Aug 31, 2020
Should Media Be Held Accountable for Spreading Harmful Messages?
The all-too-real consequences of fictional stories
TRIGGER WARNING // discussion of discrimination, mental illness, and su*cide.
…
Have you ever felt the urge to commit a crime while watching Breaking Bad, or loved disobeying traffic laws in Grand Theft Auto 5 so much you felt like trying it in the real world? Though it may be ridiculous to claim that watching a fictional character commit a crime onscreen would encourage viewers to join the dark side themselves, there is still significant evidence to suggest that the media people consume can shape their thinking. My generation was raised in the Information Age — a time where we are exposed to opinions as opposing as night and day, and social issues as complex as the workings of a NASA rocket. With the majority of the world’s population being familiar with internet pop culture, we are more involved in media, and its inevitable effects, than ever before. But such effects have become so ingrained in society over the last 20 years that no matter a person’s age beauty standards, racial stereotypes, and mental health stigmas promoted by mass media will have an impact on their wellbeing. How can such media be held accountable, and to what extent should that be done, if at all?
The debate over whether excessive use of the Internet does more harm than good is one as old as the Internet itself because there is so definitive solution. It is often forgotten that before the internet similar things were said of cable TV or telephones and before that, paper. With each technological advancement, there will always be fans and critics, benefits and drawbacks, failures and successes. In the Internet’s case an entire generation of adolescents, Generation Z, has been raised with the entire world at their fingertips, and while this has led to new levels of communication and knowledge it has also resulted in overdependence to the point of degraded mental health. But blaming an addiction to something on the object itself signifies a lack of accountability. The Internet is merely a tool, however nefarious it and other aspects of technology may seem, so perhaps the real debate should be about how Generation Z’s handling of the tool can be improved. One could point out that the same logic applies to all forms of media but considering the immense societal influence media holds either within or beyond the Internet, the solution is not nearly as black-and-white.
With that in mind, one cannot warn of the negative effects of media without discussing the details of those effects, of which there are plenty to choose from. A prominent and long-lasting social issue is the pressure to favour certain physical characteristics of a person according to the beauty standards of that time. Although men are held to unrealistic standards as well, this pressure has historically been forced upon women using “Pin-Up” posters, magazines, and other widely distributed media featuring female supermodels. During the ‘Roaring 20’s’ and the rise of Pin-Up girls, the ideal woman was thin, long-legged and boyish, yet 30 years later that had shifted to favour curviness and promiscuity. Especially considering that these constantly-changing beauty standards are Western not those found in other parts of the world, it is safe to assume that what society considers beautiful at any given time should not be relied upon — and yet, women everywhere are still striving to be underweight, hating the parts of themselves that do not line up with these standards. This social issue would not have prevailed for so long if it had not been for the supermodel-obsessed culture established in media.
Media has also been responsible for reinforcing and instigating racism, as much a hundred years ago as today. Propaganda used by America, Germany, Russia, and other nations throughout both World Wars and the Cold War famously manipulated the public’s opinions of different races. When Japan made an enemy of the U.S. by bombing Pearl Harbour in 1941, the American government produced propaganda films featuring harmful racial stereotypes that resulted in discrimination against thousands of Japanese Americans and Asian-American citizens for decades afterwards. Amidst that was much more deep-rooted racism towards Black people of colour, still prevalent in the portrayal of Black characters in modern media. Stereotypes such as the ‘Mammy (wise Black caretaker)’, the ‘Gangster’, and the ‘Angry Black Man/Woman’ were soon followed by the ‘Strong, Unemotional Black Woman’ in recent years, disguising itself as feminism when really it is another unrealistic expectation for real Black individuals. It is still rare in the 21st century to find a comic, film or novel that fully features multiple Black characters without making the plot entirely about racial discrimination — and this is discouraging not because racism should be discussed in fiction less, but because it implies that the only thing Black people can do with their lives is suffer for being Black. Not to mention the fact that for all the years media has provided society with unrealistic beauty standards, the beauty of Black men and women was not even considered applicable, resulting in a collective rejection of Black attributes such as big curly hair or naturally dark skin that, again, prevails in the 21st century.
Poor portrayals of marginalized groups in media go even further than gender or race, impacting individuals with mental illness, disabilities and disorders as well. Have you ever heard someone being described as “Psycho”, “Retarded”, or “Mental”? A person being labelled any of these things reflects on them very badly — as unpleasant or annoying — and yet 1 in 4 young adults between the ages of 18 and 24 are mentally ill in the medical sense, with millions more having no control over their “Psychotic” or “Retarded” tendencies. In the past, mental illness was stigmatized due to a general lack of understanding, but in the Information Age where a simple Internet search can tell someone all they need to know about a certain disorder, other media is responsible for the persisting stigmas. A film such as Split that features a villain who murders other characters due to his Dissociative Identity Disorder reinforces negative perception of D.I.D., while the TV series The Good Doctor where the protagonist’s Autism gives him extraordinary skills is unrealistically positive. Even when fiction attempts to destigmatize mental illness by portraying it in a raw, educated way, it can often encounter the pitfall of romanticization which is just as harmful.
The first and most infamous example of romanticization of mental illness in fiction is the Young Adult Thriller novel 13 Reasons Why by Jay Asher, or specifically, its 2017 TV adaptation. The plot is about a teenage girl named Hannah Baker who commits suicide, then leaves cassette tape recordings of the reasons she chose to end her life for the protagonist to find. The book itself quickly became controversial for, according to some, being irresponsible with its heavy subject matter, but the fact remains that it succeeded in sparking a discussion of teen depression and suicide prevention. Its Netflix series adaptation, however, completely crossed the line, dragging its source material’s most important messages through the dirt and replacing them with several new, dangerous messages. While the novel used its tense psychological narrative to convey the reactions of teen and adult characters concerning depression, the TV series interweaves depression with emotional drama, highlighting delicate topics for shock value. The popularity the series received and continues to receive is evidence that doing so makes for a compelling narrative, but for those impacted by or experiencing suicidal ideation the themes imbedded in that narrative are too familiar to be simple entertainment. Surely fiction is no longer “just fiction” when the year 2017 witnessed a re-emergence of the ‘Werther Effect’, or an increase of suicides caused by a highly publicized fictional or non-fiction suicide, in the exact demographic 13 Reasons Why targeted. In the words of public speaker and author Jamie Twokorski:
“13 Reasons Why is essentially about a girl who, after death, is in complete control and getting revenge. And I think that’s a really scary message.”
The second key example of misuse of mental illness in fiction is found in the Young Adult novel All the Bright Places by Jennifer Niven. The plot follows the romance between two characters experiencing different forms of depression — Violet Markey grieving the death of a relative, and Theodore Finch who has Bipolar Disorder. Compared to 13 Reasons Why’s glorification of suicide, All the Bright Places at first tip toes more carefully around the subject, focusing instead on the tragic fate of the couple’s relationship. And yet, despite the author’s good intentions, both the novel and its 2019 film adaptation reduce mental health to a plot device, dismissing the long-term healing process required for the mentally ill in pursuit of a definite conclusion. [SPOILERS AHEAD] The main characters are depicted as heroic and quirky because of their struggles with depression, and even with one of the characters’ eventual suicide, the theme that love cures all remains. Although All the Bright Places makes a much better effort to portray mental illness in a respectful manner, it mimics 13 Reasons Why in simultaneously raising awareness for and romanticizing teen depression.
Considering the undeniable effects mass media has had on society past and present, it is becoming an increasingly accepted idea in recent times to call for enforced accountability. But because of the right creators have to express themselves through fiction, as well as the right any individual has to freedom of speech, the response to controversial messages in media has rarely gone beyond criticism or boycotting. After all, how can a person’s choices influenced by a work of fiction be the creator’s fault? Criticism of books, films and videogames is not the same as censorship, however, and is usually meant to protect those harmed or exploited by the contents of the media. If a fictional character in a work of fiction targeted towards an impressionable demographic holds a dangerous or offensive belief, it is the author’s responsibility to provide different perspectives and challenge that belief, either with the narrative or through another character. If a creator wishes to highlight a culture that is not their own, they should consider whether what they are doing is cultural appropriation, or at the very least do the research needed to portray that culture respectfully. These are baby steps to accountability founded in moral obligation, and no matter a person’s stance on how much impact mass media can have, the excuse that damaging messages in fiction can not in any way harm marginalized groups has never been valid.
Mass media, then, should be held responsible for conveying or promoting harmful messages, at least to a degree which criticizes and does not censor such media. Unlike the Internet, fictional media is not a tool but rather a vehicle for self-expression and promotion — connecting the ideals, emotions and experiences of people who will never meet. Being exposed to opposing worldviews is an important part of personal growth for all age groups, and the increased positive effects this exposure has had since the dawn of the Internet should not be undermined. But no matter how fictional it may be, a worldview that results in dehumanization or death is no longer a personal right, because it endangers others who have no choice in the matter. There is little that can be done about the scars harmful media has left on our history, so we should take advantage of the present to inform ourselves and others.
