‘Please, sir. I want some more.’
February 26th, 2008 | by Paul |
(Public domain Oliver Twist illustration. Source: Wikipedia.org)
Damn. It would be so easy to post links to the news articles linking consumerism and childhood depression in British children.
I could say something smug about how I knew it all along. Then I could stop blogging for the day and make a sandwich.
But the fact is, those news articles are bunk. I’m not saying there’s not a link between consumerism and unhappiness. I’m saying that the news articles are about a survey that doesn’t say what the reporters say it said.
A bit of back story:
The Good Childhood Inquiry recently released the results of a public opinion poll asking UK adults questions related to consumerism and children. 61 percent thought the government should ban advertisements of unhealthy food, 69 percent thought violent video games make kids more aggressive, 90 percent thought advertising to children at Christmas puts pressure on parents to spend more than they can afford, etc.
By the way, the Inquiry is run by the Children’s Society, which got its start in 1881 as “The Church of England Central Home for Waifs and Strays.” Coolest. Name. Ever. The “patron of the inquiry” was the Archbishop of Canterbury, which confused me because I thought King Henry had his ass stabbed to death like 1,000 years ago.
(There’s no link for that joke. Look it up yourselves.)
I have no problem with the survey - a valuable tool for people looking at public perception. My problem is the damn headlines. “Pressures of consumerism make children depressed,” “‘Commercialism is harming children’s lives’, “Study: Consumerism making children miserable,” and my favorite, “How the pursuit of trendy possessions is mentally damaging our children” complete with pictures of bad role models like “ones who make it seem fashionable to take drugs such as Amy Winehouse, or who are obscenely rich footballers such as Chelsea Captain Ledley King or stick thin like the model above right.”
They didn’t even bother to find out who the file-photo model was. Journalism, baby!
I’m not saying consumerism isn’t bad for children. What I’m saying is that anticonsumerism could eventually be written off as an early-2000s fad if we don’t back it up with REAL FACTS AND DATA, not sensational Fleet Street nonsense.
Don’t believe me that this could just be a fad? Remember when everyone wanted to save the whales? The whales are still in trouble. But now all the bumper stickers talk about climate change.
The British survey is an opinion survey of adults. All it proves, all it claims and all it shows is what the weighted sample of 1,225 UK adults aged 16 and older responded in a telephone survey.
Anyway, here’s the first line of the Children’s Society’s press release on the survey [all spellings British]:
“A public opinion poll published by The Children’s Society, as part of its ongoing Good Childhood Inquiry, reveals a consensus among adults that increasing commercialisation is damaging children’s well-being.”
Simple and honest. It just says adults think that. But then, throw a reporter in the mix and you get this article from the Times Online. Here’s the first line of that:
“Pressure on children to have the latest designer clothes and computer games is making them miserable, according to a study of modern childhood.”
Ah, the magic of lazy journalism. A “public opinion poll” has taken on the authoritative-sounding name of “study” and “a consensus among adults” has become a fact. Granted, it’s catchier, snappier, jazzier and so on, but a very important nuance has been lost.
Oh, and the author of the Times article keeps pulling quotes from the press release itself. I’ve been a reporter and I’m in grad school to be a better reporter. You’re not supposed to rely on press releases. People stretch the truth or outright lie in press releases. Like a former editor of mine always said, “If your mother tells you she loves you, check it out.”
Weird, though. This is a rare instance of a press release being more trustworthy than the newspapers covering it.