Feb. 8, 2010

Mean Girls writer and co-star Tina Fey had a snarky testimonial on the front with a visual that clearly caught their eyes:

“You can’t put this book down…or it will talk about you while you’re out of the room.”

My daughter picked it up first, “What’s this?”

“Oh, that’s a new novel I’m checking out…You know the movie “Mean Girls?” Well, Rosalind Wiseman wrote the Queen Bees & Wannabes book that it was based off of…Same writer.”

(I’ve learned not to offer up too much information lest any selection be branded ‘…a Shaping Youth thing’ so kept my mouth shut entirely and let her lead the way)

She’s not one to read anything that she hasn’t handpicked herself, so I stayed silent and watched as she cautiously inspected it, flipping the book jacket over repeatedly, thumbing through the pages and reading the inside flaps… “Looks kinda good” she finally pronounced.

Her BFF who often curates her book selections with a first pass for a thumbs up in hand-me-down style chimed in, “I wanna read it!”

I nodded to her in that ‘sure, after I finish it’ mode, when my own daughter interrupted, “You can…right after me, ‘k?”

Whoa. Was I hearing this right?

My surprised expression must have prompted her backpedaling, as she immediately got that squinty suspicious look:

“Hmn…Wait a sec…do you know her?”

“Know who?”

“Know the author! Is this one of your people?”

(One of my ‘people?’ What did this even mean?)

“I know OF her. I mean, we work in similar spheres…we admire each other’s work, but I don’t KNOW her, know her.”

(She did this when we attended the recent Rachel Simmons’ event too…Not to mention when she saw the copy of the book  ‘Curse of the Good Girl’ that I bought, and my interview with Rachel Simmons.

She always give me the 20 questions…I never know what triggers the dismissive  ‘fellow do-gooder’ brush-off, but thankfully, this wasn’t it.

And yes, there IS some overlap among those of us dedicated to ‘creating cultures of dignity’ as Rosalind says, for as you can see on Rachel Simmons’ site she just posted about Rosalind Wiseman’s book yesterday!)

“Okay, but you’ve never MET her though, right?” my daughter implored…

I squirmed a bit, feeling that squishy sort of reticence knowing I hadn’t come completely clean with full transparency. (As you can see by the sidebar, Rosalind Wiseman.com and Shaping Youth.org have a probono open-ended content partnership where we choose to swap posts as relevant)

So I responded with a very unlike-me Clinton-esque phrase:

“It depends on what you mean by “met”…”Met face to face or met online?”

After all, we tweet, we correspond, we share stuff on Facebook, clearly this is a 21^st century dilemma!

So I just fessed up:

Yes, I’m hoping we’ll meet Rosalind face to face next month in L.A. at the Tween Summit March 13 …

Yes, I KNOW we’ll meet in person for the Bay Area stop on the mother/daughter Girl World Tour (April 26 now confirmed at Menlo; other GWT slates/dates here)

AND…yes, I think it’s a sorely needed conversation…

Her BFF, Suzy who is also a high school freshman, and my ‘surrogate second daughter’ had been listening the whole time and quickly piped up, “Well, I’m in.” Yes, that’ll cinch it. No further questions asked. No more third degree. Book. Tour. We’re in. Gotta love that peer to peer dynamic.

Meanwhile, here’s my two-part chat with Rosalind Wiseman about how she collaborated with youth to craft an authentic voice.

Much like branding professionals, she took a deep dive approach to getting inside the world of teens, by (what else?) engaging directly, bringing youth into the process and onto the team.

Smart. Very smart.

Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth: Boys, Girls, and Other Hazardous Materials is your first YA fiction ever. How will this book tour DIFFER from your prior tours or your updated Queen Bees & Wannabees book title? Are you adding digital components? Web 2.0 author chats? Leveraging the ‘Mean Girls’ acclaim into the talk show circuit?

Rosalind Wiseman: The Girl World Tour is very different from other book tours I’ve done because I’ve never done a mother-daughter tour.

I’ve certainly spoken with moms and girls in the same room many times over the years, but now I’ll be weaving content from Queen Bees & Wannabes and Boys, Girls, & Other Hazardous Materials into the presentations, since the tour is promoting both books.

As for digital media—this is being woven into everything I do these days. It’s hard to imagine that only 4 years ago when I was launching Queen Bee Moms & Kingpin Dads, the words “author chat” or “tweet” or “blogger outreach” weren’t considered as part of our publicity plans at all.

Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth: Queen Bees struck a universal cord, obviously becoming the framework for the Mean Girls movie which is now more of a verb & adjective than a noun in girl culture, so many of us are eager to read your first YA FICTION work since you have such a solid foundation and understanding of the youth sphere.

When did you decide to make the foray into fiction, and why?

Rosalind Wiseman: I was approached by Walden Media because at the time they had a relationship with Penguin Young Readers and were interested in seeing if I could write a story with a high school freshman protagonist.

I’d never considered writing fiction before, but I decided to do it because I knew it would be a big challenge. I tell my students to take risks and be uncomfortable all the time, but when I was asked to write this novel I realized it was an opportunity for me to practice what I preach. I have been terrified of failing throughout the whole process, but I pushed through and did it anyway.

Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth: I love that you brought teens themselves into the editing process. How did you find these “kid lit” enthusiasts, what age were they and how did you select who would be your core critics?

Rosalind Wiseman: Like the other books I’ve written, after presentations I would tell the students I worked with that if they were interested in helping me edit the book to contact me, and many of them did. And when they reached out I would send them a few chapters and just ask them if they thought it was realistic.

I also have a friend who runs a creative writing class for high school seniors, and for a semester I would go in and meet with them and we would edit a chapter every week. I would make them tell me one thing they thought was good, one thing they thought was bad, and one thing we needed to discuss.

As far as knowing WHO to listen to– it’s a little hard to define but I guess a kid just says something that rings true to me.

It has to do with the quality of their comments and their emotional reaction, both good and bad. And while I think many people assume that this book is for girls, I wanted to pay attention to what boys were saying and there were always boys involved in my editing process.

Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth: Give us a few examples of what kids edited and refined to make your work better?

What did and didn’t ring true to the teens? (in character development, voice, action, antics, etc.)

Rosalind Wiseman: In the opening scene where Charlie’s dad is listening to music in the car and she is embarrassed–we talked for almost an entire class about what the song would be on in the car. But on a larger scale, we discussed what types of hazing happen in high schools, how people hang out at parties—I wanted them to tell me what that looks like.

Towards the end of the book when the biggest conflict arises they were really reactive about how Charlie (the lead/female protagonist) would have to speak out and how in the original drafts they thought she was being too mothering to Will. I had a whole room full of boys pretty annoyed about that.

Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth: What did you learn most from the youth team advising you, and what did they learn most from you?

Also, how can we utilize the voices of youth in mentoring mode to create better literary products for us all?

Rosalind Wiseman: I think it reinforced for me that the discussions we have with kids where they can tell us about what their world looks like and feel heard is so valuable—for them and for the adults in their lives.

While a lot of conversations started with the minutiae of what the appropriate songs and brands were, it would lead us to the topics underneath like hazing and dealing with difficult friendships and speaking out in conflict. A real moment for me is when we ended up having a really authentic discussion about parents allowing drinking in the house and how teens feel about that.

For me, it’s in the discussion that you get better literature.

Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth: Ok, A few fun ones now:

If Hollywood makes this book into a movie (like they did w/Mean Girls) who would you cast as the book’s characters?

Rosalind Wiseman: Oh wow…that’s hard. I think I’d rather have it be a lot of unknown actors, but if I had to choose…

Miss Fieldston: Rachel McAdams

Charlie: Emma Watson

Will: Younger version of Chad Michael Murray from One Tree Hill

Sydney: Blake Lively

Nidhi: Frieda Pinto

Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth: Where is RosalindWiseman.com going? More fiction, non-fiction, youth advice, advocacy? What are your goals and dreams in painting your own career canvas?

Rosalind Wiseman: This is also a very big question! In general, to continue to doing substantive work, to reflect children’s experiences back to others and their parents, to be a conduit between these groups of people, and to give advice where appropriate. When we re-launched the website last year, it became this living, breathing thing that is always changing. We’re excited to continue to explore what we can do in that medium—the potential has yet to be fully realized.

Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth: What do you make of the whole Twilight phenom & the success with teen girls?

What are girls seeking in the pages of these books and what are they longing for in real life? (is there a corollary?)

Similarly, the Harry Potter series engaged both genders, but ‘boys more’ how will your book appeal to different genders in different ways?

Rosalind Wiseman: With Twilight I think that girls are longing for what girls always long for in every generation: to be understood and seen as special and unique and passionately loved for it. To be seen and to be treasured—I think girls always want that. The Twilight series really taps into that desire for better and for worse.

And with Boys, Girls & Other Hazardous Materials I really fought hard for this to be a book that was relevant and interesting for both genders, and I think that content-wise, it still is even though there is a female protagonist.

I wanted to challenge the idea that “boys don’t read” and how baffling it is to me that adults just accept this to be true for the most part. No one these days would stand for people saying “girls aren’t good at math,” and in fact we have whole initiatives and organizations to make sure this isn’t a cultural norm, yet with boys we seem complacent!

The original cover that we had for the book was a lot more gender neutral and interesting to me, but ultimately we had to go another direction because the sales department was concerned that it wouldn’t be a draw for their biggest group of readers in the age group, who are girls.

If it were up to me, we’d have kept the original that was on the galley. But in the same way that Queen Bees was written for parents but girls still write me all the time to say that they loved it, I am hoping that boys will read it and think about it. My ideal would be for it to be used in a classroom setting so that both genders could discuss the issues in the book.

Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth: What’s on your ‘to do’ bucket list of life, and who’s on your ‘must meet’ list of “sheroes”?

Rosalind Wiseman: I want to travel extensively with my family, especially Asia and Africa. I would also like to learn to do the trapeze.

As far as “she-roes”–Mary J. Blige—that’s an easy one. But personally, I’d rather meet people that are heroes but not lauded for it. I am much more interested in people who are heroic in small ways of their every day lives.

Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth: How has the conversation changed since your Queen Bees & Wannabes initial release and what role has media played in terms of youth developmental ages and stages?

Also, the newly updated Queen Bees adds entirely new components, what are they and why did you overhaul and update concurrently? (the digital sphere? etc.)

Rosalind Wiseman: I think you said it already—it has become an adjective. It’s become commodified and therefore isn’t taken as seriously, even though we’re hearing about it more. It just becomes this thing that you make assumptions about and don’t think mindfully and deeply about.

On the other hand, there are those who take things much more seriously now that they know, but I am very aware that because of my work that one of the bad things is that it’s become a commodity which has a lot to do with how media talks about girls and their conflicts.

Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth: Tell us about the fiction storyline, why you chose that direction, and what other topics interest you to tackle in either the fiction or non-fiction realm

Rosalind Wiseman: I chose to write a story that was typical and average. I did that because I have always thought that what is underneath the commonplace is interesting. I wanted to, within that kind of story, share the secrets that people have told me throughout the years. It brings to light the things that people have to deal with but that people rarely stop to say, “Wow, that is really messed up.” I believe, and hope that others will feel, that these things are worthy of discussion.

I will probably do more novels because I find it easier to speak the truth in fiction rather than non-fiction.

Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth: In your view, is it true the ‘KGOY affect’ (kids getting older younger) is in play? If so how has that altered the way you write for this audience in an authentic voice? (e.g. drama/external/internal struggles of adolescence, etc.)

Rosalind Wiseman: That’s hard. Because it’s a combination of rapidly absorbing adult ideas and themes but also recognizing that a ninth grader is still a kid.  How do you be authentic and acknowledge this? It’s  something  I struggled with all the time as I was writing…it’s about striking a balance—the extent of the physical contact for the characters in this book is one kiss, and you don’t see anyone doing drugs or swearing all the time.

There are definitely some turns of phrase that make people uncomfortable at times and I tried to use those strategically…You DO see teenagers drinking alcohol and making some really bad decisions because of that. I think it’s realistic and presents opportunities for conflict without going to extremes.

I don’t think you should have to put your characters into the most outrageous, intense situations in order for the decisions they make and the challenges they face to be powerful and worthy of discussion.

Amy Jussel, Shaping Youth: Thanks, Rosalind…

It’s refreshing to dial down the drama of media messaging (particularly on TV) which is being proved as anything BUT real.

As an aside, readers, check out this USA Today article citing stats from the new study via the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy forcing faux flamboyance:

60% of young men and boys lie about having sex

78% feel pressured by media  to the reality of media pressure

So thanks, Rosalind, for trying to ‘keep it real.’

Here’s more of Rosalind Wiseman via her 3:22 video discussing the whys and hows of the plotline, Rosalind’s Amazon page to continue the conversation beyond this blog or her own site: RosalindWiseman.com.

Here’s the growing list of spring locations for the Girl World Tour of 10+ cities along with her conversational Facebook group, and where you can chat with Rosalind on Twitter.

With all that social media you’ll feel as if you’ve ‘met her’ too!

Girl World Tour: Rosalind Wiseman’s 10+Cities This Spring

(copy via RW’s site below:)

“Moms* & daughters (ages 8-14) are invited to join Rosalind Wiseman, an internationally-recognized author, mom and expert on teens & parenting for a fun-filled evening of mother-daughter bonding.

In addition to celebrating Rosalind’s latest books, the tour will feature an interactive discussion about confidence, friendships, sweat-inducing moments and common mother-daughter challenges.

A Q&A session and book signing will follow. The two-hour event is sure to get mothers and daughters talking, laughing and connecting.”

*Moms=”any adult with a young girl in their life: Fathers, big sisters, Girl Scout troop leaders, aunts, etc. are ALL welcome!”

Please check back often as new cities are added and additional information becomes available! Contact Emily Bartek with any questions at 202-545-0633; sponsored by Family Circle & Dove Go Fresh.

Saint Louis, MO – Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Host: Left Bank Books
Location: Mad Art Gallery
Time: 7-9pm
Tickets: By phone at 314-367-6731, or in the Central West End Store located at 399 N. Euclid Avenue
Host Website:

Indianapolis, IN – Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Host: Big Hat Books
Location: Saint Richard’s School
Time: 6:30-8:30pm
Tickets: Contact Big Hat Books at 317-202-0203, or purchase in store at 6510 Cornell Avenue.
Host Website: TBA

Naperville, IL – Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Host: Anderson’s Bookshop
Location: Jefferson Junior High School, 1525 N. Loomis Street, Naperville, IL
Time: 7-9pm
Tickets: Call 630-355-2665 or visit Anderson’s in Naperville.
Host Website:

Northville, MI – Thursday, March 4, 2010
Host: Next Chapter Bookstore & Northville Youth Assistance
Location: Hillside Middle School, 775 N. Center Street, Northville, MI
Time: 7-9pm
Tickets: Tickets are available for purchase via the Next Chapter Bookstore website. See link below.
Host Website:

Houston, TX – Thursday, March 11, 2010
Host: Brazos Bookstore
Location: St. John’s School, 2401 Claremont Lane, Houston, TX
Time: 7-9pm
Tickets: Purchase online (link below) or contact Brazos Bookstore at 713-523-0701 for more information.
Host Website:

Lakewood, CA – Monday, March 15, 2010
Host: Vroman’s Book Store
Location: St. Joseph’s High School, 5825 N. Woodruff Avenue, Lakewood, CA
Time: 7-9pm
Tickets: Contact Vroman’s at 626-449-5320, visit the store, or purchase online at the link below!
Host Website:

Cincinnati, OH – Thursday, March 25, 2010
Host: Beech Acres Parenting Center
Location: Cintas Center at Xavier University, 1624 Herald Avenue, Cincinnati, OH
Time: 6:30-8:30pm
Tickets: Contact Kim Chapman of Beech Acres at 513-233-4734.
Host Website:

Washington, D.C. – Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Host: RPW, Inc. & Georgetown Day School
Location: Georgetown Day School, 4200 Davenport Street NW, Washington, D.C.
Time: 7-9pm
Tickets: Contact RPW, Inc. at 202-545-0633.
Host Website: TBA

Denver, CO – Friday, April 16, 2010
Host: Girls, Inc. Denver
Location: Girls, Inc. Gymnasium; 1498 Julian Street, Denver, CO
Time: 6:30-8:30pm
Tickets: Contact Girls, Inc. of Denver at 303-893-4363
Host Website: TBA

S.F. Bay Area: Atherton, CA – Monday, April 26, 2010
Host: RPW, Inc.
Location: Menlo-Atherton High School Performing Arts Center, 555 Middlefield Road, Atherton, CA
Time: 7-9pm
Tickets: TBA
Host Website: TBA

(Save the Date! I’ll be there for certain; might even help host; special thanks to Menlo-Atherton alum Kirsten Bollen for the helping hand in venue scouting)

Feb. 4, 2010

…And I confirmed not all that much has changed from yesteryear…Especially when girls and women are reduced to chattle despite living in this 21st century supposedly “politically correct” age of conversation.

As a nonpartisan, nonprofit, non-religious-based organization (our only ‘cause’ is the emotional and physical well-being of children and media/marketing’s role in same) I have to say, Senator Brown’s daughters typify the historic humiliation from gaffes aplenty over time; the only thing that makes it newsworthy is the YouTube video capture of the mortification for eternity. (yep, video after the jump)

Our 21st century antics of female objectification harken back to history books of slave auctions, women paraded across planked makeshift stages, and age old farmer and dowry stories where the betrothed would joke about having her ‘teeth checked’ like a horse being swapped for oats and barley. The very fact that I’m interrupting  our ‘girlcott’ series slamming the sexist absurdity of American Apparel’s latest ad campaign prompting girls to “post their backsides for judgment” says things may be getting WORSE not better in this department. Ahem. (Take action here, and visit Hardy Girls Healthy Women’s site for updates!)

Still, I prefer to view Brown’s public auction style blunder as a media literacy opportunity to turn his words into a ‘teaching moment’ for all dads and daughters out there…So listen up, guys.

No, I’m not the PC-police, but powerful words and off-the-cuff remarks can sear themselves into kids’ souls like a branding iron; especially coming directly from ‘role models’ like parents who may never deem to intentionally harm.

Great resources here from The Dad Man, Joe Kelly, co-founder of the acclaimed Dads & Daughters org for over a decade…

Anyway, whether it’s intended as a backwards compliment, verbalized in a wedding toast, or shared in SuperBowl Sunday jest…Please, PLEASE gents… hold your tongues, watch your ‘well-meaning’ words, and engage your grey matter before uttering sexist tripe that can reduce your daughter’s self-worth to an appearance-based ‘object’ of desire.

Gawd knows, we have enough of that in our crass pop culture of ‘bootylicious-hot-mama’ style coarseness, n’est ce pas?

We see this in phrases like ‘trophy wife,’ lewd and lascivious bartalk comments within earshot of attractive ingénues (particularly at Superbowl parties with cheerleader and beer commercial shenanigans; here are some tips from The Dad Man if you’re watching the game with your daughter, guys)…

…And the entire notion of upholding daughters on a ‘pillar/pedestal’ during dating years or yammering about ‘when they’re gonna tie the knot.’ (or have kids… insert narrowcast expectation du’ jour)

It can really be quite toxic, making the girl-child feel like she’s ‘nothing’ unless (or until) she ‘gets a man.’ And that kind of pressure can skew decision-making in all aspects of life. (don’t get me started with teen girls and dating violence right now, argh!)

Personal anecdote: (yeah, that’s a sweet 16 shot w/my dear ol’ Dad)

I was a ‘serial monogamist’ with very long term relationships in both high school and college years, so by the time I hit the ‘ripe ol’ age of 28’ I’d been subjected to more than my fair share of my own dad’s friends lobbing verbal grenades like:

“Why doesn’t she get married and commit? Is she ugly or something?”

Or “Whoa. She’s too smart for her own good”…

Or misguided projecting of patriarchy ideals in back-handed compliments, like, 

“Wow. You’re so attractive, don’t you want to settle down and have kids?” Ugh.

To this day, I think it’s shaped the person I am and how I walk through this world.

For better or for worse. (see Rachel Simmons’ Curse of the Good Girl interview!)

So now, here’s co-author of So Sexy So Soon, Diane Levin with her post about Senator Brown’s misfire, as she asks some pertinent questions for ALL of us to ponder.

By the way, Jean Kilbourne and Diane Levin have just launched their new blog as of 1-22-10, so check it out pronto!

Here’s my interview with Jean Kilbourne on Shaping Youth too…I tell you, this dynamic duo “saw this coming” loooooong ago…

They pioneered the movement of awareness and critical thinking skills pertaining to media and marketing’s impact on kids. “She-roes” to be sure.

The rest of us are simply taking the baton and running like the wind to reverse some of the collateral damage that’s happening in new media digital nanoseconds…preserved forevermore in a Google search of archival internet gaffes. Like:

The Bigger Meaning of Senator Scott Brown’s “Available” Comments:

by Diane Levin, Ph.D. co-author of So Sexy So Soon

The election of Republican Scott Brown to the US Senate seat vacated by Ted Kennedy made last week a very bad one for Democrats, Obama and a new political agenda.  And appallingly as it turned out, when Brown made his acceptance speech, it also became a very bad week for girls and young women.

During his speech, Brown’s two college-age daughters, Ayla and Ariena, were by his side and dressed to kill.  He introduced them and enthusiastically said, “Yes, they’re both available,” to a huge gale of laughter from the crowd.

What does Brown’s comment tell us about this father’s relationship with his daughters and how he thinks about them?

What does the audience’s response tell us about what has become a normal and acceptable way for men to relate to girls and young women and fathers to daughters?

If this were an isolated, albeit very public, incident, it would be disturbing enough.  But it really reflects a disturbing attitude toward girls that has become increasingly normalized in the new sexualized childhood.

Rather than being valued for what you do and how you behave, girls are judged by whether boys view them as “available” because they look and dress right.

More and more, from a very young age, girls learn that popularity and “success” comes from being attractive and available for boys and men.  And more and more boys and men learn to judge girls and young women based on having the “right” body and wearing the “right” sexy clothes.

Seeing one’s daughter as an available sex object does not bode well for father-daughter relationships or for men’s attitudes toward women and girls in general.  Nor does it bode well for the lessons girls will learn about themselves.

Have you seen men react to young girls this way?

What do you think it meant to the girls?

Did it affect them over time?

What did you do or wish you’d done?

What can we do about these issues now?

Cough. Cough. Um…Point well taken, Diane. Here are some resources below for tips on relationships and a healthier outlook for dads and daughters as the 21st century marches on…Enjoy!

p.s. Love you, Mom AND Dad, see you this weekend! (don’t take this the wrong way, ‘k?)

Related Resources On Shaping Youth

Shaping Youth Via Fatherhood: Joe Kelly On New Media, New Men

Childhood Matters: Shaping Youth’s Fatherhood Resources

Dads & Daughters Bonds Will Grow And Mature Over Time

Dove Ditches Superbowl: Media Tips from Dads & Daughters

Peter Coyote Lends His Voice to Dads & Daughters Video

Dove’s Onslaught: Media Messages Pummel Girls’ Self Esteem

More Fatherhood Picks/Vital Resources:

The Dad Man: Tips for Dads Watching the Superbowl Together

The Dad Man: Dads Can Help Daughters w/Body Image

What Kids Learn From Their Fathers: Family Health Digest

Zero to Three’s Fatherhood Tip Sheet

Great Dad.com

Families and Work Institute: (Fatherhood Project)

National Center on Fathers and Families (U.Penn edu site/policy-programs)

National Fatherhood Initiative (Fatherhood.org)

National Father’s Network (special needs)

Promoting Responsible Fatherhood (U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services)

Responsible Single Fathers (singlefather.org forum here)

Between Fathers And Daughters.com (enriching/rebuilding adult relationships: Linda Neilsen Ed.D)

Visual Credit: Lead Photo: One Angry Girl.net (great resources there too!)

“Confident about the junk in your trunk? Show us your assets! Post a photo of your booty’s best side for judgment,” invites American Apparel in their latest sexist slop.

Yep, they’ve launched their new ad campaign to “search for the best bottom in the world.” Could it be your daughter’s?

As Thalia, age 19, says, “You don’t need to exploit us to benefit your company. Someone that is a CEO should have more common sense, don’t you think?” Um, no. Sadly, it’s a sorry statement of our flash-n-trash sexist times where corporate profiteers figure “anything for a buck” regardless of the fallout.

Gee, AA, try empowering girls instead of consuming them. Listening to girls instead of objectifying them…Time for a gloves off, no-holds barred, “girlcott” (petition here).

If AA had the testicular fortitude to peel back the quantifiable damage and harm being done (full APA report here) they might learn something to further their brand, but instead, they’ve once again gone to the most unoriginal, base level, ‘nudie-cutie-sex sells’ pornification par usuale, while simultaneously putting these girls in legal jeopardy with new ‘sexting prosecution’ laws cropping up in some states.

Parents, teens, girls and those who love them, join Hardy Girls Healthy Women and Shaping Youth Advisory Board members of Packaging Girlhood to send a crystal clear message to American Apparel…

We’re not buying it.

Girlcott American Apparel.

Hardy Girls Healthy Women and allied orgs like ours are committed to sending a high frequency signal that enhancing a corporation’s bottom line with zero regard for the fallout on kids’ mental and ultimately physical well-being is NOT OK. (follow up post forthcoming on the quantifiable leap in violence to women when viewed as ‘parts’ rather than a whole human being, and part two, ‘an open letter to youth marketers’…stay tuned…we’re about to have a ‘tee’ party of a different sort! )

HGHW launched this grassroots girlcott just today and already it’s ignited a firestorm of social media mavens eager to help out and pay it forward to stop this crud…We are more than just “One Angry Girl” (though OAG is a favorite site of mine for girlcotts, girl tees and girl empowering products that speak for themselves!)

I heartily encourage all participating in this girlcott to take note of where your shirts are coming from…

I’ve already contacted LiveNation and Reverb about the girlcott to shift vendors for band tees; Threadless and Etsy DIY products are next…Please support sites that choose vendors on values to hit ‘em in the pocketbook as an agent of change. (e.g. PigtailPals prints tees on Bella.com shirts, etc.)

Here’s a round-up of resources for cool tee shirt companies with positive messaging for girls to wear instead)

I’ve personally invited all of our partner orgs into the mix and have been tweeting and posting to alert men’s groups, dads-n-daughters advocates,  SAHM bloggers, conscious men and gentlemen on a global scale to lend a hand. (already we’ve received some interesting stories about how this lack of marketing accountability and responsibility has impacted the daughters and women in their lives)

Rather than focus on the ‘show and tell’ media moments this round which will no doubt give American Apparel more press, let’s depants the fiscal thread that leads to the cause and effect of most of these sleaze and tease campaigns.

Here’s the full text from HGHW…

…And where to take action via iPetitions for GLOBAL access

Now spread the word, add your skill sets (any mobile app one-click cause marketing gurus want to lend a probono hand to garner some good will?) and fercripesakes let those bottom feeders at American Apparel know THIS IS NOT OKAY!

For those of you who would like to take action beyond the petition/girlcott and help Hardy Girls Healthy Women in other ways, by all means, go for it, and please send aligned orgs our way.

This is a collaborative effort and we’re proud to be a part of it.

Here’s the specific text from HGHW to send along to AA and add your own voice to the mix for extra umpf!

Joseph Teklits and Jean Fontana, Corporate Relations
Dov Charney, CEO, American Apparel
747 Warehouse St.
Los Angeles, CA 90021

Dear American Apparel:

The sexualization of women and porn-inspired media have infiltrated the everyday culture of the youngest girls.

According to the 2007 APA Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls in Media, the negative impact on girls and women is indisputable: the sexualization and objectification of girls and women in media wreak havoc on our psychological, emotional, cognitive and relational lives.

Your recent campaign is a perfect example of the insidious ways marketers and media promote sexualization and body obsession as “girl power.” American Apparel is directly and unconscionably undermining girls’ healthy development by equating confidence with looking sexy, winning with being judged on their appearance, and personal value with 15 seconds of fame.

The objectification of girls’ and women’s bodies is a real concern in a country where 1 in 4 women is a victim of violence, and sexual harassment is rampant. This ad campaign invites girls to self-objectify, inviting girls to post pictures of just one body part, and inviting others to comment and rate it is demeaning and dangerous.

By launching this campaign at a time when sexting is in the headline news, American Apparel is literally placing girls in jeopardy of prosecution by inviting them to post highly sexualized images of themselves online.

Don’t insult us with the usual defense: this is not real girl power; this is not just girls feeling good, making choices or feeling confident in their bodies. American Apparel is selling girls for parts, and we’re not buying. –HGHW”

Girlcott Pals: Anti-American Apparel

Add your name to the letter today! And…

Follow HGHW on Twitter

Follow HGHW on Facebook

And consider this: A 3-pack of underwear from American Apparel costs $24.

…”We’re willing to bet that not only will you probably find a better deal elsewhere, but you’ll sleep better having purchased your skivvies somewhere else, too.

If you want to sleep really well, here’s what Hardy Girls could do with that $24, if you’re so inclined:

-Support middle schoolers in developing critical thinking skills around media advertisements that fragment women;

-Enable adults to support girls in fighting back against sexist ideals propagated through the media;

-Encourage girls to see the world of options that exists for them without having to show their underwear.

Please, consider reallocating the money you might have spent at AA and donating it to Hardy Girls. We promise we won’t sexualize, objectify, or otherwise demean your sisters, mothers, aunts, nieces, or friends.

In fact, we promise to work toward a better world for all them — one where women are valued more for their beliefs and brains than they are their butts. —Hardy Girls, Healthy Women”

Rock on, ladies…

We’re behind you 200% here at Shaping Youth and we’ll be pulling out the stops in social media to pay it forward to all ages and stages with our sister organizations and gal pal allies.

Men we love are letting out some serious rebel yells on this one too, so thanks, guys…this is a corporate wrist slap that applies to BOTH genders.

We’d be just as ticked if they were incentivizing the hawking of boys’ backsides in objectification…No need for corporate cash registers to go ‘ka-ching’ as kids’ psyches go ‘ka-boom.’ Enough already! Act now.

Related Posts/Resources

Anti-Porn Resource Center via OneAngryGirl.net

APA Task Force on Sexualization of Girls

Sentencing Law & Policy/Sexting (Law Prof. Blog Netwk 1-15-10)

The Girl Revolution: Empowering Girls Vs. Consuming Them

New Moon Girl Media Community Online

Girls Prescription for Self-Worth: Respect Rx

Media Literacy Resources for Empowering Girls (Besides Shaping Youth, AdProofing, So Sexy So Soon, Respect Rx, Rachel Simmons.com, Rosalind Wiseman.com, The Girl Revolution, TrueChild, Reign of the GirlChild & other youth advocate blogs/resources on our sidebar e.g. aligned orgs like: About-Face, Daughters.com, Packaging Girlhood, Hardy Girls, Healthy Women etc.

T-shirt Alternatives/Worthy Positive Products:

Shaping Youth Post: Tee Party Kicks Off All Things Girl

• One Angry Girl.net Products
• 
  
• Girls Inc.com

• PinkStinks

• Pigtail Pals.com

• Hey Ugly! Products

• Ava’s Closet

• Emotional Armor

• GirlsEmpowered.com
• 
  
• GirlMogul.com
• 
  
• I Am That Girl.com
• 
  
• One Brown Girl.com
• 
  
• BGirl.com
• 
  
• Girls Can
• 
  
• Jordann’s Positive Apparel
• 
  
• HangProud.com
  

Have more to add? Just ping me to take a peek: amy at shapingyouth dot org. Meanwhile, calling all “Women2Follow” on Twitter, dedicated to inspiring girls and women…HGHW (and all of us!) could use your girlpower. Tweet!

p.s. If you have more picks for girl-advocates on Twitter, we’re in ‘list building’ mode here at Shaping Youth, so send ‘em my way…I’m adding “HangProud.com” right now! woohoo! Good one! Check ‘em out!

Visual Credits: Lead photo/girlcott logo/shirts: One Angry Girl.net

Feb.1, 2010

Where else would you see social media integration of Imogen Heap’s  Twitter Dress composed of photos sent by fans in real-time using the hashtag #twitdress?

Purpose? To let fans  “accompany me on the red carpet” (Wow. Talk about new levels of personal engagement and blurring the lines of celebs as pals; photo via Mashable)

Then there was the “You Pick It, They Play It!” Bon Jovi interactive where viewers could log on to CBS to vote in American Idol poll style (unless you’re in Ca. like me where it was already a done deal due to time slots)… And of course the Stephen Colbert iPad product placement (gotta find out the backchannel on where else iPad will iPop for an iOpp; here’s his video on TechMamas’ timely blog)

On a more mundane level, the time-shifting of media morsels points to whether (and how) kids even view events like this, and if they have become desensitized to the ‘wow’ factor. Thoughts MamaMia?! The gown parades, (5 most) outrageous costumes 3D-MJ tributes and musical hoopla of showy laser performances have become synonymous with a ‘can you top this’ feedback loop of what constitutes entertainment.

(visual credit: NYDaily News, 54 image slideshow)

It makes me wonder if perhaps this year’s style over substance didn’t perhaps trump itself with teens becoming all the more blasé; I’ll hold my tongue until I have more than a ‘focus group of one.’

Still, it merits noting: my teen was home watching a Netflix movie with her dad, had forgotten about the Grammys altogether, and though she could’ve hit ‘pause’ and watched the show, she texted me at my S.Y. outpost where I was working late:

“Award shows=boring; will catch on YouTube l8r; lemme know if Taylor wins.”

Fascinating. To me, this is more of a statement on HOW youth consume media these days, regardless of the content itself. It’s always on, always there…available when THEY are, not vice-versa.

Beyoncé and Taylor Swift scored big no doubt and there were plenty of daring divas in the running…But again, my focus turns to the insta-media real time skewering of Taylor Swift’s off-key notes in her Stevie Nicks duet (see Live Journal’s 6000+ comment forum thread) …It serves as a reminder of the power of media to tear down as well as build up.

Speaking of building up; interesting social media stats tracking music fans/marketshare on the shock artistry factor of those who are gaga over Gaga on Mashable…Anyway, barely out of her teens, Taylor Swift is the youngest award winner EVER to take home the Album of the Year prize so please be gentle, people…she may be “Fearless” but I’ve seen kids tossed into the murky media waters like chum for the sharks.

Besides, I could see Taylor Swift fiddling with her earpiece and sure know what it’s like to try to sing harmony with a mike in your ear; it can go flat fast with tone deaf reverb that can foul up the works no matter who you are. So I’m cutting the poor dear some serious slack, and hope the media will too…

As always, Mary J. Blige won my heart and my dollars with her Bridge Over Troubled Water duet to benefit Haiti with the amazing Andrea Bocelli.

I’ve already bought her “This is to Mother You” duet on GEMS Girls to empower  girls and young women (ages 12-21) who have experienced sexual exploitation and human trafficking, which deserves its own blog post, as does Mary J. Blige herself! (I also bought the GEM Girls documentary film “Very Young Girls” to use in our free house party screenings for parent/youth education as part of their Girls Are Not For Sale campaign.)

As far as all the knockout fist pumping energy and stage strutting darkness which bordered on the ‘angry’ at times, I couldn’t help but view the ‘upside down and almost naked‘ prowess of Pink as almost a swan-like ballet in comparative context. (AP Photo: Matt Sayles)

I had some media pals query about ‘what I thought’ of Pink’s “Glitter in the Air” body sleeve due to my VMA/Miley quote in the LATimes awhile back, but that’s a total disconnect in terms of apples/oranges to me.

Pink’s powerfully athletic Cirque de Soleil-style performance  seems more a tribute to what the body can DO in performance art style than any sexualized-contextualized stripper-sensory vibe.

My only question was whether there would be anything ‘left’ for this generation to be ‘wowed’ by…

I mean, c’mon, this lady has a serious set of pipes, the notion that she has to be dunked in water and whirled high above the crowd in a wet and wild extravaganza worthy of any world-class acrobatic act made me wonder what youth must be thinking…

What do you do for a ‘follow up’ to that act, ya know?

Creative director that I am, my production side was kicking in on the logistical dangers (microphones/water; heights/cables) and I had that little  “don’t try this at home, kiddies” reptilian voice pinging inside my head.

I shared my ‘kids thinking aloud’ moment on Twitter and was answered in real time half-way aross the country by Wisconsin-based @PigtailPals (Melissa Wardy) who runs a tee-shirt company, redefining girly…

Her child’s reaction?

“Mom, that girl is going to fall on her head!” heh. (never ask what kids are thinking, unless you want a raw, real answer!)

So with that I’ll close and leave the “style over substance” debates for bigwigs and music critics and just reiterate how pleasant it was to share thoughts with new voices in the social media ‘stream’ who captured some of my own feelings eloquently causing me to hit that little ‘retweet’ button…Such as?

Twitter user @MegFowler wrote:

“Mary J. Blige always sings like her voice is almost too much for her body to hold.”

Or “Dave Matthews Band always makes me think of 1997 and being 23 and being in love with guitarists and road trips and beaded hemp necklaces.”

Yep to both.

This was my first ‘online’ Grammy experience to match my first online CNN/FB Obama election coverage prior. There IS something interesting about coming together with people all over the world to share an experience when you’re alone, working late, high atop a 10^th floor outpost that doesn’t feel so isolated…pretty cool digital sense of community.

Which brings up the ‘where are we headed’ questions…

How will new media shift the music experience down the line?

Will interconnectedness of events like LiveAid or LiveEarth (7-7-07 on 7 continents) remind us of our one world underpinnings and the need for unity to create a “humanity ascending” proposition?

Will the Grammys become  virtual? (sending all of the money spent on flashy productions to Haiti instead or wherever the global crisis du’ jour might be?)

We’ve already seen how Playing For Change has shifted the music experience to global engagement blending entertainment and cause-marketing.

How is the 21^st century participatory culture of fandom being altered by new media opportunities to text, chat, engage, download (wear!?) our musical experiences?

How will the ability to connect cultures and inspire youth through music take hold in alternative ways? Want a sneak peak?

Check this out: Cain Mosni’s “Jam Session 2.0” shows how 8 people with 5 instruments from 4 continents speaking 3 languages created ONE song! (thanks @threebillion)

Could this be the future of music composition and collaborative ideation? You never know…

Mary J. Blige & Andrea Bocelli Grammy Awards 2010

Bridge Over Troubled Water: Benefit for Haiti

Via Shallow Nation pop culture blog

Jan. 28, 2010

Teens, however? Not so much.

One girl vehemently claimed it was ‘idiotic’ to make the leap to bodily functions much less have the jokes covered on CNN, the Wall Street Journal, and all over the blogosphere and Twitter. Wow. Fascinating. Teen generational bracer and reality slap? Check.

Can’t wait to run this by the younger women at the She’s Geeky conference for a comparison contrast tomorrow; especially since MADtv called it quite awhile back. (ouch) It wasn’t that they weren’t bemused, it was more like they weren’t thinking in that direction at all…

When I polled about a dozen high schoolers asking the open-ended question, “What do you think of the name?” the majority of the responses equated to a ‘meh.’ I even had to “prompt” a reaction to elicit the femme menses path…The general consensus was, “Apple doesn’t get very creative with their names because of the i thing…It’s always just iPhone, iWhatever so what’s the big deal?”

As for the price point, I got a lot of  “I don’t even like the iPhone for texting, I’d rather have a REAL keypad, so why would I want an overgrown iTouch  even if it IS cheap?”

At first glance, this seems like we may have the most level-headed generation yet, but read on for why we need to shore up the flanks of HUMANkind and why lopsided gender parity matters at all.

I wasn’t planning on addressing the whole iPad naming kerfluffle, but after 25 years in name generation and new product development I DO have some perspective on the larger conversation…

Any trolls who’d like to belitte women for being ‘hyper-sensitive,’ may “Exit, stage right” as Snagglepuss used to say…(’60s cartoon ref;  but hey, this is a generational story, eh?)

…Likewise, those seeking the ‘real news’ of how iPad is slated to “transform publishing,” yadayada or iPad spec sheets or the “price point” story, get thee to a CNET site pronto.

This piece is more about some rather surprising generational (and gender) observations along the lines of the Lady Gaga as role model controversy (is she or isn’t she?) (btw, well written youth perspective by wordsmith Lilly on Rachel Simmons’ blog in the link above; she’s an amazing teen writer I follow regularly)

The polarity of viewpoints on the iPad, gender bias, and single-sex events is like a metronome, and I’d like to deconstruct this a bit in a generational context…

Example?

Even though the Girls in Tech Catalyst Conference just wrapped, and She’s Geeky will run all weekend, (both events are aimed at inspiring, supporting and encouraging women to enter the growing STEM fields for more representation) guess what many teens in some of my non-tech circles voiced recently when I shared info about the two events?

“I don’t even get why you’d HAVE events like that.”

“Who’d want to be at something where there’s no men?”

“Isn’t that discrimination to be a girls only event?”

“I wonder what would happen if men tried to do that…”

Hmn. Altered states.

This brings up some lively contextual conversations to say the least, especially when it comes to teens vs. twenties, techies vs. non-tech and girl geekery workforce issues…

It also makes me want to explore more about the research studies of single-sex schools when co-ed influences are removed—not only for females in tech/STEM programs but for BOYS thriving in the ARTS once  gender pressures for conformity and stereotypes are removed, but that’s a different blog post. Let’s face it, there ARE differences in cues, education, social norms and career opportunities…it’s quantifiable. Yet the girls’ reaction makes me wonder:

Is this next generation of tweens and teens culture-shifting to a ‘gender-blind’ ideal in the same manner that many attempt to turn race into a ‘color-blind’ ideal?

If so, I’d argue this deserves an eensy weensy wallop of a wake-up call and perhaps a sexist pinch on the backside as well. I could say b-slap, which has entered the teen lexicon as a desensitized,  commonplace term, along with ongoing objectification, body snarking and misogynistic absurdity girls are subjected to…sometimes by each other! (I mean, really, who ever thought ‘ho and be-yatch’ would be uttered as anything other than a mean-spirited slam? ugh. We’re devolving and going backwards here, people…)

Let me be crystal clear.

There IS a HUGE reason for ‘events like this’ and though no one is suggesting STEM careers be a ‘numbers and quotas’ issue…much like racial parity, gender equality has a loooooong way to go, particularly when it comes to women in technology.

To pretend a chasm does NOT exist, is no big deal, or is totally dispensable and invisible does a disservice to all.

It alters the mindscape to depict an idyllic lala-land of ‘make it all go away’ happy chat without addressing the core stigmas, prejudices (and in many cases outright hostile) environs in favor of rose-colored glasses to make it all ‘appear okay.’

We can’t work towards a solution until people even see a problem. And there IS one when half of the global population is not being represented in a meaningful way. (in Apple’s case in either design/dev/backend systems or end-user functionality and…um, naming and product rollout)

Despite all of the funny, pithy one-liners,

“Are you there God? It’s me Steve Jobs…” etc…

There are telltale signs of gap-osis in Apple’s female representation…(one look at Apple’s exec staff roster confirms this) Sorry guys, crocodile tears on the branding brouhaha, you brought this on yourselves.

Anyone who knows what a “creative brief” is could tell you this project had to pass through umpteen channels of approval…so the core question remains, “…how many of those IT leaders making those approvals were women?” The blog Feministing echoes the incredulity, “where are the women on Apple’s branding team? MSNBC career columnist Eve Tahmincioglu points to “a dearth of women in IT.”

The National Center for Women & Information Technology NCWIT affirms it all hands down. (Full WIT by the numbers fact sheet)

Now for the ‘so what’ portion…

Girls represented just 17 percent of Advanced Placement computer science (CS) exam-takers in 2008… that’s the lowest female representation of any AP exam.

In 2008 women earned only 18 percent of all CS degrees…Back in 1985, women earned 37 percent of CS degrees. (again, going BACKWARDS)

Women hold more than half of all professional occupations in the U.S. but fewer than 24 percent of all computing-related occupations.

Only 16 percent of Fortune 500 technology companies have women corporate officers.

AND finally…A study on U.S. technology patenting reveals that “patents created by mixed-gender teams are the most highly cited (an indicator of their innovation and usefulness); yet women were involved in only 9% of U.S. tech patents.” (via NCWIT)

We need everyone’s head in the game to ascend humankind:

Half the population excluded tends to make new product development about half as useful. This goes for green/eco tech solutions, humanitarian problem-solving, and ‘thinking differently.’ (gee, Apple, remember that one?)

Mixed gender innovation teams would encompass better research and higher margins/profitability by getting features and functionality ‘right’ from the get-go…(which in turn means better products, competitive edge, etc.)

Who’s with me here, guys? Gals?

The teens’ reaction also disturbs, as it makes me resurface the need to do a branding overhaul on “The F word” (feminism) for this generation…(c’mon, when even Lady Gaga won’t call herself a feminist and is clearly confused by the word we’re in desperate need of an update!) This is not just a tech vs. non-tech stereotype either…

I wrote about this before when I asked the teens at New Moon Girl Media who self-identify as femme forward what THEY thought of their lot in life and the way they walk through the world as females…It was fascinating. (this was before we became an affiliate partner with their org; if you’re looking for a fun, safe chat/creative tween community, NMG’s an inspiration; click on the  sidebar at right)

So WHY does gender/girls in tech/generational interest matter?

In financial (and humanist) terms…think of how profitable our nations would be if we collaborated to achieve a ‘humanity ascending’ mindset versus an “I’ve got mine/win at all costs” competitive edge?

It’s The Girl Effect scaled onto the global stage…

Time and time again, we’ve seen the numbers, we KNOW how to ‘build a better mousetrap,’ think about things differently, create and design with visionary insights and sometimes, smarter, simpler solutions…

Yet without gender parity or at least an increased PRESENCE we’ll be destined to working with what is essentially, ‘half a brain’ on the intellectual, futuristic problem-solving aspects of our children’s tomorrows.

Finally, as far as the whole silly iPad name goes…

I wrote the following comment on  Eve’s Career Diva blog…

“The flow of feminine hygiene jokes (pun intended) makes me shoulder shrug more than cringe in that it COULD have a normalizing-desensitizing component that could be a good thing in terms of normalizing a natural bodily function in some ways…

In fact, of the CNN jokesters here I liked,

“16gb for light days/32gb 4medium days/64gb 4heavy days” …it really made me smirk.

…“On the other hand, to envision the far too few women that have chosen to brave the tech terrain (aka guy world) being subjected to sophomoric silliness pains me.

It reminds me of the handful of females attending the Teens in Tech conference (coming up Feb. 6 in S.F. btw) who rolled their eyes at the acronym paraded on the powerpoint presos last year: “T.I.T.” Not a welcome one, lemme tell you; not edgy, not funny, just plain rude, dudes…

It was horrid to see those teen girls squirm uneasily in ‘go along with the gag, don’t be prudish’ mode when it was clear they were VERY uncomfortable, as was I.

Sooooo…the name game DOES matter, regardless of intention.

Yes, I wonder about the gender of the approval team, but then again, terms like touchpad, thinkpad, linkpad have become commonplace geek speak universally.

In fact, I ran the iPad name past a few engineer GUYS who didn’t even blink, other than to lambast the weight of the new device as “weapons grade” suggesting the name be iBrik instead.

They talked about features vs. price-points as the potential barrier for entry. (again, in the wrong hands, I see how this verbiage could get ugly, fast)

So if you were Apple would you:

a.) Crowdsource a new name being ‘responsive’ to customer concerns
b.) Ignore the kerfluffle and let the product wow both genders/speak for itself
c.) Address the concerns quizzically and contextualize them
d.) Focus group it at She’s Geeky among female engineer teams & techies
e.) Stick a numeric/next gen upgrade to deflect
f.) Let people get used to it and see what happens

g.) Get as many women in leadership positions at Apple (& other IT arenas) as possible

(that “G” should be a ‘g’ for given)

As Eve pointed out in her reply to me, Apple’s leadership/bio page is a bit measly and pathetic.

She said, “Women have to brave the tech terrain no matter how bumpy…it’s the future. Are we going to let another few generations of women be left out in the innovation cold?”

Gawd, I hope not. She’s Geeky attendees…I hope you’ll prove this to me firsthand in about 48 hours!!

Meanwhile, what’s in a name?

Depends on who you ask, how old they are, what gender, and whether they even remotely pay attention to this kind of stuff…

As Nancy and Meghan at  Geek Girls Guide summed,

“So, let’s be clear: is the name iPad going to prevent me from buying this product? No.

…”But it does tell me that it’s unlikely that any women were involved in the naming of this product. (My other favorite example of a product name I’m pretty sure no women weighed in on: the Ford Probe.)

Tellingly, Apple’s promotional video for the iPad contains not. one. woman.

It features interviews with the men who developed it, and action shots of male hand models using it. I don’t know, maybe it was hard to find women willing to star in a film called iPad. (I can’t imagine why.)

…”So, here’s the deal: I’m not offended. I just think it’s interesting that Apple picked a loaded (for women) term for their new product…”

Agree. Though in my 25 years of name generation I cannot BEGIN to tell you some of the hilarious monikers bestowed on brand extensions and such sans professional vetting and research…

In fact I wrote an entire piece for a magazine about International advertising blunders along these lines:

Chevy Nova  translates to “it doesn’t go”

Nescafe in Portuguese means “it’s not coffee”

Biz (presoak detergent) in Syrian means “breast.”

Gaffes aplenty, lemme tell you.

So all in all, iPad’s not lookin’ so goofy in the big picture, eh? With the State of the Union address on the same day as the iPad launch, there was plenty of name-calling atwitter competing for tip of the tongue time, so I’ll end on the mashup that blends both:

“Apple has restored our nation to its natural state: lusting after expensive consumer objects. Your move, Mr. President.”

Pithy, but pitiful at the same time.  Harkens me back to my ’07 post on the iPhone hype seeding kids consumerism…just substitute iPad for iPhone in the iHave, iWant, iNeed, iWish faux frenzy.

Remember what I wrote last time?

“The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.”

“…Adults chiding each other like spoiled brats to be the first on the block to try, review, diss, or blather about the iPhone makes me want to hang up on the blatant disconnect between what parents preach and teach about mass media.”

…”Some industry brass were miffed they weren’t sent one for free, others cluck and strut about their ‘inside channels’ for procurement, and the average joe seems to be clamoring for this status symbol d’jour like black market goods on the Silicon Valley circuit. (or a kindergarten slot at a decent public school!)

…”C’mon now folks; we really need to dial this down.

The haughty arrogance of the entitlement message is part of the ‘what you have is who you are’ zeitgeist we’re trying to shift here at Shaping Youth. When people go gaga over the latest gizmo it doesn’t do us any favors.”

I feel like the Bill Murray Groundhog Day movie all over again.

If we can’t get the name right with the iPad this round, could we at LEAST keep the socioeconomic class cues and the coveting and consumption craziness in check around the kiddies please?

Fingers crossed.

Visual credits: Lead photo of legal pad, BaltTech/Sun; rose colored glasses via TV By the Numbers.com; Steve Jobs and iPad ‘retouched’ via Feministing/Photobucket.

Jan. 25, 2010

W.I.T. as in Women in Technology and also wit as in the funny, guffaw-level humorous antics of tell-it-like-it-is attendees. The wisdom? From top industry pros to young 9 year old tweens converging in leadership to create ‘The Girl Effect’ up close and personal…it’s powerful potion this weekend.

She’s Geeky is an agenda-free, supportive, intellectual haven for girls and women  who embrace technology as a catalyst for world changing where you can goof around with the best and the brightest sans pretense, intimidation, or any semblance of not fitting in. Why? Because no one fits in and everyone fits in…The UNconference runs the gamut of über-geek techno-speak to esoteric thought leaders thriving on like-minded souls. (updated list of proposed topics here)

It’s the kind of room where you can let out one of those sitcom snort-laughs and not even blush a bit; despite the fact that you’re surrounded by bigwigs, students, startups, and seasoned serial entrepreneurs ready pay it forward for the next generation of STEM leading ladies. (science, technology, engineering, math) And laugh? Believe me, you WILL laugh.

You do not get this level of social clout in one small setting without the wit flingin’ fast and the commentary pithier than a Carville-Matalin debate…It’s rebel rules, baby. And these women rock. (Follow SG on Twitter here)

When I attended my first She’s Geeky and exerienced an UNconference I was concerned I’d be a mere geek wannabe since I’m not a techie. In fact, my relationship with tech is on a ‘need to know’ basis…I’m more of a curious discoverer-explorer in the new media wilderness, stumbling on cool pathways and getting entranced by the evolution out in the field finding new horizons and trails. (think Dian Fossey meets Christiane Amanpour if you can go with that mashup!)

At She’s Geeky I ended up meeting a range of engineers, gadgeteers, researchers, students, startups, mom-bloggers, entrepreneurs and ’she-roes’ like Beth Kanter with her thorough nonprofit blog who I’d been following since Shaping Youth was ‘born’ a few years back.

Frankly, all the ‘not digital enough’ concern blew out the window when I walked in the door. In fact, I left with some amazing lifehacks and solid friendships that had nothing whatsoever to do with tech at all. (Beth is in NYC this year working, sniffle, so she’ll miss this weekend, but she’ll be a guiding light from afar, no doubt)

Anyway, to me, THIS is where thought leaders emerge, affiliate, exchange skills sets, team up in new co-ventures, get funded and kick back with a cup of tea, energized by a day of transparency sans guarded gamesmanship.

It’s refreshing to plop down at a table and share ideas without feeling like one of those carnival ducks that get shot down for points. (and yes, Lynn Langit of DigiGirlz for teens 13-19 via Microsoft will be there!)

As STEM’s leading ladies emerge to the forefront of candor and conversation, the weekend sessions will take shape and morph into ‘whatever it’s meant to be’ as Unconference.net pro Kaliya Hamlin (aka Identity Woman) says when she coaches on logistics and how-tos.

I’m thrilled to support this work as a ‘Community Sponsor’ and hope our relationship expands and grows as fast as the UnConference itself has blossomed.

I’ll also be eager to meet another ’she-ro’ at She’s Geeky on Friday when SVMoms Group co-founder Beth Blecherman (aka TechMama and on Twitter here) hosts a roundtable topic “Gadgets for Moms, How Moms/families Are Using Technology, Career 2.0 for TechMoms.”

Beth’s name and blog (what is it with all the power-Beths out there, not to mention my own MOM’s name!) has surfaced many times among Shaping Youth readers, for as you can see here, we both tend to ‘deconstruct the headlines of mainstream news without taking any study or data as a ‘given.’

For example, the recent NYT article “If Your Kids Are Awake, They’re Probably Online” seemed presumptuous and a bit skewed at best in conveying the data of the latest Kaiser Family Foundation report recently released.

Again, deconstructing in full context, I think Beth’s piece and also the brilliantly in-depth deep dive by Anne Collier of NetFamily News adds balance to help untangle the data and make sense of the study with important media literacy context.

Looking forward…

…No doubt befitting a room of futurists and thinkers eager to build a better tomorrow!

Girls In Tech Catalyst Conference (She Geek Week!)

She’s Geeky Wiki With a few proposed Unconference topics

She’s Geeky Blog With Updated Events

Related Posts About She’s Geeky On Shaping Youth

Wise Women & Alice 3.0: Geek Chic For Girls (pt.1)

BrainCake: Teen Girls Talk Tech & Worldchanging (pt.2)

DigiGirlz: Teen Girls Build Community Online & Off (pt.3)

She’s Geeky 2009: Techno Leaders Converge

She’s Geeky 2007: Vlogging with Ryanne Hodson at She’s Geeky

Media Moms, Engineers, Purple Tornadoes At She’s Geeky

She’s Geeky and Proud of It  (My first Shaping Youth geekery)

Misguided Media: Space station takes a backseat to Britney?

Kids Online UNconference: Kaliya Hamlin, Joi Podgorny

Shaping Youth Interviews Girl Mogul Founder/Geek Chic

BrainCake.org’s Teen Link Love

Science Friday podcasts. Brought to you by NPR.

10 commandments of Being a Geeky Girl in Geeky Guy World

Nerd Girls - We are a growing, global movement which celebrates smart-girl individuality that’s revolutionizing our future.

Mind Candy Clothing – cute tees that let you show the world how much you love math and science! This just in: They have a sparkly BRAINCAKE tee!  Order yours today and show the world you’re a BrainCake girl!

Justine Magazine – an awesome magazine for “teens – real teens – just teens”

Instructables – the “World’s Biggest Show & Tell where people share what they do and how they do it.”

New Scientist – A great source for science news and science articles

Twitter – A fun way to stay hyperconnected to your friends through a free social networking and micro-blogging service that lets you update your friends with “tweets.”

Girl Power Fiction and Nonfiction Reading Lists - These great titles show that girls can accomplish anything.

Engineer Your Life – An awesome site for high school girls and the adults in their lives (parents, counselors, teachers, and other educators) who want to learn more about what life and work are like for engineers.

GMSP: The Girls, Math & Science Partnership…“A program of Carnegie Science Center,  conducts research in order to inform its work – whether it is creating this Web site or the most innovative programs for girls possible.”

• GMSP Stats + Data (pdf)
• Who Influences Girls?  Research Report (pdf)
• GMSP Summary and Charts – Research Report (pdf)
• Girls’ Beliefs About Math & Science (pdf)

She’s Geeky Description From Their Site

“The unconference format is unique. Beginning at 9 AM each day, we start with a blank wall and, in less than an hour, through a highly participative process, create a full day, multi-track conference agenda that is relevant and inspiring to everyone there.

When you come to She’s Geeky, you benefit from the opportunity to:

1. Build relationships and even partnerships across disciplines.

2. Learn something new from other geeky women.

3. Find answers to the questions that matter to you.

4. Consider business issues related to the technology industry.

5. Be exposed to new ideas for making and keeping technology relevant.”

Hope to see you there! Register here for She’s Geeky Jan. 29-31, 2010 at the Computer History Museum.

Bring your WIT and wisdom! (And daughters, and nieces, and students, and scouts…)

Related Resources for WISE Women & Girls:

Girls in Tech.net (Facebook group here)

EngineerGirl.org

Girls Are IT!

Girl Geeks.org

Female Science Professor Blogspot (insightful, fresh view from a  femme/STEM with humor and wit!)

Smart Girls Fun Blogspot (love the focus; link list alone has some worthy finds, like Little Shop of Physics, and some I’d never stumbled upon)

Wise Women Campaign.org/U.K.–WISE Girls

Center for Women & Information Technology

Inspirational Women from WISE

Nasa Quest: Women of NASA

Women in Engineering Org

Fast Company’s Most Influential Women in Web 2.0

The Executives
The Entrepreneurs
The Gamers
The Evangelists
The Activists
The Bloggers
The Brainiacs

January 21, 2010

The little Animoto video I created for the session gives you a snapshot of both the ‘problem and the solution’ (no, I don’t have ‘use rights’ for Taylor Lautner’s abs and such, but hey, all in the name of education and situational awareness, eh?). It’s meant to be a call to action for a nation in trouble if we don’t heavily counter-market some of these toxic cues to kids.

This week alone we have wacky “10 plastic surgeries in a day” addiction vs. obsession media debates of The Hills star 23-year old Heidi Montag, (Ladies of The View sound off here) then the so-called ‘curvier’ Golden Globe actresses (ahem, not!) and the latest covergirl kerfluffle involving the Butterfly Foundation’s support of  “look-at-the-real-me-Jennifer Hawkins” on Marie Claire…just to give a feel for decibel level of volume.

It’s hard to help kids achieve a healthier sense of self and ditch the skewed worldview with all this chatter…But we must. We abso-freakin’lutely MUST. The future of children’s mental and physical health is at stake. And no, that’s not an alarmist statement, it’s a quantifiable one.

There are staggering implications and long term medical and societal repercussions (including dollar driven health consequences from obesity, eating disorders and dysmorphia to stressors resulting in substance abuse and emotional upheaval/depression tanked self-worth, teen pregnancy, etc.)

This is not a stretch, people.

Especially in a culture where the three actresses above were referred to by The Times’ T mag blog as having more ’roundness’ (in a Marilyn Monroe vs. Twiggy sort of way) at the Golden Globes Sunday. Roundness, really? That prompted this retort, You Call THIS Curvy?)

Again, taking stock of the media intake of the week: Let’s see…global coverage of HAITI in crisis or arm circumference coverage of Hollywood celebs. Quite a dichotomy, eh?

So let’s cut to the chase…WHAT CAN WE DO?

As I mentioned last night, Shaping Youth uses hands-on counter-marketing tactics to literally flip the motivations and persuasive tools being used backwards (example here) and we arm kids with critical thinking skills in shield-n-saber style.

After all, we ARE at battle for the hearts and minds of youth against a beauty and grooming products industry spending billions to reach tweens/teens, not to mention diet-related products racking up $40 billion in U.S. sales each year to boot.

So before I land my links list on you for resources and counter-marketing tips out the wazoo, let’s recap about BOYS being the latest statistic in “equal opportunity toxicity” since young boys have increased body dysmorphia, emulating buffed boy, ripped six-pack icons of video games and ‘hunks’ modeled and merchandised ad nauseum.

A Nov. 2009 global analysis by Packaged Facts shows male-specific products (body wash, deodorant, hair gel, shaving cream, razors, moisturizer, etc.) constitute one of the markets that now outpace the overall beauty/grooming retail markets in many countries of the world, despite economic recession.

It goes on to say, “valued at $19.7 billion worldwide in 2009, male-specific grooming products will mushroom to $28.0 billion by…” (sorry, that’s all I get, I don’t have four grand to access the full study So you see what I’m saying here? It’s NOT your imagination…follow the money trail.

It’s easy to sniff out where it ‘pays’ to tank kids’ self-esteem and sell it back to them one product at a time, as the old saying goes. It’s all about the quest for the almighty ‘hotness’ (both genders there) with BOYS gaining on girls in eating disorders and adolescents ending up with The Adonis Complex and ‘roid rage’ or ‘bigorexia’ reverb.

How would I “counter-market” the buffed boy/steroid messaging? (+ the intake of unregulated supplements promising the lean, mean teen machine?)

I’d point to the 70+ side effects of anabolic steroid use and the science behind it, much like the health teachers mentioned last night, about deconstructing the human body, using NIDA tidbits that would no doubt kids’ attention in reverse enthusiasm, like:

Teens on steroids risk losing their hair, inappropriate breast development, shrinking of testicles, impotence and lowered sperm count. Yeah, I know, they don’t put that on the “enormous increases in brute strength” style packaging, eh?

Would I use those side-effects as counter-marketing fodder? You betcha. All’s fair. Gloves off.

Then I’d inoculate youth with media literacy by tapping more doctors like Alison Field, Harvard Medical School professor of pediatrics and lead researcher on the GUTS study to back up the data with their own case studies showing how the media/marketing blitz selling kids ways to last longer, get stronger, “be hot with a shot” that’s complicit in the escalation of body image problems wreaking havoc on this appearance-obsessed generation of kids.

Again, kids are smart…they’re just not being told, they’re being sold! When you lift the veil and reveal the agenda, they’ll ‘counter-market’ for themselves!

As I wrote prior, “Girls may receive more press about disordered eating and such, but ‘Bigorexia’ is on the rise.

See Cari Corbet-Owen’s primer called ‘Who Gets the Adonis Complex?” for a helpful snapshot of milestones in media moments for male context on teens wanting to bulk up and the reverb therein.

Then I’d follow up with our own Shaping Youth RD nutrition specialist Rebecca Scritchfield’s deconstruction of Media, Myths & Misinformation (you all recall the recent Time Magazine nutrition news cover yes? She has tons of great video shorts offering tips now too!) and of course, our own body image expert Dr. Robyn Silverman’s plethora of resources and usable data for healthy mind and body cyclebreaking…

I’d probably toss in some fun hands-on exercises as shown here on LettersToMyBody.com to really focus on functionality vs. appearance and again, deep dive into asset based thinking and appreciation of our true selves. I also loved this example by Shelby Knox, “Conversations with my 13-year old self” and maybe some deconstruction from aggregator hubs like  Media Literacy Clearinghouse.

I particularly like the ‘red flag’ faux site where the FTC uses bogus claims from diet ads and Test Your Supplement Savvy quizzes to make a strong watchdog point of how fast people can be sucked into finding this crud credible.

We all know females are continuously bombarded with buxom, thin-thonged bikini imagery, 24/7 online, offline, mobile/wireless/pda or ambient advertising, virtually everywhere, so I’d also add resources like:

The Strength to Resist: The Media’s Impact on Women & Girls and all of the Media Education Foundation films and accompanying study guides. Teens get into some heated discussions challenging media with documentaries like Slim Hopes, Killing Us Softly, Playing Unfair (sexualization of female athletes in endorsements) and NEDA has a great 3pp pdf of  video offerings ripe for media literacy deconstruction, from commercial picks to documentaries.

Finally, I’d like to send this personal note of thanks to the health education teacher, Mr. Larios and the AP Bio teacher calling for systemic reform and universal change relating to kids’ mental health and academic stresses…I LOVED your prevention points and body image/nutrition corollaries.

Along those lines, here’s the article I wrote about Curbing Student Anxiety using New Media Technology like HeartMath to reduce stress. And for  those who asked about Denise Clark Pope’s work with Stressed Out Students, it’s now called Challenging Success.org.

I also DO echo your desire to bring back P.E. in a big way, and use “unschooling” tactics so that kids can approach learning creatively rather than achieving jump through the hoop GPA imbalances which can trigger ‘stress eating binges,’ time pinched starvation, or mindless eating once relaxation and an exhale kicks in…

So in sum, this TED talk is meant for you…It’s a fabulous, irreverent, and hilarious presentation by creativity expert Sir Ken Robinson about requiring radical rethinking of our schools and the need to cultivate multiple types of intelligences, as we’ve said so many times before. (h/t to Rosalind Wiseman.com for that great vid btw!)

And with that, I’ll hush and give you this starter links list of body image tips-n-tactics to get kids thinking positively about themselves.

p.s. For the NEDA/Eating Disorders discussion, I’ll be interviewing Susan James with more about her work on symptoms, interventions, and the biology side of kids’ prevention of physical destruction (binge eating, bulimia and anorexia etc.) as well as some of the ‘disconnects’ and mixed messages being sent from the E.D. community. All in time for National Eating Disorders Awareness week Feb. 3-9, 2010: Facebook group

Meanwhile, here’s a quick video of Body Image Tips to Raise Confident Daughters from our own Shaping Youth body image expert, Dr. Robyn Silverman.

AND…the first person that says ‘whoa, she’s hot’ gets bonked with a copy of S.Y. advisors’ Packaging Girlhood hardback upside their head!

Yes, that really DID happen…sigh.

From Shaping Youth Body Image Pro Dr. Robyn Silverman:

Jan. 15, 2009

Clearly there are quirky flaws in how the  entire DSM process takes shape (DSM V= Diagnostic & Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders aka the big book/manual for shrink think )  prompting valid headlines like, “How many shrinks does it take to change a diagnosis?” (see Mind Hacks’ article here and the pithy ‘rowing backwards into the future’ critique here) Is it possible to regain control of your social media habits without self-diagnosing addiction? (fabulous tips on Search Engine Journal)

Are we even questioning researchers, pundits, and doctors themselves anymore or are we being led like ’sheeple?’ What does this have to do with kids, media and marketing? Plenty.

For starters, every time any youth psychologist expert with mega-research clout sneezes, it virally takes hold via media pundits and sensationalism to impact parenting decisions, educators, and youth.

Mainstream media often fails to report the details, such as the fact that there’s been infighting among the psychiatric medical community on new diagnoses’ of digital addictions, etc. (just take a look at Science Blog’s pithy headlines on worthy of some late night talk show comedy banter at the very least…)

I’m not discounting the APA (American Psychological Association) work on addictions AT ALL…nor even the premise that there are said to be corollaries between youth anxieties/stresses and/or ADHD depression being linked to internet addiction…again, I AM NOT A DOCTOR.

But as a media analyst (for lack of a better moniker) I DO empirically know what bumps up against the pop culture/media zeitgeist with a trickle down impact on kids’ mental health; after all, I work with them a lot.

On one hand, new research that makes waves in the press can create much needed activism, waking up people from complacency to get into gear and pay attention…on the other hand, sometimes  it can create a tsunami of misinformation, knee-jerk alarm and moral panic.

And sometimes (yes, I realize I’m out of ‘hands’) it’s so OBVIOUS it should NOT need a shrink or an APA task force  to quantify at ALL…For example, many parents can use their daily life as a show and tell of how early sexualization is taking its toll on kids. (here’s all 72pp of the APA study and here’s my short version on the harm to kids’ mental health and happiness when cash registers go ‘ka-ching’ and kids’ psyches go ‘ka-boom.’

All the more reason to continue to hold the middle ground and try to see both ends of the spectrum with fairness, transparency, and yep, circumspect guardedness against sweeping generalizations. In short, the more we soak in data like a sponge, the more we need to wring it out via media literacy…that way we squeeze the ‘keepable nuggets.’

Example? This past week’s AP article about Jean Trenge’s newly released study on youth having “more mental health issues today than previous generations” stoked a HUGE fire among some colleagues of mine that were eager to forward it to me.

They’d swallowed the supposition whole in “told you so” smugness. Danger, Will Robinson! (ok, turn on the generational wayback machine for that iconic reference)

While some pals pressed “send” to forward in rapidfire “you’ve GOT to see this” data-sharing mode, it automatically triggered my own twitchy alert to warily ‘consider the source.’

I read ALL data as ’subjective’ from the onset. (fyi, for the next round of media-induced research ephiphanies or moral panic peeps) Why? Because:

EVERY piece of research needs filtered through the funnel of MEDIA literacy and youth advocacy analysis...

In addition to sampling, methodology, demographics and such, ALL research should be received with a keen eye toward bias, prior point of view, vested interests, funding, expertise, speaker and author platforms and so on.

In this case, I recognize researcher Dr. Jean M. Trenge as an author, speaker, and PhD who speaks nationwide on narcissism and is acclaimed for her focus on youth as GenerationMe —She’s earned quite a bit of a media time sharing her book/website appearances and so on…Does that make the data invalid?

No, but it sure does add context.

You’d no doubt get a very different set of data points from esteemed researchers like Don Tapscott of Growing Up Digital or Hank Wasiak’s focus on youth empowerment via Asset Based Thinking. (as I wrote here about his books, he’s calling teens the “Next Great Generation”—That’s his book series below with Dr. Kathryn Cramer; (again: PhD not MD)

Seems THESE are the types of necessary critical thinking skills that give youth the info they need to make decisions without prescribing antidotes to alleviate, medicate, placate, or confiscate media devices in their multiple forms…

It’s what we should be conveying from the get go, ESPECIALLY where medical pathologies and labels like “addiction” can usurp agency fast with lots of hand-wringing and panicked parents in the process.

By the way, pop quiz…

Did you ask yourself. “Is there an “apples to apples” comparison?” when I mentioned researchers Tapscott & Wasiak?

Do they hold a youth bias in any philosophical direction?

Do they have extensive expertise in the subject matter; programs or books and any vested interests? Are they psychologists or psychiatrists? (answer yes, yes, yes, no in that order!)

Again, does this mean their research is any more or less valid than Dr. Trenge? No, it simply gives us context.

The brain is the ultimate knowledge filter, the devices are just distribution channels. How can we better inoculate youth with ‘question authority’ cues from the get go. (parents may be face-squinching about now; I’m talking about media literacy here!)

I Googled versions of the same research to find a variety of headlines that skewed the same exact AP blurb simply by adding or subtracting descriptors, such as “U.S.” or adding the word  “serious”—

This becomes editorializing and generalizing and as I’ve mentioned before, a classic spin on one of my media literacy must-reads is How to Lie With Statistics…If adults aren’t catching the spin, how can we expect children to?

Then there’s the whole denial that any of us are influenced by media in the first place. That’s always rich.

I’ve watched this take shape a lot on the behavioral front with the sheer volume of media/marketing messages defining kids before they can even define themselves. (both decibel level and quantity)

I get peer groups that blend together so much in appearance they might as well be wearing uniforms, yet they INSIST they’re not remotely influenced by media and marketing…

Many have written that this is a whipsmart but cynical generation of ultra-media savvy critics, able to leverage personal agency for themselves at ever-younger ages (the “KGOY” effect)…But again, at what age and stage? How much free agency do YOUNG KIDS really have?

Agency is (and needs to be) with us all…but it IS at risk of being drowned out by the steady drone of 24/7 behavioral cues creating a loud cacophony of ‘shoulds’ that ultimately turn kids away from their authentic core and toward being media/marketing sheeple at ever younger ages.

Sure, agency exists, it’s just getting pummeled by proliferation landing on impressionable kids in tender years. This disturbs me for a variety of reasons…It’s where youth get mowed down by the acceleration of childhood, objectification of both genders, and early sexualization of kids at increasingly younger ages.

Without agency, (perceived or acted upon) the noise to signal ratio of media clutter turns independent thought and free-thinking minds into a pass-through filter rather than a creative vortex…

Which circles back to media and marketing:

Who is accountable for what’s being put out there, and who is responsible for perpetuating it?

How many studies and shrinks does it take to apply plain ol’ common sense to the ‘garbage in, garbage out’ theory of pop culture content?

Do we need to quantify how negative vs. positive media messages are landing on youth, impacting physical and mental health?

How do we teach critical thinking skills to ADULTS much less YOUTH when it comes to noshing media nuggets in short form gulps rather than chewing slowly and taking time not to swallow anything whole?

I’m not a medico, but some of this boils down to a requisite forehead banging ‘duh!’

Just sayin.’ For me, the whole “medicalization” of media via diagnosis (DSM-book addictions creating a victim vs. victor parable with regard to free agency and of course research sans deconstruction) is part of the reason we’re muddling in this societal blame-game of media-morality finger-pointing citing everything from parenting styles to familial causal links…

I suppose I should interview one of my “she-roes” Dr. Susan Linn (interview on screen time here), about Trenge’s latest research, since she’s renowned for putting children’s mental and physical well-being at the forefront of public health.

She was even honored with the Presidential Citation by the APA nationally for her work at Harvard, CCFC, and Judge Baker Children’s Center shining the spotlight on the media/marketing impact of commercialization on kids.

True, we agree to disagree periodically, but I’m a strong supporter of her over-arching ‘Case for make believe…” I just tend to be in the blended camp of online/offline moderation of everything…so tend to take an ‘anything to excess’ cantilever approach to the center. (which ultimately explains my core issues with the CCFC name, even!)

I also find her amazing child development work pertaining to the value of unstructured play insightful (and in fact am interviewing Dr. Stuart Brown of the Nat’l Institute of Play soon).

I concur heartily that there’s a strong need for more play in ALL of our lives…so if anyone can give an honest ’shrink think’ take on this new study she can.

I find her work to be SPOT ON when it comes to saving play in a commercialized world, and how that all lands on consuming kids universally, so she should have a few strident views on the data. (though I already know she’s not a big fan of screen time for more than a jiff, so I’ve factored that bias into the media literacy equation)

By the way, full disclosure…lights, bells and whistles should be going on in your brain right now, conveying my positive feelings towards her work overall…That’s an editorial bias.

Did you sense that? Have I done my job?

Visual Credits: Lead photo from an excellent article by Dana Lookadoo on Getting Control of Your Social Media Life on Search Engine Journal.com

As evidenced in part one of addiction vs. agency in media management, I’m not the type to be consumed by disordered terminology, symptoms and panic statistics flinging about…

If I were, I might have seen it as a dire familial sign or symptom and scrambled to test my propensity for overuse by taking the internet addiction quiz via The Center for Online Addiction. Instead, I let out a ‘lmao’ guffaw, snagged a snack and took the dogs for a walk.

Why is it that some people give up their agency like a movie ticket (case in point, this Psychology Today piece about Avatar bringing on the blues, and CNN referencing depression stats) while others not only don’t and won’t, but would pretty much have to be put in a straitjacket to submit to same? (yah, that last one’s me)

Rather than hurling a burning fireball through the media to set off alarm bells as to whether or not internet addiction is a psychiatric disorder, and try to ‘label, classify, and L-code’ it, we need to reframe the issue on a larger canvas to create CONTEXT for the conversation…

As CNN cites research stats on depression, ADHD linkage and a wide range of adolescents afflicted with internet addiction (1.4%-17.9%) I’m still struggling to define what the term even MEANS without proper context! (colleague Alexandra Rampy ponders this further here)

To even BEGIN to scrape the surface of whether “addiction” applies to our use of these tools, critical thinking skills for context need to come into play, like:

How has social media changed us over the last few years? How are we reimagining learning in virtual worlds or online communities and what form is that taking? How has connectivity impacted interpersonal relationships on and offline, pro and con? Moreover: How has the internet even changed the way we THINK?

It requires STRONG media literacy to keep from getting sucked into a ’sheeple’ mindset, sponging up media factoids and falling into pre-destined/victim mode with a shoulder shrug of  my doctor diagnosed this, therefore “it must be so.”

Is addiction the same as lacking an internal compass to gauge when moderation and balance have tipped too far into any one direction?

Kids are classic for self-centricity and lopsided behavior in this realm, (it’s even developmentally appropo) so does that mean they’re all extra prone and highly at risk on the spectrum for addiction? Not by a long shot. Some are going to be more at risk than others, but again, what’s the cultural context? For example:

MANY of us experienced a media tug-o-war spanning the generations over the holidays with weapons of mass DISTRACTION…I know in my own house ‘put the phone away’ was uttered more than once, as was ‘turn off the TV’ and ‘you’re not staying in jammies again texting all day’…

But is this addiction?

It was more like slug time/teen decompression and proliferation of media access and opportunity for use.

Likewise, “just a sec, lemme finish this post” is a regular utterance for yours truly.

Is this addiction?

It was listed as a ’symptom’ on the quiz I took to see what the psychiatrists had to say! (this is why self-diagnosis and the whole medicalization concept is worrisome to me)

Writing is a release for me…As a knowledge gatherer and lifelong learner, information FEEDS and nourishes me like that big ol’ plant Audrey Jr., in Little Shop of Horrors. I have a lot to say and when it starts piling up without venting social commentary at regular intervals, it’s like a rumbling volcano ready to spew.

Sometimes I read these studies and feel like a museum curator of the mind, trying to jury quality bits and bytes, then let go of the rest of the data in ’sorry, not quite good enough to make the cut’ mode.

In the media morass it’s important to have these analytical filters in order to make sense of it all, so I’d urge everyone to take this internet addiction quiz to assess your own propensity for overuse, or at least understand what’s being discussed in terms of ‘warning signs’ at The Center for Online Addiction.

Like youth, I’m a sucker for quizzes as an entertainment means, or even to shed light on foibles for self-assessment and insights…If you keep a modicum of balance the site has some watch worthy tidbits, ways to assess various risk factors, valid insights and advice on how to veer back on track without over-correcting.

Most alarming thing about my score?

I tested out with a score of 30 and a congratulatory note:

“You are an average on-line user. You may surf the Web a bit too long at times, but you have control over your usage.”

Whoa…let’s hope I’m anything BUT an average user as I’m on this gear a lot!

I’m a media analyst not a shrink, but from a layman’s perspective deep diving into this research is fun and fascinating, but it seems like it could also easily impart either a false sense of normalcy or conversely, trigger a flashpoint of crazy-making drama and parental panic for no good reason.

The value to me gets very squishy when the freak-out factor (e.g. amped up anxiety of how much is too much in the media mix) overrides the balanced ‘just unplug’ sense of agency…not to mention when “disordered” terminology starts entering the lexicon with fancy medicalized logos and formal diagnosis…

I’m also concerned about the pharmacology factor…how long before pharmaceutical Rx enter the scene? I’m not too wild about more kids being doped up and stigmatized with yet another ‘disorder.’ Bleh.

Again, where does personal agency (and parenting) factor in to media management and addiction? How do we guide a digital generation away from overuse or misuse without labeling a malady or obsessing on the clock?

Media Management Ideas

Here’s Common Sense Media’s advice on ‘beating’ a computer addiction, and here are their guidelines for a Healthy Media Diet. Some kids are under media management “contracts” with clearly defined expectations…(CSM has some sample family media agreements by age here)

Other families handle guidelines by device (cellphone parameters, TV limits, wkday/wkend rules etc. timers and gadgets that ’shut down’ etc.)…or parameters tied to grades, chores, or “learn to earn” segues like SmartyCard for kids’ media privileges…

…And still others have ‘media free’ zones, unplugged vacations, screen time limitations by hours, days or given days of silence, and of course, some disconnect from media forms altogether.

However you choose to manage media, push that pause button to allow your OWN thoughts to dominate your worldview instead of the media regurgitations that can envelop, persuade, and dominate your sense of agency.

And not to make light (well, um, maybe a little) here’s a little ditty from The Daily Beast titled, “8  New Ways You Might Be Insane.” Some of their comments are classic. Feel free to add yours below and tell me if I’m out to lunch.

Remember, it’s all about context and perspective…

PsycheTruth’s YouTube Blurb on Psychologist vs. Psychiatrists:

Below is an excerpt from NetAddiction for the uh-ohs at a glance, and above is an anti-addiction stance in a 5-minute video which helped me understand more about the differences between “psychologist and psychiatrist”…both helpful in discerning what this all means.

From NetAddiction.com:

…”Dr. Kimberly Young has likened Internet addiction to addictive syndromes similar to impulse-control disorders on the Axis I Scale of the DSM. She developed the Internet Addiction Diagnostic Questionnaire (IADQ) to diagnose the disorder. Meeting five of the following symptoms were considered necessary to be diagnosed”

1. Do you feel preoccupied with the Internet (think about previous online activity or anticipate next online session)?
2. Do you feel the need to use the Internet with increasing amounts of time in order to achieve satisfaction?
3. Have you repeatedly made unsuccessful efforts to control, cut back, or stop Internet use?
4. Do you feel restless, moody, depressed, or irritable when attempting to cut down or stop Internet use?
5. Do you stay online longer than originally intended?
6. Have you jeopardized or risked the loss of significant relationship, job, educational or career opportunity because of the Internet?
7. Have you lied to family members, therapist, or others to conceal the extent of involvement with the Internet?
8. Do you use the Internet as a way of escaping from problems or of relieving a dysphoric mood (e.g., feelings of helplessness, guilt, anxiety, depression)?

“Other Symptoms Include:”

• Failed attempts to control behavior

• Heightened sense of euphoria while involved in computer and Internet activities

• Neglecting friends and family

• Neglecting sleep to stay online

• Being dishonest with others

• Feeling guilty, ashamed, anxious, or depressed as a result of online behavior

• Physical changes such as weight gain or loss, backaches, headaches, carpal tunnel syndrome

• Withdrawing from other pleasurable activities

“How do you know if you’re already addicted or rapidly tumbling toward trouble? The Internet Addiction Test is the first validated and reliable measure of addictive use of the Internet. Click here to read the study.”

“Developed by Dr. Kimberly Young, the IAT is a 20-item questionnaire that measures mild, moderate, and severe levels of Internet Addiction.”

Visual Credits: Lead cartoon: JoyofTech.com, Compass

Jan. 11, 2010

Yep, it’s my personal media management smackdown which surfaces on occasion. (visual via MediaScape, NZ an informative site on youth media use too!)

So, why did I do this? Coupla reasons. No secret I’m a fairly intense person and ‘take on too much’ in shades of author Liz Funk’s SuperGirls mode.

Thankfully I have Alvin Toffler warning bells that go off in my brain when I’m on the verge of information overload and can literally feel the discordance and overwhelm impacting my worldview, so I  pullback, purge my data streams and go silent…Youth? Not so much.

There’s less inclination for youth to shut off the media just for grins…

It’s simply part of their way of life; and even disquieting for some to turn down the flow to a trickle or close off the valve altogether (all the more reason to introduce this altered state!)

Habits ingrain early so I ditch them when I see them just to create chaos in my routine and purposely force myself out of a comfort zone regularly. But kids? Developmentally, they tend to like routine and shun change, so there’s security in knowing they have peers at their side 24/7…(not always welcomed by parents who can feel over-run by ‘pack mentality’ either in person or via tether to devices)

Since the testing teen years are a natural progression for bucking the tide, I thought I’d toss in a healthy New Year media literacy exercise to ‘dare to compare’ who’s in charge…putting the rebel yell smack dab in the hands of teens to prove THEY ARE.

The game challenge?  I’d unplug from the blog if my teen unplugged from texting…Caveat? No advance sign offs, warnings, last words and ‘must dos’ —just cold turkey, whammo, to prove the sun will continue to rise.

The more I hear buzz about “netaddiction” the more I gear up to shut down periodically, ‘just because.’

If anything, this is a life skill I’d like to pass along to my teen, as I’m a die-hard existentialist that bristles at all of the easy outs and self-fulfilling prophecies sans personal accountability, which holds for the whole  classification of  ‘electronic addictions’ e.g: “I can’t help myself, I’m addicted”= I have no agency

“Everyone else has the same problem”=Get used to my face in the screen ’cause that’s just how it is now…meh. And bah, to boot. This is lacking any modicum of balance, moderation and common sense, giving up ‘agency’ to ‘addiction’ in wimpy pass the buck mode.

No need to echo MY media management style of upsetting the apple cart ‘just because’ to prove you can, it’s a ‘build your own’ model for sure…

But instilling the notion of maintaining free agency is paramount to kids’ decision-making of all kinds, far beyond bucking the “net addiction” moniker of media pundits flinging the latest pathology du jour…

A healthy sense of personal agency with a dash of “you don’t own me” defiance has guided my life choices for many a decade, whether it goes for guys, gals, bosses, sponsors, vices, advertisers, you name it…and frankly, it’s served me well.

With media stats of teen dating violence today, it seems many young girls out there could use a dose of that ‘tude…

So who knows, maybe this is my “mama mantra” surfacing subconsciously under the radar to show-n-tell what free agency is all about?

No question it’s a paramount necessity to maintain control over; especially in teen years when pushback against peer influences, pop culture mindshare and any other controlled states of being is difficult at best.

Whether it’s my personality quirk or prescient parenting conviction, I firmly believe a strong allegiance with the “A” word…agency, safeguards against submitting to the OTHER “A” word addiction in all its many diverse forms.

Internet addiction is certainly getting a ton of air time, along with other electronics: videogames, phones,  Twitter, texting, and so on…

…But I’m fuzzy on the nuances of what constitutes the term, especially when psychiatrists are considering adding it to ‘the bible’ of mental illnesses, the diagnostic big book, aka Diagnostic & Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V)

There’s plenty of controversy about this proposed medical inclusion, from lack of transparency, oversight, and big pharm companies nosing into this new DSM medical iteration due out in 2012, as indicated in this LA Times article here… to confusion and angst via plain ol’  parents like me, who feel this might just make media waters even muddier. When docs start attaching maladies to media using diagnostic benchmarks, it stirs up even more stress as we ratchet up our own familial self-assessment.

Color me cynical, but this seems poised for profiteering…

Just think, a whole NEW form of “therapy and recovery” business along with all the other ‘isms’ and ‘holics’  and real or perceived anxieties in today’s 21st century living. (ahem; there you go, I just saved you $45,000 at the first ever internet addiction facility in the U.S. called reStart, unplug from your screens and call it a day)

The  notion that psychiatrists are starting to assign mental illness monikers  to medicalize  ‘internet addiction’ is nothing new, but it IS a bit problematic, because it’s ripe to be framed as a ‘catch all’ self-diagnosis  that could exacerbate a “helpless” modus operandi,  removing even more personal accountability and parental responsibility.

Walk away from the screen, baby. And if you can’t, don’t, won’t or don’t wanna, you’re addicted? Clearly it’s not that simple.

To maintain free agency and avoid ‘addiction’ there’s power in reining in the massive media encroachment to set solid boundaries for yourself.

It’s one of the reasons we annually go off the grid to my folks’ solar cabin in the Rockies every year with no media contact whatsoever and only the picturesque view of the Rockies and the hummingbird wings dive-bombing the deck feeder to amuse and delight. (see this post about media savvy kids & nature deficit disorder)…

Sure, I’m disturbed that media is usurping the quieting of the mind (where you can hear yourself think, listen to your own points of view and develop an independent identity outside the pop culture norms/image projections foisted upon us with deafening amplification) but I’m MORE concerned that quiet in and of itself is unsettling for some kids, even bordering on foreign…

…So if I’ve got a double-dog-dare to shush, experience the silence and embrace whatever life lessons evolve out of it, I’m IN. Now if I could only put the rest of life on ‘pause’ in the same manner. Meanwhile:

How do YOU manage media so it doesn’t manage you?

What do YOU do to walk away from the screen and maintain healthy balance and control in managing your media?

Do you feel addicted? Or do you feel you have full agency? Have you heard of sites like Center for Internet Addiction and Internet Addiction.Ca?

In part two we’ll look at cultural context, information overload, and the burning question: Is internet addiction a psychiatric disorder? Why or why not, who says so? And what if anything have they got to gain? What role does free agency play? How vulnerable are kids? Or are kids managing their media better than adults?

We ALL need to find our media footing to start deconstructing how much is too much, what addiction means and add CONTEXT to the conversation.

Meanwhile, note to media habits:

You don’t own me, suckers.

I’ll continue to tune out from media enough to tune into my own thoughts and values. It’s become a ritual for me to mental floss daily.

China’s Internet Addiction Bootcamp?! CBS News:

Watch CBS News Videos Online
Visual Credits: Agency graphic of YCN/Young Creative Network by Oscar & Evan via Creative Review Book stack DSM photo via ScienceBlogs and graphic dialog box via Nintendork.com