Fear Factor; The Telephone Rings in the White House?
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
A telephone fills the screen. The deep blood red hue warns us war is eminent. Little light shines on the barely visible instrument. The tone is ominous and foretells the future. The audience is aware there is trouble in the world. Slowly, the table turns. A yellow bulb in the center of this contrivance communicates doom. It glows and pulsates. We concentrate on the orb shaped object squarely in the center. The dominance of this display is foreboding. Our future is in the hands of the person who picks up the receiver. The question reverberates through our mind. Who will we place in this most powerful position?
Americans are familiar with the symbol and the stories attached to this crimson contraption. With a word, the leader of the world's superpower can commit this country to war. Perchance, the voice on the other end of the line will inform the President of the United States, we have been attacked. No matter what is said or done, citizens in this country recognize the dire circumstances.
In cinematography circles, the term is mis-en-scene. An auteur creates the scene, sets the stage, and decides what is essential to communicate. A desired message is maximized. The method and manner in which a communiqué is delivered can manipulate a made-up mind. The choice of lighting is critical. Textures and colors are telling. Space can be used to intensify the sensations a spectator will experience.
If characters are in view, the make-up they wear must be impeccable, believable, and impressive. Costumes must speak with a voice so subtle as to be unnoticeable. Prominent persons in the cast must dress in a manner that draws attention to them. Interiors convey a meaning. The medium is the message.
Advertisers understand this and take advantage of the props. If the product to be sold is luscious to look at, then a director will focus on the appearance. If the façade is less appetizing, alterations are possible. When the exterior is less expressive, the experience can be enhanced. Sex sells. Food is fine. Meals fill our minds. Snacks satiate our stomachs. Sustenance stuffs the pocketbooks of industrialists who manufacture the provisions. Profits are plenty with thanks to the primary ingredient, promotional advertisements.
Product placement, a more discreet statement, can be far more powerful than a blatant cry for attention. Consider the items purchased by patrons as they wait at a counter or in line. A magazine title titillates. A shopper will stop to scan the articles. Sunglasses positioned at the front of an aisle remind a buyer it is bright outside. If the weather looks as though it may take a turn for the worse, and umbrellas are near when a patron enters the store, the collapsible canopies will leap into human hands. Storeowners understand, it is location, location, location. Humans hope to be comfortable and comforted.
Political consultants comprehend the dynamic is true for the candidate. Name recognition is the first priority. Once a person's identity is established, a professional public relations representative will work to solidify a respectable reputation. Slogans echo throughout the airwaves. Experience, judgment, the record, and a personal biography that captures the character and imagination are publicized.
A Presidential aspirant, desirous of greater exposure, and an opportunity to appear average Joe or Jane, will perform on a popular television program. Light hearted comedies and self-deprecating humor certainly will sell a figure considered too formal or firm. A so called "candid" communication will garner more votes, just as a can of Pepsi in the hands of an athlete will stimulate more sales.
Public relations persons, campaign coordinators, and advertising consultants such as Roy Spence, creator of the 1984 Red Phone commercial and the 2008, 3 AM advertisement, know what the public wants. Mister Spence is familiar with what the electorate will buy. This specialist selects the stage, and sets the scene. He has a flare for the dramatic. Just as a knowledgeable film director can gently induce an audience to suspend disbelief, a fine marketeer can persuade the constituency to cast a ballot for the candidate of his or her choice.
In 1984, Mister Spence convinced Democrats that then Democratic Presidential hopeful Walter Mondale was preferable. Mondale would protect them from an unknown enemy. Democratic Presidential challenger Gary Hart was doing well in the polls. It seemed the good-looking well-spoken rival had a chance. Hart might have won the nomination. However, political commercials warned the public Gary Hart might not experienced enough to hold the office or the red telephone receiver.
Human as he is, a public performance brought Hart's judgment into question. His own folly hurt him. However, even without such a slip, history tells us an advertisement can change the public's perception. From television sets nationwide a narrative evolved.
The most awesome, powerful responsibility in the world lies in the hand that picks up this phone. The idea of an unsure, unsteady, untested hand is something to really think about. This is the issue of our times. On March 20, vote as if the future of the world is at stake. Mondale. This president will know what he's doing, and that's the difference between Gary Hart and Walter Mondale.
Voters were intentionally filled with fear. Might a Senator be less senior and not as prepared as a former Vice President was? Could it be that time in the White House better qualifies a person to be President of the United States? Americans cannot be certain of what might have been. We only comprehend what we believe. Whether the world was, or is, in fact dangerous, it matters not. Humans feel great trepidation for the unknown. An imminent threat daunts and taunts us. The unfamiliar is perhaps more ghastly than any reality might be.
When it comes to ruling the brain, fear often is king, scientists say."Fear is the most powerful emotion," said University of California Los Angeles psychology professor Michael Fanselow.
People recognize fear in other humans faster than other emotions, according to a new study being published next month. Research appearing in the journal Emotion involved volunteers who were bombarded with pictures of faces showing fear, happiness, and no expression. They quickly recognized and reacted to the faces of fear -- even when it was turned upside down.
"We think we have some built-in shortcuts of the brain that serve the role that helps us detect anything that could be threatening," said study author Vanderbilt University psychology professor David Zald.
Other studies have shown that just by being very afraid, other bodily functions change. One study found that very frightened people can withstand more pain than those not experiencing fear. Another found that experiencing fear or merely perceiving it in others improved people's attention and brain skills.
When people are panicked, they react and remember. Any good advocate [advertiser] understands if the message is to be effective, it must be unforgettable. Public relations is the power of storytelling. Anyone can create a market for merchandise if they recognize they have three to four seconds to grab the attention of an audience. An promoter has moments more to tell a story. If an impression is to made, and the message is to influence, the information and delivery must be memorable.
In recent days, the public has been flooded with extraordinary expositions. The narrator warns in a portentous voice "It’s 3 am and your children are safe and asleep. But there’s a phone in the White House and it’s ringing. Something’s happening in the world. the question is asked of voters, 'Would you want Hillary Clinton to answer the call or Barack Obama?' Will experience settle your mind or will judgment quell your angst?
New York University researcher LeDoux says, "We've gone from 'vote for me or you'll end up poor' to 'vote for me or you'll end up dead.'" . . . .Why do these ads "work?"
"Elementary, my dear Watson": the amygdala. The amygdala overrides the work of the more thoughtful cortex of our brains. It is a vestigial organ that testifies to the superior nature of the brain's fear circuitry. Neurons only carry traffic one way from the cortex to the amygdala, which allows it to override the more logical and thoughtful cortex; it doesn't work the other way around. You might be able to "think" yourself out of an unreasonable or irrational fear, but, usually, the amygdala hobbles logic and reasoning, making fear "far, far more powerful than reason," according to neurobiologist Michael Fanselow of the University of California at Los Angeles, whom Ms. Begley quoted in her article this way, "It (the amygdala) evolved as a mechanism to protect us from life-threatening situations, and, from an evolutionary standpoint, there's nothing more important than that."
Some say talk is cheap. Speeches are not solutions. However, in reality resolve is an afterthought actually well-founded in fear. Try as humans might to silent the beast within, hysteria burgeons. Frenzy follows. Men, women, and children act on fervent beliefs. The telephone will ring in the dark of the night, and an experienced person must be in the Oval Office to answer it. People prefer to place their hope in reason, regardless of the fact that fear, our emotions are not really rational.
By the time the telephone rings in the White House Military officials have already acted. Professionals in the Pentagon are the first to respond and react.
Contrary to popular myth, and Hollywood portrayal, the hot line has never been a pair of red telephones, one in a drawer in the Oval Office, the other in the Kremlin. At first, it was a set of teletypes with messages punched in at a rate of about one page every three minutes. That system was replaced in the late 1970s with two satellite systems, as well as an undersea cable link.The American end of the hot line is located not in the White House but across the Potomac in the Pentagon -- at the National Military Command Center.
Without knowledge, people presume. Humans fill in the facts. Citizens rely on sources, even if these references appeal only to our innate fears. Indeed, if a informant can touch a nerve, they can cause abundant concern. Consternation is often the catalyst for great change. We see this in political polls and through our purchases. Currently, post September 11, 2001, Americans have bought the idea, we are in a necessary battle.
Even as far back as the 18th century the theorist Edmund Burke said, "No passion so effectually robs the mind of all its powers of acting and reasoning as fear." It's no wonder, then, that the electorate since 9/11 has been constantly manipulated with "orange" and "red" alerts and color-coded systems of assessing the threat of terrorist attack. (Duct tape, anyone?) After 9/11, few of us doubt that there are terrorists who threaten our country, but constantly invoking that threat for political purposes has become Plan "A" for this Republican administration. And it seems to be getting a great deal of play on the caucus stump, as well, especially from Republican hopefuls.Here is one interesting example of fear trumping reason. Flight insurance was offered that would cover "death by any cause" or "death by terrorism." The specificity of the word "terrorism," combined with the responses that it triggered, caused more people to spend money on "terrorism" insurance than they spent for "death by any cause" insurance, even though "terrorism" insurance is merely a small part of the "death by any cause."
Harvard University psychology researcher Daniel Gilbert is quoted in the article: "Negative emotions such as fear, hatred and disgust tend to provoke behavior more than positive emotions, such as hope and happiness do."
Hence, we may speak of peace and prosperity; nonetheless, Americans, as humans throughout the planet act on antipathy. Our aversions drive us further and more frequently than affirmations do. Politics, with all the claims that it is practical is in essence personal. Affairs of State are also psychological. More than a century ago, advertisers realized that the best tool they had was human emotions. Brain researchers may not have plotted the patterns at work within the gray matter, until recently; nevertheless, Applied Psychologist, Walter Dill Scott explains, entrepreneurs knew how to move the masses. Marketeers, then and now, acknowledged art alone, presented on a page or on a silver screen, does not have the appeal that an inferred message might. Science, if applied subliminally, sells as well as sex does.
In an address before the Agate Club of Chicago the speaker said: "As advertisers, all your efforts have been to produce certain effects on the minds of possible customers. Psychology is, broadly speaking, the science of the mind. Art is the doing and science is the understanding how to do, or the explanation of what has been done. If we are able to find and to express the psychological laws upon which the art of advertising is based, we shall have made a distinct advance, for we shall have added the science to the art of advertising."In a recent address before the Atlas Club of Chicago the speaker said: "In passing to the psychological aspect of our subject, advertising might properly be defined as the art of determining the will of possible customers.... Our acts are the resultants of our motives, and it is your function in commercial life to create the motives that will effect the sale of the producer's wares."
Perhaps that is why politicians invest as they do. The expected expense for influence in the 2008 Presidential election could exceed three [3] billion dollars, according to TNS Media Intelligence/Campaign Media Analysis Group, Cable News Network's consultant on political television advertising. Professionals in the public eye have learned from profiteers. 'You must spend money if you hope to "change" public opinion or odious perceptions. We all are familiar with the notion politicians are crooks. Image is everything if you wish to be elected or selected as the best software system, or the most sumptuous soda. Search engines also understand the importance of image and advertising. Coffeehouses are not exempt. As much as customers crave caffeine, without a bit of gentle coercion even the most loyal consumer might consider the cost of the Jamaican bean unnecessary.
- Microsoft - more than 20 percent of their annual revenue or $11.5 billion
- Coca-Cola – more than $2.5 billion
- Yahoo - more than 20 percent of their annual revenue or $1.3 billion
- eBay - 14 percent to 15 percent of its revenue - which was $871 million, much of that to advertise on Google
- Google – In the millions rather than billions of dollars – with $188 million
- Starbucks - $95 million
Fear can convince a constituent to vote as they will. When a presentation is deftly designed, people forget the influence of media. Persuasion is palpable. Human hearts are touched by tone, tint, and tenor. After, the emotional sentinel, the amygdala internalizes information, then people intellectualize. Men, women, and children ponder, and ultimately affirm that they are right to think as they do. The fives senses may not be directly involved in decisions made; still, information [or intuition] is studied through the filter of fear.
Americans think they analyze, what will occur if the red phone rings. Then, just as advertisers hope, they act emotionally. As citizens of the United States listen to the campaign commercials, watch the stump speeches, and seek solutions, we must accept that our choice will not be logical, for we are not reasonable. The two-legged animal called man is but a blip in the natural cycle of neurological events. The difference is, we have the capacity to build, and create machines that kill. Humankind acts more aggressively on apprehensions than other animals are able to do. We, the people are perhaps more vulnerable to descriptions, metaphors, and similes. The psyche is profound as is psychology. So, this election season remember.
This illustration of the way in which one chapter of psychology (Mental Imagery) can be applied to advertising is but one of a score of illustrations which could be given. Psychology has come to be one of the most fascinating of all the sciences, and bids fair to become of as great practical benefit as physics and chemistry. As these latter form the theoretical basis for all forms of industry which have to do with matter, so psychology must form the theoretical basis for all forms of endeavor which deal with mind.The householder in glancing through his morning paper has his attention caught by the more attractive advertisements. The mechanic in going to and from his place of employment whiles away his time in looking at the display cards in the trolley or the elevated cars. The business man can scarcely pass a day without being forced to look at the advertisements which stare at him from the bill boards. The members of the family turn over the advertising pages in their favorite magazine, not because they are forced to, but because they find the advertisements so interesting and instructive.
These persons are oblivious to the enormous expense which the merchant has incurred in securing these results. They are unconscious of the fact that the results secured are the ones sought for, and that in planning the advertising campaign the merchant has made a study of the minds of these same householders, mechanics, business men, and members of the family. Advertising is an essential factor in modern business methods, and to advertise wisely the business man must understand the workings of the minds of his customers, and must know how to influence them effectively, -- he must know how to apply psychology to advertising.
Roy Spence certainly knows his stuff. The Texas advertising consultant for Senator and Presidential hopeful Hilary Clinton, creator of the first 3 Ante Meridian commercial and the Red Phone infomercial has captured our attention. Mister Spence is truly a master. He is an artiste and a scientist. This amazing man has moved the media and the masses. He has advanced a implication, increased the audience, and altered the focus. Roy Spence, on more than one occasion, has triumphed. He successfully worked to make the most of the fear factor in a manner few can match. Perchance, when the telephone rings in the White House or at the Pentagon, we may want our man Roy to answer the call. Mister Spence grasps what alludes most malleable minds.
Congratulations Roy Spence. You are a marvel. You apply psychology and artistic principles. Mister Spence, you have proven yourself to be the genuine candidate of change. At a crucial moment in your candidate's campaign, you alter reality.
Situations, Sources, Slogans, Speeches, Solutions . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on March 4, 2008 at 11:00 AM in Advertising, Elections, Political Campaigns, Politics, Presidential Politics, Propaganda and Politics, Psychology | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The Yellow Brick Road, The Campaign Trail, and Us
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
Americans, mired in debt, desperate for adequate Health Care, fearful of foreclosures, and worried about a protracted war, cry out for change. Compatriots wish for a wizard, one who will work for the common folk, and not solely for self, a Commander-In-Chief who will acknowledge the current crises, and lead us into a Land like Oz. We want America to be the perfect country. We wish to be known as benevolent, caring, compassionate super power. We yearn to say aloud with conviction, "There is no place like home!"
Throughout the nation, citizens are thankful we have an opportunity to transform this country. Americans have the right to vote their conscience. In the land of the free and home of the brave, we can and will advocate for the values that made this country great. Citizens will walk through snow, sleet, ice, and rain to cast a ballot for the man or woman we think right for the homeland.
Democrats and Republicans alike hope to improve this nation and their station. The difference may be in degrees. For now, those most desirous of a Progressive revolution are the downtrodden. Democrats yearn for an event that will take away from the daily grind. Those on the Left hope for a gust of wind that will place them in the Emerald City where life is Green and clean, and where average people are the priority. Thus, Democrats participate in the process; they are intimately informed.
Iowa Caucuses, New Hampshire primaries, and the polls. Do we have a consensus? Is there a crisis on the campaign front? Might the race be too close to call, or is it all merely a manufactured media myth. We are told Hillary is ahead, or she was. Perhaps Edwards has the lead. Barack Obama is closing in, or was with the help of Oprah, maybe. Some skeptics say the throngs of fans want to touch a celebrity. The Obama/Oprah ogling will not necessarily equate to votes. Bill Clinton can do what no other has. Certainly, he will boost the New York Senator's numbers. However, the charismatic Clinton may not be enough; or perchance he is or has too much, too much power, influence, and baggage. No one is ever certain what the other Clinton will say or do when he publicly steps onto the stage. John Edwards might be the come from behind kid. This man and his family have seen and experienced hardships. After the pain of his son's death he, and wife Elizabeth have been on a shared mission.
This synopsis is Democratic politics in America, or is it? There are whispers of Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Bill Richardson in the halls of Iowa and New Hampshire hotels. The media mentions these notables may wish to accept another position. On the hill, the same is said. Each is considered experienced. Any of the three would be an ideal Vice President or Secretary of State, or so we are told. What we do not hear is what Americans would think if they were not told what to believe.
We read the research. A survey can be slanted to produce the desired results. Apparently, the polls are designed to deliver the information that the candidates, the campaigns, the columnist think our countrymen must know. Americans have head the rumors, the rhetoric, and the railed against such surveys. Intellectually, we understand that studies are skewed. Yet, we, the people repeat what we are told. He cannot win; he is too short. She will polarize the electorate. He is too Black, or is not enough of an Afro-American. He understands how divided the country is, and he will work to change the system. He has his place; it is just not in the White House. He would make an excellent Secretary of State, an Ambassador, or perhaps he serves us best in Congress.
Even the most articulate and educated cannot resist reiterations. Knowledgeable learned scholars, just as everyday students of the issues succumb to the standards. Perhaps, since few of us have the opportunity to validate what we trust is likely true, we surrender to the situation as it is reported. Thankfully, there are moments that allow us perspective.
On the eve of the New Year word spread far and wide. In electronic communiqués, reality and reason were evident. New Hampshire voters shared their experience, their distress, and disgust. Citizens in the land of the free, and home of the brave, are afforded only select choices. One candidate is dismissed before the electorate can cast a ballot. Yet, a few spoke out in dissent.
New Hampshire resident, Helen distressed and distraught wrote to her friends after she received a telephone call.
I just received a political phone call asking if I was going to vote in the primary. Then she asked if I was voting for a Democrat would it be Hillary, Biden, Obama, Edwards and a couple of others, and I told her she left the best one out - Dennis Kucinich. And she asked, "Is he a Democrat?" It turned out that she is working for the Clinton campaign. If she's representing the Clinton campaign, that's another reason not to vote for Hillary. The young lady did thank me for the information!
Imagine, within the Clinton Camp an campaigner, a spokesperson for the presumed future President knows nothing of another Presidential hopeful. A vibrant voice of the people is muffled so succinctly. The sounds Dennis Kucinich makes are silenced before those that live in the cloudy skies of politics-as-is can hear them. Fortunately, among the electorate and the friends of Helen there are those who like to label themselves '"enlightened" and proud of it.'
A few more-than-typically-well-informed voters care enough to look behind the golden curtain. Some in Iowa and New Hampshire understand they do not live in the Land of Oz. These compatriots comprehend, even if they themselves are prosperous, others are not. As good citizens these individual believe to their core they must act in accordance with the Constitution and consider all people are created equal. Helen cares for the common folk. See recognizes that Dennis Kucinich lived in dreadful poverty. He will do more than express false or fragile piety; Kucinich will relate and react to a circumstance that is real for him. This voter longs for a President who does more than posture and profess. For this compassionate soul, it is time for true change.
Like Helen, other people in New Hampshire [and Iowa] do not wish to follow the yellow brick road just because they are told that is the way to the Emerald City. A few know to trust that promises of fortune, or a solid foundation do not come when, for the most part, the status quo is sustained. Universal Health Care with Insurers in charge will not cover those who cannot afford the cost at any price. War will not end if one soldier remains in Iraq to "secure the peace" within a sovereign nation.
In the Granite State, the constituency can be hard to sway. A body of voters can challenge the conventions, and they do. When Aprille received two similar survey calls, she responded with glee, then revulsion.
I have had 2 phone calls just like that one and I did the same thing. The most recent one asked if I was voting for Clinton, Obama, or Edwards. I said...."There are a heck of a lot more candidates running, why aren't you mentioning them?" She said, "Who are you voting for?" I said..."I'm planning on voting for Kucinich." She said, "Kucinich?" I said....."Yes, Kucinich. And if you refuse to include the other candidates, then this is a bogus survey!" As I was hanging up, I heard her say that this survey was paid for by the Hillary campaign! What the bleep!?
Indeed. Might Americans consider what is true. Contrived, campaign rhetoric, and more importantly push polls [political telemarketing masquerading as a poll], do not give the constituency a choice. It is all good and well that the people are promised they can take their country back. However, in truth, as long as the public is told who will win, who is electable, and who is not worth a mere mention, then this election will be just as those we witnessed in 2000 and 2004. Cast your ballot. Then, let the courts decide.
America, as long as you vote as the wizards of Wall Street tell you to, if you cast your ballot for the person you believe will win, because that is what the broadcaster say is "spot on," then this country will not belong to the people on Main Street. Each time we choose the person defined as a victor, we give up our freedom. We are but munchkins, ruled by the glorified little man who stands behind the curtain and pulls the switch.
In fantasylands, citizens may never suffer. It seems people do not need to settle. Wizards work wonders. The people only follow their lead. In America, if we are all to prosper, life must be different. People in pursuit of happiness cannot take jobs just to survive, as they do now. They must not marry solely for money, food, or shelter. We can no longer vote for the candidate of "hope and change" while aware of the fact that this person is solidly part of the system that ensures our life is miserable.
In truth, in America, there are no glittery gold pavements, or yellow brick roads, that lead to Emerald Cities. We, together, the common man, woman, and child, with a leader who fully relates to our plight, must build these communities. Wizards who can offer us a heart, a brain, or courage do not dwell in the White House or on the campaign trail. We the people can make magic if we choose to think and act for ourselves.
If life is to be grand, we need to accept that Presidential hopefuls are humans. If a leader is to lead well, he or she must be able to relate to what we go through, for they have lived, and continue to live among us. If a candidate speaks of our carbon footprint, we might ask, what is yours. When asked of trade agreements, might we muse, Mister or Madame Presidential hopeful, how has such a pact transformed your life. Talk of deep pockets could prompt a look into the purse that strings an aspirant along.
Americans must be more realistic and less enamored with emeralds that they do not own, if they are to chose someone who will truly represent them. Just as a small paycheck alone will not secure our future, a political aspirant who speaks for the elite will not help bring us to the bargaining table. The cash of a spouse who lost his or her job will not bring endless smiles. Nor will our contributions to a campaign that is beholding to corporate influences help cure our ills.
If we wish to live in the Land of Oz, Americans must create it. We, the people, and a President, who is, as we are, must take our country back.
In our everyday existence, we accept that good looks and charm will not keep us warm at night. Nor, will the pretty one provide adequate Health Care. When on the streets, in the office, or at home we acknowledge that a sweet-talker does not have our best interests at heart. We recognize a colleague who wants only to climb. A snake-oil salesman smells of no good. A song and dance does deliver more than a tune.
Common folks flee when they encounter scams during their daily deeds. Yet, come election season, when Presidential candidates whisper words of all-I-want-to-hear . . . unless we are Helen, Aprille, or perhaps you, and I, citizens will follow the yellow brick road and forget who paints that pavement.
In 2008, and in all the years hence, let us remember that unless and until we recognize the wizard is in each of us, and in a nation united for a just cause, there will be no change.
Words for Wizards, and We, the People . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on January 1, 2008 at 12:00 PM in Advertising, Elections, Emotional Decisions, Hillary Clinton, Manipulated Media, Political Campaigns, Politics, Presidential Politics | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Americans Have No Choice; A Diet of Fats, Salts, Sugars
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
'Tis the season to be jolly. From Thanksgiving Day to the dawn of the New Year, Americans are encouraged to eat. He, she, you, and I are expected to fritter our fears away. We will worry not of weight gain, heart attacks, coronary artery disease, strokes, or diabetes. Citizens in celebration will gorge on and gulp down millions of morsels. Americans will eat, drink, and be merry with reckless abandon. There are some expressed concerns for food safety, especially after a year of scares; however, for the most part we will dine with delight.
Then, come the First of January we will do as we did last year and the year before, we work to munch more wisely. Most of us will make a conscious effort to decrease the fats, salts, and sugars in our daily diet. Individuals throughout the country will convince themselves it is only a matter of self-control. We can eat well if we decide to. Citizens in the USA believe what they ingest, how, and when is a choice. In the land of the free, and home of the brave, we boldly do, as we desire. Here, in America, there are food choices galore, or so we are led to believe.
However, since the late twentieth century Americans have actually had a very limited selection. They, we, are not free to dine as we might. Our menu is extremely restricted. We can chew on Acidulants, enriched Baking Aids and Mixes, luscious Cocoa and Chocolate, chemical Emulsifiers, Texturants, and Stabilizers, refined Flours, "organic" Nutrition Ingredients, [meager when available], processed Oils and Fats, palatable Protein Products, and "naturally" Sweeteners. If we wish to ingest more wisely, we can; that is, if we are up to the challenge. In the States, the Recommended Daily Allowance is wrought with ruse.
The public professes they want no government in their lives, or more importantly, on our dinner plates. Yet, Americans accept that administrative authorities must regulate to ensure that what we eat is truly safe. Federal Officials are necessary and tolerated in moderation. Indeed, Americans actually appreciate the Food and Drug Administration.
According to a survey of 30 federal agencies being released today, consumers asked about the FDA's performance believe that food labeling is useful, clear and understandable, that consumer alerts of food safety issues are useful, and that customers trust FDA to ensure food safety in the future . . .The survey asked about the usefulness and clarity of food labeling; customer awareness and the effectiveness of inspecting, testing, and labeling efforts; and the usefulness of consumer alerts; meats and poultry are regulated by USDA.
In addition to consumers' positive views of the food label and FDA's ability to ensure that food is safe, the survey also indicated that the FDA should increase public awareness of actions to ensure food safety and focus on awareness efforts during consumer alerts.
Despite the claims of contentment, for the most part Americans resent government influence in their daily lives. Americans are independent minded mavericks. Granted, we are grateful for the small favors the Food and Drug Administration affords us; however, we want no more assistance than we deem suitable. Citizens in this country are selectively scrupulous.
Americans prize and advocate a free enterprise system. We want the freedom to decide for ourselves what is best. Where food is concerned, citizens of this civilized nation want to preserve their right to choose. We welcome the rise of an innovative industrialist who might introduce an ingredient into the mix. A crunchier cookie, a sweeter soda, tastier tenderloins, a savory sauce, and a flavorful fondue, all are appreciated in abundance.
Cakes, cookies, crackers, pies, bread, potato chips, corn chips, popcorn, salad dressing, breakfast cereal, margarine, and animal products all taste good to the average American.. Regardless of the warnings, that each of these manufactured or mechanically prepared foods contain trans-fatty acids, are high in sodium, and are filled with high fructose corn syrup, those in the Western World continue to consume these tidbits with fervor.
Intellectually, we may know trans-fatty acids, salts, and sugars are hazardous to our health. We sacrifice some. Nonetheless, we do so slightly or on occasion. Mostly we gorge, gulp, guzzle and stuff our gullet with these gems and then die.
Clogged arteries might cause our demise. A heart attack could end our life. Obesity may do us in. Still we say, we rather eat fats and be happy.
Scientific evidence shows that consumption of saturated fat, trans fat, and dietary cholesterol raises low-density lipoprotein (LDL), or "bad cholesterol," levels, which increases the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). According to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health, more than 12.5 million Americans have CHD, and more than 500,000 die each year. That makes CHD one of the leading causes of death in the United States.
People say they might as well enjoy now. After all, we will all pass eventually. An additional year or two will not make a difference. The quality of our life is what matters. Besides, any true danger is moderated by the system.
In this agri-industrialist nation, we trust that if a corporation wishes to make a profit, they must and will keep the consumer in mind. That construct alone will guarantee quality. When it does not, then, the government will step in to preserve safety . . . well sort of.
Years ago, Josh joyfully ingested his early morning Egg McMuffin ™ in a Fifth Avenue McDonalds. As he ate, he read the news. An article in The New York Times, screamed for his attention. Hold That Fat, New York Asks Its Restaurants. He thought of how much he loves his partially hydrogenated oil filled foods. Joshua would not wish to be deprived of the greasy flavors that warm his belly. The young gent contemplated what might this announcement mean to him. Then, Joshua concluded, he need not worry. At least Gotham City officials give restaurateurs a choice. Proprietors will cater to what the their customers crave; thus, the world will continue to turn as it has.
Months later, a content Joshua sat in his overstuffed chair and snacked on a bag of Doritios®. He could not imagine a life more complete. Suddenly, that tranquil sense of calm disappeared. A radio announcer declared our democratic right to choose would be constrained. The broadcaster bellowed, New York City Plans Limits on Restaurants’ Use of Trans Fats. The earlier "request" had done nothing to reduce usage of the hazardous oils.
The Board of Health vote comes a year after it conducted an unsuccessful campaign to persuade restaurants to eliminate trans fats from their recipes voluntarily. It said