Clorox Wipes...

In light of Tuesday's class discussion, I've come to the realization that I am incredibly easily manipulated by consumer products. First, I thought specifically of anti-germ products. Being a germ-aphobe, I readily purchase any cleaning product, antibacterial wipe pack, or bottle of hand sanitizer that catches my eye in a drug store. No matter how many products I have at home, or in my dorm room, I can't stop myself from making the purchase if it is something I haven't seen before, or a "new and improved" version of a product I already own. The process is always the same: I see the product, tell myself to not touch it, have an internal debate in my head about its necessity, and then always end up grabbing it. I scan the label and information for a few minutes, still mentally debating, and all it takes is one picture of a squeaky clean surface, or the phrase, "Kills 99.9% of bacteria!" to push me over the edge. Why do I continue to do this every single time? Every disinfectant product, after all, claims to eliminate "99.9% of bacteria" and that may not even be something you want anymore, now that we know there are so many "good" bacteria you can have in your system. I do it because, as I can now acknowledge, I fall victim to manipulation in every way, shape, and form.

I wondered if, after many talks about it with my classmates, and after Professor Schwartz made us aware of the fact that manipulative forces are always acting around us, I would change my ways. I gave it my best over break, convincing myself that I'd be better off not succumbing to such tactics of society; yet, in class on Tuesday, I found myself thoroughly enjoying flipping through the Free People magazine that Hannah used as her mediated artifact. In my opinion, resisting is simply not worth it--as much as I hate that I'm allowing the media to control me and influence my thinking, it is what I've been trained to do all my life, and most of the time it makes me happy. Maybe I would be better off if I'd never been told to act against manipulation. Isn't ignorance bliss?

The Fantasy of Money

I enjoyed our discussion of the objects presented in class on Tuesday, but one of the problems that I had with the examples that we used is that while they all demonstrated interesting kinds of manipulation, they did so in ways that weren't very fundamental to our thought-processes. It certainly is true that many different advertisements subtly (or not so subtly) influence the way we think, but they are manipulations that we can recognize and, more importantly, ignore if we wish to do so.

As such, I've been trying to find some more fundamental forms of manipulative thought, kinds that we do not readily notice or cannot regularly ignore. And to me, the first example that popped into my head was money.

I've talked to several people who are currently taking economics about there experience, and almost invariably, they have all mentioned their surprise at rediscovering how money actually works. After all, it does objectively seem like quite an odd system. The fact that I can take a small piece of paper into any store in the United States and come out with some thing of real value is somewhat strange- the paper, while quite pretty, has no intrinsic value in of itself. It's value lies solely in the value we attach to it as a nation. Which changes almost constantly, in inflationary terms. Even if you shy away from quantitative reasoning (I am certainly not very good at it), one of the most important lessons that can be gleaned from an economics class is that money works because people believe in it. In lots of cases, this kind of systematic self-manipulation that the country embroils itself in works very well, but its easier to highlight the negative examples; the reason that the stock markets crash is because people expect them to crash, and so they sell their stocks, When they do so, those stocks lose value, fueling the belief that there will be a crash, which then causes more people to withdraw their money, and so on.

I am certainly not claiming that this is the only interesting feature of money that even light training in economics can afford, but it is a startling one, and people often make note of it. It is a form of macroscopic self-manipulation. The system arises out of belief in the system, and can only be maintained as long as belief remains.

To end, a quick speech about humans and belief spoken, strangely enough, by Death the anthropomorphic personification. The clip is from a TV-adaption of the Discword-series book Hogfather by Terry Pratchett, whose books I strongly recommend. The clip is definitely cheesy, but strikes at the heart of what I wanted to explore.

Janelle is Secretly a Writer for The Colbert Report

For a while before taking this class I'd been a bit cynical about the various sources of manipulation in my life.  It’s been fun to talk and think about this more throughout the semester, especially with respect to literature, which I haven’t thought about before.  I found myself worrying a little about all the manipulation, but found comfort in the realization that the best and perhaps only way to rise above the manipulation is simply to acknowledge it.

I remember one of the first days of class we talked about which news sources we thought were most unbiased.  Most people would tend to think CNN is probably the most unbiased, reliable source, and would discount The Colbert Report and The Daily Show as merely comedy sketches.  However, I think it’s pretty impossible for something to be entirely unbiased.  The bias in CNN reporting could be so subtle we can’t even perceive it, which means we are unknowingly being tricked into agreeing with them.  Colbert and Stewart present bias that is so obvious, so transparent, that, in a way, we can see the issues for what they really are.  The bias is so easy to peel away with these shows, making them perhaps a better way than CNN to react to the news in your own way, without being influenced by the way in which it is presented.  Once you know you are being tricked, you can see the situation more clearly.

I think this class, in a way, operates much like the Colbert Report, with my other classes being more CNN or NPR-esque.  It was so blatantly stated from the first day of class that we would be manipulated, but also that it was exactly the point of the class.  Much as the Colbert Report challenges viewers not to trust traditional media, this class encouraged us – through the transparent manipulation in this class – to examine the ways in which we are manipulated by other authority figures in our lives. 

PLEASE SIR MORE OVALTINE

I was going to write a post telling everyone to stop bitching about advertising because it pays for everything (internet, TV shows, social media, etc.), but as I was trying to find support for this statement I found an enlightening article by a professor at The Wharton School of Business about how advertising is going to fail. Interestingly, the reasons he points out are simple enough: people don't trust ads, and people don't want them.
Raise your hand if you've ever actually clicked on anything on the side bar of Google. Maybe like once or twice? Did you buy anything?
I haven't.
 Raise your hand if you've ever actually called an infomercial.
If yes, did you expect it to actually be any good?

As the article points out, people give very little precedent to messages presented to them by an advertiser. Do you like Coke because Coke tells you it tastes great? Do you buy shoes because the shoe company says they're good?
Personally, when I an advertiser tells me something, I instantly feel the need to double check it. As soon as I'm aware of manipulation, it becomes ineffective. When I was a kid, I told my mom not to buy Ovaltine because of a commercial I saw where they slammed Nestle chocolate milk and told me that kids love Ovaltine more. Even though I was eight, I could smell their bullshit.

Everyone knows Ovaltine is gross. Even Google.

So the point is, even though I'd never tried Ovaltine before, I knew they were trying to manipulate me. I instantly rebounded and still hate Ovaltine to this day. I've still never tried it and I still hate it.
Point is: Ovaltine is a failed advertising manipulation. One of many.

I feel like in general, ads are ineffective at manipulating me. And my mom. She watches TV all the time but has acquired a special skill where she doesn't listen to the commercials at all. She tunes out every single one of them.


Here's a list of questions that I have about advertisement and manipulation:
Is any TV advertising subtle enough to actually affect anyone?
Did anyone actually adopt a dog because of Sarah McLaughlin?
At what point does advertising become content? (I'm mostly talking about this Old Spice Ad)
Do you agree with Eric Clemons that advertising is going to fail because people hate it?
Do you actually like Ovaltine?
Do you disagree that the label "As Seen On TV" actually means "Cheap Junk"?
Can you think of an instance in which you have changed your opinion or bought a specific product as the result of advertising?

Sorry about the disconnected blog post. I just have a lot of thoughts.

It Was Clear, Blue, and My Downfall

In this day and age I think that it is painfully obvious what things manipulate us in our everyday lives. We see commercials and advertisements and billboards and slogans that bombard us constantly with this sense of unending want. We are surrounded by people and businesses and images that make us feel like we are missing the next "must-have" product or the newest convenience and the scary part is that we cave. We as a society have caved to awesome selling power that is society. The biggest manipulator out there is oneself.

                We are all victims, and not to say victims as we have all been perpetrated or betrayed, but victims in the sense that we have all been affected. My manipulation came in the form of a water bottle. When the semester started I never carried a Nalgene. I would walk around campus not even thinking about getting a drink or where a water fountain was, not to say that people generally know where water fountains are, or that I was thirsty. Yet, as the semester went on I noticed more and more Nalgenes. At the Climbing Wall where I work they are almost a part of the scenery, everyone who works there has one. So I started carrying one. It was simple and quick and it didn’t really leave me pondering my decision, but it happened. But the beauty of it is that it solved a problem; a problem that had never existed before. I think that is the true heart of manipulation, to create a problem and then to solve it.

Can I Manipulate Myself?

When I was thinking about manipulative forces in my life, I at first thought of all the obvious ones, or the ones that most people are already aware of. Advertising, peers, our school, magazines, books all came to mind. But since the point of this course is to become aware of more forces, I then tried to dig deeper, seek out manipulation where I had not seen it before. If we think of manipulation as a form of influence, then really everyone in my life manipulates me. What I thought about, and am still thinking about, was whether I every am “guilty” of manipulating myself. At first this seemed dumb, but the more I thought about it the more I realized that really most of the beliefs, most of the times I’ve been judged have really been by myself. Usually society plants the idea in your head, but it is in fact our own choice whether to accept it.  Most clothing brands cater to the idea that you can become “more or less beautiful” based on what you wear.  But what I am suggesting is that we could take them manipulation and turn it right back around. When you wear a shirt you don’t really like, or don’t feel comfortable in, you seem less confident. Maybe you look around more at how people are reacting to you, wary of any strange glances. But suppose you took the ugliest outfit you could think of and walked as if you looked the best you had even looked. It could be contagious, you could start to manipulate other people right away. Kind of like fake it till you make it. If you think you look great, you probably consciously or unconsciously act in a way that inspires greatness. What if we turned right back around to clothes designers and said, but yeah, it’s not what you wear but how you wear it? There would be no comeback. Many times someone plants an idea in your head: you have to write this essay; this book is the best book ever written; you have to be more athletic to play hockey than to play baseball. But then we obsess over it, taking them one comment and turning it from a subjective idea to a force of manipulation. We manipulate ourselves when we make every message society sends out ten times more dramatic. So yes, the media will keep trying to enforce their values on us, but we can take it or leave it.

Commercials...

Over Thanksgiving break, my mom and I were watching The Good Wife. During the show, one commercial came on that was particularly upsetting. Currently, American Airlines is advertising how their airline is supporting troops. The entire commercial is tinted grey, which you would not notice unless you were paying close attention. By changing the color, they are manipulating the viewer to feel more depressed, without he or she even realizing. The advertisement also shows a young child running over to a female soldier to give her a drawing that she drew for her while lying on the floor of the gate. This is heartbreaking because it explains that children are inevitably involved in something as devastating as war. American Airlines touches on the audience’s emotions because everyone is able to relate to some aspect of the commercial such as a ticket counter, or boarding an airplane. The commercial persuades you want to take their airline because everyone seems compassionate and associated with those around them. It also shows a relaxing and pleasant gate and airport environment, which we all know is usually not the case.

I think this commercial is just a poignant and heart rendering as the ASPCA ones of abused animals. However, I think American Airlines influences a wider audience because I was not so upset that I had to change the channel, and I am more likely to be manipulated to take an airplane than to adopt a new dog.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tgm33OrO3k

For Just 10 Dollars More…

           The more you spend, the better the quality. That’s what they say, right? This break, I needed a new pair of running shoes. My old ones still worked, they covered my feet, they weren’t breaking in half. But the “experts” told me there were “too many miles on them”, that they would eventually harm me if were to continue wearing them. I’m no expert on the science behind running shoes, so I decided to invest in a new pair so as to not cause “harm”. At the store, I immediately find the brand I’ve always had, zoning out the other 50 shoes on the wall. As I look through the 10 “models” of running shoes, I notice the pattern. Each shoe is 10 dollars more than the last on the wall. I grab some shoes on the cheaper end and try them on. They feel good, fine. They feel like shoes should feel. They’d be effective.  Just as I’d made my decision, the dreaded shoe salesman walked over and began rapid-fire questions on my running habits. He used big words, maybe even made up words, to explain the technology behind the shoes, how it is more sophisticated in the higher end shoes. Suddenly, I found myself trying on shoe after shoe, each one more expensive than the last. The 100 dollar ones feel good, but not quite as good as the 120 dollar ones. Should I try to the 140 dollar ones? The salesman explained they have a fancy sounding built in shock technology to give me an added boost. Before I knew it, I’ve doubled the price of my original choice.

            I had to stop myself and take back control that I had so easily given to the salesman. Does this shoe really feel 50 dollars better than the original I tried on? Will it make me twice as fast when I run? How do I know that this is all made up? And since when do shoes even have such complex technology? They’re all essentially the same, yet the different colors, stitching, and price tags make us believe otherwise. I let that salesman manipulate me simply because he used big words and sounded like he knew what he was talking about. But its more than just the salesman at work, it’s the long paragraphs on the tags, filled with diagrams and stats, it’s the bright colors, the flashy ads.  In my ignorance of the subject, I chose to believe every one of these claims. It was only when I found myself so far from my original choice did I realize how powerful the manipulation had been. We often chose to blindly accept the unfamiliar information rather than looking at it through a critical lens. I walked out of the store with my original choice, feeling embarrassed of how close I came to falling into the salesman’s trap. 

Manipulation, Its Not That Bad, Plus You're Kind Of Trapped so Deal With It!

Manipulation happens every day in a persons’ life. No matter how conscious an individual is they cannot escape manipulation. A person that tries to live outside of this is forced into a paradox world, where every manipulation they reject, they are subconscious placed into another. Example, a man sees an advertisement for a product, however, understands he can get the same product for cheaper. So he buys the no name brand product. He consciously believes he was not manipulated by the advertisement. However, manipulation comes in many forms, the product maybe cheaper, but that is how they advertisement it. The cheaper product’s manipulation lies in the ability to make a person believe you can get the same product cheaper. The affect is still the same; an external force affecting an individual’s perception, which means Manipulation took place in that situation. The only way for this person not to be manipulated is to randomly pick a product, pay for it, and leave the store before actually seeing what was brought. This ensures the choice neither internal nor external had an affect, and leaves everything to random. Only random anomalies, which are separated from human thought or human interference, can truly be free from any form of manipulation.

Manipulation is not a bad thing. Everything in the world is a form of manipulation, from what we consider as beauty to what a person desires for their lives to be. In a society a person must allow for manipulation to happen in order to ensure their productivity in the world. individuals’ realities are intertwine with manipulation, if it was not this way then ambitions cannot exist, the world will slow down and there will be no real production within a society.  Manipulation has a negative stigma to it which it should not, the forms presented by society are mostly positive. The problem lies in our own interpretation, and humans over dramatic belief they have to be unique in this world.

Manipulating the Manipulator

Who is manipulating who? People are so aware of what ads and commercial are trying to do that one begins to question how much effect do they actually have? Ads and commercials are so common today that often times they are overlooked. I for one will change the channel the second it goes to commercials. I'm not saying that we can avoid completely these ads nor am I saying that I am not manipulated somewhat, but all of the manipulation is not even happening to the consumers. Companies are paying countless sums of money to get their product out there. They spend even more money to make their products to the exact specifications that the consumers want. Maybe it is actually the consumers who are pitting companies against each other for their attention. Just like kids want to fit in, are companies trying to fit in with their competition? "But all of the popular companies are doing it." Or could it be the television companies who are manipulating producers being that they spend even greater amounts of money for certain air time such as Super Bowl time slots. I don't know about everyone else, but during the Super Bowl I only enjoy the funny commercials none of which actually make a product seem more desirable. This all might be farfetched but it was the only thing I could think of in attempt to not repeat to much of anyone else's post. Sometimes it is just easier to not try and think so in depth about what everyone is trying to do. We might think we know what someone is trying to do but in reality it could be completely different.

Disillusionment

         Let me first say that I love this class and everything it stands for, as well as what it has taught me. However, after our semester-long examination of manipulation, I have become slightly disillusioned with society and the media. As many others have mentioned, commercials seem so obviously manipulative, and I have become increasingly short tempered with the tricks that all advertisers seem to use to get people to buy their products. Unfortunately, I cannot see a way to proceed from here. On the one hand, we could try and force the advertisers to stop their manipulation, to simply state what their product does, and why, and who made it, and where. We could try and have a market that only caters to specific wants of specific people and does not try and force itself on others. But really. Is there anyone who believes that would work with the greed of both the producers and the consumers? Advertisers would not just leave well enough alone, and although I have never taken an economics class, I’m pretty sure the point is not to be satisfied with a small group of consumers but rather to grow your business until it is classified as booming. So, now we must consider the other hand. What I see is a world where advertisers come with better, more subtle, tricks, and the consumer no longer has any idea they are being manipulated. This eliminates the annoyance of having products forced on you because the consumer would now be happy that this is occurring, but is that any way to live your life? We decided that the only way manipulation itself can be defeated is if you choose to either accept of defy this manipulation. The idea of a world where the consumer lives in ignorance of their forced consumption is a terrifying concept, but I see no other option other than living in annoyance. If anyone has any other ideas, please share them.  I don’t want to live in fear. 
          I’ll leave with a quote from a Prilosec-OTC commercial: “Now why make a flavored heartburn pill? ‘Cuz this is America! And we don’t just make things you want, we make things you didn’t even know you wanted!” Yikes.

Why is google stalking me?

        In recent years some bright genius down at Google decided that it would be a great idea to track our queries, website visits, video watchings, etc. I mean why not? It's not like I respect my privacy or anything. Regardless, what Google is attempting to do is generate a thicker stream of revenue through the use of advertisements. These advertisements that are "just for you" demonstrates an abuse of a privacy loophole to manipulate our dealings on the world wide web.
         Regardless of whether or not you may buy the bearded beanie that shows up on your newsfeed is beside the point. Over time the constant bombardment of advertisements becomes too much and curiosity overtakes you. Very quickly you go from simply ignoring the stupid ads to saying "what the hell" and clicking on the link. Soon this becomes a very slippery slope and the time spent browsing becomes time spent buying. And in a matter of seconds the manipulation you said you would never succumb to becomes the $100 t-shirt getting shipped to your mailbox. And each one of those clicks you make gradually becomes another dollar in Google's bank account. Without even knowing it, the pages you once visited becomes the tool that manipulates you into spending hard earned money on something you may not necessarily need.

Who are we?

The average American is exposed to thousands of advertisements a day. Our generation especially is constantly being bombarded by ads and messages on how to live our daily lives and how to spend our money. So how are we possibly supposed to decide what to buy or which brand of deodorant is better? Is anything in our culture actually unique anymore?

Over break I read the opinion piece in the NY Times called “How to Live Without Irony.” Although there were many interesting parts of this article about the modern idea of “ironic living,” the most interesting part to me was the argument that our generation has become attached to this lifestyle of indirect action because we lack a unique culture. The article explains:

"It stems in part from the belief that this generation has little to offer in terms of culture, that everything has already been done, or that serious commitment to any belief will eventually be subsumed by an opposing belief...This kind of defensive living works as a pre-emptive surrender and takes the form of reaction rather than action."

(http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/17/how-to-live-without-irony/)

We have come to rely so heavily on non-action and communication through social media that it has become difficult for most to interact in person. We have become so consumed with defending ourselves from taking risks that we no longer have anything we stand for. We now rely on making fun of everything around us, which I see as an unhealthy and destructive lifestyle that I am just as much a part of as anyone else. We have become so accustomed to all of the stuff in our lives that our generation is constantly searching for something that is specifically ours. We look to generations past, yet that is never truly ours.

So what do we do?  Is it possible to actually break away from this? I believe the first step is becoming aware of the prevalence this ironic lifestyle has in our culture, especially in social media.

Tapped

I know I posted already but I just watched this movie "Tapped" which is all about how terrible plastic water bottles are, and huge chunk of it was about how big companies like Coca-Cola and Nestle manipulate the consumer, so I thought I would post again.  Every Aquafina, Poland Spring, and Dasani that you find advertise the pureness and safeness of their water, saying that it is better than any other water out there, especially tap water.  But this is a load of bull.  To begin with, more than 60% of all bottled water comes from the tap.  It is no more pure than any water you can get out of the bathroom sink in Bundy.  Further, these companies insist that their bottled water is super, extra safe.  Lies again.  Bottled water is virtually unregulated.  Only one half of one woman at the FDA is in charge of all 8 million bottles of water that are consumed each day.  All of the reports that this one woman reads on the "safeness" of bottled water are written by Coke, Nestle, and Pepsi themselves and are never available to the public, which makes us think that they aren't all that reliable.  I mean never once has an independent source tested bottled water for contamination, it is always Coke saying that Coke's water is great.  Tap water, on the other hand, is extremely regulated, tested multiple times a day so you find out within hours if something in your water is bad.  Plus, the plastic bottles themselves are not healthy.  All plastic water bottles are made with PET (you can see it on the bottom of any bottle, next to the recycle symbol).  PET is part of the benzene family, which is a cancer causing chemical, and it has happened many, many times that dangerous amounts of benzene are in the plastic bottles and they have to be recalled.  PET is also killing hundreds of people who live in towns surrounding the plastic-making factories because it gets into their groundwater and lungs through air pollution.  So basically when plastic water bottles advertise how safe and clean their water is, they really mean that their water is unregulated, may cause cancer if you drink from the bottle, and is killing a ton of innocent strangers.  Yet I bet anyone who hasn't seen a documentary on bottled water would be oblivious to these facts and truly believe that Poland Spring is much cleaner, safer, and more pure than tap water.  That's some serious manipulation right there.

By the way, Aquafina actually does say on its label that it is "from a public water source" aka tap water, yet it has mountains on the front to manipulate the consumer into believing that it is from a super clean mountain stream.  Dasani refuses to mention that it is from tap water on their labels.

Stupid Facebook

            At Thanksgiving dinner this year my family and I were celebrating my Aunt Lisa’s birthday.  We bring in her favorite pie, alight with candles, singing a rousing rendition of happy birthday.  Before she blows out the candles though, Lisa insists on having her picture taken in front of her pie.  She poses with an artificial smile, then looks at the picture on her iPhone, then does a reshoot and looks again, then makes sure that my Uncle uploads it to Facebook immediately, all before blowing out her stinking candles! I swear the candles were stumps by the time she got around to wishing on them. 

While this was happening I looked around and noticed that half of my family was rolling there eyes, and I began to wonder what happened to the good ole days of skipping around the room and birthday punches?  Suddenly everything we do now is for the camera and Facebook.  My Aunt Li is a prime example of someone who has been so manipulated by the sheer existence of social media that she won’t even partake in the oldest of traditions without letting technology interfere.  Facebook dictates our behavior because we know that within seconds, all of our acquaintances (they aren’t all actually your friends are they?) can find out exactly where we’ve been, what we’ve done, and with whom.  Privacy has become as rare an ice cube in the Sahara.  Suddenly our lives have become more about posing for pictures than smiling at a friend, more about funny wall posts than actual conversation. 

In class we talked mostly about how we are manipulated as consumers to buy certain things like Old Spice or room spray, but I believe that social media manipulates us to an even greater extent, by influencing how we think, how we act, and to an degree, who we are.  Ten years ago my aunt smiled over her rum chiffon pie with genuine happiness to be with her family, but this year she smiled because she wanted the world to see and believe how happy she is, and that distinction truly shows the influence of social media.

No One Understands Me...Except Netflix

All right, Netflix, I'll admit it. You're right. I do like British Period Pieces Featuring a Strong Female Lead. I just didn't realize how much until you pointed it out. But you're so clever you've given me neat little row of movies just for me! What was it that gave me away? It's because I watched Masterpiece Theatre's Bleak House, isn't it? Are you sure I'd like The Mill on the Floss?

Netflix, you've got a nifty little system. You figure out what I like, and you offer me more of it. In doing so you make me label myself as an Anglophile feminist. You think you've got me all figured out. Maybe you do. You decide what kind of viewer I am, and bombard me with suggestions in my "preferred genre." And there's a high likelihood I'll watch or at least browse through your suggestions. But what if this system prevents me from expanding my horizons, trying new things, discovering something that you thought I wouldn't like? You even try to guess how I'll rate certain shows and movies. You think I'd only be two-stars interested in one thing, but four and a half on another. Can't I be the judge of that? You seem terrified that I'll watch something I don't like. What if everyone was like you? What if everyone told me what I wanted to hear? What if I could avoid anything that made me bored, angry, or uncomfortable? What would I learn, Netflix? Not much at all. If people confine themselves to their own narrow interests, they'll never learn how to appreciate the interests of others. If you tell people what they are and what they like, you should watch out. They might believe you.

Brand names

Hamilton College: a school swarming with preppy young adults, flaunting their brand-name apparel. Before coming here, I was generally accustomed to buying things because I liked them, not because they were the cultural norm. Apparently here however, it was deemed incredibly odd that I did not own a piece of Patagonia merchandise.

            The society that we live in throws fancy labels on a generic piece of clothing and then all of a sudden, it becomes the next best thing since slice bread. But how much better are these pieces of clothing in comparison to their cheaper competition? Yes, some apparel may last a little longer, or look a little nicer, but the general function of the item, regardless of the label, remains the same. A coat keeps you warm regardless of whether or not you purchase it from The North Face or from Target. Again, I realize that some outdoors gear may in fact be of a higher quality, but for shirts and sweaters among other things, a 241-dollar sweater from Free People is absolutely no different than a sweater from Marshalls. As we saw from the beautiful “pendant” in the Free People magazine, items are absurdly priced at these stores and yet people still feel the need to buy these items and give into societal pressures in order to fit in. The woman I babysit for bought her three-year old son a pair of Ugg slipper. I repeat, this child is three. Not only is he running around, destroying those expensive slippers on the playground at school, he is also going to outgrow them within the next year. I was appalled at how ridiculous this gesture was just because the slippers have a small label at the back of the heel. And yet here I am, sitting in my Ugg boots and my new gray Patagonia pullover, embracing my inner hypocrite.   

Gary BUTTman

            I just couldn’t resist throwing that juvenile (and strangely satisfying) insult to NHL commissioner Gary Bettman in my title. Anyway, I’m going to use this blog post to vent my frustrations about the current NHL lockout (because there’s lots of manipulation going on!). Perhaps it’s karma for laughing at the NBA last year, but nonetheless I’m sure any other hockey fans out there feel my pain.

            Basically the National Hockey League (NHL), led by Gary Bettman, and the National Hockey League Players’ Association (NHLPA), led by Donald Fehr, can’t agree on new terms since the last collective bargaining agreement expired. Many issues are being negotiated, including the players’ share of revenue, term limits, salary caps, and free agency.

            Manipulation is rampant in this whole mess. I’m sure plenty of manipulation is going on in the negotiations, with each side trying to manipulate the other to agree to their respective offers. Somehow Bettman and his cronies have to try to make getting less than 50% of the revenue seem appealing to the players. I think the main manipulation, however, is the way blame is being thrown around and everybody’s trying to convince the fans of who’s at fault.

            The fans tend to want to blame the owners, and of course Bettman, instead of tarnishing the superstar players’ reputations. With all the hate directed towards him, Bettman tried to redirect it back in October. He tried to make himself look like the good guy by putting up an offer that seemed perfect on the surface, “in the spirit of getting things done” [x]. The fine print of this offer (unknown to many fans) was very disadvantageous for the players. When the NHLPA rejected the offer, they looked like the bad guys (at least for a little while). Now the NHL is blaming Fehr for the deal not being made.

            The media covering the lockout is full of manipulation as well. I haven’t found a single unbiased article on the issue. Many take the natural route blaming Bettman (“Bettman could get a five-year-old girl to hate her favorite doll. He could even get the doll to hate the girl.” [x]) They play off many fans’ predisposed dislike of the man for his unpopular redistribution of teams and the past two lockouts since he’s been commissioner. It’s easy for these writers to manipulate people in to hating someone even more when they already don’t like him.

            Other articles, though not many, rebel against this traditional view and put the blame on a variety of other sources: the owners' greed [x], the player's greed [x], Donald Fehr’s greed [x], and even the fans [x] (I don’t fully understand the logic behind this one). Without actual games to write on, sports journalists are going crazy for a scapegoat. As an innocent hockey fan, I just want to know what’s actually going on in the negotiations, but I have to filter through loads of biased crap. And although I’m very aware of the manipulation going on, I’m clearly not unaffected. I hate Gary Buttman as much as then next fan, but the greed on all sides needs to end so I can watch some hockey.

(I had to throw in this picture too. [x])