PR Straight Talk

It seems as though communication as an industry is growing, but communication as genuine and spirit-filled interaction between people is declining.  “Communication” as a means to an end – in journalistic reportage that appears in print or on-air with the scintillating, the gossipy and that which appeals to a lower common denominator of tastes in order to draw readers or viewers in in order to benefit from larger ad revenues – is on the upsurge.  Communication as what appears in film that focuses on violence, or sex, is on the upsurge.  Communication as to what some companies pay p.r. and advertising people to promote services or products that aren’t necessarily of quality, is on the upsurge as well.

Because big money is behind all these communications ventures, communications is booming; and sadly reflects that part of our culture that is all about bucks first, and reaching people’s minds and hearts with something worthwhile to say…a distant second.

Sadly, these values are reflected in the culture, and the culture reflects these values.  I see less and less real communication and meaningful connection between people in our communities.  I see, increasingly, more and more disconnection and fragmentation between people – even between neighbors.  I see people less interested in getting to know their fellows, within their neighborhoods and wider communities, than ever before.  I see more and more of people treating one another as a means to an end, and not as ends in themselves.  I’ve been noticing more of this within the last 20 years, and I’ve seen it regrettably grow within the last ten.

I see less of “community” – of people reaching out and caring about one another.  Less talking to one another.  I see less “listening” to one another – and less real sharing of one another’s lives and stories.  I see less caring and less heart.  Less authentic acknowledgement.

I see the art of conversation at dinner tables declining, even evaporating, especially with neighbors inviting neighbors to dinner to share openly and with a feeling of comeraderie.

I see more disconnection, more apathy, more distrust.  With every observation reflecting the above, there are hopefully notable exceptions – and people out there who do live in caring and connecting communities.  Hopefully.

So I see technology becoming more sophisticated and advancing rapidly, large corporate interests which seem to encourage the lowering of tastes and values, a media too often bought into the delivery of mediocrity in programming, and less heart in communications on a grand scale – and in one-on-one personal interaction.  The culture is declining not in technology, but in the quality of its humanity.  More technology…less heart.

It seems as though, too, that the emergence of the Internet is a double-edged sword.  Because while there is a revolutionary new opportunity for inter-human communication, it’s all electronic where the physical presence of others vanishes.   

If only all this were not so, but this is what I see.  Time for a cultural revolution of the heart, that reestablishes real communication about what’s important.  What’s most important, it seems to me, is seeing each other, and acknowledging each other, and meeting each other in our mutual presences, for the unique and extraordinary beings each of us truly is, connected to one another by the Web of Life, our common humanity, our need for love and recognition of our own and others’ precious lives.

Such a revolution…of the heart…can create an increased demand within the culture for a higher and more humane standard of values.  A culture so transformed would then reflect back on the quality of our individual lives.

Is this too much to count on?  In the end, it’s up to us.

Television has not yet actualized its potential nor realized its responsibility to humankind. The most powerful medium on the planet, the medium that has the greatest impact on individual and collective consciousness, has fallen far short of its ability to enrich and empower our lives. If someone would argue that this is not television’s mission, I would then ask them to please explain what they think constitutes that mission. Surely, it must be more than purpose as a description of function. We all know that television transmits programming; and that this programming is generally intended to entertain or inform.

To paraphrase MacLuhan, it’s not just that the medium is the message. The medium and its messages are also powerful imprinters on the human psyche. In this context, the medium of television not only transmits programming; it is also, by its very nature, in the business of programming minds. It is, therefore, a decisive activator and determinant in the condition of human consciousness and human behavior.

To be sure, thanks to PBS and programs like Nova, or programs such as those presented by Dr. Wayne Dyer, and talks shows like Oprah, not everything on tv today is vapid.  But the suppositions of network television programmers leave much to be desired.

Many have already looked at the relationship of violent programming and violence in our society. How many have looked at the tendency of too many programs to anesthetize its viewers with vapid material that merely fills time slots and tranquilizes people into deadened passivity instead of engaging, enlivening and opening their minds and hearts? How many have seen a relationship between the increasing number of shows dedicated to what I call “negative creation” - to tabloid mania and the lowering of consciousness? Just what is it that programmers and producers think they’re doing? Do they think that these kinds of magazine and talk shows, characterized as they are by violence, vicious gossip and the baser side of human behavior, bring out the best in people?

It’s much clearer that these programs depress our spirits and undermine and violate our deep yearning to rise above separatism, greed, selfishness, vulgarity and self-hatred. ”

There is the argument that these are the shows that people want; these are the programs that pull in the ratings [and whatever pulls in the ratings pulls in the bucks]. Television executives are adept at noticing what works. What works is what is entertaining and what gets attention. What gets attention is what seems enlivening. They’ve made the choice to create a kind of enlivenment packaged as entertainment that presents the baser side of human experience, knowing that humans, out of their boredom, self-doubts, or lack of fulfillment, can be attracted to the negative if they don’t have the option of turning to the positive that’s packaged in an equally entertaining fashion. Humans are attracted to negative or positive creation, because humans are creative beings.

These tv executives have chosen to ignore the possibilities for entertaining, enlivening programs that not only captures what’s real (for surely many of the suffering souls who expose themselves to national TV audiences on the plethora of current talk shows are having “real” experiences) - but they’ve also chosen to ignore that which points to truth.

The feeling of anxiety is real, but actions based on anxiety are about the future, which is illusory since it is a moment in time which has not yet occurred. The feelings of guilt are real enough, but actions based on guilt come out of a memory of something done in the past. The past is gone forever and, like the future, is an illusion in the context of the here and now. Therefore, actions that emanate out of anxiety or guilt are not true; nor are most actions that emerge out of fear, since fear is almost always a distortion that stems from some conditioning.

While we must always acknowledge as real what people are feeling, we must set our sights on looking for the truth. The truth is always illuminating, and when the truth is spoken, it clarifies that which is distorted, no matter how “real” the distortion feels. The truth is that we as humans are struggling through the negativity of this world, the negativity that is a condition of duality, to find what’s really true. What’s really true has to do much more with what lies in the deepest recesses of our hearts:  love, understanding, insight, inspiration, and all that is connected to a fuller, richer dimension of human consciousness. The struggle to reach and access higher truth, the struggle through negativity, is a noble story worthy of telling, but we must always be mindful of its contextual underpinning, of the truth that lies waiting to be revealed in the deeper recesses and on the higher planes.

People who feel fundamentally powerless, depressed and/or frustrated will turn to programs that represent pure escapism or depict scenarios that portray a reality uglier than the one we live in, especially when there are few other options; and when programmers have turned away from the creation of material dedicated to what is true. Egos need reassurance, but this is a reassurance that negates the nobler possibilities and potentialities of human nature.

Television as a business is money-driven, pure and simple, some would argue. The pattern shows that what makes money is what represents the lower aspects of the human condition. This is distorted, unclear and irresponsible thinking.

The pattern exists because it is a pattern that shows itself to work, to the detriment of a newer, more positive pattern that has been undertried because it has been harder to think of programs that inspire us, encourage us, and lift us out of our negativity that are also entertaining. The reason it’s been harder is because we tend to stay with what works.

The human mind can be manipulated to exercise curiosity, attraction and addiction for lower forms of energies out of an external environment that intentionally or unintentionally supports these conditions. Humans seem to be attracted to the energy of negative drama, or negative creation; but I would argue that at the deepest level they are attracted to what enlivens and brings meaning to their lives. Sadly, television executives seem adept at not noticing this truth.

Television must do more than mirror the state of consciousness in our society. If people feel isolated, powerless, frustrated, unexpressed and suppressed, is it socially conscious and conscionable to present programs that sustain and reinforce the status quo? To my way of thinking, it’s just as ugly to present sleazy gossip as it is to present violence for violence’s sake. Both kill the human spirit and the human imagination.

At the core of the problem is a severe underestimation and/or underwillingness to recognize the capacity and need of human beings to be seen and to reach for their higher potential and promise. Humans need to grow, to love self and others, to create, to express, to build, to connect, to cooperate, to imagine and to be challenged. Every human being who comes into this world, at the deepest level wants to make a difference in this world.

New and more programming with a human potential/spiritual dimension must also focus on programs that inspire people to go out into the world to do something constructive.

Programmers must find ways to engage people in their real lives, and to design viewing as a step towards that lively creative engagement, not merely to sustain the disempowering energy of passive “viewing.”

What has been insufficiently supported in television programming is the idea that people can rise from mere existence to a sense of being intellectually, emotionally and spiritually alive. What has also been insufficiently supported is the idea that television can enrich, empower, expand, inspire, inform, educate and entertain. Instead of descending into programming that reflects the lowest common denominator of attitudes, tastes and proclivities of our collective viewing population, television can pull and raise content to the highest values of human aspiration. In so doing, a whole new kind of energy and presence can be achieved on the screen, lifting and guiding and challenging individuals and society to new heights and new vistas.

None of this is to say that the “shadow” dimension will be ignored. On the contrary, we want to shed light on the parts of ourselves that we repress out of guilt, shame or our sense of inappropriateness in society. It may be that some of the popularity of so-called “sleaze” programming is based on people’s projection of their own shadow onto the shadows of people they see on the screen. If so, there may be some purpose to these shows. What makes more sense, however, is to consciously reveal the energy and aliveness contained in the shadow, and offer people the hope and promise that this energy can be transformed and moved in constructive, even spiritual ways.

Television can support the driving force of evolution and the ascension of consciousness in every man, woman and child. It can support what moves forward. The greatest lesson yet to be learned is that television as a for-profit enterprise need not preclude television as a vision-driven force for good in the world. What supports the best in people supports our highest values. What supports these highest values has value. We need to move towards a society that values this kind of value above all else. When we do, the money and marketing considerations will flow out of vision. The reverse can never be true.

We need to stand ready to say NO to the horrors of this past century and say YES to a brighter, more enlightened future for men, women and children everywhere. It’s time to create a kind of television that supports E Pluribus Unum : “many out of the one” and individuals within community; a kind of television where every human being can be inspired to grow, to enrich their lives and to fulfill their missions in the world. That’s what will create true social empowerment and the kind of global interconnectedness that will make the 21st Century filled with unimaginable hope and possibility.

1.  “Vivekananda: Lessons in Classical Yoga” by Swami Vivekananda (edited by Dave DeLuca) is, in my opinion, a spiritual masterpiece.  There are two reasons for this:  first, one can recognize almost instantly that the book is universal, and has relevance for anyone of any religious persuasion; and second, it is simple at the level of profundity.  

I have never read a book that speaks to the reality of the great Oneness that permeates the Universe, existence and our lives, in such a compelling and inspirational manner as does Vivekananda in this wonderful compilation of the great Swami’s own speeches and writings.

I recommend this book highly for seekers and realizers alike.

2.  “From Diversity to Unity: Return to the One Spiritual Source” by Hua-Ching Ni, a great Chinese master who in his youth learned from highly achieved masters in the mountains of China.

The book endeavors to review the objective reality of the world’s great religions, but then works to reintegrate the flow of different cultures and present them as one universal culture.  It’s a wonderful read for people who honor humankind’s diversity, but also see the Unity that transcends diversity.

3.  “The Writings of Florence Scovel Shinn” by Florence Shinn.  Florence Shinn was a pioneer on the subject of the power of positive thinking, the power of the spoken word, and the power of treatments and affirmations.  What a wonderful book, with powerful affirmations and treatments that can make a difference in clearing the cobwebs of the mind, and manifesting abundance and fulfillment in your life.

“Self Matters:  Creating Your Life From The Inside Out” by Dr. Phil McGraw is the best self-help book, both written and audio versions, I’ve ever read or listened to – and I’ve read and listened to many.  Dr. Phil starts out with an essential premise:  we all come into the world with an “authentic self” – and that organic self, filled with natural God-given unique talents and attributes, becomes marred with negative programming and influences from key people in our external lives, at crucial points in our growth and development, that distort who we truly are in terms of how we see ourselves.  We develop a false self-concept.

Until we can break down these key moments, and key influencers in our lives, and the negative messages and belief systems about ourselves we’ve bought into – the path along the journey of life can be rocky and problematic.  Dr. Phil then provides exercises and questions we can give ourselves that help us isolate those moments, and allows us to come into contact with the false messages and false beliefs we’ve absorbed – and by becoming conscious of them – our path to releasing them, and coming into a healing realignment with our authentic selves, can begin.

It’s not that the information is glaringly new – but it is brilliantly and simply presented – from a man who’s obviously not only gone through the process in his own life – but who’s deeply thought through the cause-and-effect relationships, and presents his findings in an upbeat, confident, centered and inspirational style of delivery.  The book reaches, and has impact.

I recommend the book to anyone who’s been through therapy, self-therapy or no therapy.  Dr. Phil seems to be the therapist we all deserved, but didn’t necessarily get.

Some time ago, I realized why I probably chose public relations as a career, and publicity, specifically.  First, I was enough in touch with my “authentic self” to realize I loved to write, and loved to communicate.  I also enjoyed the art of persuasion.  Second, my false or inauthentic self had a great need for approval from the outside – beyond the norm.  Public relations provided a certain satisfaction for the fulfillment of my talent – and my need.  But the latter was somewhat out-of-whack.  I craved getting the approval of editors and producers on a story I had pitched.  And I felt a real down when the proverbial “rejection slip” came along – the “no, not interested.”

I think this is true for a number of my colleagues in this field, as well as literary and entertainment agents.  We live for the approval, and “die” when the rejection comes.  We confuse the approval or disapproval of our pitch, for ourselves.  We believe we’ve been rejected when nothing could be further from the truth.

The way out of this, for me, was to come into greater touch with my authentic self, and develop greater self-respect for who I truly was, and to disassociate rejections from rejection of “moi.”  Perhaps strains of this false belief, that I had to count on approval from journalists for my own self-affirmation, came from the fact that I am the child of parents who survived the Holocaust.  Perhaps I inherited a semi-conscious belief that we are “not good” because society once said so – and that we are embarked on a path where we constantly seek society’s approval.   

The story of how I moved through that is too long for this blog entry – but the turnaround comes from a moment, and recurrent moments – of realization that my self-concept is affirmed by me, from the inside out.  I don’t ultimately need anyone to approve of who I am, or what I’m worth.  My worth – and our worth – is inherently God-given.  I am – and we are – individualized creative expressions of a Higher Power; and so I am perfect just as I was created. 

That led to a moment as a publicist where I no longer invested my own self-definition or self-worth on the approval or disapproval of a journalist’s reception to my pitch of a story idea.  I became “unattached” to the outcome of that pitch.  And when I did that, I noticed that I gained increased respect from journalists – but most important, from myself.