Your blog this week comes from a different angle. US Magazine has placed teen mom Maci Bookout and her son on its cover. You may have the magazine and read the story or at least have heard about it. If you have not, do the easiest thing and Google the story. The questions I pose to you this week:
- What message does this send to teenagers?
- Is this a situation, the explotation of teenagers and teenage parenthood, that should involve government intervention? Explain your reasoning. If you answered yes to this question, what would you recommend?
Can someone post a link to the story. I have no idea whats i'm looking for...
ReplyDelete1. I feel that maybe this isn't such a good message to be sending out. It's kind of a way of saying its cool to be a teenage mother. The TV Show shows the heart ship and hard work that goes into being a parent not making it look good.
ReplyDelete2. I don't think that this is really a government issue. I feel that it's more of an at home issue. There’s not a lot the government can that won't seem like their taking away people's freedom. Cause if the government makes strict crazy rules a lot of people aren't gone take it. It's more of what that person has grown up to learn and value that makes the difference. If the government can do anything it would be to give more education on the topic. But now some parents are so scared to be blunt and educate their children on the subject so they try to hind things. That only leave teenage to find out on their own. Doesn’t mean go yell and scream at your child and scare them half to death. Just mean go talk to them.
@ everyone: here's a link to what the story is about if you're unable to find it:
ReplyDeletehttp://celebritychatta.com/2010/09/01/us-weekly-sept-13-teen-mom-stars-second-chance-at-love/
1. The story sends the message to teenagers, that if you choose to become sexually active, there are great risks involving you and your child's future. I don't believe that it sends a bad message to teens, because we all are pretty much aware of consequences to risks we take. The show nor the "Teen Moms" just blatantly state that all teens should run out and get pregnant. In reality, the show actually shows all of the troubling times and how this variety of teen parents deal with their differential lifestyles while coping with either bringing up a child or dealing with emotions post-adoption. I believe that it gives the younger teenage viewers a mere glance of teenage motherhood and the many challenges that comes along with raising a child at a young age.
ReplyDelete2. This issue is not so much a governmental one and therefore, should NOT be intervened by the government. I believe that it's based more on the upbringing and core values that were instilled into the parental figures of teens. As TMeeks stated, most parents DON'T openly talk with there kids about sexual issues or their sexuality only leaving them to find their way on their own, which in turn could lead to an unplanned pregnancy. The government should be more open to allowing the education of sexual matters to be discussed within a higher educational setting(high schools; the most apt time for teens to consider sexual interest). Having programs that teach more about the topic could cut down on the increasing rate of unplanned pregnancies and inform teens about the risk factors that most probably know nothing about.
I just wanted to say that I just spent 2 hours writing a response and I went to a previous page before posting it and it is now gone.
ReplyDeleteI'm not happy.
1. This article (and the tv show) try to glamorize teen pregnancy. The focus of the article was not the baby, but the mother which is not right. Bookout moves her child away from his family just to spend time with a guy. Children need family support and stability. She states that she waited until she knew "Kyle was serious about me" to introduce him to her son. The first problem I have with this is that they haven't been dating long enough to know how the relationship is going to work out. She couldn't possibly know that they are going to end up getting married yet so she is putting her son at risk of experiencing abandonment. The other problem with this is that a person can be very serious about someone in the moment, which might be the reason she is in her current situation, but that can quickly change. Bookout should be "serious" about her son right now and focus on his best interest. She may be a great mother and we only see what the media wants us to see, however her actions seem to me like she is trying to get her 15 minutes of fame instead of being a responsible parent. This article is thought provoking and I tried to imagine what would my priorities be if I were in her situation.
2. There is not much the government can do, as TMeeks said, without taking personal rights away but I do think this is becoming a government issue. More and more teen mothers are finding themselves unable to provide monetarily for their children and end up on welfare. Parents should be discussing sex with their children but unfortunately many fail to do so. This results in all Americans paying for their lack of responsibility in taxes. The only suggestion I have is to put more emphasis on sex education in schools.
@ Erin I see what you're saying but I have watched the show as well and it seemed to me that there was too much emphasis on the moms and boyfriends instead of the baby. It is more about silly highschool drama than what they are going to do for the child. I don't really think this was the shows's purpose, it's just that these are highschoolers. We are immature, selfish, and we like to be the center of attention.
ReplyDeleteThank you for posting the link Erin! That was super helpful.
ReplyDeletePosting for Cortez
ReplyDelete1. First of all let me say that the whole idea of having a reality show focusing on the drama involving teen moms is just stupid. To answer your question though, i think that this article sends the same message that all reality programs do. In my opinion the problem is not teen pregnancy, but the glorification of it, and the use of a child as an "accessory" to get your fifteen minutes of fame. This is about teenage mothers thinking that it is "cool" to have children and not taking into account how the child will be affected. I believe this article basically says if you have a baby when you're young you'll stand out and you can be different. Its almost as if some women are using getting pregnant as a form of rebellion against society.
2. I really don't think this is the government's problem. If you chose to become sexually active and your teenage years then it is also you responsibility to accept the consequences that come with that. Talking about sex and it's consequences is the responsibility of parents and nobody else, the government has no place in such personal matters of peoples lives. Even if it is a problem, as long as nothing illegal is being done then all matters of teenage pregnancy and the sexual exploitation of teenagers should stay within the family.
@Megan, i like your idea of puting more emphasis on sex education in schools, and i also agree that the overwhelming amount of teenage pregnancy and single mothers on welfare is becoming a problem. This is a social issue, but it is affecting everyone because tax dollars are being spent on covering up situations that people put themselves in.
Thanks Erin for finding a post and putting it up. Since this is not the full story, you might want to search for more reports or the actual story.
ReplyDeleteMegan, sorry you lost your work, but that is why you should type in a word process program and then copy and paste. ;)
1. I do not believe this cover story sends much of a message past the titillating discovery that dear Maci Bookout has found a new man that is not her “hostile” Baby Daddy Ryan Edwards. US Weekly is doing what US Weekly always does: capitalizing on pseudo-celebrities with melodramatic stories that people will devour. By showing the reality show “Teen Mom”, which Bookout stars in, MTV is also doing what MTV always does: capitalizing on pseudo-celebrities with melodramatic stories that people will devour. MTV doesn’t care if the message they are (actually) sending is that being a teen mom is a little glamorous if you can still date and are a main character in a hip new reality show. I’m not even sure if US Weekly realizes that is the message they are sending. But all in all, I do not believe that glamorizing this poor girl’s life is planting in the brains of many-a-preteen that it would be okay for them to get pregnant. I believe that it is telling them that if it happens, there are ways to keep on living. And boyfriends you can keep on dating.
ReplyDelete2. This is not a government issue in the least bit. The mother in question is 19, so she is legally an adult. If the government spent all of its time saving face for adults who spew their personal life for public consumption, they would have no time left to do anything else. The government can’t protect stupid people from themselves.
Mrs. Matherson, US Weekly did not put the story up on the internet. They just want me to subscribe!! The only other thing that I found related to the article on some level was a web forum about the TV show that looks like it's manned by people with way too much time on their hands. Then again, I guess that's not a new observation about forums.
ReplyDeletePost #6690 by tony 1819 says some things about Maci moving to Nashville.
http://forums.televisionwithoutpity.com/index.php?showtopic=3190864&st=6675
1. I am personally somewhat a fan of the show. I watched the 1st season and it was interesting to see how teenage mothers actually dealt with taking care of the responsibilities of parenthood at such a young age. It didn't make me want to go out and have a baby, though. True: The show has glamorized teen pregnancy but if you actually watch the show you will see that teen motherhood is a hard knock life to live, and I can honestly say that the show turned me off to the houht of a having a child...not that it had crossed my mind. The show just gave me more reason not to.
ReplyDelete2.
2.
1.I think the message that the show sends to teenagers is dependent on how the stars of the show act and what they are doing. I don’t watch the show so I can’t get that detailed. I think that, in theory, if they are immature, self-centered, or (insert critical character flaw), then that sends the message to teenagers that it wasn’t terrible enough to not be on a TV show, so those negative traits are acceptable by television’s standards. The problem is when people watching are stupid enough to make TV standards their own moral standards. As far as Maci Bookout and US Weekly goes, I think that the message the article sends is that US Weekly thinks the Teen Mom show is popular enough to sell more magazines. Most people are level-headed enough to know that US Weekly sells fodder for gossip about celebrities. From an objective standpoint, Maci Bookout is supposedly trying to show teens how hard it is to pursue her dreams with a baby to take care of. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teen_Mom]. Her breaking up with one guy for another shows teens something they have already known: in America you don’t have to date someone you don’t want to. So she moves to Nashville for this guy. So her actions are said to be for the benefit of her and her baby. So they might only be for her benefit and in the end the baby suffers. Those things happen to thousands of other families. Shining the spotlight on her does not mean that her actions are what every teen mom should aspire to; it just means that in that particular issue US Weekly wanted to feature a reality show star that was not just partying on weekends but was instead trying to improve her life. Whether or not her actions actually result in improvement is probably one of the cliffhangers that the show relies on to keep people watching.
ReplyDelete2.I don’t think this should involve government intervention because it would overstep how much control we idealistically say we want the government to have. We have censorship for what most people consider obscenities that they don’t want children under certain ages watching, but we shouldn’t have censorship for what an entertainment program can or cannot put on TV because it seems like someone’s being exploited. There might be argument that because the stars are teenagers they might be more easily exploited than adults, but in this case exploitation is a word subjective to each person’s opinion. We do not know what levels of these people’s lives are being influenced in, or in what direction. The government should stay out of it because a government functions best when it works objectively. When it is working objectively its citizens can run back to a law book and point out when a government has overstepped its bounds. So unless there is irrefutable evidence that the spotlight will harm these people’s lives forever, there should not be intervention.
Ok so my ipod is acting really crazy so just excuse the two 2s at the bottom of my last post.
ReplyDelete2. I don't believe that this should be something yhat should have gov't interference. I mean, what could they possibly do?? Put an age limit on sex?? I don't believe that is possible, so there is basically no way that the government can stop teen pregnancy unless they just stop teens from having sex all together. That, my friends, is a negative.
@ cortez: The show isn't about showing how cool it is to have a baby as a teen. MTV actually makes it look miserable. The article on the other hand is not a good reflection of the show. US WEEKLY has glamorized the image of yeen pregnancy, not MTV. I think we interpreted the message of the article differently because I feel as if it was aimed at teen moms who believe that life has to stop because of a big mistake on her part, and Macy is just a representitve that life goes on and you just have to live for not just yourself but your baby also.
ReplyDelete1. I found myslef getting angry while reading this article. People need to quit watcing and supporting pointless shows like this, in my opinion. The message it sends teens is that MTV can get you to watch just about anything that they put out there. The message it sends me personally is quite insulting, that they think they can get me to waste time watching this crap, frankly.
ReplyDelete2. No. The government should not get involved. That would be quite a personal situation. If a couple chooses to have sex, they know what they're getting into whether they are willing to acknowledge it or not. There is a risk of becoming a parent, but they just have to deal with it. Plus, I'm not sure there is anyway the government could effectively intervene.
@Cortez, i agree with what you said about using a baby as ticket to fame. That's not appropriate.
Okay in my opinion this does not display a negative message. I mean the fact that the article is focusing on Maci Bookout getting a new boyfriend is bad. It makes it seems like she's all happy with everything. As far as the show goes, it actually sends kind of a good message. It show how difficult teenage pregnancy can be. So overall, in my opinion, I think it sends a positive message to teenagers.
ReplyDelete2. No, this is not something the government should interfere with. It's more of an issue that parents have to deal with. There is really nothing the government can do. If parents don't talk to the teenagers then there's nothing anyone can do.
1. I personally think that the message is sending out a good message, to actually let people know the hardships of having a baby. I can see if they were showing how much fun she's having or something like that, but they actually make you not want to have a baby at a young age. Maci is wealthy and it's hard for her. Imagine how it would be for someone who is not as wealthy. So, in my opinion, it actually sends a good message.
ReplyDelete2. I don't think the government should have any say, the teenager knows what he/she's getting herself/himself into. Like Courtney stated that should be between the parent and the child. What could the government do anyways?
I don't thing there is any message being sent out and put in front of teens that the average teenager doesn't already know about. Do I think they should be making a big nation wide celebrity out of this girl, no. Because it protrays her in a light that is probably untrue but gives the general public a skewed idea of whatever condition she herself is in.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the use of the teen moms as examples for younger teens and older ones as well is exactly a terrible thing because I believe this is the kind of thing that people need to see to get a more reality feel about life. That all actions have consequences whether they're good or bad.
I also like what Amber said about the parents involvement with their teens.
ReplyDeleteBtw Mrs.Mathy an opinion poll called my house today.
I didn't pick up the phone but just thought you'd enjoy knowing you're not alone.
This article/show isn't ALL bad and viewed in a negative light. I personally think the show is intended to show teenagers the outcome and risk that you take when you have sex and how hard it is to deal with the results mentally and especially emotionally. I feel that the show put forth a good effort into trying to inform teenagers but wasn't completely successful due to the fact that they sometimes tend to give the impression that its alright to become a teenage mother.
ReplyDelete2. I strongly believe that this IS NOT a government issue. What can they possibly do? This problem starts within the households of these individual teens. Its the PARENTS job to inform their children on the dangers and consequences that follow when you decide to become sexually active. Most teenagers are going to do what they want regardless; however, if the parents show that they care the least little bit and do what their suppose to, it may waver their opinions and decisions and the parents will know that they've done all that they can do as a responsible parent should.
@ Chasity: How could giving her a cover, talking about her new love be a good thing? The Show gives an idea of how hard motherhood is, but the cover of the magazine that’s a hold new story.
ReplyDelete@ Paris i HIGHLY agree with you on your comment towards Cortez's response. The article and the show exploit two different meanings and should both be looked at accordingly.
ReplyDelete1.(cont.) However, the cover reveals a different meaning than the show and simply means that life doesn't stop because of the mistakes that you've made and how, eventually, things get better. I don't think the cover was intended to express the "real" life of a teenage mom.
ReplyDeleteI would first like to start off by saying that this is a great blog topic!
ReplyDeleteI know the media, such as televison and magazine articles, have a big influence on teens, not myself personally. I would honestly hope that no teenaged girl would see these young moms and think that their lives are glamourous. Reality tv serves for one purpose and one purpose only, entertainment. I have watched the show and if there is a message being put out, I think it would be to not have premarital sex. These young mothers do a lot more of struggling than having fun as far as I've seen. Any glamour that MTV has tried to sprinkle upon them is clearly for tv. I think I could speak for some of our generation and say that we don't believe everything we see on tv. We actually have a lot of teen mothers at Bryant, and they are clearly not being featured on television.
I actually do think the government can do something about this issue. Why don't we have sex ed in schools? Teenage pregnancy rates are rising, so I think there is a need. I'm not saying sex ed would prevent this issue, but if helps if teens are more informed and then they can make better decisions.
1. In my opinion, this is just another one of those reality shows that is just pointless. To some it may send a good message and to others it may not. I don't think that the show or article really tells about the actual hardships of a pregnant teen. To me it sends a bad message because I see it as just flaunting a baby around and I do not think that it is very appropriate. Babies have feelings too. They made it seem like they were thinking at the best interest of the child, but in reality (real reality) I don't think they were. They're too busy trying to make a show! It kind of sends that message that's like "hey we can do it! so can you!"
ReplyDelete2. I don't think that the government has anything to with it really. There's really nothing they CAN do. Sure you can have sex ed classes and try to scare them or something, but teens are going to do what THEY want to do. But again I don't think the government has much say, I think it starts off in the home with the parents and the teens surroundings. You also have the media that's just out there that may be influencing some of this nonsense.
@Cortez- I agree with you when you said that it is the parents responsibility to deal with that type of thing and the government should not intervene into personal lives.
ReplyDelete@Jessica- I like how you put that "people watching are stupid enough to make TV standards their own moral standards" because it is SO true. People, if you haven't learned, don't believe and go by everything you see on TV.
1) Things like this are becoming more and more prevalent in American media every year. It's becoming quite ridiculous to be honest. Magazines and Hollywood have become acidic in the lives and mentalities of teenagers in America. This story is just a recent example. Although the show does show some aspects of the hardships of being a teen parent, it is glamorizing teen pregnancy and showing how they can be happy regardless. I don't think they can't be happy, but this show does not display how truly difficult it would have to be to be a teen parent. By showing that these girls are making it as pregnant, viewers may begin to think that if they were to get pregnant they could make it through easily as the T.V. shows these girls. All-in-all this sends a very negative message to teens across our nation.
ReplyDelete2) Although I do believe this is the exploitation of teenagers and teenage parenthood, I don't believe that the American government has the authority to intervene; also, even if they had the authority, I do not believe they could effectively enforce laws and/or penalties. Couples that choose to be sexually active know the risks, so they should have to deal with the consequences. The government can't bail everyone out when they screw up or make bad decisions. This is not only in this situation or any. People in society seem to be feeling that the government should be doing more to help out people who have made bad decisions. I don't believe that governments have the right to intervene in a citizen's personal life. But again, that is just an opinion.
@ Michael/LNZ : I completely agree with the fact that this is yet another example of how MTV and channels like it have so much control over its viewers. It's completely pathetic at some of the garbage that people watch on channels like MTV. They are the true culprits in this situation. If the government was to step in, I think a little more censorship of channels like MTV wouldn't be such a bad idea.
To clarify on my post for question number 1.
ReplyDeleteI think it is magazines like US Weekly that are glamorizing situations like Maci Bookout's. The magazine showed how it was possible to live life like a normal teenager and move on. Yes, I think it's great that she is happy and left a bad relationship and found a guy who makes her happy, but that isn't the point; the point is that the magazine is showing that even though she got pregnant and had a child, she still is living a normal life, which is completely wrong.
1.) I've never watched the show so I don't really know what kind of message it sends. But I think the article glamorized her situation. What I got from the article is that if your a teen mother, you can still go to school, have a personal life, and provide a suitable living for your child. This is unrealistic in my opinion. Not everyone is fortunate enough to be on a national television show that pays you in order to be followed a around by a camera crew and be featured on magazine covers. It's making teen pregnancy look like the fast lane to fame.
ReplyDelete2.) I don't believe that the government should intervene in to these types of situations. This should be a personal matter that concerns the family of the teen parent. I don't believe the government knows what appropriate actions should be taken to help every individual teenager who gets pregnant and each have different needs.
I believe it puts a glamorous spin on a unfortunate situation. I don't think we should act like it's the end of the world because then once it does happen teens are unable to cope. But I do think it gets over played on shows like "16 and Pregnant" because those mothers are being paid to exploit their live where as real life doesn't involve a MTV paycheck.
ReplyDeleteI believe the schools do as much as they can to warn young adults. But mainly it's not their problem. If you're old enough to have sex you're old enough to know the consequences. It's a moral and maturity factor and if you aren't prepared to deal with a pregnancy and also your partner isn't then blaming not being educated by a government program isn't a valid excuse. If you want to about the birds and bee's take the time to do some research on your own. It's your body and your choice and in most cases no one's holding a gun to your head to make stupid last minute choices.
I don’t watch the show, or care about the article or her life for that matter. From I can tell the show doesn’t represent what teen motherhood is really like. That girl got lucky. She got pregnant as a teenager and now has a TV show and ends up on magazine covers, it is clearly unrealistic and it depicts teen pregnancy as something more glamorous than it really is. I don’t think that government should get involved. I think everyone should be responsible for their own action and realize that they can’t depend on someone else to fix their problems and bail them out.
ReplyDelete1.This article does not send a good message to teenagers, in my opinion. The way the producers try to make motherhood at 16 seem glamorous is appalling to me. Don't get me wrong, I like how the show shows some of the hardships of being a young mother but it makes seem like it is way easier than it is in real life while the cameras are off.
ReplyDelete2. I believe government should stay out of it. Teenagers are going to do what they want to. in my opinion if you are old enough to make a grown decision and have sex then you should also be ready for the consequences of such actions. We have shows that campaign about practicing safe sex and in school, so why should government interfere with this show? If they did then they would have 2 regulate other shows that do the same thing in respect to making early parenthood glamorous.
I assume this week's blog questions are based on Maci Bookout's reality show and general life situation; not the quasi-tabloid cover story for US Magazine. I mean I'd be happy to assess her boyfriend situation, but that doesn't seem to be what everyone else is focusing on.
ReplyDelete1. What message does this send to teenagers?
I think the message this sends is all relative to the viewpoints of the teenagers watching. It's ludicrous to think that any given story will have the same affect on teens nationwide. I'm not sure how well known this is, but media does not entirely shape the opinions of its audience. The audience absorbs the media and the raw data of a story, and then base an opinion on their personal philosophies and beliefs. Simply put, media does not produce the opinion. As for an answer, I'm going to base my prediction on the viewpoints of the audience group I think would watch this show the most. The people I envision watching this are bored teenagers who are very invested in popular social culture, and have a condescending view towards reality stars (ironically). I honestly think a lot of these viewers just want to see every aspect of this girl's struggles and triumphs, and the deeper implications don't matter as much. But if they drew something away, I'd think they'd appreciate the idea of being a teenager mother, because they see this girl still striving for her dreams despite her overwhelming responsibilities.
2. Is this a situation, the explotation of teenagers and teenage parenthood, that should involve government intervention? Explain your reasoning. If you answered yes to this question, what would you recommend?
I'm confused by the prompt. If we are just talking about the reality show and the ripples Bookout will cause in society, than I don't see any wrongdoing here that the government would be justified in affecting. As far as I know there is nothing illegal about this, and the only reason why this issue is being discussed so heatedly from what I can see is the controversial idea of accepting teen pregnancy as a norm. I feel that it would be a terrible idea for the government to intervene in any way. It would essentially be the federal government taking an official stand on a moral issue, which is never done without extreme criticism.
@ Hayden
ReplyDeleteI understand the concern for the popularity stories such as this are getting recently, but I feel like the media isn't as poisonous towards the teenage mind as you'd think. The way people interpret stories and what they take away from it is based off of their own personal preferences and beliefs, not the media's implications. It's true that media, particularly gossipy type sources, try to point the audience in a certain direction, but how you perceive a story is based on your own principles. It's exactly like how people can have differing opinions on a political figure's speeches. Some people find the economy to be the most important thing, so they focus in on that part of the speech, while others find the War in Iraq to be the most prevalent issue, so they'll focus on that part of the speech. And it all affects the way they see the speech on the whole.
1. I think that US weekly is sending the message to society that having a baby while a teenager is the current "thing to do". These shows like "16 and Pregnant" put these moms on sort of a pedestal and seem to sugarcoat the process a little. Although I don't believe teenagers should be put in one generic catagory, I do believe certain teenagers are taking this show as a cue that having a baby is the current trend and that it is socially acceptable now.
ReplyDelete2. I do not believe that this should be the governments problem. The government has much bigger problems than what is on the current issue of US weekly. If they constantly tried to focus on what the magazines are reporting then they would never have time to do their jobs.
1. As Micheal said, why do people watch this stuff. But I don't think this is a bad influence on teens but I do think the are trying to say, "Hey have a baby and you'll be on MTV.". It also, like most have said, seems as of MTV is trying to glamorize having a baby. Also who cares another some girl who broke up with h boyfriend and found a new one to support her, having stuff like this on tv is like saying you'll get a boyfriend to take care of you if your baby-daddy leave you.
ReplyDelete2. No, I do not agree with the government taking action on tuis, but they should try to encourage young people to have safer sex or non-at-all. But like te'kara said, them taking action can ntot happen unless they take away Riggs and be like china.
1. I think that the US Magazine article/show is sending a message that it is somewhat not hard to raise a child as a teenager, but also in perspective that everybody life will not turn in the same direction. I have watched the show before and I do not think it influences teen girls to have babies. It does glamorize their lives as teen moms, but in a way, I think it helps motivate some teenage parents and influences them that they still have a chance, but their main priority is their child/children now.
ReplyDelete2. I do not believe that this should be a government problems. This situation is more personal socially and should not be handled by the government but within the household and communities as a society.
@ LNZ (who was speaking to Michael) : MTV wouldn't broadcast all of the superficial junk if there was no market for it. I don't believe MTV has a "power" over its viewers--people can make the decision whether or not they want to watch the shows. But, I do think that it casts a negative light on our culture and our intelligence that shows like Jersey Shore are so popular and well-watched. Are these the people we emulate, or do we just like watching them fail? Is Jersey Shore any different than watching a school fight?
ReplyDelete1. I think the message sent from macy from teen mom being placed on the cover is that it is difficult to raise a child but it can be done. I see teenage parents all the time who dont try and feel like they just cant do it but this article proves that it can be done that you can be a parent at 16 and still raise your child.
ReplyDelete2. No i dont feel that this is even the explotation of a teen it is an article about a girl that had a child and how she found a man that is willing to treat her and her child right.
1. What message does this send to teenagers? The message I receive from this magazine cover is that Teen mom is getting a new hunky bear for her and her baby. Personally I don't care about this chicks baby, baby daddy, or problems. It sickens me to see teenagers feed into this. It depends on the individual to create there own thoughts on the page. It could make teens not want a baby, while on the other hand, there are bound to be few people that want the fame this girl has because of her child. This magazine cover makes me even more uninterested about Maci than ever.
ReplyDelete2. I don't think this should be a government issue at all. It isn't the governments responsibility to instill morals into the minds of teenagers. Is Maci being exploited? I'm sure she knows she's on the cover of U.S. weekly. She's put herself in the spotlight, i don't think it's the responsibility of the government to keep up with whether or not Maci is being exploited. There are bigger fish to fry.
@ cortez- I agree with how you think this kind of thing is making a child an "accessory", which a child shouldn't be.
@ Andrew: I do agree with you. People interpret things how they want, but I feel that the media encourages a specific type of interpretation. And leads readers to believe things that "must be true" because it was written in a popular, well-established magazine. And there in lies the negative effect of the media on teens.
ReplyDelete1. I do not think this necessarily sends a positive or a negative message to teenagers. I think that if anything this shows that having a child while you are still a "child" yourself isn't the end of the world.
ReplyDelete2. I dont think think the government should have anything to do with this. There are more important things that they should be concerned about.
@Merrill. I get what you mean where it seems like being pregnant isn't as socially scarring as it once was. I think that people hone in on the media because it quickly reaches thousands of people and portrays that society is becoming more tolerant to things once scorned. Combining that idea with Nancy's response about how it's just like watching school fights, I think exploitment boils down to the question: why do most human beings find it interesting to watch people act stupid, beat each other up, or live out bad choices in life? What makes it so intriguing and what does that say about society in general? I think that ultimately the exploiting thing isn't the media, it's us and that we (as a society) are eating up the stuff.
ReplyDeleteTekara, i didnt look at it as far as them giving her a cover, i was looking at the show in general. But yeah as far as the cover, it did kind of seem as if been a teenager with a child is a good thing. In which it is not.
ReplyDeleteps. for everyone, as far as message, im meaning the show.
1. By putting this image on the front cover of a magazine like this one it may give the impression that it is supporting teen pregnancy.
ReplyDelete2. I don't believe this is an issue that requires direct government intervention. I think it's reasonable to maybe have government funded commercials speaking out against teen pregnancy, but the real fight is in the home and at school.
@ Mercedes I do think it would be a great idea to have sex ed but I don't think it would change teen attitudes dealing with sex.
ReplyDelete@ Mona I agree with what you said, that is exactly how I was thinking!
1)I believe the magazine it showing teenagers that it is hard to raise a child at such a young age. Her story consist of constant hardships that she has to undergo with her childs father. There are also certain things she cannot do when it comes to her friends.
ReplyDelete2) i really do not think this issue is a governmental issue. I feel it all has something to do with the image of teenagers and how you should learn and feed off of other peoples mistakes.
@ Merril I disagree with ur 1st questions statement, I think that by putting that on the cover of the magazine simply suggest that teenagers should not follow her example.
ReplyDelete@madison I totally agree with you!
ReplyDelete@ Megan, I agree with your statement that although Maci may be a good mother, she seems as though she's trying to get her 15 minutes of fame. Personally, I would try to keep my son out of the media and away from the possible dangers of the public.
ReplyDelete@Cortez, I don't believe having the show is a stupid idea. If you really think about it, it's putting the spotlight on a rising issue among teenagers. And really, what better way to get a message across to us than using a mass media option such as television? It doesn't "glamorize" the situation of becoming a teen mother and definitely doesn't portray the children as an "accessory" so to speak. It shows the real life struggles these girls go through on a day to day basis. It relays the message that if you do decide to engage in sexual activities, there are some risk and consequences and the show focuses in on showing teens the hardships they would endure if the situation were to happen to them.
ReplyDeleteMegan--I agree with your belief that parents should have a serious talk with their kids about the different issues that come with being a teen parent.
ReplyDeleteJennifer, I agree with the statement that teenagers are going to do what they want, and the most that can be done is to educate them and warn them about the consequences.
ReplyDeleteYeah I'm late.
ReplyDelete@ Matt
I agree that the government has bigger fish to fry that sexually active teens. If Obama talking about education in his "Welcome back to school" speech is viewed in a bad light I doubt him critizing a few underage prego teen girls will go over well. If i had to guess the minute our health class started to really get down to the nitty gritty of teens having sex that half the class would go home and whine to their momma's that they felt awkward. Americans view it as too much of a taboo subject for the government to intervene. Also who wants the President to set an appropriate age to have kids? I'm not a fan of 15 year old moms but i'm also not a fan of having my mind made up for me.
My apologizes for just getting to this. It's been quite a busy week.
ReplyDeleteTe’Kara - heart ship? (hardship). Reading between the lines, I see where you are coming from. Proof read please before posting.
Erin - Good points. Also to note, most high schools do not allowed to have Sex Ed. classes. They can have “lessons” under the auspices of a course, but cannot have separate classes.
Megan - Excellent points. I guess we will only be able to tell with time the impact of this on the child.
Cortez - Interesting that you state, “...as a form of rebellion against society.” I would like to hear more of your reasoning behind that.
Nancy - Good comment. One thing for sure, US magazine does know what message they are sending. They have lawyers and editors just for these reasons.
Paris - Glad you’ve learned some valuable lessons from the show. What about the message of the magazine? As to your #2 question. No, the government cannot put an age on sex, but they can limit the scope of the magazine. Think of how Tipper Gore lobbied Congress until they regulated the recording industry to put ratings on CDs.
Jessica - Excellent points. However, believe it or not, there are people out there that are not level-headed thinkers :).
Michael - Getting angry can sometimes be a good thing. Anger, directed appropriately can effect change. See my comment to Paris.
Courtney - Interesting take. Good to see other viewpoints.
Chasity - Good point. I think you missed my point on question #2. I was not referring to teenage pregnancy, but to the tactics of the magazine.
Lyndsay - Good points and great questions. Can’t wait to read on to see if anyone responds to them.
Ben - Should the government intervene? Glad I’m not alone. Would have been interesting for you to have taken the poll - just to see what they are all about.
Diamond - Good comment. Yes, parents must be the responsible party, but as you stated, teenagers don’t always listen.
Mercedes - Excellent points. Your question in regards to my second question is very good as well. That is a loaded topic. The government supports many programs, but standing behind sex ed. classes in schools is a different story.
Jennifer - Great comment and points. It should be in the home.
Hayden - very good response. Great insight.
Lena - What, and to what level, do you find unrealistic? That you can go to school, have a personal life, provide a suitable living to your child or all three? How many of your fellow classmates do you see doing this? I wonder how they would respond to this statement.
Madison - No, real life doesn’t involve a MTV paycheck. Wonder just how much that paycheck is? Interesting take on the second question.
Mona - Good points. But what about the people who will take notice and “care”?
Amber - Good points. There are indeed other shows out there of this magnitude. Maybe there should be some regulation...
Andrew - Well, the blog was about the magazine. Not so much the story, but the implications of the message. To clarify #2, If we consider the magazine to be using Bookout’s situation to capitalize on sales then should the government intervene to prevent such glorification of teenage pregnancy?
Merrill - Interesting take. Another way of thinking about it.
Alex - Good point.
Da’Shelle - Good point. Now if all teenage parents would put their child first :)
John - It is possible to raise a child as a teenage parent, but does having one as popular and famous as Bookout cause others to feel as if they can “make it too?”
ReplyDeleteBen - Great comment. Some things to think about.
Matt - There are indeed bigger fish to fry, but how many of these bigger fish are a result of situations such as this?
Julian - Why so very late?
Amani - Why so very very late?
Again this week I am impressed by many great thoughts and the questions you are posing to each other. Keep it up!!!
On another front, you must remember to post your replies. Eight people posted in response to me, but failed to post in response to each other.
Great post. Really I am surprised about this post.Thank You very much.Self publishing tips.
ReplyDelete