lying
around, do you?
The cattlemens’ real goal achieved: chill the
debate.

Or more precisely, to “make reporters and
journalists and entertainers – and whatever
Oprah considers herself – more careful.”




Enquirer investigates Chiquita Brands for
business practices in Central America.
Company creates secret entities to avoid local
land and labor laws, bribes local officials, uses
pesticides in harmful ways, moves plantation
residents without their OK.
Runs in an 18-page special section in October
1997.
By May 1998, paper was apologizing on the
front page. Why?





Well, stories were based on information
obtained using stolen voice mail codes.
Ventura gave the Enquirer reporter the codes,
told him how to tape without detection.
Gallagher accesses system 15-20 times; keeps at
it even after editors say it’s illegal.
Gallagher pleads guilty to two felony charges –
and gives up Ventura.
Ventura invokes Ohio’s shield law – wants
same protection.



Judge says no – his role not discussed in the
articles.
Everyone knew he was a source.
But what’s the bigger picture here?



All of this was a huge steaming distraction
from the content of the stories – which Chiquita
didn’t offer evidence to counter.
This type of story takes courage, skill, sacrifice,
and money – the latter is not readily available
at small media outlets.
And the Enquirer just freakin’ caved!!!






Joined WTVT (FOX affiliate) in 1996.
Learn farmers injecting cows with BGH.
Four-part series; five states; 50 tapes with 16
hours of footage.
Station is thrilled! Will air during February
sweeps. Buys many ads.
Until a fax from Monsanto’s law firm citing
“recklessly made accusations.”
Story delayed, then pulled.



“This is not the TV news business, this is the
entertainment business,” says new news
director.
Demands Monsanto-driven changes in piece or
face termination.
“We paid $3 billion for these television stations.
We’ll tell you what the news is. The news is
what we say it is.”

David Boylan, station GM





A&W reject the deal, say they’ll go to the FCC.
New deal: full salaries through end of the year,
drop the stuff Monsanto wants dropped, and
never say anything about this.
Former sources now complaining about their
reporting.
Sanitized it somewhat: risk of cancer becomes
“human health implications.”
A&W finally say kill it – FOX doesn’t want the
bad PR.





In all, 83 rewrites – none approved.
New new deal: One year salary and benefits in
form of cushy consulting gigs. No talking
about it. Rejected.
“I just want people who want to be on TV,”
says Boylan.
Fired in December 1997
File FL whistleblower suit in April 1998 – first
ever by journalists. Lies not in public interest,
violated the law, FCC regs.





FOX claims they abandoned story, missed
deadlines, were out to get Monsanto.
No errors in original version; news director
says it should have aired.
FOX counsel brags he could “edit all the risk
out of a story by sending threatening letters.”
Objected to use of Nader, Cronkite as
experts…really.
Jury awards Akre $425,000. Fox appeals, says
“there is no law, rule, or regulation against
slanting the news.” You read correctly…






Verdict stands.
Irony alert: little interest in story from
journalists – too “inside baseball.”
Only WTVT and a university-run community
station show up.
“Not a watershed case,” says the famed
Poynter Institute.
Just a labor dispute.
2003: Appeals court reverses and remands!




FCC’s news distortion policy had never been
adopted as law.
Can’t be invoked to protect a WB.
A&W just went after station for distorting story
to favor Monsanto – they didn’t’ document
when asked.
This would expose employers to liability
beyond what was contemplated when law was
passed, wrote Jeb Bush-appointed judge.



Court grants FOX’s motion for attorney’s fees $1.5 million to be exact.
Request for en banc review denied.
Judge later says they don’t have to pay fees,
just FOX’s appellate costs, their costs.

So: Do you really want to report on that food
safety issue?






The “Looking Glass Self”: self image formed by
messages from others.
See thoughts in terms of their behavioral
context.
Social acts understood as entire processes, not
just summation of stimuli and response.
Have to start with the attitudes of others.
The lovely and talented “generalized other.”
The play and game stages; the me and the I.



“Comparison is the thief of joy,” claimed
Teddy Roosevelt.
The land of Albert Bandura: We learn by
watching and modeling.
Three main ideas:



We can learn through observation;
We require intrinsic reinforcement;
Learning doesn’t necessarily cause behavior change.



Three models of
observational learning:
live, verbal-instructional,
symbolic.
How does one model? In
four stages: attention,
retention, reproduction,
motivation.
The basis of Harrison and
Cantor’s work: see the
happy young thin people
and model their behavior.






Didn’t explore how the information was used,
given meaning.
Investigated in a vacuum.
Exposure not done in real time.
Didn’t explore why the folks attended to the
images.
Folks just reacted to the images, not the situations
in which the characters found themselves.
Strongest predictors? Peer influence, selfconfidence, BMI, then comparison to images.




Post 20th Century shift in values – leisure,
spending, apolitical passivity, permissive
morality, self-fulfillment.
Marketing isn’t enough to grow the consumer
culture. Need a favorable moral climate, too.
We go from salvation through self-denial to
therapeutic ethos stressing self-realization;
obsession with health.
Wanted to renew a sense of selfhood that had
grown fragmented.



Advertisers talking about the same
preoccupations as psychologists, clergy.
Dominant groups don’t always rule by force –
need PR, academics, clergy to sell the
conventional wisdom.
Older values stick around and the newer ones
are sanitized.

Ingredients:






Professionalization of
medicine.
A sense of “unreality.”
Being known in a village,
anonymous to the city (no
matter what Glenn Frey
says).
More comfort and
convenience.
Firsthand experience
becomes obsolete.
And gives us “nervous
prostration,” among other
packaged diseases.
More specialized jobs.
 Success dependent on policy made up elsewhere.
 Decline in personal autonomy.
 Success is redefined.
 We become…wait for it…other-directed!
 Began to think the self was a social
construction…which brings us back to Mead.
 No self to control.
 Decline of orthodoxy, lack of norms, fluid
ethics, not committed to our own beliefs.
 And we were expected to be productive!







We had emotional needs to meet.
We wanted outlets – we wanted intense
experiences.
Perfect terrain for the sowing of the TE.
Its creators offered us harmony, vitality, selfrealization.
The latter was most important – and could be
rediscovered with some expert advice.
Focus on the personal.








The land of “abundance therapy.”
At first, we’re urged to conserve our
strength.
Soon, abundance was heart of therapy.
Live! Live! Live! – Tap our sources of
hidden energy. Go after a fuller life.
The focus is on now – getting more out
of life is its own reward.
Unlock our potential.
“We all need to glow, tingle, and feel
life intensely now and then,” Hall said.
Becoming, not being!






Helps promote adjustment to bureaucratic
authority.
How can you cultivate spontaneity?
How can you calculate inhibition shedding?
You end up worshipping growth and process
as ends in themselves.
Old values get in the way of growth!
Constantly anxious and busy – and dissatisfied
with our bodies, and worried about calories,
etc.

Easy targets for:




Media “symbolically annihilate” women.
Condemned, trivialized, excluded.
Endless advice about “hearth and home.”
Defined by men in their lives.





Media “define and shape the woman’s world,
spanning every stage from childhood to old
age” (McRobbie).
You head back to media products for more
advice.
Take control of your bodies, but only to make
them aesthetically pleasing.
Marxist “double bind:” indulge, but be thin.
Produces a pretty tense relationship with food.





Food companies make us heavy; diet
companies slim us down.
In their best interest to encourage a tenuous
relationship with food.
A destructively symbiotic relationship at that.
No room for “alternative constructions of
identity.”
Are women – and increasingly men – complicit
in their own degradation, as Douglas asks?






Suffering Alone
A Single Event
Control and Competition
Recovery: An Ongoing Struggle
Blame the Media
And when all else fails, invent new disorders.





Often narrated the struggle, heightening the
sense of isolation.
Identity often concealed by pseudonyms.
Role of parents and peers unexplored;
oblivious to the struggle – until a single event.
Treated condescendingly, like a petulant child.
Happens out of the blue and originates solely
in the person who struggles.





Some teasing from friends or a flip comment
from a coach or doctor can send the person
spiraling into ED.
Family dynamics left unexplored.
Taunts from siblings, during rehearsal for a
dance recital.
Cultural assumption that we should always be
dieting not explored.
It simply appears – and is inevitable.




Coverage ``lurid and sensational’’ (Bordo, 1990, p.
85), built on extreme descriptions of the main
character’s suffering.
Likened to experiencing the depths of battle; some
characters felt that ``food was the enemy’’ (Bell,
1996).
Food positioned as one thing character can control
– portrays the character as selfish, trying to
monopolize attention.
``The thinner I grew, the more absorbed I became
in my own narcissistic world’’ (Woods, 1981).



Character must be coerced to fight the disorder,
which cannot be cured without medical
intervention, often at an expensive eating
disorders clinic.
Discovery of the illness by family members or
friends often reads like an account of a criminal
investigation.
Treated with cultural disdain reserved for drug
addicts. Magazines take advantage of the
tendency toward addiction.



A number of writers paint a less daunting
picture of the road to recovery.
Impression that an eating disorder is a phase, a
small bump. Disorder emerges and subsides
suddenly.
A rite of passage, part of the price to pay for
acceptance.




A simple causal relationship: consuming media
content featuring thin characters damage body
image.
Blame ``our magazine culture with its
supermodel mania for thinness’’ (O’Neill,
1994).
Parents urged to ``take a hard look at the
media your children are exposed to’’
(Newman, 1997).
Media’s role not explored against broader
cultural backdrop.






EDs are an epidemic; a rite of passage.
Folks who struggle are selfish perfectionists.
Disorder comes out of nowhere; stems often
from one comment or experience.
Roles of parents and siblings not explored – at
least until disorder emerges.
Family then watches helplessly – and
complains about disorder’s impact on them.
Therapy is the only answer.





WM publishers wouldn’t want to spoil the
buying environment.
Interrupt the “health and beauty
consciousness” (Andersen).
Ratio of ad space to editorial in WMs is 10:1.
Treat EDs as aberrations – can thus treat it as a
problem, but sustain the discourse that
contributes to the problem.
Make EDs seem like it takes place outside the
realm of consumerism.




We’re only seeing the “privatized landscape”
of the folks who struggle.
The reader is left only with ``the voyeuristic
pleasure of gazing into the private lives of
society’s victims.’’ (Andersen).
It’s like a talk show, a ``destructive public
spectacle, invoked to confirm . . . the moral
righteousness and superiority of the audience.’’
Magazines can continue to normalize diet
while paying lip service to the experience of
those who struggle with EDs.





Encourages the narcissism packaged as
liberating by the media (Douglas).
Attacks the anorexic for her narcissism by
framing ED as a lonely ordeal brought on by
self-involvement.
A side show. Missing is a frank discussion of
power and prevalence of dieting.
Aberrations examined apart from cultural
context.
Directed away from discussing our culture’s
ongoing dieting discourse (Sontag).





Have to think about the needs and motivations
behind media use.
Combine Uses and Gratifications with Effects
model.
Think about media exposure as an intervening
variable, not the intervening variable.
Gauged reading frequency, assessed
motivations for reading.
Wanted to find the motivations most associated
with risk of AN.

We read:




To learn about popular diets and become as thin as
models.
To become popular and happy. To learn what the
“in” folks do.
To improve relationships, learn new trends, become
more interesting.
To entertain ourselves, to avoid boredom.

What they learned:





Reading frequency most strongly predicated by
desire for self-improvement.
AN risk best predicated by motivation to lose
weight; to a lesser extent by desire for popularity.
But frequency as a mediator between motivation and
risk of AN? Not much there.
Media exposure alone isn’t a key factor in
development of EDs.
Frequency less of a predictor in presence of the other
motivations.

What they learned, continued:
It’s the motivations that contribute to AN behavior.
 Self-evaluation is a key reason for reading, but use
may not always produce negative consequences.
 Frequency’s ability to predict AN drops when other
factors are considered.
 Could be reading is motivated by desire to improve
things other than appearance.
 So why do we read? Not sure.
 Have to look at all the media we consume; consider
that we’re so wrapped up in self-improvement that
maybe there’s not a lot of time for media.



So it isn’t how much you read that puts you at
risk, but the needs that push you toward a
particular medium.
More focus on why.





Women – and men – persuaded to ditch the
selflessness, the activism, and focus on the self.
Remember those self-help solutions: always
personal, private, and political.
Feminism appropriated to sell – hence
“liberation as narcissism.”
Break free from those damned hippie
conventions!
Nonconformity in the service of conformity!





Life in a “narcissistic paradise”
meant change was possible –
but it had to be personal.
Desire for autonomy co-opted.
“Sisterhood was out,
competitive individualism was
in,” (p. 255).
Weren’t these movements
anticapitalist?
Sites of resistance now deployed
to sell.






No more free and easy relations – of any kind –
with food, with our bodies.
Eat well – and be dieting.
Hunger as a force all its own.
Power grows as we rip each other for seeking
gratification.
Content plays on our obsession with food.
Men just eat voraciously – and diet with a purpose.







Fad diets are out.
Dieting to maintain, improve health is in.
Call it “weight management,” call it “personal
weight management” even – but not dieting.
“Normative discontent” still at work.
It’s not an extraordinary behavioral regimen.
We control dieting (wink wink!)
Our distrust of fad dieting effectively
mobilized, co-opted.



Moral panic about obesity at
least partially rooted in our
distaste for heavy folks.
Coverage frames “fat
activists” as being radical.
Yet every so often, there’s
some enlightenment…




Saying ideal body was
heavier, curvier “back
then” affirms superiority
of thin body.
It’s a little more fluid than
“thin is in.”
Let’s ponder social and
economic factors.
How’d we get to this
point?
Worried that our overconsumption is eroding
our integrity.
 Worried about the nation’s health and fitness.
 Worried that Big Food is flooding the market
with cheap, fattening foods…
 And Big Pharma is offering up endless string of
diet products.
 Worried about the toll of obesity on health.
But is it an epidemic? Is it a bigger threat than
terrorism?





To this point, personal
responsibility is the
main coverage theme.
Right out of the
“healthism” playbook.
Disease means you’ve
been irresponsible.
You’ve brought it on
yourself.




Health seen as the outcome of
our everyday behaviors.
Environmental theories tied to
lifestyle, and discussed in
connection with isolated cases.
Who stands to gain from such an
approach?
To date, “episodic” frames are
the order of the day.






She found a new frame: Fatalism.
Responsibility and environment frames are still
duking it out, but obesity now seen as unavoidable,
even inevitable.
Be resigned to being obese.
Life demands too much of us for us to lose weight.
Have to balance more work with family
obligations – no time to diet!
All the stress in our life is causing “visceral fat.”






It’s the nature of the beast.
The tactics are interesting – they’re just not
practical.
Make the right choices, but it won’t matter.
The old frames essentially cancel each other
out.
And then there’s good ol’ biology – we’re
programmed to to overeat.
Being heavy is preordained!





Even in the womb – you can
program your kid to gain
weight in a particular way.
“The crucible of a major health
problem, obesity’s ground
zero,” noted one story.
It can’t be helped.
You can fight genetics, you can
try regulation – but neither
fight can be won – it’s destiny!
Agency – oh, agency; that’s
just some people talking…




We should be resigned to
battling obesity at some
point. It’s not fixable, it’s
fixed.
An ongoing state of
limbo…
She also found a Zeitgeist
frame to go with the
fatalism frame.
Locates events within
larger sociohistorial trends.



For starters, skip the “eat
right and exercise” and “fix
it with laws” themes.
Build messages that
reference social, cultural,
historical, economical,
individual conditions
implicated in obesity.
How do you persuade them
to do this, when they want
to write about gastric bypass
surgery and bootcamps?

Carnie’s still at it:



"It's like a daily decision. Am I going to eat healthy
today or am I going to make some shitty decisions?”
"I've really struggled since I've become sober. How
do I balance that? How can I relax and not overeat?
Because I have a lot of pressure in my life. I'm a
working mother ... You try to pay the bills, you try to
keep your life going and there's pressure.”
Meanwhile, Al Roker’s doing just fine…


“Inextricably entangled with commerce,
technology, and fear, it has become difficult for
many Americans to recognize and appreciate
good food.”
“…[W]e are confused. We flit from one loopy
diet to the next. We feel guilty; we binge and
we purge. And we’ve become just about the
fattest people on earth.”

“The voice of reason has never been heeded
when it comes to mealtime in America.”

“And you tell me friends, that there is no
disputing taste and tasting? But all life is a
dispute over taste and tasting…”