February 3, 2019

No Image

Super Bowl Ads 2019: Stunts, Self-Deprecation And Celebrity Sightings

Harrison Ford and a dog stand in front of a house in a still from an Amazon commercial that ran during the 2019 Super Bowl.

Amazon YouTube

Pepsi should have chosen a different slogan for its ads during this year’s Super Bowl.

The company’s slogan was “More than okay.” Well, not really. In fact, most of the high-priced commercials we saw between the football plays were just OK. They were so careful to avoid scandal and backlash they felt leached of originality or bite.

That’s pretty much what Greg Lyons, Chief Marketing Officer of PepsiCo Beverages North America, predicted when I asked him last week what this year’s spots would look like: nothing controversial.

“The Super Bowl is a time for people to enjoy themselves and enjoy the ads,” Lyons said, deftly avoiding direct mention of the elephant in this particular room — allegations that the NFL blackballed former quarterback Colin Kaepernick for his silent protests over social justice issues, leading to the hashtag #Imwithkap trending before the big game started.

Super Bowl ad time was costly — CBS charged up to $5.3 million for each 30 seconds of time — so the commercials sidestepped anything that might offend. That left viewers with a lot of spots centered on emotional tributes to first responders and soldiers, artificial intelligence and robots acting out and awkward celebrity cameos. One example: Charlie Sheen, reading a newspaper as Mr. Peanut speeds by in a car shaped like a peanut, looking up to say, “and people think I’m nuts.” Really.

Here’s my take on what worked — and so much more that didn’t — on the world’s biggest showcase for TV advertising:

Best argument for a free press: “The Washington Post Spot” “Democracy Dies in Darkness.”

Yeah, as a journalist and sometime media critic, I’m a little biased. And at a time when journalists are enduring layoffs across many outlets the price of a Super Bowl ad may seem foolish. But The Washington Post spot reminded us how journalism informs every facet of our lives, with clips of fallen reporters like Marie Colvin and Jamal Khashoggi with the reassuring voice of Tom Hanks telling viewers “knowing keeps us free.” Would an “enemy of the people” do that? I don’t think so.

[embedded content]


The Washington Post
YouTube

Best mashup of two things that probably shouldn’t be mashed up: Bud Light and HBO’s Game of Thrones.

Last year, Bud Light featured a bunch of ads in a medieval setting with characters saying the catchphrase “dilly, dilly.” This year, they upped the ante by showing one of their Bud Light knights killed in a jousting contest by a character from Game of Thrones — The Mountain — before a dragon from the show sets everyone on fire. I’ll give Bud Light points for teaming up with a cool, highly anticipated TV event. But in a Super Bowl advertising environment that’s mostly about humor and sentimentality, selling your beer with a commercial that shows scores of people getting killed feels a bit, well, off brand.

[embedded content]


HBO
YouTube

Good try making the best of a bad thing: “Is Pepsi OK?”

Props to the company for not shying away from something that could be considered a serious weakness: the fact that wait staff often ask customers “Is Pepsi OK?” when customers ask for a Coke, but the restaurant serves only Pepsi products. The ad featured Steve Carell berating a waiter before rappers Cardi B and Lil Jon show up bellowing the word “okay” in their signature styles. Carell’s patter did feel a little like watching your dad joke about a pop music video. But at least he admits trying to cop Cardi B’s style is probably a bad idea.

[embedded content]


Pepsi
YouTube

Best use of celebrities: Harrison Ford, Forest Whitaker, Abbi Jacobson, Ilana Glazer, Mark and Scott Kelly Cope with Amazon Fails

Give Amazon points for making Harrison Ford’s increasingly curmudgeonly style look charming. The premise of the ad is simple: after showing off a microwave with Alexa, the commercial features celebrities trying other Alexa/Amazon products that didn’t turn out so well. It’s cute seeing Forest Whitaker struggle to hear a podcast through an Alexa-enabled toothbrush stuck in his mouth, while the stars of Broad City, Jacobson and Glazer, get accidentally ejected from an Alexa-powered hot tub. But it’s Ford jousting with his dog, who keeps ordering stuff through his Alexa-outfitted dog collar, who steals the show. (I think he just might have found his partner for the next Indiana Jones movie.)

[embedded content]


amazon
YouTube

Worst use of a celebrity: Jason Bateman for Hyundai

Jason Bateman is an under-appreciated talent with a skill for serving up dry humor. So it’s sad to see Hyundai stick him in a role anyone could have played: an elevator operator descending with a car-shopping couple, going past floors with awful activities like getting a root canal or attending a vegan dinner party, until they finally land in the basement, where there’s a car dealership. Frankly, I expected him to pass a floor where people were watching this commercial, which might have rescued the whole thing.

[embedded content]


Hyundai
YouTube

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Poor Students More Likely To Play Football, Despite Brain Injury Concerns

Mo Better Jaguars’ coaches and players huddle at the end of practice at Betsy Head Park in Brownsville, Brooklyn in September 2014.

Courtesy of Albert Samaha


hide caption

toggle caption

Courtesy of Albert Samaha

Fears of brain injuries has deterred many parents and their children from choosing to play football.

After years of publicity about how dangerous football can be, football enrollment has declined 6.6 percent in the past decade, according to data from the National Federation of State High School Associations.

Those who still play the sport are increasingly low-income students.

Over the past five years in Illinois, the proportion of high school football rosters filled by low-income boys rose nearly 25 percent – even as the number of players in the state has fallen by 14.8 percent over the same period, according to a story out this week from HBO’s Real Sports.

[embedded content]


HBO
YouTube

This doesn’t surprise Albert Samaha, a BuzzFeed News investigative reporter and author of “Never Ran, Never Will: Boyhood and Football in a Changing American Inner City.”

Samaha spent two seasons embedded with the Mo Better Jaguar football program in Brownsville, a small Brooklyn neighborhood overburdened with poverty and crime. The program is for children ages 7-13, who are all aware of the risks of playing football, but play anyway.

“The reason that football is so valuable to them is the fact that it’s still the sport that that’s the most popular in America, that is getting the most money from high schools and colleges in America,” Samaha said in an interview with NPR’s Michel Martin on All Things Considered. “At a time when the educational gap continues to widen between low income, particularly black and brown kids, and higher income white kids, football offers a path to upward mobility that is not really available through any other extracurricular activity.”

Many of the 10, 11, and 12-year olds who Samaha reported on told him that they were playing football not just for the chance of getting a college scholarship, but also for the chance to get financial aid for top private high schools in New York City.

Their hopes were reinforced by private high school coaches who attended Mo Better Jaguar football games and told the boys that if they played well enough, they could get a scholarship, and with that scholarship, avoid the student debt and poverty that so many in generations before them faced.

“Kids feel pressured to play football, it’s rooted in the problem of education,” Samaha said.

Kids on the Mo Better Jaguars football team board a bus in Brownsville, Brooklyn to go to a game in September 2014.

Courtesy of Albert Samaha


hide caption

toggle caption

Courtesy of Albert Samaha

So why do so many low-income students choose football, and not a different, less dangerous, sport? Why not try for a baseball scholarship? Or soccer?

It’s a numbers game.

The odds of getting a college scholarship for a man playing football at a NCAA or NAIA school is 43:1, according to MarketWatch, and football offers far more athletic scholarships at NCAA and NAIA schools than any other sport, numbering close to 26,000 per year.

At the high school level, schools are investing big money into football as well. One high school in Katy, Texas, just outside of Houston, recently spent over 70 million dollars on a new state-of-the-art football stadium.

“As long as the money is going into this activity this is where the opportunities are going to be,” Samaha said.

Additionally, unlike some sports, football has a relatively low barrier of entry of participation, because there are so many positions that rely on differing capabilities.

“Football unlike other sports doesn’t require you to be a certain size or certain height,” Samaha said. “You can sort of play it whether you’re overweight whether you’re underweight. It’s sort of the most in some ways meritocratic of all the sports available for these opportunities.”

But with the opportunity to achieve affordable higher education, playing football also brings the risk of long-term brain damage.

Boys on the Mo Better Jaguars Pee Wee football team collide during tackling drills on the first full-contact practice of the season in August 2014.

Courtesy of Albert Samaha


hide caption

toggle caption

Courtesy of Albert Samaha

A report by the Journal of the American Medical Association, published in 2017, showed that in a study of 111 brains of deceased former National Football League players, 110 had evidence of chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE).

CTE has been linked with repeated blows to the head, and can result in behavioral changes and cognitive decline.

Some of the behavioral side effects include difficulty with impulse control, aggression, emotional volatility and rage behavior. Extensive signs of CTE has been found in the brains of former NFL stars such as former New England Patriots tight end Aaron Hernandez, who hung himself in a prison cell while serving a life sentence for murder.

It’s not just NFL players though. The same study showed that in the 202 brains examined across all levels of play, nearly 88 percent of all the brains, 177, had CTE.

Low-income students who choose to play football know about these risks, Samaha said, but have factored it into a bigger risk assessment calculation. For them, playing football is still worth the risk, because they’re trying to avoid other dangers.

Boys on the Mo Better Jaguars youth football team line up for warm ups during practice in September 2014.

Courtesy of Albert Samaha


hide caption

toggle caption

Courtesy of Albert Samaha

“It’s a luxury to worry about these long-term, sort of abstract damages to these kids and their parents,” Samaha said. “The risks are all around them — the risks of not going to high school, the risks of not making it into college, or the risks of of falling into kind of the street path that they’d seen other people around them fall into.”

Football is their ticket out. But Samaha argues that America needs to reckon with the broader ethical implications of the sport.

“America’s dual commitments to football and racial oppression have meant that the danger of the sport will increasingly fall on the shoulders of low income black and brown kids,” Samaha said.

Meanwhile, he says, the money from the sport is mainly going to white coaches and white owners.

Samaha likened the disparity between the people who participate in football and the people who benefit to a “gladiatorial dichotomy.”

Meanwhile, there has been no real decline in viewership for the sport. A 2017 Gallup poll showed that football still leads as America’s favorite sport, with 37 percent of U.S. adults choosing it as their favorite sport to watch.

Millions are expected to watch the Super Bowl on Sunday, including Samaha.

“I feel guilty about it but I watch every Sunday,” he said. “I don’t know how to reckon with that.”

Sunday night, as millions look on, the players will inevitably clash in tangled lines of bodies on the field, perhaps risking a lot for a few yards — risking more to win.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Most Inmates With Mental Illness Still Wait For Decent Care

The Joliet Treatment Center, southwest of Chicago, is one of four facilities now providing mental health care to some of Illinois’ sickest inmates. It’s a start, say mental health advocates, but many more inmates in Illinois and across the U.S. still await treatment.

Christine Herman/Illinois Public Media


hide caption

toggle caption

Christine Herman/Illinois Public Media

Ashoor Rasho has spent more than half his life alone in a prison cell in Illinois — 22 to 24 hours a day. The cell was so narrow he could reach his arms out and touch both walls at once.

“It was pretty broke down — the whole system, the way they treated us,” says the 43-year-old Rasho, who has been diagnosed with several mental health conditions, including severe depression, schizophrenia and borderline personality disorder.

Rasho says little things would trigger him, and he’d react violently. Although he’d been sentenced to prison initially for robbery and burglary, his sentence was extended over and over for assaults on prison staff.

“Even if they would label us schizophrenic or bipolar, we would still be considered behavioral problems,” Rasho says. “So the only best thing for them to do was keep us isolated. Or they heavily medicate you.”

He spent most of his 26-year prison sentence in restrictive housing, or solitary confinement, where he had hallucinations, engaged in self-mutilation and tried to kill himself.

In 2007, Rasho and 12,000 other inmates with mental illness sued the Illinois Department of Corrections, alleging that the agency punishes inmates with mental illness instead of properly treating them.

A settlement was reached in 2016, when the state agreed to revamp mental health care and provide better treatment.

But a federal judge has ruled that care remains “grossly insufficient” and “extremely poor.” The agency has not hired enough mental health staff to provide care to everyone who needs it, and inmates with mental illness suffer as they continue to wait for long-overdue treatment.

Punishment, not treatment

Dr. Stuart Grassian is a psychiatrist who spent 25 years at Harvard studying how the conditions in solitary confinement cause harm — especially for people who are mentally ill.

“You’re looking at the population of a state psychiatric hospital,” says Grassian, who has met hundreds of inmates like Rasho who have served long sentences in extreme isolation.

“They’re not the worst of the worst,” Grassian says. “They’re the sickest of the sick; the wretched of the Earth. Maybe they weren’t even that bad before they got in, and they just get worse and worse. It’s a tragedy — absolutely immoral — to see that happen to people.”

Inadequate treatment of mentally ill prisoners is a problem across the U.S. When psychiatric institutions began closing down in the 1950s, they weren’t replaced with mental health services in the community. So, many people with mental illness have scrapes with the law, and end up in prisons that are ill-equipped to treat them.

According to federal data on state and federal prisons from 2011 to 2012, nearly 40 percent of inmates reported having been told by a mental health professional that they had a mental health disorder.

Yet among those who met the threshold for having serious psychological distress at the time of the survey, only about half were receiving treatment — medication, counseling, or both — for their illness. And they were more likely to be written up or charged with verbal or physical assault against correctional staff or other inmates than prisoners without an indicator of a mental health problem.

Correctional facilities in the U.S. are considered the largest provider of mental health services. Yet many prison systems are facing fiscal crises and struggle to provide constitutionally adequate treatment, even after lawsuits lead to court mandates for access to mental health care.

The problem is particularly bad in Illinois, which has long ranked near last in terms of the amount of money it spends on health care for inmates, according to the Pew Charitable Trusts.

And when prison inmates don’t receive the mental health care they need, they’re more likely to cycle in and out of the criminal justice system.

Alan Mills, one of the attorneys representing inmates in the 2007 class-action lawsuit, has made numerous visits to Illinois prison facilities in recent years.

“When you walk through these galleries, you get overwhelmed by the pain and suffering that you see in front of you,” says Mills, director of the Uptown People’s Law Center in Chicago.

An obvious problem

Even state officials acknowledge the prison system has not done well for inmates with mental illness.

“Corrections in Illinois was a little slow to recognize we are the mental health system for Illinois,” says John Baldwin, who directs the state’s corrections department. “Whether we want to be or not, we are; and we have to start acting like it.”

Baldwin says since he took over in 2015, the department has hired more mental health staff and provided training to all employees on how to engage with people who are mentally ill.

Most inmates now spend at least eight hours a week out of their cell and see a therapist once a month.

Nearly 800 Illinois inmates with serious mental illness have been transferred to Joliet Treatment Center and three similar treatment facilities. The campus includes single-story “dorms,” a dining hall, a gym and a vocational building. It’s also surrounded by two layers of barbed wire fencing.

Christine Herman/Illinois Public Media


hide caption

toggle caption

Christine Herman/Illinois Public Media

And about 765 of the inmates who are most ill have been transferred to new residential treatment facilities — where they are finally receiving appropriate care, Baldwin says.

But Mills points out: That’s a small fraction of the 12,000 who are mentally ill.

“And for the vast majority of those, not a lot has changed,” Mills says. “They simply aren’t getting the kind of treatment they need in order to improve their situation at all.”

A sign of progress

The Joliet Treatment Center in the southwest suburbs of Chicago doesn’t look like a typical prison facility.

Half a dozen single-story buildings — called dorms — surround a big grassy area. Walking paths connect the dorms.

“I always refer to it as the quad,” Warden Andrea Tack says, as she takes me on a tour. “It reminds me of some of the college campuses that have [a] big center lawn area and then all the classrooms surround it.”

But, unlike a college campus, this facility is surrounded by two layers of barbed wire fencing.

A few years ago, Illinois spent $17 million to convert what used to be a youth detention center at Joliet into a mental health treatment facility for inmates with serious mental illness.

The dining hall is at the center of the quad; the gym is just to the east, and a building to the south houses a library, medical clinic and classrooms where inmates take GED courses and receive job training.

Tack says the inmates here spend about 30 hours a week out of their cell in various activities, according to their individual treatment plans.

She says she’s seen inmates who’ve been transferred to the Joliet facility make huge strides over the past year.

People who were attempting to hang themselves and acting out aggressively, “now, they’re out and about in the community — going to classes, going to meals, interacting with others,” Tack says. “Some are serving as mentors for other residents.”

Mills says he, too, has seen this transformation in some inmates.

“And it’s a difficult transition,” he says, “because you’ve been treated in a place where you’re continually traumatized, and then you get to a place where actually people care about you.”

It takes time, Mills says, for many to learn that they can trust and receive help, instead of acting out aggressively the way they’ve been conditioned to do for so many years.

‘Culture of abuse’

The atmosphere at the Joliet center stands in stark contrast to the experience at some of the state’s other prisons, such as Pontiac Correctional Center, located about 60 miles south of Joliet.

There, inmates with mental illness are often kept isolated and are lucky to get even one hour of mental health treatment a month, says Dr. Pablo Stewart, a psychiatrist. He was appointed by the federal court to oversee the settlement in the lawsuit.

In his most recent report, Stewart singled out the prison at Pontiac for having a “culture of abuse and retaliation” against mentally ill inmates.

“Almost everyone at the mental health unit at Pontiac should be at Joliet,” Stewart says.

If they were getting that same level of mental health care, Stewart says, they wouldn’t have as many behavior issues.

The Pontiac prison has a high concentration of inmates with behavior problems; the most challenging inmates are transferred there from prison facilities across the state.

And the facility lacks the necessary mental health staff to provide treatment to everyone who needs it.

As a result, Stewart says, many mentally ill inmates are isolated from the rest of the prison population, with little or no meaningful social interaction. The conditions cause them to deteriorate, he says, making them more prone to acting out.

Mentally ill prisoners isolated this way “end up throwing feces or urine at staff; end up exposing themselves [or] masturbating in front of female staff,” Stewart says.

Inmates with untreated mental illness also often get into fights with other inmates and prison staff.

Stewart says the workers themselves are traumatized from their job, and that can make them prone to retaliate. Based on interviews with both inmates and staff, Stewart says he’s absolutely convinced that some staff members abuse inmates at Pontiac.

Asked about those abuse allegations, a spokesperson for the corrections department, Lindsey Hess, writes in an email that the agency takes allegations of excessive force seriously and investigates them.

In an interview prior to the latest court monitor’s report, Baldwin said he would “be surprised” if inmates with mental illness were being abused today.

“We take swift action to refer [any reports of abuse] we get to the state police or the state’s attorney,” he said. “We will not tolerate that.”

As for prison staff who may be traumatized by their job, Hess says the agency has implemented several initiatives in recent years to improve the mental, physical and emotional well-being of employees.

These include peer support groups for staff, access to professional counselors and a recurring class — called “From Corrections Fatigue to Fulfillment” — that teaches staff members about the psychological dynamics of working in the field of corrections.

Stewart says Joliet is one Illinois facility that is finally providing inmates with adequate mental health treatment. That should be the norm everywhere, he says. But it’s not.

“That’s the standard of care that’s required,” Stewart says.

A lingering problem

When I interviewed Rasho last May, he’d been out of prison for more than a year. But his many years spent in solitary confinement still haunt him.

“I don’t sleep right,” he told me. “Any little thing triggers something in me.”

Last fall, Rasho was arrested again, so he’s now back in the prison system.

Mills says the situation in Illinois shows that lawsuits don’t always solve the problems — at least not right away.

“A court order is great, but it’s a piece of paper,” he says. “It’s not actually treatment.”

The orders from U.S. District Judge Michael Mihm continue.

Days before Christmas, he ordered Illinois’ prison agency to correct widespread deficiencies. He gave the agency until March to hire enough mental health staff to provide adequate care to all inmates who need it.

This story was produced by Side Effects Public Media, a news collaborative covering public health. Christine Herman is a recipient of the 2018-2019 Rosalynn Carter Fellowships for Mental Health Journalism. Follow her on Twitter: @CTHerman.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)