Consumerism, Guilt, and the Story of Stuff

Gee, thanks a lot Jennifer. I was going to celebrate the end of the semester by going shopping. After that video I'll just spend my whole vacation feeling guilty and baking tofu cookies or something.

But then, I guess that's the point of your blog, isn't it?

On the other hand, maybe I can use that video in my summer physical science class when we discuss pollution. Then the guilt wouldn't be a total loss.

Mixed thoughts on this one. The self proclaimed âunapologetic activistâ seems to have created a very smooth and provocative piece. Yet, it seems to have crossed the ambiguous line from education to propaganda. Its tone and its language may be very effective in creating a sense of guilt, yet, I must wonder if that's the desired outcome for young Americans. Does guilt lead towards long term investment in this age bracket? How do kids respond to being manipulated by such media pieces?

As someone who is fairly moderate I must say that I myself wouldn't want to expose my children to this movie. I guess I would my kids to a higher expectation of their ability to internalize knowledge to foster change. I also tend to agree with the idea of unbiased education. But, maybe I am just being idealistic...maybe I need to convert to the greenpeace cynicism about government, corporations, and consumerism. Maybe I need to prescribe to their very limited world view about how the "system" works. Not yet, I choose to hold out some hope and belief that there are more options and perspectives than Ms. Leonard's movie communicates.

On a side note.....how do the 7,000 DVDs she is sending out work into her solution? Or how does her world travel work into the consumption equation? Guess it easier to preach than to practice (are we, including she, even remotely ready for her recommendations?)...

I also tend to agree with the idea of unbiased education.

So how do you feel about the 24/7 bombardment of pro-consumerism propaganda, aka "advertising"? How do you feel about kids in school watching ad-supported TV services such as Channel One News?

The film is meant to be provocate, and so is obviously biased. But it makes several important points that are never discussed by our society.

1. Our manufacturing system is linear, and a linear system cannot continue indefinitely in a world of finite resources. We consume far too many resources in manufacturing and distributing products. (Just one example: next time you go shopping look at how many things you buy that are double and triple packaged with non recyclable and non biodegradeable materials.)

2. Our manufacturing system does hide the true cost of production by 'externalizing' costs. Society unknowningly has to pay these hidden costs so that private business can increase sales with lower prices.

3. We have far too many products with planned obselescence. There is no good reason to have new models of cars, phones, clothes, electronics every single year. This system is designed solely to maximize profit for business, and provides no actual benefit to the consumer.

Personally, I am considering using this video as a provocative discussion starter in a college science class. I don't agree with all of it, but it does contain many ideas that our consumer society ignores. I think it could be used in grade schools also if followed by a discussion led by the teacher. That would be a far less biased discussion of the subject than what the students get every day when they bombarded by advertising on TV, the internet or radio.

for a film that squishes an explanation of our global economy in 21 minutes, it's pretty damn good. it also reminds me of "affluenza", a BBC(?) miniseries and book about our addiction to stuff, and the movement towards living lives with less stuff.

also, re: "unbiased education"...wtf does that mean? are you simply saying we should dump a bunch of dry facts and factoids on our kids, and let them sort it out without providing a narrative? because that's the closest a human being can get to "unbiased", and even then, unless you dump ALL available data about any given subject on a kid, you're biasing the information you're handing out by sorting things into important and unimportant information.

i can't know if this is how Phillip meant it, but usually "unbiased" means showing an equal amount of information from both sides (regardless of the actual proportion of information), and make them both out to be equally valid (regardless of whether one side is predominantly factual, while the other is predominantly made up); it plays into the "every story has two sides" thing, and also it often seems that people assume that reality is always exactly between two extreme worldviews, generally around the point on the sliding-scale they are on. this is of course not true, not every issue has two equal sides, not every truth is somewhere halfway between what two sides claim, and sometimes our self-made "reality" is closer to fiction than to actual reality.

Thanks for the video. I agree that it is slightly biased, but it has to be. To not want people to see it for that reason seems ridiculous...like sticking your head in the sand and pretending nothing is wrong. Each of us makes choices about how we spend our money, choices that I would suggest matter for more than any vote due to the sheer quantity of how much we consume. Americans (myself included) in particular are guilty of consuming far too much, and that while science and society still needs some consumption, some resource exploitation, there are surely thousands of better methods out there. If only society would stand up and face it full-on, perhaps we could work together to find solutions, one by one. I for one am ready...

Showed it today in my biology classroom in Missoula, Montana. Of course, it's too late, because we've got our own local controversy to frame it. Mostly I watched my students watch the video, which I love to do. They were riveted when she went through planned and perceived obsolescence. Some nervous giggles about third-world exploitation issues. I think The Story of Stuff is wonderfully provocative. Yes it's over-the-top at times, but perhaps that's what is needed to shake people out of the consumerist fog-of-war engulfing them. The only way you can deny we are in this fog is if you have blinders on (or really-cool-new-halogen-fog-lamps-$79.88 at WalMart), or you firmly believe in consumptive Manifest Destiny, or don't care and are waiting for the Rapture.
For something perhaps more tangible, may I suggest http://www.oilandwaterproject.org. Local boy Seth Warren brought "Baby," the vegetable oil-burning Toyota firetruck, to our school today for a visit. We also watched his movie, which is excellent and the kids related to it. My later biology class got to watch The Story of Stuff. It was a good day for this liberal science teacher. So there.

I tend to agree with the primary content and message of this video(especially issues of obsolescence, "Cradle to Cradle" was an eye opener for me years ago). Unfortunately, I am hesitant to believe it is appropriate for what I assume is the target audience, primary and middle schoolers. I base this assumption off the tone and quality/method of presentation, but it is an assumption so I could be wrong. I hesitate to believe its "what is needed" for younger school children. ( Young adults, maybe, as long as they have developed the critical thinking skills to analyze its content. ) Have there been any studies regarding type of media used and retention/analysis in young school children?

I guess I tend to be hesitant that we are to the point of needing to incorporate such tools into our primary and secondary education. I like to think we aren't there yet. I would be more interested in teaching kids the processes, the consequences (positive and negative), and fostering critical analysis rather than showing them such a biased, over the top film. I think such a style of holistic education would actually empower young Americans to analyze every aspect of the consumption chain, including media advertising (and Dunc, I feel the same way about 24/7 advertising as I do this film, I don't appreciate the "means"). I guess I fear films like this are trying to control the outcome and use biased formats for the means. I tend to believe we lack much control over educational outcomes (as far as how students internalize and act upon knowledge) and are best to focus on the means (which I believe should be noticeably "unbiased").

To clarify my idea of "unbiased education": my idea is that we create critical thinkers, not indoctrinated, dogmatic followers in our national education system. Maybe this specific film can satisfy that outcome, but I fail to see that. I see a media product that has a message that is undermined by the application of gross stereotypes. I especially think the message is lost with the very biased interpretation of corporations and flawed government (get ride of the very tangible political bias and the content is hard to ignore). I just believe that level of cynicism backfires and primarily creates a polarized view of a very complex issue. I for one don't believe sustainable change comes from such extremes fringes, but instead comes from a slow (normally) internalization that is catalyzed by an existing value system.

I am intrigued by the use of guilt in the environmental movement (inferred point of this blog) I am just hesitant to believe that should be a tool for such young audiences. Could be wrong, maybe we are to the point of having to use the same techniques as advertisers and media outlets. I sincerely hope not.

I tend to agree with the primary content and message of this video(especially issues of obsolescence, "Cradle to Cradle" was an eye opener for me years ago). Unfortunately, I am hesitant to believe it is appropriate for what I assume is the target audience, primary and middle schoolers. I base this assumption off the tone and quality/method of presentation, but it is an assumption so I could be wrong. I hesitate to believe its "what is needed" for younger school children. ( Young adults, maybe, as long as they have developed the critical thinking skills to analyze its content. ) Have there been any studies regarding type of media used and retention/analysis in young school children?

I guess I tend to be hesitant that we are to the point of needing to incorporate such tools into our primary and secondary education. I like to think we aren't there yet. I would be more interested in teaching kids the processes, the consequences (positive and negative), and fostering critical analysis rather than showing them such a biased, over the top film. I think such a style of holistic education would actually empower young Americans to analyze every aspect of the consumption chain, including media advertising (and Dunc, I feel the same way about 24/7 advertising as I do this film, I don't appreciate the "means"). I guess I fear films like this are trying to control the outcome and use biased formats for the means. I tend to believe we lack much control over educational outcomes (as far as how students internalize and act upon knowledge) and are best to focus on the means (which I believe should be noticeably "unbiased").

To clarify my idea of "unbiased education": my idea is that we create critical thinkers, not indoctrinated, dogmatic followers in our national education system. Maybe this specific film can satisfy that outcome, but I fail to see that. I see a media product that has a message that is undermined by the application of gross stereotypes. I especially think the message is lost with the very biased interpretation of corporations and flawed government (get ride of the very tangible political bias and the content is hard to ignore). I just believe that level of cynicism backfires and primarily creates a polarized view of a very complex issue. I for one don't believe sustainable change comes from such extremes fringes, but instead comes from a slow (normally) internalization that is catalyzed by an existing value system.

I am intrigued by the use of guilt in the environmental movement (inferred point of this blog) I am just hesitant to believe that should be a tool for such young audiences. Could be wrong, maybe we are to the point of having to use the same techniques as advertisers and media outlets. I sincerely hope not.

sorry about repetitive responses, not sure how I did that.

As a kid who graduated out of the Missoula high school system in 2000, Craig, I'm glad your still there and engaging your students. I think that people are seeing too many minor flaws in this production and missing the bigger picture: Humanity is on an out-of-control path with consumption, and we need to stop. Soon. What matters when you are working with kids is to get them to engage. To wake-up. To care. If you do that while simultaneously teaching skepticism and critical thinking, you needn't fear they'll become indoctrinated zombies. But if you don't show them stuff like this, or don't engage with them, you'll have missed your chance.

Gee, Jim, thanks a lot for your provocative and completely non-constructive sarcasm.

But I guess that's the whole point of your comment, isn't it?

I agree with the basic point that we waste way too much. But I take umbrage with some of her statements and conclusions. In particular, she is just dead wrong about planned obsolescence in computers. The CPU (which seems to be the funny jigsaw-law piece she talks about) is not the only part of the computer that is upgraded. It's not just ignorance either, I've sent her emails informing her of her error that have gone unanswered. Also, some statements like "governments are here to protect us" are loaded with non-fact based philosophical viewpoints.

However, and I can't stress this enough, the parents and school board must have the heads firmly planted if they are worrying about the lack of an alternative point of view about this internet presentation. Come on. I can't count how many times I had to endure teachers in grade school and college pushing their own particular viewpoints. Everything from high school health teachers arguing unashamedly against abortion to telling us that slaughtering Native Americans was good to telling us copying music is bad. You can't avoid this. Every teacher is going to try and sneak their viewpoints into the classroom. In many ways, that's what teaching is.

What parents and the school board should really be concerned about is the lack of education in critical thinking and scientific method.

The definitive critique to the Story of Stuff:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5uJgG05xUY

I was only able to watch the first minutes of the video "critique" of the Story of Stuff, link provided by Brian above. What a joke! Advances in technology won't be able to save future generations from human over population and a wasteful United States society. The best thing the rest of the world could do is to stop doing any business with the United States.

The Story of Stuff is exactly what the young students need to see and learn from. Any parent that objects to it doesn't really love their children and/or grandchildren because their children will be suffering for the lack of care given to the planet by their great(not)-grandparents who are selfish, disgusting christian jackasses.

I like the video. It covers some hard truths, and truth isn't always easy to swallow. I think that Ms. Leonard's goal was to make us aware of what's going on, not to make us feel guilty for our ignorance. We all have the power of choice. So if a kid wants a new Lego set, then so be it. Kids should enjoy being kids. However, if they are old enough to understand where their toys come from, then they should be made aware...and who knows? Maybe they'll be able to make choices for themselves. What a concept! I would recommend this video to anybody who's raising eyebrows at our insatiable need for consumer goods. It makes you think.

We would be better served indoctrinating our children with material that is factually correct.

Ãzellikle son zamanların en popüler cilt yenileme ürünüdür. Pembe Maske bir çok ünlü isim tarafından da yoÄun olarak kullanılmaktadır. Yüzdeki kırıÅıklıklar, sivilce ve sivilcelerin sebep olduÄu deformasyonları gidermede kullanılan Pembe yüz maskesi ve inceltici, selülit giderici olarak kullanılan pembe vücut maskesi olmak üzere iki farklı ürün mevcuttur.