Band of Brothers TV Series Review: Story

Band of Brothers is ten-part HBO TV series about World War II, based on the Band of Brothers book written by historian and biographer Stephen E. Ambrose. Band of Brothers received considerable attention because it was produced by Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks who both worked together on “Saving Private Ryan,” another realistic World War II movie.

The series follows Easy Company of the 2nd Battalion who is assigned to the 101st Airborne Division. It follows their experiences from before landing in Normandy to the end of the war. The events are based on real life accounts from the soldiers of easy company. Before every episode the surviving members describe their experiences, often in tears thinking about their fallen friends and the experiences that will forever haunt them the rest of their lives.

The series mainly focuses on Major Richard Winters (1918-2011), played by Damian Lewis, as he grows into a leader and strives to keep his band of brothers together and alive. However different episodes often highlights different soldiers of E Company, and their various experiences. Through out the series you get to know each of the character from the first time they step onto soil, to hard veterans, battle tested, growing into leadership roles… for those who survive through the battles. As a viewer, you get to experience both the forming and loss of relationships as well as the hardship of war life especially mentally and emotionally.

Band of Brothers TV Series. Is it Clean? Safe?

Band of Brothers by no means should be shown to children. It’s a war movie, and a realistic one at that. Just like Saving Private Ryan, there are plenty of realistic violence. There is also plenty of cursing, which of course is expected as it is a war movie.

There is also a sex scene in the beginning of episode 9. Avoid it. It is explicit and completely unexpected as all the episodes up to this point was clean in this area. Why the directors chose to add this scene is beyond me as it seems completely out of place.

Band of Brothers TV Series: Morals? Opinions?

Personally, I loved Band of Brothers. Though it may be hard to follow all the characters as the cast is large, you can easily sympathize with the various characters as they struggle mentally and emotionally through the war. The loss of key people are disheartening but there is also a sense of triumph as the various characters grow up, and step up as is needed. As the title says, you can definitely come to appreciate how these men draw together, put their differences aside and become like brothers. Every battle is tense as you don’t want anyone to die or get hurt. The struggle of dealing with death is a big theme as well.

Major Winters – Lessons on Leadership

Major Winters is a person to be admired, someone who deeply cares for his men and does everything in his power to protect them and train them properly. Watching him grow from a fellow soldier into highly respected leader has many lessons packed in itself. He leads by example, he is always in the front lines, he seeks to understand his men, he is decisive, he follows the rules, he cares deeply about his men, he thinks through how his interactions with his unit affects their morale, their behavior and the level of respect he needs to command the unit. An example is when Major Winters reprimands his his Lieutenant for gambling with his soldiers because he says he should never put himself in a position from taking from his own men. A leader must always give in every way to the people you lead. From the beginning, he slowly earns everyone’s respect and you can see how it plays out with each of the characters. There are many other men you can compare leadership qualities with such as E Company’s first commander, Herbert Sobel (great trainer, but horrible leader), the mysterious Captain Ron Speirs (everyone feared but respected him), and Lieutenant Norman Dike (who no one had confidence in).

Major Winters Quotes about Leadership

“The qualities you are looking for in a leader include: Does the individual have the respect of the men? How do you get the respect of the men? By living with them, being a part of it, being able to understand what they are going through and not to separate yourself from them. You have to know your men. You have to gain their confidence. And the way to gain the confidence of anybody, whether it’s in war or civilian life or whatever, you must be honest. Be honest, be fair and be consistent. You can’t be honest and fair one day, and the next give your people the short end of the stick. Once you can achieve that, you will be a leader.”

“You maintain close relationships with your men, but not friendship. You have mutual respect for one another, but yet you have to hold yourself aloof, to a degree. If you are too friendly, it works in a negative way when you need to discipline your men. You can have your men’s respect and friendship, but there is a point where you have to rise above this relationship and make sure they are following the orders that are in effect for everybody. In leading groups effectively, you have to rise above camaraderie. You have to be fair to everyone. Everyone must know that they are treated equally.”

Major Winters

The Pacific – Band of Brothers Followup – Quick Note

NOTE: “The Pacific,” the followup mini-series covering WWII battle in the pacific is NOT A CLEAN MOVIE. It is unlike Band of Brothers which was relatively clean throughout. Also “The Pacific” less centered around brotherhood and leadership but more centered around the degrading psychology of men – Highlighting how innocent people’s mind becomes jaded and ruthless in war. Thus the series is much darker.

• How did you like Band of Brothers?
• Any addition lessons to note?
• What was your favorite episode?

Related posts:

1. Ever Fading Sensitivity to Violence in Media

“Skins” the Hottest New TV Show

“It is one thing to be documenting reality, it is an entirely different matter when you are manufacturing a representation of the youth lifestyle…”

A new MTV show “skins” started in January 17 with 3.3 million viewers, 2.7 million of them within 12-34 age range, making it the largest show launch in MTV History. Show creator Bryan Eisley called it “a very simple and in fact rather old-fashioned television series about the lives and loves of teenagers, how they get through high school, how they deal with their friends, and also how they circumnavigate some of the complications of sex, relationships, educations, parents, drugs and alcohol.”

Sounds like a good TV show that helps us see the true lives of teenagers right?

The Parent Television Council calls it “the most dangerous program that has ever been foisted on your children.”

Let’s be clear, MTV has no qualms promoting this show to a young audience, yet the show is rated TV-MA. It even uses actual teenage actors rather than adults depicting teens. One actor is as young as fifteen. The show has been accused of child pornography due to the nudity shown with underaged actors. It’s been called the most racy show ever. But even more telling is how the advertising world had responded.

Advertising Sponsor’s Response to Skins

Advertiser after advertiser, sponsor after sponsor has pulled out of these series due to it’s controversial content. Subway, General Motors, L’Oreal, Wirgley, Taco Bell, Dominos, Foot Lockers & Schick. Good riddance. Perhaps much of the decision was more of a brand play than anything as stated…

“There are few advertisers that are willing to put their neck on the line for any show… there is no lack of youth to reach in the marketplace. Why court backlash when you can find this audience somewhere else?” (Advertising Insider)

Though to their credit, many of these companies protested the underage sex and heavy drinking.

“It was never our intent to endorse content that could offend our consumers,”  Wrigley said in a statement. “Any ads that previously aired during the show were part of a broader advertising plan with the network [MTV].”

I just wish they would of just said “It was never our intent to endorse content that is WRONG”. Rather than what offends consumers. The decision should be made regardless not because of self-preservation.

However, when the advertisers pull their sponsorship, that means the money is not there which hopefully would deter networks from heading into this direction. So though the motive might not be correct, none the less we should be thankful the advertisers have pulled out their sponsorships.

“Skins” as a Moral Teacher?

This isn’t the only show focused on youth “life” and youth transgressions. In fact to no one’s surprise, Hollywood is obsessed with sexualizing teen girls, according to a study released by the Parents Television Council.

The study, which looked at the top 25 shows on broadcast television among viewers age 12-17, found that underage female characters have a higher percentage of sexual scenes compared to adult characters. It also found that only 5% of underage female characters showed any dislike about a sexual situation.

From “16 and Pregnant” and “Teen Mom”, MTV has really capitalized on the interest of those in this age range. MTV and other networks often try to sell these shows as trying to depict “real life” and scaring teens from doing bad things.

Bryan Eisley says “It is just that these are characterized from the point of view of the many young people who write the show and has a very straightforward approach to their experiences; it tries to tell the truth,” he continued.

It’s the argument that, hey if it is real life, we should be able to show it.

But is it really necessary to show scenes that can be just implied? And why so graphically?

Also shows like “Skins” seem to fail in both depicting reality as it is and preventing teens bad habits.

A Virginia Tech senior writes in an article in Collegiate Times “What I find most irksome about [Skins] is simply how far removed from reality the premise and the character depictions truly are… to suggest that those experiences comprise the majority of high school students’ lives is not just irresponsible: It isn’t true.”

Another insider writes “It is one thing to be documenting reality, it is an entirely different matter when you are manufacturing a representation of the youth lifestyle,” an insider says. “Drug use or sexual activity as ‘news’ is very different than those same subjects as ‘entertainment.’”

In other words, the show is made for drama and made for TV. However the effect it could have is to plant ideas of what is the norm for teenagers and even adults.

If we watch enough of a certain lifestyle lived out as if it is normal, we start to assume those lifestyles as the norm of society.

Media’s Responsibility to Teens & Young Adults

Even MTV themselves have said “Young adults 15-17 are excited consumers and extremely impressionable,” MTV tells advertisers. “Now is the time to influence their choices.” Yet do they not realize, that they are influencing their choices, just in the worst way possible by altering their norms and desensitizing them to this kind of lifestyle?

Again Bryan Eisley argues that “We proceed not from the idea that teenagers are inherently likely to misbehave, but rather that they are intensely moral and disposed to make judgments on their own and others’ behavior,” he wrote in his Huffington Post blog entry.

Really? Do you interact with teenagers at all? Have you been a teenager? When I was a teenager I was always struggling with temptations, heck I still do now (with thankfully more restraint than before). I would argue that we as human beings are actually not moral at all if left to our own devices. Remove all sense of law and punishment and it would be utter chaos. That is a worldview not true to reality folks.

• What are your thoughts?
• Is there value to these shows? Does it outweight the negatives?

Related posts:

1. The Secret Life of the American Teenager – Sex Obsessed ABC “Family Channel”
2. Study Links Pregnancy with Watching Sexy TV Shows
3. Children Media Consumption: 7.5 Hours a Day

Children Consume nearly 8 hours of Media per Day

Kaiser Family Foundation released their most recent media usage study. Six years ago they found the usage of 8 to 18 year old was about 6 hours and 21 minutes of media consumption a day. This recent study shows that the media consumption rate has risen to 7 hours and 38 minutes. That is almost as much time as adults spend at work except remember that adults only work 5 days a week.

The amount of media consumed by children has always been a point of concern as media has been found to have great affects in molding a child’s view of the world. It has become all the more important that parents watch over what their children are consuming and what kind of message they are taking in.

Some things parents can do are to regulate what kind and what type of media their children consume. Another is to watch what your kids are watching together so you can explain how best to process the message it portrays. Another is to ensure internet safety for kids with tools that can supervise online activities.

With the proliferation of online media, increased video sharing, and mobile media – these numbers are shocking, yet they are not a surprise.

For the first time, Traditional TV consumption actually fell as other mediums such as video games, music, online media and movie watching has increased. What is even more wild is that kids are often watching multiple forms of media at once. The actual consumption of media was found to be closer to 10 hours and 45 minutes.

Growth of Mobile Media

Greater adoption of iPods and other MP3 devices has increased access and usage of mobile media. Children are able to surf the internet while listening to music and perhaps watching TV all in the same time. In 2004, only 39% of 8 to 18 year olds owned a cell phone. Now it is closer to 66%. Ipods? Jumped from 18% to 76%.

Television Consumption goes Online

TV broadcast consumption fell from 3:04 to 2:39. However TV consumption as a whole has increased by 38 minutes. This increase can be partially attributed to mobile media as kids watch movies and videos on their cell phones, but also a continuous trend towards TV show streams being available online.

Did You Know:

• Home Internet Access has grown from 74% to 84%
• Youth with Laptops jumped from 12% to 29%
• Internet Access from the Bedroom jumped 20% to 33%
• 71% of all 8 to 18 year olds have their own TV in their rooms.
• An Average home with an 8 to 18 year old contains 3.8 TVs, 2.8 DVD/VCR players, 1 digital video recorder, 2.2 CD players, 2.5 radios, 2 computers, and 2.3 console video game players.

Youths who spend more time with media show lower grades and lower levels of personal contentment

Nearly half of all heavy users who consume more than 16 hours of media per day (21% of all 8 to 18 year olds) report having fair or poor grades compared to 23% of light users who show less than three hours of consumption. Unfortunately statistics still support that majority of parents do not engage in much regulation of media consumption.

Did You Know:

• 7th-12th grader spend 1.5 hours/day TEXTING

Media Usage Statistics Study

This report was based on a national survey of 2,002 3rd to 12th grade students and includes a subsample of 702 respondents who volunteered to complete seven-day media use diaries. This is the third of such reports by Kaiser Family Foundation.

Download the full Study Here:

Media in the Lives of 8-18 Year Olds

It is a pretty long study with lot of great media consumption statistics to consume. We’ll try to break it down for you hear at Clean Cut Media with future posts. So be sure to come back!

Related posts:

1. You Watch 153 Hours of TV & Online 68 Hours
2. Powerful Impact of Media on Children
3. Who Regulates Online Advertising & Marketing to Children?

Want to share this old, but great article from the Harvard Medical Alumni Bulletin. Very interesting points about how media cuts into many issues such as obesity, eating disorders, attention disorders, violence, sex, and drug use and how Medical Professionals need to deeply consider how much media has an influence on the development of these.

As this fairly long article is well written, I will simply excerpt huge chunks of it. I’ve copied out significant paragraphs and bolded the main points. Hope it is helpful. Full Article Here.

The most important thing we’ve learned,
So far as children are concerned,
Is never, never, never let
Them near your television set…
They sit and stare and stare and sit
Until they’re hypnotized by it…
Did you ever wonder exactly what
This does to your beloved tot?
His brain becomes as soft as cheese
His powers of thinking rust and freeze
He cannot think—he only sees!
—the Oompa-Loompas in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

TV Media on Child Development

The Oompa-Loompas’ cautionary song about the hypnotic effects of television on children may have seemed alarmist in 1964 when Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was first published, but now its lyrics seem almost understated. In Roald Dahl’s story, television addict Mike Teavee pays for his obsession by getting shrunk to the size of an actor on a television screen. Dahl exaggerates the effects of excessive viewing, but for children glued to media screens today, the consequences may be more insidious and just as hazardous.
Decades of research have established that television and other screen media—movies, the Internet, and video games—constitute a powerful environmental influence on children’s health and development, according to the Center on Media and Child Health at Children’s Hospital Boston. American children aged 8 to 18 spend an average of 6 hours and 21 minutes daily using media—more time than they spend in school or with their parents. And the risks of so much time spent in thrall to their screens are serious.

More than 2,200 studies have linked media use and aggressive behavior. By age 18, a child will, on average, have witnessed 200,000 acts of violence, including 18,000 murders. Children’s programs—shows that one would expect to be free of violence—average 14 violent acts per hour, 8 more than adult programs. For adolescents, the influence of violence in media may even prove fatal: the top three causes of death among 15- to 19-year-olds all involve accidental or intended violence.

Media’s Influence on the Mind

Like the Oompa-Loompas, Michael Rich ’91 understands the powerful clutch media can have on the mind, especially the mind of a child. So well has research documented the connection between watching violence on television and aggressive behavior, he says, that the correlation is “stronger than those linking calcium with bone density and passive smoke with lung cancer.”

Rich, a pediatrician and former filmmaker who worked for two years with the famed Japanese director Akira Kurosawa, directs the Center on Media and Child Health. Much of Rich’s research has focused on the dangers stemming from the violence depicted on television and, more recently, the violence that permeates video games.

One 2004 study by another group compared the physiological responses of adults playing four different video games, two with storylines and two without. The researchers found that story-based video games led to significantly more character and game identification and increased physiological arousal. Other studies have documented how such physiological responses can lead to aggression. “If you watch a violent show and a half hour later go to a store where someone cuts you in line, you’re more likely to respond aggressively,” Rich says. “Over time, small incidents accumulate and form patterns of violent behavior. What matters is that you learn from what you experience.”

And by learning, he means the hardwired kind. “Brain mapping indicates that media violence is processed along primitive survival pathways and stored in long-term memory,” he says. In other words, we embed media violence deeply in our brains. In work with functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI, Rich’s team has discovered that “the brain regions activated when viewing violence onscreen are the same ones that light up when those suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder relive their traumas.”

Alvin Poussaint, founder of the Media Center at the Judge Baker Children’s Center and an HMS professor of psychiatry, says that the way children learn from television can cause another form of lasting harm. “If children watch ‘edutainment’—shows that teach through song and dance—they begin to associate learning with an entertainment format and expect that format when they go to school,” he says. “But teachers aren’t going to sing and dance for them. So then children complain that school is boring. Compared to the fast-paced, exciting shows they’re used to on television, it is boring. Nothing will meet that standard. Television constantly ups the ante.”

Some of the newest research suggests that television and the multimedia world in which children simultaneously watch MTV, listen to iPods, and chat on the Internet may be contributing to the increase in diagnoses of attention disorders. Rich believes that fMRI studies on attention, which are only now just getting started, will help establish whether a connection exists.

Certainly, researchers have found a correlation between media use and reading. “Kids who watch the most television don’t do as well in school,” says Poussaint. “Television is not the best way to learn; it’s too passive and noninteractive.” A 2003 study found that toddlers and older children with screen media in their bedrooms learned to read later and read less than those with no screen media in their rooms. The Oompa-Loompas begin to seem like prophets.

Media can be a Good Influence on Development

John Livingstone ’58, a pediatric psychiatrist at McLean Hospital, an HMS assistant professor, and a consultant to the television industry, is campaigning for PBS to embed emotional literacy in its new programming and for the cable industry to embrace health-risk standards. “Television shows can model positive ways for handling feelings,” he says. “Social learning research shows that when children watch likable characters struggling with decision-making, they can learn better impulse control, especially when they see the realistic results of the choices the characters made.”

The power of prosocial programming can be so strong, Livingstone adds, that even violent content—when portrayed realistically and in the context of outcomes—can be beneficial. “If it’s handled well,” he says, “violence with consequences can promote socially responsible behavior. Let’s say a show features a gang of kids on a street. In one scenario, a gang member remarks that a passing kid looks like a wimp and says, ‘Let’s punch him out.’ The group beats him up.”

“In a better scenario,” Livingstone says, “the gang member remarks that a passing kid looks like a wimp and says, ‘Let’s punch him out.’ But this time a likable gang member speaks up against the plan, then another and another. Half the group takes off in protest. The other half beats the boy up and later faces legal and parental repercussions. The program could retain its dramatic tension while modeling a socially acceptable option in the teenager’s world.”

Change Media Intake, Change Everything Else

Strasburger, who researches media’s effects on children and adolescents at the University of New Mexico, also wants to promote media literacy, but finds it difficult to convince physicians, parents, and teachers that the issue should take priority. “When I consulted with the National Parent Teacher Association,” he says, “its leaders had a hundred concerns on their list, and media literacy was nowhere near the top. They wanted to talk about obesity, eating disorders, and bullying, but didn’t realize that media affect all those problems. Many parents and teachers believe media have a minor influence. That might have been true when they were growing up, but it sure isn’t the case now.”

Poussaint adds that parents should play an important role. “Parents need to watch television with their children and explain what’s make-believe,” he says. “Commercials are especially insidious, because children don’t begin to understand the persuasive intent of ads until about age eight. Commercials also pit children against parents. Television tells children a particular candy bar will make them happy and, when parents refuse to allow it, the children see their parents as denying them this happiness.”

Strasburger says some of this work can be done in school. “We need to teach kids skepticism about advertising and television programming,” he says. “They should understand, for example, why a commercial or show airs when it does. We already have a system in place for teaching media literacy: sex and drug education programs in schools. Both could incorporate media literacy, and teachers could take the lead.”

Medical Professionals should lead the Charge Against Media

Studies have suggested that 10 to 30 percent of violence in society can be chalked up to the impact of media violence, says Strasburger. “That’s a nice big chunk we can do something about.” And by “we,” he means doctors.

Until improved high-tech approaches go live, physicians can help children develop healthy media habits through a low-tech approach: conversation. “Physicians aren’t saying enough to parents,” Rich says. “We need to educate doctors to educate parents that media matter.” He adds that many parents don’t know that the American Academy of Pediatrics has established guidelines that recommend no televisions, video games, or Internet access in children’s bedrooms; no screen media for children under two; and no more than two hours of educational television a day for children older than two.

If most parents don’t know the recommendations, they certainly don’t know the reasoning behind them. “In the first 18 to 24 months of life, the brain is developing rapidly, primarily in response to environmental stimuli,” Strasburger says. “Stimuli that optimize the development of brain architecture include personal interactions, motor skills practice, and problem-solving activities. And the best way to teach these skills is not through screen media.”

“Physicians need to encourage parents to interact with kids while watching television,” Poussaint says. “Parents come home from work and turn on the news without thinking. Kids see images of the war in Iraq without anyone addressing their fears.”

“What disturbs me most is that my fellow pediatricians don’t seem to get it,” Strasburger says. “Media cut across every public health concern that they have for their patients: obesity, eating disorders, attention disorders, violence, sex, and drug use. Yet while they worry about obesity, pediatricians don’t realize the significance of media. The reality is that media play a huge role in determining if a child will become overweight; obesity has been linked conclusively with television ads and time spent in front of a screen.” Strasburger discovered that his own heavier patients watch three to five hours of television a day. When they take him up on his suggestion to adopt a dog and walk it one hour each day, they lose significant weight.

But change can happen only when doctors perceive content and misuse of media as a root health problem, Strasburger says. “I have several theories about why pediatricians put media at the bottom of their lists,” he says. “They may not watch much television themselves. They may know television from a kinder, gentler era. Or possibly they may be so focused on helmet use, immunizations, and developmental milestones they can’t squeeze another discussion into an examination. Of course, they may just be tired of being browbeaten by academics like me.”

Parents, who themselves are likely desensitized to violence through media, may also feel browbeaten—by the challenges of careers, caretaking, and commuting. But counsel from a trusted source—a pediatrician—could make a big difference, Strasburger says. “Giving such advice can take less than a minute. Ask just two questions: How much screen time does your child have per day? And, is there a television set in your child’s bedroom?”

What are your thoughts?

I find this article fascinating. This article attempts to raise greater awareness on how much media has an impact on many pedatric health and social issues. It urges medical professions to look at the data available, consider all the evidence and not be afraid to think outside the box by tackling one of roots of these issues: media.

• What are your thoughts? Do you agree or disagree?
• Which section struck you the most?
• In your experience, have you seen the influence of media play out your life? Have stories to share?

Related posts:

1. Sexualization of Girls in Media – New Report
2. Children Media Consumption: 7.5 Hours a Day
3. The Secret Life of the American Teenager – Sex Obsessed ABC “Family Channel”

Google still reigns the search world with 65% search share (data from comScore Oct). Yahoo currently holds shy of 19% search share though that figure is expected to rise once the Yahoo/ Microsoft deal is complete.

You’ll find the data quite revealing about what our culture truly cares about.

Note that these are searches on Yahoo & Bing. This does not include Google.

The Top 10 Searches in 2009 (Yahoo)

Top 10 Overall Searches for 2009

1. Michael Jackson (Celebrity)
2. Twilight (Movie)
3. WWE (TV – Wrestling)
4. Megan Fox (Celebrity)
5. Britney Spears (Celebrity)
6. Naruto (TV – Cartoon)
7. American Idol (TV)
8. Kim Kardashian (Celebrity)
9. NASCAR (Sport)
10. Runescape (Game)

Top 10 Mobile Searches for 2009

1. Megan Fox
2. Mobile Games
3. Michael Jackson
4. Movies
5. Rihanna
6. Mail
7. Lady Gaga
8. NFL
9. Ringtones
10. iPhone

Top 10 Economy-Related Searches for 2009

1. Coupons
2. Unemployment
3. Stimulus Plan
4. Cash for Clunkers
5. Student Loans
6. IRS Refund
7. Foreclosures
8. Government Jobs
9. Bernard Madoff
10. Health Care Bill

Top Obama Searches for 2009

1. Obama Inauguration
2. Obama Biography
3. Obama Speech
4. Obama Stimulus Plan
5. Obama Family
6. Obama Health Care Reform
7. Obama Approval Ratings
8. Obama Facebook
9. Obama Overseas (a roundup of his numerous travels)
10. Obama Dramas (a roundup of controversies)

Top 10 Celebrity Farewell Searches for 2009

1. Michael Jackson
2. Farrah Fawcett
3. Patrick Swayze
4. Natasha Richardson
5. Jett Travolta
6. Billy Mays
7. David Carradine
8. Steve McNair
9. Jade Goody
10. Ted Kennedy

Top 10 Sudden-Fame Searches for 2009

1. Jon & Kate Gosselin
2. Erin Andrews
3. Susan Boyle
4. Kris Allen & Adam Lambert
5. Nadya Suleman
6. Carrie Prejean
7. Governor Mark Sanford
8. Portuguese Water Dog
9. Falcon Heene
10. Sonia Sotomayor

The Top 10 Searches in 2009 (Bing)

10. Jaycee Dugard: National News. Jaycee was kidnapped in 1991 and was found on August 2009.

9. Billy Mays: Passed away in June 2009. Famous pitchman.

8. Jon and Kate Gosselin: Their fallout in their marriage was huge news in 2009. Former stars of Jon and Kate Plus

7. Cash for Clunkers: US government program to replace less fuel efficient vehicles with newer, more fuel-economic cars.

6. Patrick Swayze: Famous Actor who passed away in September 2009.

5. Farrah Fawcett: Famous Actress who passed away in June 2009.

4. Stock Market

3. Swine Flu: Huge health concerns in 2009 over this virus.

2. Twitter

1. Michael Jackson: Pop icon, his passing in June was huge news. The internet went wild – never has the world seen such a huge response online.

Very interesting to see Yahoo is more media centric than bing. Part of the reason is that Yahoo is also defined as a PORTAL than a SEARCH ENGINE. A PORTAL is a site someone visits to access all their information (news, mail, sports, finance, weather etc).

• Do any of these search rankings surprise you?
• How do you feel about the fact that the highest search terms are mostly about celebrities? (Yahoo: 4 of top 10 searches are celebrity related)
• What does this say about our culture?

Related posts:

1. Top 10 Fastest Rising Google Searches in 2011
2. Kids Consuming More Online Content
3. Bias of American Media – Influence of Media Money

Average American watches 153 Hours of TV & online 68 Hours per Month

A new report for the Nielsen Company reported that in September 2009, the average U.S. Internet user spent approximately 68 hours online per month. The figure may not seem all that staggering, but consider this: The average American watches 153 hours of television per month (1Q 2009) [Nielsen's A2M2 Three Screen Report].

2 Hours per day online. 3 Hours per day TV. Just between those two mediums that is 5 hours per day spent in front of a TV or a cruising the internet. An average American is also exposed to an hour worth of TV ads every single day! Everyone should be familiar with how the media influences and shapes our views both from childhood and throughout our adulthood. Whether it is overall happiness or direct issues such as sex and pregnancy, media has such a power influence on our outlook on life. Thus the rising trend of media engagement is very alarming.

Online Usage Statistics – 68 Hours Per Month? How?

Online Usage Statistics – Where are users going?

Online Users visits almost 2700 websites and spends about a minute per site. The average user spent 1 hour and 53 minutes a month on Google and 3 hours and 8 minutes on Yahoo. Users also average 5 hours and 24 minutes on Facebook.

Media Consumption up across the board

Ameericans are also increasing in their media consumption across most mediums. Hours spent watching TV is at an all time high. 153 hours in 1Q and 141 Hours in 2Q – both all time highs compared to past years. The number of people watching mobile video is up 70% from last year.

Other Interesting Media Consumption Facts and Trends

• Average U.S. home in 2009 has 2.5 people but 2.86 television sets.
• 54% of American homes had 3 or more TV sets at home.
• Mobile video viewing has increased 70% in 2009 versus 2008.

Let us know your thoughts!

• What are your first thoughts about the sheer number of ours spent watching TV and on the internet?
• Do you find this alarming as well?
• How long do you think it will take for Internet Use to Catch up to TV?
• What media medium do you use the most? How many hours are you on the Internet?

Related posts:

1. Children Media Consumption: 7.5 Hours a Day
2. Kids Consuming More Online Content
3. Late Night Internet Statistics: Online Videos, Games & Chat

Wu Fei (吴非), is a school teacher who often contributes to several different newspapers and textbooks. She maintains a blog that covers issues in contemporary education. Utilizing the movie Schindler’s List she wrote a post discussing the need to be careful in the way we expose children to the tragedies of human history and the evil of humanity. She believes there needs to be an emphasis on kindness and understanding or these cruelties can be taken the wrong way.

Personally, I really like the post, because it indirectly brings up the issue of our ever fading sensitivity to what we should be viewing with disgust and shame. That is media’s influence at it’s best.

I’ve pasted the entire translation below.
Credit to Danwei for the translation.

Unendurable Brutality

by Wu Fei

The script to Schindler’s List has been selected for inclusion in a middle school textbook.* From the standpoint of both language arts and humanities education, this is a necessary step forward. Secondary education should make students aware that the history of human civilization contains such instances of violence against civilization and humanity.

However, I’ve heard that there are teachers who have watched Schindler’s List ten or more times, and this is something that I can’t understand. I’ve watched it once, and although there were some plot points I wasn’t too clear on, there’s no way I’d watch it again: I don’t want to put myself through another round of emotional torment, and my health won’t allow me to watch it again, even if it is a modern classic. Massacres, beatings, abuse, stripping people of all their dignity, forcing them to live like domestic animals, all came out of the same nation that produced Goethe and Beethoven. The desecration of human dignity and mockery of civilization in that human tragedy is truly breathtaking. For me, the movie is unlike other classic art that I can revisit over and over without tiring.

I detest war and detest killing, and hate even more when killing is turned into some kind of game or entertainment. I’ve never been interested in watching a decapitation, even one that is necessary to soothe the people’s anger. In China, watching a decapitation may not be a way to “soothe anger”; more often, it is a demonstration of — or a training in — disregard for life. I believe that one who is not a professional engaged in that line of work or a scholar researching it should not repeatedly watch that sort of film. I have long expressed my ire at the TV stations, under the control of propaganda departments at all levels, that continually broadcast bloody, violent shows.

In 1983,* Network News aired the execution of an official’s son in Hangzhou: a shot rang out, and a man crumpled to the ground, yet this clip did nothing to placate my “anger.” Instead, it shocked me: how can you let children sitting in front of the TV see real scenes of someone being killed? Fortunately, from then on there were no similar news clips. In Iraq under Saddam, and in other authoritarian countries, children are compelled to watch executions in person in what is apparently called “education.” In China, it used to be “kill one to scare one hundred,” public decapitations, and heads hanging atop the city wall. Just one hundred years ago, the capital’s execution ground could still be placed in a bustling place like the Caishikou vegetable market, and the entire city crowded round to watch. But a people that delights in watching decapitations has no dignity, nor does it have a future.

The “learn from Lei Feng” campaign in 1964 had a whole set of slogans, and one that remains in my memory went, “Treat the enemy as ruthlessly as the bitter winter.” Then came the Cultural Revolution, during which I witnessed all kinds of “ruthlessness,” in which not a single one of the targets was the “enemy” of those holding the guns. And when you recall those decades of bitter experiences, you will discover that in all kinds of “campaigns,” most of the “enemies” that were exterminated in the flesh – the vast majority, even – were innocent people, or at least not deserving of death.

Our education, particularly early education for children and young people, should do as much as possible to imbue them with kindness and charity; whatever happens, we cannot let our children become excited at the scent of blood. Educators ought to keep this in mind: the next generation must keep in mind that human history contains all of those abominable pages. If we have no education in humanity, humanitarianism, and human conscience, if we do not reflect on our own people’s history of education, then the barbarism will repeat itself in all kinds of different ways, regardless of how many years of so-called glorious civilization your nation has. I recently had a discussion with professor Du Wentang, a scholar of German history, about how a period of Nazism took hold of Germany, of all countries. Du said that this was precisely the issue: a nation that believed its people to be superior, its culture far too grand, and that looked down on all other peoples, was what let so many ordinary Germans be bewitched by Hitler.

I am not evading that bloody, fiery past – I couldn’t avoid it even if I wanted to, for it plagues me like a nightmare. Iris Chang’s suicide is understood by very few people, I suspect. A woman who had put all of her energies toward investigating the Japanese invaders and the Nanjing Massacre was unable to rid herself of the images of barbaric cruelty. Perhaps she could not believe that such evil could exist in the world, and that utterly destroyed her formerly peaceful life. Their cruelty went beyond simply killing people; they smeared their cruelty onto people’s memories. To defend justice, the upright had to pay an enormous price. This is the reason we must abhor fascism. Every time I see people online clamoring to “kill the Japanese,” “bathe Tokyo in blood,” and on and on, I get the sense that humanity and humanitarianism is lacking in education. In the 20th Century, militarist Japan and Nazi Germany left behind for humanity a shameful memory, and other totalitarian states have likewise trampled on human dignity. Fascism will bring harm to humanity wherever it exists. No matter what, we cannot permit another page of barbarism in the pages of Chinese education, we cannot have further education in heartless cruelty.

Mo Luo wrote a short piece called “Those People Have Become People,”* a story that includes a reflection on rationality and a call to conscience. The short piece has touched many young people. This is the kind of education we need. After the Second World War, people did not adopt the methods of the Nazis or the Japanese invaders to pay back the war criminals, an eye for an eye, for while ruthless beasts stood on one side, humans were standing on the other.

So that no one will be subject to “ruthless cruelty” ever again: this is the educator’s mission.

- Wu Fei’s Blog (Chinese)

What has happened to our Sensitivity?

One thing that really strikes me is the fact that Wu is very disturbed by what she sees in the Schindlers list, as well other visuals of human cruelty. In our media driven culture, we’ve lost this kind of sensitivity to violence, sex, coarse language, among other things. We are so saturated by violent movies and TV shows that a scene that once would have disgusted us and emotionally drained us, no longer has the same kind of affect.

We see a person getting shot in the head, and it’s just another scene in a movie. “Come on what is the big deal?” We see epic wars where thousands are slaughtered yet we don’t flinch. “It’s a war movie, what do you expect?” We see explicit sex scenes, and suddenly it’s artistic or just part of the film. From our early days of childhood, we are constantly bombarded by such images that it becomes the norm. Where has our sensitivity gone?

• What are your thoughts about the deadening of our sensitivity?
• How has media shaped our minds to become numb to these things?
• Do you think Wei is overreacting to Schindler’s List?

Related posts:

1. Children Media Consumption: 7.5 Hours a Day
2. Powerful Impact of Media on Children
3. Study Links Pregnancy with Watching Sexy TV Shows

Pornography Influence on Teens

A recent research study, conducted by Cyber Sentinel, of 1,000 teenagers showed that the average teenager spends 87 hours a year looking at porn. That is equivalent of 1 hour and 40 minutes a week browsing for pornography.

What other topics did the teenagers search for online?

• 31 hours a week looking at soft pornography, plastic surgery, family planning, emotional support and dieting.
• 1 Hour 8 Minutes on cosmetic surgery sites on procedures like breast augmentation and collagen implants.
• Teens also go online to find information on pregnancy, contraceptives, sex and weight loss.

“The alarming thing about this research is that it shows that teenagers are obviously exploring all sorts of topics as a result of modern-day pressures. For instance, pressure to emulate celebrity standards of beauty is resulting in teens spending a significant amount of time researching cosmetic surgery.” – Ellie Puddle, Marketing Director of Cyber Sentinel

A piece of statistic that is alarming about this study is that teenagers were left alone to surf the internet for an average of 2 hours a day. Without adult supervision and with the freedom to do as one please, it is no wonder teenagers are easily able to access pornography.

The effects of pornography on teenagers are well documented through numerous studies and cases. A recent study from the journal CyberPsychology and Behavior showed that exposure to pornography leads teenagers to lose their virginity at a much younger age. They were also more likely to initiate oral sex as they imitate what they see on screen.

What other effects have been found to be linked with viewing pornography?

• Rise in STD levels
• Higher Teenager Pregnancies Rates
• Sexually active earlier

“The internet is having some kind of accelerant effect, influencing and changing behavior. Males are having oral sex and losing their virginity much younger when they are exposed to pornography, sometimes by a good three or four years for oral sex or two years for their virignity.” – Shane Krauss, Psychologist

I See, I Do – Teens Desire to Imitate Sexual Acts seen in Porn

In one study of 600 people junior high school and older, found 91% of males and 82% of females were already exposed to hard core pornography. 66% of of those males and 40% of the females reported wanting to try some of the sexual acts they saw in the pornographic material. 31% of the males and 18% of the females went through with it and did some of the things they saw.

Pornography has a way to take extreme sexual acts and make it seem more normal which unfortunately has led to the spread of many STD related disease. Unfortunately, many men end up getting their sexual information and cues from pornography. Especially the message that sex without responsibility is acceptable and desirable.  The results?

Venereal diseases such as chlamydia of the eye had been spread by men coercing partners to perform sexual acts they view in pornography. Rise in oral sex has also led to an increase in the number of mouth, throat and tongue cancers caused by the STD papilloma.

• 1 in 4 teenagers in the US acquire a sexually transmitted disease every year
• 3 Million cases of teenage STD each year.

Unfortunately the initial exposure to pornography at an early age continues to affect the viewer for the rest of their lives. One study showed that among nearly 1000 addicts, 90% of men and 77% of women reported that pornography was significant in their addictions.

Also the images a person sees will forever be seared into the minds of the viewer.

Other deterimental effects of pornography such as demeaning degradation of women, links to higher aggression, violent coercion, rape, and molestation will be covered in a later post.

Related posts:

1. Study Links Pregnancy with Watching Sexy TV Shows
2. Are you Unhappy? Stop Watching TV! Go Socialize
3. Downloading TV and Watching Video Online Biggest Gainers in 2008

Media Influence on Children - Marketing Power

“The advertising and marketing industry spends over $17 billion a year on shaping our children’s identities and desires.”

Below is an excellent article discussing the influence of media and money in “commodifying” of children in our modern culture. The article itself is very long so I’ve excerpted pieces of it below with a link at the bottom to the original source. Enjoy!

As we face difficult economic times, everyone is wondering how are we going to bounce back? What can be done? In all the pain and sufferings we are facing, perhaps we should stop and ask ourselves, is there something we can learn from all this? Is there something we could change? The article asks “What kind of society and future do we want for our children given how obviously unsustainable and exploitative the now failed market-driven system has proven to be?”

In a society that measures its success and failure solely through the economic lens of the Gross National Product (GNP), it becomes difficult to define youth outside of market principles determined largely by criteria such as the rate of market growth and the accumulation of capital. The value and worth of young people in this discourse are largely determined through the bottom-line cost-benefit categories of income, expenses, assets and liabilities. The GNP does not measure justice, integrity, courage, compassion, wisdom and learning, among other values vital to the interests and health of a democratic society.

“Subject to an advertising and marketing industry that spends over $17 billion a year on shaping children’s identities and desires, American youth are commercially carpet-bombed through a never-ending proliferation of market strategies that colonize their consciousness and daily lives.”

Children once was perceived as important social investments, innocent children we needed to protect as they would one day be the moral foundations of our society. Our culture protected them. Businesses wouldn’t dare objectify them or treat them like any other commodity. Yet time has changed dramatically in the last couple decades. It has moved from a culture of social protection to a culture of commodification. Now children from a young tender age, grow up in a culture that objectifies their value taking away any sense of moral agency.

Media Influence and Advertising from an Early Age

At age one, she’s watching Teletubbies and eating the food of its “promo partners” Burger King and McDonald’s. Kids can recognize logos by eighteen months, and before reaching their second birthday, they’re asking for products by brand name. By three or three and a half, experts say, children start to believe that brands communicate their personal qualities, for example, that they’re cool, or strong, or smart. Even before starting school, the likelihood of having a television in their bedroom is 25 percent, and their viewing time is just over two hours a day. Upon arrival at the schoolhouse steps, the typical first grader can evoke 200 brands. And he or she has already accumulated an unprecedented number of possessions, beginning with an average of seventy new toys a year

Targeting Children with Rising Purchasing Power

American Children between 12 and 19.
2000: 31 Million Kids controlled 155 billion Consumer Dollars.
2004: 33.5 Million Kids controlling 169 billion in Consumer Dollars.
That is equivalent to $91 per week per kid. Tremendous spend growth in only 4 years.

In 2002: Children 4-12 years old.
4-12 years olds: $30 Billion in Personal Spending
12-19 year olds: $170 Billion in Personal Spending

Children are big spenders, but also assert huge influence on parental purchases of over $670 billion a year.

Where is the Crossing the Line? Do people Notice?

Market strategists are increasingly using sexually charged images to sell commodities, often representing the fantasies of an adult version of sexuality. For instance, Abercrombie & Fitch, a clothing franchise for young people, has earned a reputation for its risque catalogues filled with promotional ads of scantily clad kids and its over-the-top sexual advice columns for teens and preteens; one catalogue featured an ad for thongs for ten-year-olds with the words “eye candy” and “wink wink” written on them.

Full Article: Commodifying Kids

Related posts:

1. Powerful Impact of Media on Children
2. Children See, Children Do. Media & Parents
3. Who Regulates Online Advertising & Marketing to Children?

TV Media Consumption

When the subjects were asked to recall their media consumption behaviors, “people underestimated the amount of time they spent with TV by a substantial amount,” about 25 percent on average. – Mr. Wakshlag

• Average Americans are exposed to 61 minutes of TV ads and promotions every day.
• An Average Adult are exposed to some form of digital screen (TV, GPS, Cellphones, Computers) for 8.5 hours a day.
• Computer usage has supplanted radio as the second most common media activity

These are some of the statistics found by the Council for Research Excellence, formed by the Nielsen Company. The $3.5 million dollar study was started to determine whether media companies needed new ways to measure media. Ball State University’s Center of Media Design conducted the study and called it the largest observational look at media usage ever conducted. Rather than surveys, researches shadowed 350 people (over 18 years of age) and recorded their behavior in 10 second increments for 952 days.

Consistent Exposure to Media among All Ages
They found that the number of minutes exposed to advertising was consistent among all the age groups other than 45-54 year olds who spend on average an extra hours more in front of the screen.

“It flies in the face of conventional wisdom, of course, which tells us that the younger cohorts apparently spend more time with screen-based media,” said Michael Bloxham, a director of the center at Ball State.

Television is still King of Media
The data reaffirms much of what was found in the past, that television remains by far the dominant medium for video viewing which is a comforting thought for the television industry. The media study found that the average adult was exposed to a little over 5 hours a day of live TV every day.

“Even though people have the opportunity to watch video on their computers and cellphones, TV accounts for 99 percent of all video consumed in 2008,” Mr. Bloxham said. “Even among the 18-to-24-year-olds, it was 98 percent.”

Differences in Media Consumption by Age Groups
However for the younger viewers, there are some indicators that the web is having an influence on media consumption. 18 to 24 year olds watch the least amount of live TV among all age groups at 3.5 hours a day. Among all age groups they spend the most time in watching online videos (5.5 minutes a day) and text messaging (29 minutes a day).

When you get slightly older at 25 to 34, this group spends the most time watching DVDs.

Ages 35 to 44? Spend more time on the Web than other groups (74 minutes a day)
Ages 45 to 54? Spends the most time on e-mail.
Age 65+? Watch the most live TV.

Usage of Digital Video Recorders for TV Viewing

More than 30 percent of households now own digital video recorders. This allows them to fast-forward through ads and pick and choose what they want to watch. The study found that the average American watches 15 minutes of TV using a DVR per day.

Everyone underestimated time they spent watching TV
The study showed similar statistics as past studies by Nielsen but one interesting note is that the researches found that people remembered watching less TV then they actually did.

When the subjects were asked to recall their media consumption behaviors, “people underestimated the amount of time they spent with TV by a substantial amount,” about 25 percent on average, Mr. Wakshlag said.

The “social stigma” that causes some to under report is the idea that they may be seen as a “couch potato”. However for some people there is no such social stigma, in fact they consider the ability to talk about some show or game is useful social currency.

Related posts:

1. Powerful Impact of Media on Children
2. Are you Unhappy? Stop Watching TV! Go Socialize
3. Study Links Pregnancy with Watching Sexy TV Shows

Secret Life of the American Teenager

Influence of Sexual TV Programming on Teenagers

“This is the strongest evidence yet that the sexual content of television programs encourages adolescents to initiate sexual intercourse and other sexual activities. The impact of television viewing is so large that even a moderate shift in the sexual content of adolescent TV watching could have a substantial effect on their sexual behavior.”

This article discusses two new programs on ABC called “The Secret Life of the American Teenager” and “Greek”. ABC has traditionally known as a “family channel” have new programs that centers around sex themes for high schoolers and college students.

A high-school guidance counselor agrees to change a student’s schedule so that he is more likely to meet a girl who will have sex with him. A cheerleader breaks up with her boyfriend after discovering that he accepted oral sex from the school tramp. A good-girl French horn player discovers she is pregnant after a one-night stand at band camp and debates with a friend whether or not to terminate the pregnancy.

Sound like the kind of racy fare one might see on HBO or its slightly tamer cousin, the CW? Think again. The previous scenes come from The Secret Life of the American Teenager, a hit show on ABC Family that is changing the network’s image and may change parents’ minds on whether to allow their children to watch the channel.

According to the ratings, most parents aren’t concerned. The show, which focuses on the romantic entanglements of a pregnant 15-year-old girl and her friends, has given ABC Family its biggest audience yet, with nearly 4 million viewers per episode. This is millions more than the CW’s much-hyped teen drama Gossip Girl draws in, despite the fact that ABC Family broadcasts in far fewer homes. Teen viewers also crowned Secret Life with “Choice Summer TV Show” at the 2008 Teen Choice awards. Yet many argue that the show’s material is hardly appropriate entertainment for the 12- to 17-year-old viewers it attracts.

With episodes showing teens in bed together and frank discussion of masturbation and internet porn, the content is so adult, it prompted one Huffington Post critic to quip, “If that’s family programming, what would non-family programming look like? Frontal nudity?” But network executives claim that Secret Life isn’t pushing the envelope so much as staying right in step with real teen experiences.

ABC still claiming to be a Family Channel
ABC has historically been known as a family channel, a network safe for families to watch together during prime time hours. However the two new programs have raised huge concerns due to it’s heavy sexual content. Disney who owns ABC has released very peculiar ratings such as 18-34 and 12-34 in order to perhaps avoid any controversy of rating the show as a “teenager” show. Surprised? Their other show “Greek” is centered around college freshmen pledging into fraternities and sororities engaging in casual sex with a general lighthearted comedic attitude.

“It’s kind of a misnomer to call ABC Family a family channel,” said Michele MacNeal, head of a local branch of the Parents Television Council. “When you call something ‘family,’ it gives the impression that it’s safe for all members of the family, even young children.”

Sexual Content on TV impacting Teenager Behavior
With sexual content on TV doubling in the past few years, there has been many studies conducted in order to measure the increase in sexual programming to teenager behavior. Not surprisingly, the studies conducted by independent research groups show that sexual content does impact behavior of its viewers.

According to research conducted by the independent, nonprofit firm RAND, watching television programs with sexual content not only makes teens more likely to engage in sex, but also increases the likelihood of pregnancy. A 2008 study published in the Journal of Pediatrics asked 2,000 12- to 17-year-olds to keep track of the television shows they watched that contained sexual content. Those who watched a high amount of such programming were twice as likely to get pregnant or to get someone else pregnant.

Noting that sexual content on TV has doubled in recent years, behavioral scientist Anita Chandra who led the study commented, “Watching this kind of sexual content on television is a powerful factor in increasing the likelihood of a teen pregnancy.” This held true even when factors like parental involvement and economic status were accounted for. “We found a strong association. . . . Even when we removed all the other factors,” Chandra stated. “We still saw a compelling link between a high exposure to sexual content on television and teen pregnancies.”

A previous study by the RAND organization also found that teens who watch such programming are twice as likely to begin engaging in sexual intercourse in the following year as those who don’t. And it doesn’t matter whether the programs actually depict sexual behavior or merely talk about it—according to the research, both types impact teens’ sexual behavior.

Said Rebecca Collins, the psychologist who headed the 2004 study, “This is the strongest evidence yet that the sexual content of television programs encourages adolescents to initiate sexual intercourse and other sexual activities. The impact of television viewing is so large that even a moderate shift in the sexual content of adolescent TV watching could have a substantial effect on their sexual behavior.

Full Article

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS:

• Do you watch The Secret Life of the American Teenager?
• Do you think it’s influence is negative or positive of teenagers?
• What life lessons (or norms) does the show teach? Have examples?
• Do you think by watching numerous shows similar to this would have an impact in the way a person behaves or considers norm?

Related posts:

1. Vampire Influence on Teenager Self Identity
2. Sexualization of Girls in Media – New Report
3. Children Media Consumption: 7.5 Hours a Day

“…I wasn’t too happy with ads for erectile-dysfunction drugs popping up every 15 minutes whenever I watched a football game with my daughters in the room.” ––Barack Obama, The Audacity of Hope, 2006

Common Sense Media released a study on the content of TV ads & commercials shown during NFL game broadcasts. They studyed nearly 60 games covering 180 hours of game time coverage. Within that period there were nearly 6,000 commercials and the easy conclusion was that it is impossible to watch a single game without visually taking in messages of sex, violence or Viagra.

The CEO of Common Sense Media, James Steyer said “Nearly 5.3 million kids watch football each week, yet one in six of the ads shown during the broadcasts features content that’s wildly inappropriate for kids — that’s every other commercial break…”

“The game of football is great fun for families, but it can be really awkward for parents when they have to explain erectile dysfunction on a Sunday afternoon, or have to dive for the remote during violent promos for network shows. I know we speak for millions of football fans and parents everywhere when we say this situation is really getting ridiculous.“ — James Steyer CEO of Common Sense Media

Some statistics of note found in the report:
• 500 of the advertisements involved significant levels of violence, including gun fights, explosions, and murders
• 300 of the ads were for alcohol
• 80 of the advertisements involved significant levels of sexuality, including scenes about prostitution and strippers
• 44.7% of the violent or sexual advertisements were promotions by the networks for their own programs
• 40% of the games included advertisements for erectile-dysfunction drugs

Ronnie Lott, former San Francisco 49er and a member of the Pro Football Hall of Fame, says “Football teaches kids a lot of great lessons… but families… should be able to watch these games without worrying that their kids will be bombarded with adult ads… ”

Pro football is well known to have cross appeal for a family. On Sunday afternoons it is a given that millions of families sit around the TV to root for their NFL teams. Most programs show during traditional family programming hours, however the ads tend to be catered towards adults.

“My son was walking around one day singing the Viagra jingle. He’s 9!” – Mother

Clean Cut Media – More Thoughts:
I think it is very important to take this up another level. I would dare say that these ads are not only inappropriate for kids but they are having a profound impact on our culture and thus to all adults. We may not want to admit it but media is feeding particular messages about sex, alcohol and violence not only to the younger generation but it has a clear influence in the way we [Adult's] view the world. How is it that the networks are able to get away with such crude advertising? Because as a whole our culture has become more and more lenient on what is considered inappropriate and what is considered the norm. Scantily dressed women dancing in a beer commercial – it is so common place an average adult wouldn’t budge to cover their eyes or flip the channel especially if a child isn’t present, though many wouldn’t budge even if a child WAS present. Infomercials about shows where the characters sleep with every other character, have one night stands, live a seemingly glamorous and fun life – don’t you think these images have a profound impact in the way we view sex and how our lives should be? How about young women who only see skinny beautified celebrities and models on TV? Won’t that impact their self-image? More than 75% of girls in jr.high school already don’t like their body image! Does it seem surprising that depression is at record levels when all we see are exciting and happy lives both in commercials and in sitcoms?

It makes it extremely difficult to try to raise girls who have a positive self esteem and appropriate values when you have constantly explain why some people think it is perfectly normal to appear scantily clad on national television – Mother

Stop and Vote!
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

Take Action
Want to do something about it? You can email the NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and let him know your thoughts about the commercials.

Email Commissioner Roger Goodell Here

Common Sense Media is a nonpartisan, nonprofit resource that helps families and educators teach kids how to be safe and smart in today’s 24/7 media world.

Study PDF Here

Common Sense Media – Example Video of Superbowl Commercials
There is a video on the common sense media website and on youtube that they created with snapshots of the type of commercials that are shown. I decided against posting it here because I don’t want to promote the message whatsoever. But just imagine ridiculous violence, glorification of movie characters shooting with style, sex imagery, viagra commercials, commercials telling people to drink beer for the holidays with lot of happy people and you get the picture.

• What is your opinion in the appropriateness of sports broadcast TV ads?
• Do you think the commercials only affect just the younger generation or adults as well?
• Would you ever consider shutting the TV off during infomercials or would that be too hard?
• What do you make of the fact that there are commercials you would watch without hesitation that you would never let your children watch?

Share your thoughts below!

Related posts:

1. Creativity: Superbowl TV Commercials
2. Just Inappropriate for Kids or Just Inappropriate
3. Powerful Impact of Media on Children