Rosalind Wiseman's Blog, page 43

Doing Good Is Complicated: Kind Campaign's Partnership With Mattel

As first posted to Huffingtonpost.com on May 30, 2011

The Kind Campaign's recently announced partnership with Mattel is an opportunity for any of us who advocate for children or any social cause to think about a  difficult question; how do we collaborate with larger, more powerful organizations and corporations to get our message across?

I know about the Kind Campaign because two years ago, its founders, Lauren Parsekian and Molly Stroud, asked to interview me for the documentary they were making. A few weeks later, two beautiful young women who had not yet graduated from college, arrived at my house, schlepping all their gear into my living room. As they quickly set up lights and cameras, they immediately gained my respect. That feeling grew as they asked thoughtful questions (substantially better than many journalists who interview me) and they cleaned up after themselves. When they left, I wished them the best and hoped for their success.

I knew the road to their success wasn't going to be easy. They were young, had little professional experience, and no connection to an established organization to give them credibility. Exactly the same position I was in when I first began my work seventeen years ago. I knew what they were up against: convincing people to take a chance on you, raising money, forgoing salary, and depending on family and friends for support, driven by the need to get the message out.

Two years later, Mattel announced that their Monster High Doll line was partnering with the Kind Campaign. My understanding of the campaign is that Lauren and Molly will act as KIND characters within the Monster High webisodes. As I read people's reactions to this, and Amy Jussel's comments, it caused some amount of personal pain. It's not that I'm against corporate partnerships. How could I be? I'm a spokesperson for Unilever's "Don't Fret the Sweat" Campaign and LG's Text-Ed Council and I'm proud of the work I have done with both of them. I have worked on and off with Liz Claiborne for years. I sold the rights to my book, Queen Bees and Wannabes to Paramount so Tina Fey could turn it into Mean Girls.

For better and for worse, I believe that working within institutions is worth the effort.

Yes, the power dynamic can be unequal as you feel insecure compared to their money or influence. Yes, as an advocate you may be hesitant to say what you really think and progress can be slow. Yes, if you aren't careful you can be co-opted by the system and/or perceived to have compromised yourself and your mission by people on the outside. But overall I believe the majority of people employed at these companies are decent people who want to do good work and it's better to work within systems than be on the outside where you have less chance of having your voice heard. And the fact is that corporations are the best at getting messages to the cultural marketplace. We need to be at the table when those messages are being crafted.

I really get why Kind Campaign did it. By agreeing to work with Mattel they could reach the girls Mattel reaches. That's huge.

But here's my problem: The Monster High doll line continues the skinny and sexy/super cute cultural ideal that is so toxic for girls and women.

One of the primary ways girls can be incredibly unkind to each other is by degrading a girl who doesn't fit into this ideal. I worry that the girls will see the mixed message within this program and the more visual message (i.e. of the skinny/sexy/supercute girl) will dominate. In addition, while Mattel says Monster High is targeted at tweens and teens, I have a hard time believing that is the case. Dolls and the marketing campaigns created around them are targeted at girls between 5-10; not tweens and teens. And my review of some, albeit not all, Monster High webisodes makes me extremely uneasy because the "Monsters" story line comes across to me as the characters being "cooler" than everyone else.

Emily Bartek, marketing and brand strategy consultant for Scout Strategies looks at it differently, "A partnership with Mattel reflects on some level their [Kind's] intuitive understanding that looking the part of cool is a vehicle for delivering a message. No one looks at two attractive girls and assumes they've been bullied — no one looks at sexy dolls and assumes they will sneak in messaging about friendship and equality. Regardless of whether or not the dolls create a whole layer of problems in addition to those they intend to solve, it's easy to see how both KIND and Mattel could stand by the assertion that young girls love these toys and how they look and that they're getting positive messaging into something girls and their parents would buy anyhow."

My counter to Bartek's argument is two fold: I believe that companies that sell products to children not only have a responsibility to their shareholders but a higher obligation to consider their products' impact on children's well-being. The bottom line is, you can still make the dolls cute without having them wear tiny mini-skirts and high heels. And parents, of course, must be educated and empowered to not buy things that are reinforcing of these images.

But there's more at stake here than this one campaign. How we discuss this topic is critical because so often the substance of the problem is lost in the dynamics going on between the people on the opposing sides.

Here's what I am worried about:

In a world where a particular look takes up more space in our often culturally vapid landscape, we have to face our own anxiety and reactions to it. And it's certainly not new that attractive women doing good work are received skeptically at best. We owe it to each other to raise the level of dialogue whenever we can and we can start by admitting when we ourselves are caught in this mix; possibly blind to a more nuanced understanding of a situation.

That means that this can't devolve into another case of older women criticizing younger women for being naive. Not only is it patronizing, but it will come across to the general public as women sniping at each other. That is an old, tired script that needs to be put through the shredder. It doesn't give any of us, or the substance of our work, the respect we and it deserve.

From a women's leadership standpoint, if we are to walk the walk we have to stand for allowing girls and young women to reach for big goals, put themselves out there, do things we may not agree with and still let them know they are valuable, thoughtful, and are making meaningful contributions. The message to come out of this cannot be "you partnered with Mattel and no real expert with any integrity would have done so."

So the questions to the Kind Campaign's founders are: Will they use their voice as advocates to speak out to Mattel? Will they advise them on how to change the dolls look so that, while still making something girls want to buy, aren't sexualized? Will they point out the mixed messages? Can they talk to Mattel about the impact of growing up as a young woman in today's culture and the part that Mattel plays within it?

It comes down to this: their success and credibility demands that they expand the definition and application of being kind and the unkindness of "girl on girl crime" from the girls themselves to the corporations they partner with who target girls. Because it's wonderful to change a girl's life when she realizes the worth of being kind to others but it's transformational to the culture if institutions like Mattel can similarly own up to "girl on girl" crime and become more KIND, and truly support girls in the process.

Rosalind's Inbox: Sexy Texts

Rosalind answers a question from Charlotte who has learned that her 14-year-old niece is sending provocative texts to boys. She thinks she and her parents should talk to Charlotte about this and how it might affect her life, but is worried that she will freak out about them violating her privacy. But is there such a thing as privacy in the world of electronic communication? And what happens when a daughter's need for privacy collides with a parent's need to keep her safe?

Rosalind's Inbox: Rapper

Rosalind answers a question from Dominique, who has been asked to monitor her 17-year old nephew's online activities by his mother. She's worried that doing so will amount to spying on her nephew, but ever since he started producing Hip-Hop and sharing it on-line his grades have been slipping. Should she tell his mother "no," and respect her nephew's privacy, or do she and his mother have the same right to see what he's posting as everyone else?

Rosalind shares the following resources during this Inbox:

Can't Stop Won't Stop:  A History of the Hip-Hop Generation

Hip-Hop:  Beyond Beats and Rhymes

Rosalind's Pick: The Bully Project, a year in the life of America's bullying crisis

The Bully Project is a grassroots movement to educate and empower kids, parents, teachers and all school staff, to build stronger communities where empathy and respect rule.  With director Lee Hirsch's powerful film "The Bully Project" at it's center and the support of the BeCause Foundation among others, this initiative promises to be a powerful force in the anti-bullying movement.  Check out the trailer and other excellent resources on their website here:  http://www.thebullyproject.com/index.html

The Bully Project, a year in the life of America's bullying crisis

The Bully Project is a grassroots movement to educate and empower kids, parents, teachers and all school staff, to build stronger communities where empathy and respect rule.  With director Lee Hirsch's powerful film "The Bully Project" at it's center and the support of the BeCause Foundation among others, this initiative promises to be a powerful force in the anti-bullying movement.  Check out the trailer and other excellent resources on their website here:  http://www.thebullyproject.com/index.html

Rosalind's Inbox: Attention Girl

Rosalind answers a question from 13-year old Sarah, who will do anything, even lie to her friends, to get attention.  Now her friends are starting to desert her and Sarah has seen the error in her ways.   But can she break her affliction, repair her reputation and regain their trust?

Good and Bad Bullying PSAs: How to Tell the Difference

When you work in bullying prevention like I do, you are repeatedly asked if there is a bullying epidemic. Sometimes it's said as a statement of fact. An epidemic is a sudden, widespread occurrence of a particular undesirable phenomenon. Since conflict and abuse of power are inevitable between people and bullying is the abuse of power in a conflict, we have always had it. There is no epidemic. But that fact that bullying has existed forever doesn't make it right and it doesn't make it less painful when someone you love is experiencing it.

What we are experiencing is an epidemic of ineffective bullying prevention educational programs and public service announcements (PSA's). In the wake of the media's recent focus on a handful of high-profile bullying cases that ended in a victim's suicide, many organizations have all released short videos to take a stand about the issue of bullying. But is the sudden flurry of media attention to this problem effectively demonstrating for children and teens how to engage with each other civilly even when it's difficult? Unfortunately what I'm witnessing time and again is a poorly-executed attempt at raising awareness that ultimately gives kids greater cause to dismiss adults as clueless and unable to help them solve problems in a way that actually works.  And while it's important to formally evaluate these programs, those studies can take years and our children can't wait. We all need to agree on common sense criteria to differentiate messages that are laughable and easily dismissed, irresponsible or inaccurate, or realistic, relatable, and inspirational.

With the goal of starting the conversation, here's what I think.

A bad bullying prevention program or PSA:

1. Relies on gimmicks, like anti-bullying T-shirts, useless slogans like, "Bullying isn't cool. Don't do it," bracelets, pledges, and celebrity appearances as the principle educational strategy.

2. Depicts stereotyped situations.

3. Shows all white people at the center of the plot, or has token racial diversity. For example, the Queen Bee white girl with her back up Black and Asian friends.

4. Presents suicide as a natural consequence of being bullied and as a revenge fantasy against the bullies. Kids don't have to have suicide thrown in their face to take bullying seriously. Emphasizing suicide will make children think that any feelings less than that aren't worth reporting.

5. Portrays no realistic and comforting adult presence.

6. Provides no skills or strategies to stop bullying beyond, "Tell an adult" and doesn't acknowledge that telling an adult often doesn't help at all.

7. Assumes that bullying is always one-way.

8. Gives the primary motivations to not bully as that you will be punished or feel guilty.

9. Emphasizes blame.

10. Ignores the fact that most bullies think they're defending themselves or are at least justified; e.g. the victim deserves it. This is one of the primary reasons why a bully won't see themselves in these types of campaigns.

Some Examples:

A particularly poignant example of an ineffective and irresponsible PSA is the American Bar Association Antitrust Law section's cyberbulling video:

Like many, I have been extremely critical of this PSA. In response to criticisms of their original video, the ABA re-edited it to the version above, which is no longer irresponsible but still ridiculous. I am highlighting this PSA because Mr. Allan Van Fleet, the Chair of the Antitrust Law Section, defends their actions by saying that the video was "a rough cut that [sic we] never intended be released to the public"  (Quoted from his comments on this Slate article) The ABA posted something online that they never intended other people to see? Somehow they don't realize the irony of this response given the subject matter. It's what teens say after they've posted something inappropriate online and can't believe it went public. More unbelievably, in researching for this article I found that Mr. Van Fleet, who as the chair, must have some supervision over this project, has no privacy settings on his Facebook page. That means I was able to see all of the personal information he posted on line. From his personal postings, it is clear that Mr. Van Fleet is a decent person who means the best. But good intentions are not enough; you actually have to know what you're doing. And what is first thing you tell children when they begin to use social networking? Set your privacy settings so only people you know and trust can see your information. I understand that the next video the ABA is doing is about sexting. Seriously. And they were asked to do it by the United States Department of Education. I am not joking about this.

The National Crime Prevention Council's cyberbullying PSAs were done in conjunction with the National Ad Council and US Department of Justice. Entitled, "In the Kitchen with Megan" and "Rant with McGruff," both use the classic outdated advice of, "Just delete the bad messages you get" and "If you wouldn't say it in person, don't send it on line." If you work in schools you know there are plenty of kids who will say it and send it.

The NCPC's radio PSAs, click the titles to listen:

In the Kitchen With Megan

Rant With McGruff

A Good Bullying Prevention PSA and Campaign:

1. Depicts realistic scenarios, knowing that if presented realistically the topic will hold the viewer's attention. (T-shirts, bracelets and celebrities are unnecessary)

2. Incorporates the power, negative or positive, of the by-stander.

3. Clarifies, age appropriately, the difference between snitching and reporting.

4. Reflects young people's understanding and experience of race dynamics. i.e. while racism can be a weapon to bully, children have a nuanced perspective on race.

5. Understands how homophobia is tied to bullying.

6. Has an adult (maybe a parent) comforting a child.

7. Doesn't patronize the viewer.

8. Provides skills and inspiration in equal proportion to depicting the problem.

9. Is willing to acknowledge that adults can be part of the problem as well as help solve or improve the situation.

10. Inspires people to take the risk to publicly support victims and responsibly confront bullies.

Examples:

For tweens:

Adina's Deck: Adina's Deck is a new Internet Safety DVD series designed for the classroom. In each episode, savvy characters solve contemporary problems including: cyber bullying, online predators, and plagiarism.

"Abuse of Technology" by imbee.

Imbee is a social networking 'mega-platform' for kids between the ages of 8-14. The video moves fast, is age appropriate for tweens, and doesn't preach while managing to get key messages across.

For teens:

"Words Do Hurt."

Lots of people have seen this one.  Alye (the girl) and her parents have created a Facebook page where people can share their experiences and information:

Link to FB page

For parents:

Good is good—even when it's hard to admit. I usually disagree with Focus on the Family and have heatedly debated its representatives about including homophobia in bullying prevention curricula. (I am for; they are against). But they have some good parenting advice. Here's an example from their website:

Link:

http://www.focusonthefamily.com/parenting/schooling/bullying/the_wounded_spirit.aspx

For everyone:

AMHIR's music video of Perfect (it's a P!ink cover). This guys need to sit down with all these so-called experts and tell them how it's done. I would take them to any high school in the country.  Check it out!

An Adult Take On Childhood Bullying: Rosalind in The Chicago Tribune

Mary Schmidt interviews Rosalind in The Chicago Tribune on bullying and why it is becoming such a critical issue for our country.  Read full article here…

Worst Bullying PSA Ever

Thanks to Emily Bazelon's excellent article in Slate, "How Not To Prevent Cyberbullying," I just watched "Cyber-bullying" a PSA video presentated by the American Bar Association, with the endorsement of Microsoft, Time Warner Inc., and the US Department of Education Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools, among others. It's amazing. In four minutes it manages to not only be laughably stereotypical but send the message that suicide is the best revenge against bullies.

a presentation of the american bar association

Here are the top ten reasons I hate this video and why it makes my job as a bullying prevention educator more difficult:

It comes across like an after-school special from 1985 – stilted and condescending to the viewer's intelligence. It opens with a teen actor earnestly telling us, "Bullying is not right, it's not cool."  It reminds me of the "just say no" drug prevention campaign (again 1980's) and we all know how successful that was.
The acting is horrible.  But you can forgive the actors because of the ridiculous dialogue they were given.
Case in point:  the bullies use bad words gratuitously. "Fat, pig, slut" is their favorite phrase; which by the way I have never heard girls use in combination because frankly it's not smart enough.
The way in which the "mean girls" cyber-bully is unrealistic and outdated, such as creating a website to bully their victim.  Ask any teen, kids stopped creating websites like this in about 2004.
The mean girls and everyone else in the school find out about the victim committing suicide because the Principal announces it over the intercom. It'd be laughable if it wasn't so ridiculous, and puts in to question the producer's and advisors (Did people from the Department of Education really review this?) knowledge of schools.
Immediately after this announcement, the "Authorities," aka, men in suits representing some kind of government agency, walk into the classroom and take the "mean girls" away.
The message of the video is not, "don't bully". Instead it is suicide as a revenge fantasy. When people bully you, if you commit suicide then everyone who tormented you will either feel guilty or be taken away by men in dark suits.   To where?  Mean Girls Prison?
It doesn't show kids how to stop bullying. There are no strategies and no skills presented except tell an adult. It only shows that you shouldn't bully or else you will get in trouble.
This PSA fails to grasp the complexity of teen society; showing the entire student body joining in with the "mean girls." While certainly some would join them, other kids would hate what was happening but be too afraid to say anything, and some would try to defend her.
But the top reason I hate this video? This is a collaboration by a consortium of some of the most powerful and influential corporations and government agencies in the world.  They have the ability to do a tremendous amount of good on this topic.  Instead, they have produced one of the most counter-productive bullying measures I have seen.

And we wonder why teens blow us off when we talk about bullying? We are surprised when they won't come forward and report bullying? Would you trust us (adults) if you were them and this was the advice you were getting?

We need to do better. I want to see the adults who are responsible for this, hold themselves accountable, and try again.  Give kids the tools and guidance they deserve.  But don't take my word for it.  Watch the video, decide for yourself, and contact the American Bar Association and tell them what you think:  service@americanbar.org or call 202.662.1000

"My Kid Would Never Bully" – Seeing Bystanders In Action

Recently I participated in a Dateline show entitled, "My Kid Would Never…". The episode focused on the role of by-standers by inviting teens to witness teen actors who were playing the roles of bully and target—but the teens believed the situation was real. The goal, as their parents watched in another room through hidden cameras, was to see what would happen. Would the by-standers stand up to the bully? Would they side with the bully? Would the teens do what their parents expected?

I sat next to the parents as they watched the scene unfold and there were some really anxious and uncomfortable moments as the girls reacted in their individual ways. When one girl laughed along with the bullies against the target, I could feel her mom tense and become incredibly angry in the chair next to me. I turned to her and said, "You know if you yell at her as soon as you are in the car going home, she's going to shut you out, right?" She laughed and said, "That's exactly what I was thinking!" And what was one of the best moments of the day for me, was watching this mother and her daughter talk about the situation in a manner where both left feeling that they learned something positive from a difficult situation.

-RPW

NBC-Dateline – My Kid Would Never Bully 1/6

NBC-Dateline – My Kid Would Never Bully 2/6

NBC-Dateline – My Kid Would Never Bully 3/6

NBC-Dateline – My Kid Would Never Bully 4/6

NBC-Dateline – My Kid Would Never Bully 5/6

NBC-Dateline – My Kid Would Never Bully 6/6