Why Oprah Winfrey is Evil
Well, perhaps not evil in the same way that Bob Barker or Jenny Jones is evil. But she's certainly not as good as she'd like us to believe. Here's why:
I had the opportunity to see one of her shows last year, and it was deeply troubling. A quick synopsis:
Oprah is playing fairy godmother to ordinary folk through her "wildest dreams" show.
The recipient du jour of Oprah's largesse is Bernadette, a woman who works at Starbucks 7 days a week to support her own 3-4 kids and her brother's 3-4 kids, whom she has taken in because her brother is a heroin (or some other pretty serious drug, can't quite recall) addict. So I'll just say right now: Bernadette is clearly a saint, and clearly deserves and needs a little help. I'm not taking issue with that.
What's Oprah's solution? Well, first she needs us to feel for Bernadette. So cue the piano music... The voice over tells us what I just told you. But all the while we're treated to the slow motion shots of Bernadette off to work at Starbucks, and shots of Bernadette's current living quarters: Busted up furniture, boxes everywhere, not enough beds for all the kids. The montage basically screaming "Look at her poverty. Look how poor she is. Look at what her kids don't have." Cut back to the studio shot. Bernadette is in tears. So are her kids. How humiliating that must have been.
So now we get the solution. Oprah takes the kids on a Toys R Us shopping spree. Somewhere in the $15-$20 thousand dollar range. Now this is great. The kids are happy. They've got toys. Oprah's hoping they choose books. They chose play stations. And bikes. Good for the kids. The Toys R Us basically shuts down for the hour or so so the kids can do the shopping spree.
And I'll begin the theme you're about to see here: Was this generosity? Did Oprah cover the toys? What do you want to bet Toys R US did? Why? $20k worth of stuff and one hour of lost sales from one location on a weekday mid morning is a very, very, very small price to pay for the halo that you just bought to go over your company's head right at the outset of the holiday shopping season. And Oprah's middle class house wife audience -- your target customer -- just saw the whole thing. Toys for poor kids: $20,000. Lost sales $10,000. Value of making the entire Oprah audience think you deserve their Christmas toy budget: Many millions of dollars. So was it nice? Yup. Did Toys R Us benefit financially? Oh hell yeah.
And the show goes on. Sears gives Bernadette new appliances. Walter E Smith gives her furniture. And the big grand finale: Oprah is gonna buy Bernadette a house. The audience freaks.
Now again: This woman deserves it all, and I'm not taking issue. But the these firms I'm sure furnished the goods and services to the show at no cost to Oprah, for just the promotion value. There's still a link on the Oprah site so the companies can get credit for the donation. Again, the economics of the free advertising to Oprah's audience right before Christmas is more than worth the value of what was furnished.
All through this, we're getting shots of Bernadette and her kids. And their reactions. And it's touching, it truly is. This person who's lived in poverty for so long is having all this material wealth provided for her. Why? Because she's a good person. Oh, and incidentally because it makes for GREAT TV. Thoroughly compelling stuff, this "lifting people out of poverty". Thank God for poor people who can be moved to tears by appliances from Sears, or it'd be hard to keep these ratings up.
And one really has to ask: Has Oprah really improved Bernadette's life? Is life improvement about having things? "My life sucked, but then I got cool stuff, and now my life is great?" Mid life crisis: Buy sports car, be happy. That seems to be the answer after all! Our culture of consumption is, in fact, enlightened! Now that I have a washer, I don't mind working 7 days a week! Now that the kids have toys, they don't mind having no father figure at home, nor do they care that their mom and dad are on drugs and that they must live with their aunt in a bad neighborhood! Will Bernadette be able to afford the taxes and insurance on her new home? Who cares?! That requires thinking about the future. We're American! 'nuff said.
A real solution: Get Bernadette some job skills and education so that she can become a better provider. Of course, that takes years instead of days to do, and isn't as entertaining. But teaching this woman to fish will put her and her kids in a much better place. Maybe get her brother into rehab. Maybe get him some education and skills, too. Show him some a path to joy other than drugs. Nah, that's tough. Shopping spree!
Sending Bernadette back to Starbucks with lots of new stuff is a band-aid solution for a cancerous problem: Poverty is the problem of not being equipped to provide for yourself, of being stuck in a cycle of just getting by and not getting ahead. When the toys break, when the washer needs a plumber, when the house needs a new roof, how will Bernadette deal with that with her 7 days at Starbucks and 7 kids at home balance sheet?
So let's look at the winners and losers here:
Sponsors: Winners: Got halos for their brands and reached massive audience with huge purchasing power for a tiny tiny cost.
Oprah: Major winner: She comes off as sensitive, generous and kind, gets a fantastically compelling show, high ratings, future ad revenue, and spent pretty darn little out of her own pocket to get there.
Bernadette: Short term winner, long term neutral: She gets a brand new set for her same old life.
Bottom line: Oprah exploited a poor woman's misery for entertainment value while providing no enduring benefits to the woman she exploited. Meanwhile, she and her coporate sponsors reap huge returns on tiny expenditures.
Oprah: Giving poor people things isn't the answer to poverty. Raising poor people's capacity to provide for themselves is. But learning new skills isn't very entertaining. And it takes a while. So if it's truly the thought that counts, if the motive matters, then Oprah and her sponsors are crafty, but not kind.
I had the opportunity to see one of her shows last year, and it was deeply troubling. A quick synopsis:
Oprah is playing fairy godmother to ordinary folk through her "wildest dreams" show.
The recipient du jour of Oprah's largesse is Bernadette, a woman who works at Starbucks 7 days a week to support her own 3-4 kids and her brother's 3-4 kids, whom she has taken in because her brother is a heroin (or some other pretty serious drug, can't quite recall) addict. So I'll just say right now: Bernadette is clearly a saint, and clearly deserves and needs a little help. I'm not taking issue with that.
What's Oprah's solution? Well, first she needs us to feel for Bernadette. So cue the piano music... The voice over tells us what I just told you. But all the while we're treated to the slow motion shots of Bernadette off to work at Starbucks, and shots of Bernadette's current living quarters: Busted up furniture, boxes everywhere, not enough beds for all the kids. The montage basically screaming "Look at her poverty. Look how poor she is. Look at what her kids don't have." Cut back to the studio shot. Bernadette is in tears. So are her kids. How humiliating that must have been.
So now we get the solution. Oprah takes the kids on a Toys R Us shopping spree. Somewhere in the $15-$20 thousand dollar range. Now this is great. The kids are happy. They've got toys. Oprah's hoping they choose books. They chose play stations. And bikes. Good for the kids. The Toys R Us basically shuts down for the hour or so so the kids can do the shopping spree.
And I'll begin the theme you're about to see here: Was this generosity? Did Oprah cover the toys? What do you want to bet Toys R US did? Why? $20k worth of stuff and one hour of lost sales from one location on a weekday mid morning is a very, very, very small price to pay for the halo that you just bought to go over your company's head right at the outset of the holiday shopping season. And Oprah's middle class house wife audience -- your target customer -- just saw the whole thing. Toys for poor kids: $20,000. Lost sales $10,000. Value of making the entire Oprah audience think you deserve their Christmas toy budget: Many millions of dollars. So was it nice? Yup. Did Toys R Us benefit financially? Oh hell yeah.
And the show goes on. Sears gives Bernadette new appliances. Walter E Smith gives her furniture. And the big grand finale: Oprah is gonna buy Bernadette a house. The audience freaks.
Now again: This woman deserves it all, and I'm not taking issue. But the these firms I'm sure furnished the goods and services to the show at no cost to Oprah, for just the promotion value. There's still a link on the Oprah site so the companies can get credit for the donation. Again, the economics of the free advertising to Oprah's audience right before Christmas is more than worth the value of what was furnished.
All through this, we're getting shots of Bernadette and her kids. And their reactions. And it's touching, it truly is. This person who's lived in poverty for so long is having all this material wealth provided for her. Why? Because she's a good person. Oh, and incidentally because it makes for GREAT TV. Thoroughly compelling stuff, this "lifting people out of poverty". Thank God for poor people who can be moved to tears by appliances from Sears, or it'd be hard to keep these ratings up.
And one really has to ask: Has Oprah really improved Bernadette's life? Is life improvement about having things? "My life sucked, but then I got cool stuff, and now my life is great?" Mid life crisis: Buy sports car, be happy. That seems to be the answer after all! Our culture of consumption is, in fact, enlightened! Now that I have a washer, I don't mind working 7 days a week! Now that the kids have toys, they don't mind having no father figure at home, nor do they care that their mom and dad are on drugs and that they must live with their aunt in a bad neighborhood! Will Bernadette be able to afford the taxes and insurance on her new home? Who cares?! That requires thinking about the future. We're American! 'nuff said.
A real solution: Get Bernadette some job skills and education so that she can become a better provider. Of course, that takes years instead of days to do, and isn't as entertaining. But teaching this woman to fish will put her and her kids in a much better place. Maybe get her brother into rehab. Maybe get him some education and skills, too. Show him some a path to joy other than drugs. Nah, that's tough. Shopping spree!
Sending Bernadette back to Starbucks with lots of new stuff is a band-aid solution for a cancerous problem: Poverty is the problem of not being equipped to provide for yourself, of being stuck in a cycle of just getting by and not getting ahead. When the toys break, when the washer needs a plumber, when the house needs a new roof, how will Bernadette deal with that with her 7 days at Starbucks and 7 kids at home balance sheet?
So let's look at the winners and losers here:
Sponsors: Winners: Got halos for their brands and reached massive audience with huge purchasing power for a tiny tiny cost.
Oprah: Major winner: She comes off as sensitive, generous and kind, gets a fantastically compelling show, high ratings, future ad revenue, and spent pretty darn little out of her own pocket to get there.
Bernadette: Short term winner, long term neutral: She gets a brand new set for her same old life.
Bottom line: Oprah exploited a poor woman's misery for entertainment value while providing no enduring benefits to the woman she exploited. Meanwhile, she and her coporate sponsors reap huge returns on tiny expenditures.
Oprah: Giving poor people things isn't the answer to poverty. Raising poor people's capacity to provide for themselves is. But learning new skills isn't very entertaining. And it takes a while. So if it's truly the thought that counts, if the motive matters, then Oprah and her sponsors are crafty, but not kind.
posted by Kenneth at 10:52 AM
<< Home