Last year (YiB 2009, #5), I went against my better judgment and read Twilight to see what all the fuss was about. Based on what I’d gleaned from the pop culture currents, I was pretty sure it wasn’t something that was going to appeal to me. And, I was basically right. For many reasons, I didn’t think it was particularly good reading.

However, overcome by boredom, masochistic tendencies, and with more than a little bit of morbid curiosity, this week I read the sequel, New Moon. I thought it was, in a lot of ways, worse than it’s predecessor – short on plot, high on melodrama, with attempts at world-building that felt more like amateurish Underworld fan fiction with a Mary Sue POV than a bestselling pop phenomenon. It also continued, and increased, the anti-feminist and pro-patriarchy themes that continue to make me so uncomfortable.

I recognize that part of this is because these books are simply not written for someone like me. However, as I read this one, I started to maybe develop some theories as to why these works do appeal to so many people.

I imagine that Meyer’s one great success with these books is that she seems to have captured a bit of what I imagine is the essence of what it’s like to be a pre-teen girl. It’s all blustery angsty melodrama at every turn; when her stalkery boyfriend kicks her to the curb (out of love, apparently), Bella wallows in depression for months. It’s exaggerated slightly, but I guess I can see this as being the way the target audience reacts to things – any setback, for some young girls, feels like “the end of the world.” In that regard, I guess a lot of young readers can see themselves in Bella – the fact that the character is pretty much otherwise a blank canvas the reader can paste herself onto only helps this along.

I guess that covers the kids…more troublesome are the so-called “Twilight Moms”: all the women around my age who swoon over the “romance” angle, though they really ought to know better. Despite the fact that the relationships central to this story are clearly not healthy, these women loudly and vehemently hold them up as good examples for which to aspire.

I wonder if their affection doesn’t have more to do with tapping into memories or idealized impressions of youthful infatuation, when not having some random boy’s attention crushed them emotionally, and it’s a little bit of wish fulfillment to imagine themselves as Bella, who’s nothing special, but still has both the golden god and sensitive nature boy both mooning over them. Related to this nostalgia is probably a longing for the potential of youth, when life was full of possibilities, before they got started on their path adulthood and day-to-day tedium.

So, I kind of understand the whys of people enjoying this, but there are implications I’m still terribly uncomfortable with. Paramount is the message it imparts about a woman’s role and place in society. Bella totally defines herself in terms of the man she’s with (or not with); at one point in NM, Bella offers up the following in an attempt to come to terms with Edward leaving her:

It was depressing to realize that I wasn’t the heroine anymore, that my story was over.

It really bothers me that she can’t conceive her life as worth anything without the influence of a man to validate her, but even more that the book continually reinforces this as a valid way of feeling. This isn’t helped by the fact that Bella has no defining characteristics other than her infatuation with Edward; She doesn’t have a life of her own when he’s out of the picture. And Edward, when he’s with her, tends to encourage this dependence on his influence, stalking her “for her own good,” regulating who she associates with, acting generally like a controlling asshole and swooping in to “protect” her from her “baser” urges. Which Bella passively lets him get away with because she “loves” him (read: she’s afraid if she doesn’t please him, he’ll go away and leave her worthless again).

This bit’s actually interesting – one way Meyer almost plays with expectations is that contrary to cliché, Bella’s actually the sexual aggressor in the relationship* – well, not literally sexual, but the whole wanting Edward to “vamp” her while she’s still young and nubile isn’t that hard of a metaphor to grasp**. Edward’s the abstinence vampire gatekeeper here, defying the tradition where the woman are expected to shoulder both the responsibility of remaining chaste and pure while at the same time keeping the man’s impulses in check, because he can’t be expected to do it himself. Expectations are restored however, as Edward’s refusals to do anything in that general area before they’re properly married are portrayed primarily as “oh, silly non-rational woman, let the powerful man make all those difficult decisions for you, Ha!”, restoring the patriarchal party line, thus earning Twilight the seal of approval from conservative authority figures (despite their rejection of other YA fantasy IP) despite the near constant presence of “demonic” elements such as vampires and werewolves** in the text.

There’s probably more there, and a lot of people have written some really good serious pieces (and some pretty funny ones) about it. I don’t have the inclination for more in-depth literary analysis right now.

As I said, this thing just really isn’t for me; I’m not wired to tap into the personal or nostalgic resonance it’s sending out. Also, the characters are bland, the actual composition is shoddy and of what I consider low quality. But mostly, it’s because I can’t get behind the messages inherent in this text so far (not that I expect it gets even worse in the next two volumes, given what I’ve heard). I like my female protagonists a little more empowered, and I’m not comfortable with the worldview that a woman should be totally dependent on a man for anything – I’ve always found it disconcerting when I’ve encountered women who tend to radically shift in personality depending on the man they’re currently with, and seem to have no particular interests independent of the relationship, or outside of certain approved societal constraints (it’s really the same thing – it’s the “man” or it’s “The Man” – some guy or the patriarchy), and also the idea that controlling sorts of men that behave like Edward do aren’t the sorts of partners women really ought to be seeking out.

I do know a lot of people who appear to subscribe to certain pieces this worldview, perhaps that’s why a lot of those same people are really into this series. However, I also know that these aren’t the kind of ideas I can really support in good conscience, and I certainly don’t want my kids, especially my daughters, to ever be told that such a worldview was a good idea.

___________________________

* – this is one area where the producers of the film of the book got something right. Whatever else you can say about Kristen Stewart (I’ve not seen her in much, but I hear The Runaways isn’t bad), she honestly looks like she’s ready to tear Pattinson’s pants off with her teeth through much of that film (that’s probably because she really was going to do exactly that after the scene wrapped and they got back to their trailers); that thing she does where she bites her lip…gotta say, kinda sexy.

** – The most fun you can have with New Moon is to willfully ignore context when Bella teases Edward about how if he won’t [vamp] her, maybe his hot psychic sister will. ♪Bow Chicka Bow Wow♪

*** – Notably, many people have commented on the fact that Meyer vampires, with their sparkling and such, aren’t really vampires. Few people, however, note that Meyer werewolves, lacking the whole “infected with lycanthropy” business and with no connection to lunar cycles, aren’t so much werewolves as they are naturalistic shaman shape-changers or skinwalkers. Why yes, I am a pendant.

So, twelve years. I’ll take it.

I shall always be eternally grateful my best friend agreed to this arrangement so many years ago, and that she continues to put up with me and all my quirks.

Especially those quirks that cropped up this year.

Not much else to say, really, except “thanks.” And this little timely bit from xkcd, which just popped up on Friday, and seemed strangely appropriate:

Returning to hotel living after a couple of weeks does strange things to a person’s sleep cycle.

1. “Baclava” – Arctic Monkeys
2. “Big Big Ugly” – Innocent Nixon
3. “Broken Family” – Julie Schreiber Band
4. “Move On” – The Rentals
5. “Pollution of the Mind” – Miss Kittin
6. “Begin the Begin” – REM
7. “I Pity the Fool” – Molly Lewis
8. “Why Does the Sun Shine?” – TMBG
9. “Hysteric” – Yeah Yeah Yeahs
10. “Your Kisses are Wasted on Me” – The Pipettes

A couple of posts ago, I tore apart a media article which seemed to report results from a scientific study, but really did no such thing, and in the attempt, did it really badly.

This week, I found a good example of a short news report about a research study, and though it appropriate to share. Allow me to shine a light on Science Daily‘s article "Mom’s favoritism tied to depression in adulthood", as reported on July 10, 2010.

I’m not going to say this is a perfect example, but for the format the article is written in, it hits the high points without getting bogged down by a lot of pointless fluff.

What is exactly that makes me call this article better than the one about video games being tied to reckless driving? Here’s a list:

• The study is sourced to the institution where it was conducted, and all the authors are cited, as well as their qualifications.
• The research methodology and project scope are clearly spelled out.
• General findings presented are clearly tied only to the research itself, rather than folk wisdom. Potential outcomes of said research are realistic, and not presented sensationalistically.
• Quotes presented from a proposed "authority" are directly tied to that person’s authority (in this case, the quotations come directly from the author of the study); there’s no "bait and switch" here.
• The story is  based on a press release, though is clearly identified as being sourced to such.   Press-release stories are common, but the acknowledgement is nice.
• The story offers a direct citation of the journal article written about the study, and a link to the abstract if a reader desires more information.

Also, a cool nice-to-have but not-strictly-necessary extra is the fact that the web site provides citations for this article in MLA and APA format in the event a student wishes to reference this article in a paper or report.

Now, to be fair, this article is written for a science-centered news outlet, rather than a local network affiliate, though I’d argue that both are aimed at general audiences. Also, both deal with similar topics, are roughly the same length, and both news outlets use advertising – I believe there’s enough similarities between them to make the comparison.

Clearly, both articles and studies deal with societally relevant topics a good portion of the audience can relate to; however, I believe this one does a much better job of reporting factual, specific information on the topic in a way that is engaging to the reader, without resorting to controversy or manipulative emotional appeals that have little bearing on the actual subject.

I wish this type of reporting were the norm. Sadly, we all know it’s not.

Things are looking an awful lot like that other weekend.

1. “Highly Strung” – Orianthi & Steve Vai
2. “Stuck in a Movie” – The Aquabats
3. “A Certain Romance” – Arctic Monkeys
4. “I’ll Give You My Skin” – Indigo Girls (feat. Michael Stipe)
5. “Kiss Me On The Bus” – The Replacements
6. “You Really Gotta Hold On Me” – She & Him
7. “Whistling in the Dark” – Jonathan Coulton & Paul & Storm
8. “You Wouldn’t Like Me” – Tegan and Sara
9. “Grace Cathedral Hill” – The Decembrists
10. “From Me To You” – The Beatles

______________________

On a completely unrelated note, I seem to have two spambots arguing with each other in my moderation queue…Nice try, but am I really going to believe that two real people named “buy tramadol” and “cialis” from the same IP address are arguing over the intellectual content of the page where I display my PSN trophy card?

At least wait to see if a comment gets past the filter before responding to it…seriously.

Looking at my hit stats for the last month or so, I’m getting a bunch of unfamiliar hits (most of it seems related to all the Doctor Who blogging I’ve been doing lately) from people I’m not necessarily expecting, so I though it might be a good time to sort of re-introduce myself, for what little that’s going to be worth.

Hi.

As you might expect, I’m Chuck, and this is my soapbox, my cry for help, my means of bellowing opinions and random thoughts balefully at the darkness. Sometimes, it helps me to remember what I did this time last year. It is, in short, a blog.

If you’re interested in who I am, I keep a bland, business card sort of site at www.chuck-parker.net, but really, there’s nothing there that you won’t infer from the stuff you’re finding here. The words here are pretty much a direct dump from my cerebral cortex – if you want to know what’s going through my head at a given moment, the site you are currently reading is your best source.

You might also ask about whether I’m on all those fancy social network sites – the answer is yes, I’ve claimed space on several, though rarely use any of them besides twitter, a service I consider myself a big fan of. Feel free to “friend” me on the others, but I honestly don’t find reason to use them much beyond a quick glance now and then.

That’s really about it, really. Enjoy your visit; if something affects you, feel free to comment; I enjoy comments that aren’t from ‘bots trying to sell me penis inflation pills.

We started Saturday with a nice family bike ride to the local farmer’s market to pick up some fresh vegetables – eggplant, sweet corn, basil, and a couple of other bits. Led to some good meals for the weekend, though next time, with the eggplant, i’m going to season italian, but cook asian.

A little more cleaning and some more biking led into Sunday, which was pretty laid back – watched some movies, did some laundry, then headed a little bit south to check out a fireworks display (and spent longer wrangling the car out of the lot afterwards than we spent watching the show). Not a bad time, though. Kids had a good time, even if they were more distracted by the rednecks lighting off little explosions behind us than with the main event.

Monday, being the federal holiday, was a day off as well. After Sunday night’s adventures, I needed some quiet time, so I packed up the bike and rode the trails at the park for a couple of hours first thing, which felt really good. Me, nature, animals (saw an owl in addition to the osprey this time), and a few hikers who had trouble hearing my bike – I guess I need to get a bell, or at least a couple of baseball cards.

A few thoughts on what America means from The Star-Spangled Avenger himself (as transcribed by J. Micheal Straczynski in Amazing Spider-Man #537):

Given that the lettering in that panel above is a little tight, I’m just going to type that whole speech out below so it’s a bit easier to read:

…Doesn’t matter what the press says. Doesn’t matter what the politicians or the mobs say. Doesn’t matter if the whole country decides that something wrong is something right.

This nation was founded on one principle above all else: The requirement that we stand up for what we believe, no matter the odds or the consequences.

When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree besides the river of truth, and tell the whole world–

–No you move.”

Just a little something to think about as you’re out cooking burgers, watching fireworks, buying mattresses at a discount or whatever it is you’re doing to celebrate The Fourth of July.

This week, the title’s been the soundtrack of my life…thanks to some bug the eldest brought back from a girl scout activity. Seriously, it’s not much fun feeling like you’ve got a gorilla using your chest as a combination sofa and trampoline.

Oh well…here’s hoping the weekend is less pleghm-filled.

1. “Love Can Destroy” – The Raveonettes
2. “Voices Carry” – Til Tuesday
3. “MyHope” – Molly Lewis
4. “Bastards of Young” – The Replacements
5. “Machine Joy” – Miss Kittin
6. “This Town” – The Go-Gos
7. “Blackie’s Dead” – Pete Yorn & Scarlett Johansen
8. “Radio Free Europe” – REM
9. “Shoelace” – The Blibbering Humdingers
10. “Dreamin of a Whole Lotta Breakfast” – Rock Sugar

Long-time readers of this space are probably aware of my general cynicism toward broadcast media, mostly to do with the fact that the “news” isn’t really much about disseminating useful information than about selling advertising slots, and with vast swaths of the american public, the most effective ways of raising ratings (to get eyeballs on those advertisements) is through scandal, conflict and manipulation rather than providing reliable, objective, and detailed information.

Because actual information doesn’t necessarily interest most people…it doesn’t sell. As H.L. Mencken famously said, “no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.”

Local news organizations are often the worst, alternately teasing with implied danger and innuendo and manipulating audiences with schmaltz and and emotional appeals…when they aren’t busy disgusing cross-promotional advertising as news reports (a story about a reality show airing during prime time on the affiliated network really isn’t “news”, is it?).

I could go on about this, invoking Kent Brockman and Ron Burgundy, but I’m sure you get my point. To be honest, it’s not a particularly new point – it’s the kind of “water is wet” thing that Ric Romero might report*. However, these last couple of paragraphs about vacuousness in the broadcast media serve as a pretty good introduction to an examination of what I’m reasonably sure is one of the better examples of shoddy reporting I’ve seen in a long time:

I present to you Survey: Video Games Linked To Reckless Driving, reported recently by WCCO in Minneapolis, MN.

Let’s just look at some of the many problems inherent in this report, starting at the beginning:

First of all, what jumped out at me immediately is the fact that the “Survey” in the title, referred to in the article itself as “a new study” or “research” isn’t actually named anywhere. The organization or instutution that did the research is never named, cited, or referenced. I’m going to bet that any researchers working on this particular topic had to cite their sources, why does the reporter get a pass?

Further, “Reasearchers” are mentioned having said “their data should not be taken lightly since car accidents are the number one cause of death in teenagers.” There’s the scandalous checkbox being ticked off, though this might have some authority if the researchers were named.

The next paragraph claims that the “research” was conducted in three different countries, but that doesn’t matter, because the report then mentions “Grand Theft Auto,” which is all anybody’s seeing, because it’s become the ultimate strawman for “scary video game,” and if the scare sticks, the purpose of the piece is fulfilled.

The piece then moves on to equivocation/debate portion, quoting first a “video game player” indicating how GTA is fun, but yeah, involves some recklessness, followed by more unsourced statistics. The other side is represented by Doctor David Walsh, who supports the article’s title almost verbatim. The doctor’s affiliation isn’t provided, though the way the piece is composed, it seems he’s got some authority – did he do the research?

After another unsourced statistical reference about the number of teenage traffic deaths in Minnesota, hitting both the Could This Happen to You? and Local Angle tropes – referencing that 19(!) teenagers had died in car accidents this year thus far, without context, to add to the dramatic presentation.

To add some context, according to statistics from the University of Minnesota, there were 421 TOTAL traffic fatalities in Minnesota in 2009, out of total population (acording to this google search) of around 5.2 million people.

So, four percent of all traffic fatalites are teenagers; though there’s no particular connection between traffic deaths and video game playing, or even whether than the teenagers were driving. Every traffic death is a tragedy to someone, certainly, but it’s not like this is an epidemic or anything; the lack of context implies an urgency that simply isn’t there.

Returning to Doctor David Walsh, we find that he hasn’t actually participated in the research – he’s the founder of the National Institute of Media and the Family, a media watchdog group who (was…they’ve since shut down and reformed with another name) in the business of pointing out content it deems harmful to children in the media. And appearing on TV and selling books…he’s apparently the go-to guy for “video games are bad, mmmkay?” pull quotes.

Not to mention that the ESRB, the software industry’s rating board (which, for example, gave GTA IV the perfectly appropriate rating of M – appropriate for ages 17+) called out his organization for seriously flawed video game reporting, citing innacuracies, misleading statements, flawed research, and ommission of material facts (kind of like, you know, this article). Walsh has also made the claim that the video game industry was promoting cannibalism after seeing a couple of stills from a zombie game. So, an authority without much authority; not that such things are mentioned.

Rounding out the article is the following quote, still unattributed, but nonetheless seems to scuttle the whole thesis:

The findings do not directly link playing video games to reckless driving. They only show an association. Researchers say the impact of playing games like “Grand Theft Auto” is minimal.

So, that’s the article. What was the point? Not to provide information, other than to reinforce unsubstantiated (even by the research allueded to) “conventional wisdom,” with “support” from attention whores with disgraced authority.

It does, however, drum up emotional turmoil in order to draw the eyeballs of parents who are justifiably worried about their children’s safety (but not necessarily in this case), and thus drum up their ad rates, while hoping that nobody notices (or worse, that they never noticed themselves) that the article is essentially content free, even if it mentions research.

It’s almost like a producer or editor decided they needed a controversial video game story, and somebody just assembled this story to hit some emotional notes and everybody’s fretting enough about the totally manufactured controversy to not notice how shoddily constructed the whole thing is.

What’s so sneaky about this whole business, really, is how there is just a nugget of truth to support the claims; nobody’s going to dispute that exposure to inappropriate media won’t have some effect on kids, or adults, for that matter.** The message that parents ought to monitor what their kids are playing, watching, or listening to is an important one (that’s why, for example, I do this with my kids so I know what they’re doing, and can explain or filter out what’s not appropriate for them), so, most people will give pieces like this a pass, never mind that it’s misleading, poorly researched, and written badly.

For me, though, even if it’s a good message, I can’t get behind the mischaracterization and manipulative delivery. Passing on even valuable information under false pretenses isn’t the kind of message I want to pass along.

___________________

* – Romero’s not disingenuous, he’s just severely behind the times, though to be fair, so is most of his audience. And he’s got a good sense of humor about it.

** – I can provide plenty of personal anecdata about this. After I go through a cycle of playing a bunch of Gran Turismo (a very realistic racing sim) for a couple of weeks, when I find myself behind the wheel of a real car, I sometimes feel a small urge to take a corner with the proper racing line, which would definitely cross a yellow line. Doesn’t mean I do, nor does it mean that just because teenagers play GTA despite the rating (which is definitely not a realistic experience), they’re likely to go ahead and start jacking cars, shooting pedestrians, and visiting prostitutes for the health bonus then beating them up to get their money back because the video game influenced them to do so.** If they’re doing so, there’s a bigger problem at work, and it’s going to take a lot more parental involvement to fix it than just taking the video games away. Sadly, there aren’t any simple answers. Sorry.

** * Just like when I was a kid, I didn’t start worshipping Satan or believing I could practice witchcraft because I rolled some dice and drew maps on graph paper. My penchant for footnoting footnotes might be related, however.