2. 200702737
2
ContentsPage
Page 3-4: “Culture Jammingamountstolittle more thanPranksterism”.Discuss
Page 6-7: Marketerswhotarget children are nobetterthanpaedophiles. Allmarketingtochildren
shouldbe banned.Discuss
Page 9-10: We wouldall be betteroff withoutsupermarkets. DiscussthisStatement
Page 12-13: “The counterculture movementisunderpinnedbyaflawedlogic”. Discussthis
statement
Page 15-16: The Self helpIndustryisaShamdiscuss
3. 200702737
3
“Culture Jamming amounts to little more than Pranksterism”.
Discuss
“We can change the World”- the clichédyetcommandingmantraof Kalle Lasn(2000), Founderof
“Adbusters”(p.8). Suchan ideology seemstopurportthatbrandishing“culture jamming”asmere
prankishnessis ineffectuallymyopic,giventhe sleekandprofessional polishof recognised“culture
jamming”bodiesandtheirpotential toengenderorganisational fear anddefensivereforms.
ReverendBilly’s charismaticattackonStarbucks,saw legal actionandemployee-training
intervention (Hindley,2010) and movements like“Occupy”create large-scaledestructive hijacks,
patentingthe Rebel’s capacity todistinctly debunk anddegrade the machine.
Beyondreputational damage infiltrated oncompanies throughsardonicinterventions ( Soloman,
2003, p.209) the “culture jammer”transcendsas a transformational figureheadwithlegitimate
spiritual authority.Groundedinthe pioneeringidealsof GuyDebord(1967 ),rejectingthe “society
of the spectacle”throughmockeryor“detournement”,enables emancipationfromrepressioninto
truth and“playful”living(Lasn,2000). Supportingthisidea,McClish(2009) assertsthat Reverend
Billy isa “spiritual leaderinhisownright”(p.3), bornfrom a legitimate dedicationtocombatingthe
consumeristfailingsof modernsociety (p.5). Activist’softendistinguishthemselves viasome
“epiphany”of character,creatingan unyielding embodimentof the cause beyond seeming
buffoonery(KozinetsandHandelman,2004. p. 698).
Despite the revolutionaryideasof culture jammersandtheirforthrightmissiontofree individuals
fromthe “mindpolluters”(Solomon,2003),Bruner (2005) underlineshow suchimpassionedyet
unrecognizedsocietal disgust, oftenirrepressiblytranslatesintohysteriaand“carnivalesque
protests”(p.136). The BioticBakingBrigade,anorganisationthat publicly “pies”capitalistfigures
attemptedtosymbolically rejectglobalisation by “pieing”MiltonFriedman ataglobal conference,
cunningly exploitingthe machine through inexorable mediaattention,whilstrejectedbymanyas
blatantphysical assault (Harold,2004). Thoughsuch prankish protestaimstosubvertsymbolsof
bureaucracy,Hindley(2010) cautions that radical andunrestrainedActivists are easytodismissas
lunatics, steered byengrainedsocietal norms (p.122). Therefore, whilstprovocative behaviour
seemsnecessaryto“jolt”audience expectation withinabureaucraticmediaclimate(Warner,2007,
p.6),act insignificance ormisinterpretationmeans Activistsparadoxically become mediaco-
constructors,substantiating theirownmenial,pranksterish demonizationand intellectual demise.
The situationist’sexploited“art”as a mediumof “detournement”,insightfully andsubtly subverting
the class system (Haiven,2007. p.93). This approach rejectsseeminglysenselesspranks,valorising
lessaggressive culturejamming vehiclessuchas“billboardliberation”or “subvertisements”(Sandlin
4. 200702737
4
and Milam,2008. p.325) Lasn, howeverrejectsthis“pure activism”asfutile tomodernrebellion
presentingculture jammingasa“hyper-masculinized”bureaucracykillingmachine (Haiven,2007.
p.100). Whilstarguablynecessary, boorishpranksterism reflectsignorance tothe fundamental
prophecies of jammingandacommodificationof resistance, promoting“rebel sell”,whereby any
apparentantiestablishmenttendenciesare perceivedas revolutionary,regardlessof authentic
substance or direction (HeathandPotter,2005, p.141).
The London riots embodied thismonotonous idolisationof the mutineer,throughYouth’sinane
ravagingof communitiesand incapacitytoarticulate validjustification,subsequentlyillegitimating
genuine political grievancesviauntargeted,yobbishdestruction.Thishysteriafacilitatedportrayal of
riotersas desperados,hungryforsome 15 minutesof fame, viaascapegoatof working-class
revolution,contradictedbylootingsymbolsof theirownhelplessoppressionfor counter-
revolutionary material gain(Henwood,2011). That said,the metamorphosis of revolutioninto
hooliganismmayprovideasynecdoche of modernculture inasmuchasvoicelessandmedia
redundantindividualsare forcedtoboorishness, indesperationforacknowledgementandsalvation.
The pranksterish dangerof culture jammingliesin blindnesstounderpinning ideologies ,offsetby
mere gratuitouscriminality.Byattackingthe machine sothoughtlesslythe revolutionarycapacityof
culture jammingtransmitsmerelyasnomore than some emptysearch forkudos as a rebel,
contradictingthe entire anti-conformistpremise of the movement.
6. 200702737
6
Marketers who target children are no better than paedophiles.
All marketing to children should be banned. Discuss
The insidiouscannibalisationof youth,infiltratedthroughincreasinglydisconcertingandinvasive
childmarketingpractiseshasbeen,controversiallyyetineludiblycondemnedaspaedophilic,bychild
expertMichael Brody(Lancet,2002. P.959). Thisdisdainful representationisperpetuatedby
Young’s(1990) vernacular,portrayingthe mercilessmediamolestationof the “innocents”,dubiously
attainedthroughthe “seducers”(Marketers) persuasive domination(citedinGunteretal,2005).
Gale (n.d) moreover,assertsthatchildrenare “bombarded”withadultimages,provingparental
avoidance strategiesdestitute tomarketing’sinexhaustiblesaturationof the publiclandscape (p.22).
ThispredatorymetaphorcorrespondswithLinn’s(2004) contentionof injustice,concerningchild
marketer’sflagrant“exploitation”of adolescentvulnerability,despitemultiple childprotection
sanctionsinotherareas(p.145). Despite the argumentthatcommercial exposure isfundamentalin
empoweringchildren(Bandyopadhyayetal,2001, p.113), specificdevelopmentsinvolvingever
more inventivemeansof manipulationandbriberyhave emerged,forinstance usingchildrenas
brand advocates,despiteobliviontotheirpromotionalutilization(Wells,2004).More extremely,
interactive expansionshave enabledcompaniestoshrewdlycollectpersonaliseddatafromchildren
as youngas 4, oftenwithoutparental consent(Beder,1998).Such illusorytacticsportraychild
marketerssomewhatominously,substantiatingBrody’sextremistposition.Perhapsmost
distastefullyobtrusiveare newethnographicmarketresearchmethodswhichseektogainaccessto
the “most private recesses”suchaschildren’sbedroomsandevenbathroomactivity(Schor,2004.
P.99). Suchneuroticandpryingresearchtactics,representatransgressionfromwide-reaching
colourful exploitationof adolescentinexperience through transparentpromotional embellishment
intosomewhatunwarrantedanddiscrete observation,deceptivelyscrutinizingconsumption
behaviourstosomewhatperverteddegree.
Whilstthese evasive researchtechniquesseemexcessive,the broadercondemnationof youth
marketingentirely,maymerelytypifysocietiesabsurdlyromanticisedpreoccupationwiththe
“goldenage of childhood”,exacerbatingparent’sperceivedinadequacies,regardingincapacityto
functionasconstant chaperones(LynottandLogue,1993).This obsessionhasarguablymanifested
intoan age dictatedbya successionof sensationalisedfads,enforcingnew desecrationsof
innocence,guilt-inducedparental overprotectionandasubsequentdiminishmentof children’s
psychological development(Ungar,2009. P.262). Schor (2004) contendsthatwhilstthe protective
dutyof caregiversisirrefutable thisisrepeatedlyexploitedbycorporationsasa scapegoatfor
patentlynegligentandunethical targetingandpositioning(p.183).Perhapsincreasedadvertising
7. 200702737
7
regulation,acompromise tototal eradicationwouldeffectivelyalleviatedevelopingparental
pressurestoflawlesslybalance parallel dutiesto“instillsociallyacceptable behaviours”whilst
facilitatingautonomyandformationof ideals(Hanley,2000. P.8),recommendedasanupshotof
“commercial world”exposure(Buckinghametal,2009 p.79).
The evidentdespoilmentof childpurityhowever,extendsbeyondyouthtargetedmarketing,given
adolescent’sdailycontactwitheroticisedthemesandconsequentconditioning,amidstasociety
consumedby“Raunch culture”(Levy,2005). George (2007) discussedthe “eroticizationof
girlhood”,andsociety’sthwartingfascinationwiththe “Lolita”andsexual purityasavehicle of
allurementinadultmarketing.Thisperverse aspiration,endorsedbyinfantileyetlascivious
celebritiessuchasParisHilton,hasinadvertentlytransmittedtoyouthculture,wieldingasocietyof
prematurelypromiscuousgirls,mimickingthe mediaandflauntingtheirsexualnaivetyasa means of
risqué enticement.Insum,childreninnatelyimitate theirelders,meaningthatwithina
nymphomaniaticsocietal milieu,prepubescentpurityisinvariablyperforatedandinfected.
The outrageouslysexualisedsaturationof marketingentirelyandof societal normssuggeststhat
banningchildtargetedmarketingwouldprove insignificantinthe battle tosalvage innocence,
moreovergeneratingmasseconomicdamage (Sherwin,2011). Since corporationsshow nosignof
experiencingasuddenethical awakening,earlyexposure tothe politicsof consumption,breeding
familiaritywiththe manipulationsinherenttomodernitymayprovide the onlyglimmerof hope in
engenderingscepticismandmedialiteracyinadulthoodbeyondself-indulgentcredulity.
8. 200702737
8
References
Bandyopadhyay.S,Kindra.G& Sharp. L (2001). ‘IsTelevisionAdvertisingGoodforChildren?
Areasof ConcernandPolicyImplications’. InternationalJournalof Advertising. Volume.20,Issue:1.
Beder.S (1998).'A CommunityView', Caring forChildren in theMedia Age,Papersfroma national
conference,editedbyJohnSquiresandTracy Newlands,New CollegeInstitute forValuesResearch,
Sydney,pp.101-111.
Buckingham,Det al.(2009). ‘The Impact of the Commercial WorldonChildren’sWellbeing:Report
of an IndependentAssessment’. Departmentof Children,Schools&Families and theDepartmentof
Culture,Media & Sport. [Online].Availablefrom
www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/DCSF-00669-2009 (Accessed
15/02/2012).
Gale.J (n.d). 'Sexualisationof ChildrenandYoungTeens', Educating Young Children:Learning And
Teaching In The Early Childhood Years,Volume.17,Issue:2,p.21
George.L (2007), 'Why are we dressingourdaughterslike this?(Coverstory)', Maclean's,
Volume.119,Issue:52/53, pp.37-40
Gunter.B, Oates. C & Blades.M(2005). ‘AdvertisingtoChildren:Content,ImpactandRegulation.
Lawrence ErlbaumAssociate publishers.London.
Hanley.P(2000). ‘Copycatkids?The Influence of TelevisionAdvertisingonChildrenandTeenagers’
[Online] Availablefrom: www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/itc/uploads/Copycat_Kids.pdf (Accessed
17/02/2012)
Levy.A (2005). ‘Ariel LevyonRaunchCulture’ TheIndependent. 4December.
Linn.S (2004). ‘ Consumingkids:Protectingourchildrenfromthe onslaughtof marketingand
advertising.’FirstAnchorBooks,NewYork.
Lynott.P, & Logue.B (1993) 'The "HurriedChild":The Mythof Lost ChildhoodinContemporary
AmericanSociety', SociologicalForum,Volume.8,Issue:3, pp.471-491
Schor. J (2004). ‘Born to Buy’. Scribner.New York.
'Sellingto-andsellingout-children'(2002), Lancet,Volume.360,p.959, EBSCOhost,viewed15
February2012
Sherwin.A (2011) ‘Advertisingbanwontstopbrandbullyingsayschildexpert’ TheIndependent. 15
September.
Ungar. M (2009), 'Overprotectiveparenting:helpingparentsprovidechildrenthe rightamountof
riskand responsibility', American JournalOf Family Therapy,Volume.37,Issue:3,pp.258-271,
Wells. M(2004), 'Kid Nabbing', Forbes,Volume.173, Issue:2, pp.84-88, BusinessSource Premier,
EBSCOhost,viewed15February2012.
9. 200702737
9
We would all be better off without supermarkets
Discuss this Statement
Blythman(2005) lamentsthe demise of the humble close-communitytown,anantiquatedidealism,
subsumedbyanepidemicof artificialgrandeur,of capitalisticvulgaritydesecratingdistinctivecivic
symbolsinsurrendertosupermarketmajesty.The result,“Clonetown”,aplace removedfromall
previousconnotationsanddefinedmerelybythe bigbox superstoresthatcommunitiesbecome so
hopelesslycompelledtopatronise (p.10).The existence of busroutes merelybearingsupermarket
namesexemplifiesthiscultural transition,howeverwhetherthisjustifiesobliterationof the
undeniablemodernpracticalityof the supermarketisquestionable.
Lawrence (2004) presentsatransfixingargumentagainstthe superstore’sunyieldingtacticsto
dominate the retail landscape,of anenvironmentdestroyedthroughpollution, of supplierscheated
of fairpayments,aneradicationof local businesses,aseizure of local jobprospects,all achieved
throughinanelyunethical practises,mercilesslydisenablingpublicrebellion.Fishman’s(2006)
“Walmart effect”boldlydemonstratesthe supermarketslimitlessquestforglobal domination,of the
publicasunquestioningvictimstothe machine,forcedtosubmitandrefuel the powersources
throughlossof all alternatives(p.6).Muchof the concern surroundingsupermarketspossessive
mechanismsliesintheirextensive relationshipmarketingpractises,usedtoengendertrustand
loyalty,aconcept cautionedas manipulative“abuse of power”(WelchandZolkiweski,2004; citedin
Hingley,2005.P.66).Take the Tesco clubcard systemwhicharguablysurpasses“convenience”,
becomingincreasinglyakintoconsumer“surveillance”(Simms, 2007.P.94), and exacerbatingpublic
concernsof an intensifying“surveillancesociety”(Peel,2007).
On the otherhand,howevercomesthe chickenandeggscenario, i.e.have supermarketscreated
these extensivepracticalityneedsorhave theymerelyrespondedtothe increasinglydemanding
desiresof modernsociety?(Spade,2004).Despite societal vilification,people continuetoreligiously
patronise supermarkets,underminingcallsfora renewedtraditionalisingof shoppingstructures
(Majumdar,2009 ).On the otherhand, thisloyaltymaybe interpretedasan inevitable responseto
supermarketsunavoidable seizure of the shoppinglandscapeandsubsequent“deprogramming”of
“creative”shopping,enablingconsumptiondictatorship(Blythman,2005. P. 43).
Contraryto thisviewof Supermarketsasdemonicleaches,suckingthe hopesanddreamsof the
consumer,thismayderive fromsome arguablynaive andmisguidedperception thattraditional
retailersfollowed“RobinHood”philosophies despite,albeittoa lesserextent,theirundeniable
pursuittowardsprofit(Bindel,2009).Simms(2007) acknowledgesthatfromone angle all thatTesco
10. 200702737
10
is,infact doingis respondingtothe deficienciesof the marketplace,extrapolatingpowerwherethe
“system”allowsit,atactic that wouldsurelybe followedbylocal retailersif theytoohadreached
these levelsof logistical prestige (p.15).
Moreover,the unquestioninganti-supermarketstance adoptedbycriticslike FelicityLawrence
(2004), may,to some extentrepresentblinkeredmiddle-classsnobberyinitsseemingirreverence to
the supermarketsassistance inenablingthe dual-workerfamily’ssurvival;allowingamore realistic,
time-efficientexperience,complimentarywhere one incomesimplywouldnotsuffice (Rayner,
2008). Furthermore, Shankpurportedthatsocialistremoval fromcapitalistsupermarketsentirelyis
a contradictioninitself since theseinstitutions,howevermenially,have providedthe dual demands
of qualityandvalue thatsocialismsounyieldinglyfoughtfor(Blake,2000. P.87). Therefore,despite
the patentmalpracticesof supermarkets,anti-supermarketizationiscommodifiedasthose that
wouldtraditionallyseekemancipationfromcapitalisticmanipulationare replacedbylargelymiddle-
classindividualsinfatuatedbygrosslyoverpricednatural independentretailersandachievingsome
paradoxical bohemianprestige,stigmatisingworkingclassshoppingchoice limitations(Bindel,2009).
Thus,the “Tesco-bashing”obsessionof asupermarket-freecityscape seemsalluringuntil we realise
the undeniableeconomicimplicationssucharesurgence wouldhave uponworkingclassfamilies
(Economist,2011) especiallyinanexploitativeerawhere more natural retail alternativescome ata
heavyprice.
11. 200702737
11
References
Bindel.J(2009). “Enough of thissupermarketsnobbery”.The Guardian.14 August
Blake,C(2000), 'All Lost inthe Supermarket', RadicalHistory Review, 76, pp. 80-89,
Blythman,Joanna(2005), “Shopped:TheShocking Powerof theBritish Supermarkets”,
London,HarperPerennial.
Economist(2011) “BashingSupermarkets:A nationof shoppers”.Bagehot’sNotebook,British
politics,May19. Availablefrom
http://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/2011/05/bashing_supermarkets [Accessed14
March, 2012]
Fishman.C(2006) “The WalmartEffect”.Penguin Books,London.
Hingley.M(2005), “PowerImbalance inUKAgri-FoodSupplyChannels:LearningtoLive withthe
Supermarkets?”, JournalOf Marketing Management,21,1/2, pp.63-88
Lawrence.F(2004), “Ghost-townBritain”, Ecologist,34, 7, pp. 60-67
Majumdar.S (2009). “Don't like supermarkets?You're off yourtrolley”.Guardian,11August.Word
of Mouthblog.Available from
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2009/aug/11/supermarket-shopping
[Accessed14 March, 2012]
Peel.M(2007). “Surveillancesociety:warningondatasharing”.Financial Times,August6.
Simms.A (2007). “Tescopoly.Howone shopcame out on topand whyit matters”. Constable and
RobinsonLtd,London.
Spade.L (2004). “Convenientenough?”, Food Manufacture,79,9, p. 27,
Rayner.J (2008). “Be honest- supermarketshave made ourlivesbetter”.The Observer,17February
12. 200702737
12
“The counterculture movement is underpinned by a flawed logic”.
Discuss this statement
Underpinnedbyanidealisticamalgamationof Marx’s“utopian”anti-bourgeoisiesocietalaspirations
and Freud’sgrave interpretationof acivilizationcondemnedbyinescapable conformity, the
counterculture movement emergedasthe antidote toarchaic repressionof instinctual emotions,as
a blowingof the lidded“pressurecooker”,if youwill (HeathandPotter,2004. P.37).Unfortunately,
thispremise of emancipationfromthe breachesof self-repressionthroughcountercultural rebellion
may be paradoxicallytarnished,consideringKowalski’s (1978) contentionthat“society’sripenessfor
revolution”may ultimatelyrepresentmere “bourgeoisdeceit”(Ford,2008, p.146). Marshall
McLuhan himself,regardedsince the 1960s as a pioneerof the counterculturalpositionisoften
misinterpretedassome bohemianradical,despitehislargelyconservativetheoretical basis(Strate,
2011).
Frank ( 1997) purported thatthe subconsciousandirrepressible obsessionwithconsumer
sovereignty, throughconsciousremoval from media-controlledprototype consumptionambitions,
has inadvertentlymanifestedintothe strategy of corporationsthemselves.Thisdeceitor“co-
optation”apparentlyfacilitatessyntheticsimulationof countercultural ideologies,prompting
hopelessconsumerloyaltythroughaveneerof rebelliondespite capitalisticmotivations(p.7-9).
Take the developmentof Apple,foundeduponJob’sapparentcounterculturalautonomy,his
“Buddhist”connections,hishedonistichistoryof adolescentLSDuse, permeatinginacorporate
culture of unadulteratedinnovation(Teitel,2011).
ThisApple phenomenonseemstorepresentacontradictioninitsowndelivery,however.How can
innovationbe slicklymarketedandpackagedtomassaudiencesandretainintegrity?Smith(2011)
contendsthatApple mayhave become anenemyof itsowninvention,inasmuchasitcan no longer
claimto personify the rebeldepictedinits “1984” commercial,symbolicallydestroyingthe mindless
mechanisationof consumersociety.Apple now,isbetterepitomized bythe “BigBrother”ruler,
cultivatingdevoutfollowingfromitsresistance-tranquilizedclergyof worshippers.Since consumers
allowthemselvestobe manipulatedbythe revolutionarypromisesuchorganisationsproject
throughlustrousmarketingmasquerade,true countercultural thinkersseemtohave recoiledin
inadequacy.
Conversely,the inarguabletransformationof Appleintothe ranksof corporate powerbrand,
suggestsitwouldundoubtedlybe rejected bythose claimingrebellionagainstmassconsumerism,
breedingitsdeceptioninferiortothispure minority.Insayingthishowever, Adbuster’sthemselves
13. 200702737
13
have recognisedadistinctdiscreditingof the meritsof culture jammingthroughanew wave of
individuals,engulfedbythe oxymoronicelitistappeal of rebellion,yetlackingintrue sardonic
dissent.These peoplemerelyconveyarepresentationof self,aproductof the “lost generation”and
theirabsence of loyalty,norpride inanyone wayof being.The highlystylizedandpretentious
nature of these “hipsters”reeksof revolutionaryartifice, exploitingsymbolsof archetypal
“revolutionaryclasses”suchasfashion (Haddow,2008) to satisfythe romanticised“middle-class”
obsessionwiththe rebelviasymbolicescapismfromwealth(Hale,2011, p.302).
The increasingdictationof fashionbythe consumersthemselvesthrougharguablyegotistical street
fashionblogsexemplifiesthisnewwave of cool-seekingdesperados( FerrierandSweeney, 2012).
Thisand the inane adoptionof unfamiliarbandT-shirtsbyyouthsubculturesasmere “status
symbol”(Rogers,2011) is consistentwithFiratandSchultz’s(1997) position,highlightingthe fickle
“fragmentation”of consumerloyaltiesin“postmodern”society.Moreoveritdemonstratesthe
“commodificationof resistance”thathas signalledthe deathof authenticityinthe countercultural
movement,if thisevertrulyexisted(BryantandGoodman,2004. P.345).
In conclusion,the seeminglyself-obsessedquestforsome exclusive societal prestige mayultimately
leadthe individualtorejectanything“middlebrow”regardlessof taste orenjoyment,avictimof
theirownobstinate affectation(Reynolds,2009).Thisunderminesthe countercultural movement,
hollowingthe intellectual prowess thatrejectionof the mainstreamoriginallysetouttoachieve.
Perhapsthe popularisationof those genres once deemedunconventional shouldbe seenas victory
for the traditional cultural recluseandnota justificationtofabricate ever-more mindlesslybizarre
fadsat the expense of genuineartisticorintellectualmerit(HeathandPotter,2004. P.152).
14. 200702737
14
References
Bryant,R, & Goodman,M(2004), 'ConsumingNarratives:The Political Ecologyof 'Alternative'
Consumption', TransactionsOf TheInstituteOf British Geographers,29, 3, pp. 344-366
FerrierandSweeney(2012) “Streetstyle bloggers:dedicatedfollowersof fashion”.The Guardian.3
February.
Firat,A, & ShultzII,C (1997), 'From segmentationtofragmentation', European JournalOf Marketing,
Volume:31,Issue.3/4, pp.183-207
Ford,P (2008), 'Hip SensibilityinanAge of Mass Counterculture', JazzPerspectives,Volume:2,Issue.
2, pp. 121-163
Frank.T ( 1997). “The Conquestof cool”. Universityof Chicagopress,London
Haddow.D (2008). Hipster: The Dead End of Western Civilization. Adbusters,Issue 79,29 July.
Available from:http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/79/hipster.html
Hale.G (2011). “A Nationof Outsiders:How the White Middle classfell inlove withrebellioninpost-
war America”.OxfordUniversitypress,NewYork
Heathand Potter(2004) “Rebel Sell:WhyCounterculture becameconsumerculture”.HarperCollins
Publishers,NewYork
Reynolds.S(2009). “Stuck inthe middle withyou:Betweenpopandpretension”.The Guardian,6
February
Rogers.J (2011) BandT-shirts:'I warn you – don't throw themout'.The Guardian,13 October
Strate.L (2011) “Marshall McLuhan's message wasimbuedwithconservatism”.The Guardian,26
July.
Teitel,J2011, 'TURNED ON AND TUNED IN.(Coverstory)', Maclean's,124, 41, p. 50.
15. 200702737
15
The Self help Industry is a Sham discuss
Salerno(2005), fiercelysleighsthe constructof self-help;amulti-millionpoundindustry,wieldinga
somewhatunwholesome commoditisation of self-improvement, directedbythe charismatic,yet
professionallyunaccreditedprowessof supposedtransformationalfigureheads.Whilstthese
institutionsclaimtoprovide some epiphanyfortheirpayingcustomers,the mindlesssaturation of
the market,rangingfromthe bizarre andcarnivalesque tobanal repackagingof commonsense as
groundbreakingwisdom, meanstheirinspirational promise becomes diluted(p.2).ThisDIY
interpretationof self-helpbyindividualseagertoprofitfrom itsmarketpopularityimplores
spectatorsto ridicule industrylegitimacy,despite the factself-helphasbeenproventobe effective
insome instances(McKendree-Smithetal,2003; citedinGellatlyetal,2007; p.1218).
Foucaldiantheorists,Rimke(2000) and Hazelden(2003) transpire thatthe self-helpmovementis no
more than a reflectionof enhancedsocietal interestsinthe psychological,encouragingincreasing
waysof exploitingthese “ideals”forthe conservationof capitalistic“political objectives”,like
“consumption,profitabilityandefficiency”(Phillip,2009; p 152-3). Because self-helpisultimately
“the product formoderncapitalism”(Jordison,2009), in the questforsalvation,the individual
becomesaservantto the system;the source of those veryfeelings of emptinessthat primarily
soughtsolace inself-help.
Lasch (1979), theorisedthatthe explosionof “therapy” hadbred a societyconsumedby
“narcissism”,condemnedtorepeatedpursuit of temporarymaterial fulfilment(Hazleden,2003,
p.113). Thisis reflectedfurtherbymovementslike“The Secret”andtheir“slicklymarketed”
projectionof “The universe”as“a giantvibratingATM” andpure materialisticgain,playingupon
society’spreoccupationwith vacuous wealth(Beato,2007).Whilstthissuggeststhe industry may
merelybe respondingto thisnewself-obsessedtargetmarket, there alsoliesthe contentionthatthe
industryitself exacerbated,if notproducedthisabsurd superficial fixation(Hazleden,2003, p.113).
Conversely,Lichterman(1992) purportsthat the predominantly“middle class”readersof self-help
literature are aware of itspaltryspiritual underpinninganditsempty,clichédspiel,constantly
interpretingfrom adismissiveangle (p.427).Whilstthis audience mockery,mayundermine the
powerof such literature,consumerscontinuetobuy. Perhapsthisisa worse outcome thangenuine
belief,reflective of the cultural deathof literaturebeneaththe blockbustermightof self-help
(Salerno,2005;p.9).Moreovera “sick-note”subculture seemstohave emerged,wherebythe various
ailmentsof modernlifepromotedby self-helpgurushastranslatedintoasocietyconstantlyseeking
exemptionfromphysical exertionviasome artifice of mental illness andlongingforsympathy
(Peacock,2011).
16. 200702737
16
Taylor(2011) stressesthatthe absurdlyexaggerated therapeuticdramatisationbythe likesof Tony
RobbinsandDr Phil,presents self-helpalmostasaparody of itself,aboldlyridiculousmanifestation
of regurgitatedmachismo.Audiencesrealise they’re ownmanipulation,yetsuccumb,particularly
since the once-elusive mysteryof suchtherapy hasbecome a mass-marketnormality,luring
consumersof all backgrounds throughcheaprelicsof life-enhancementsuchasbooks andDVDs.
On the otherhand,the successof self-helpis, bydefinition,distincttothe individual experiencingit.
Despite the questionable methodsof some self-helpCharlatans,the worthinessof the experience
liesinitsabilitytoengenderafeelingof elationorachievementfromthe individual,however
misguidedortemporarythismaybe.Despite Salerno’s(2005) argumentthatthe marketforself-
helpandit’sretargetingof the same people every18monthsisa paradox initself, thesepeople
continue tobuy (p.6).Thus,howeverbrainwashedfollowers maybe,theyare ultimately hungryfor
some feelingof self-enrichmentandwhetherthisismerelythe productof “groupcohesiveness”
withinsuch followings (Galanter,1990; p.544), much like religion,self-help,forsome, providesareal
glimmerof hope inan otherwise dubiousconstruct.
