I'm a little perplexed.

[velvetpage]

The issue is with this video:

I've heard one opinion on it. I want other people's. What do you think?

Comments

[lovmelovmycats.livejournal.com]

Agent: "Hiya, Celebrity. Oprah's office called and
Celebrity (interrupts): "I'll do it."
Agent: "I haven't told you yet what it
Celebrity (interrupts): "You had me at Oprah."
Agent thinks: This propaganda piece is great publicity.

Me as viewer thinks: Election is over. Boring.

[momentrabbit.livejournal.com]

The last time I heard about a pledge to show more love to strangers, it ended with time served and a three hundred dollar fine.

Perhaps I'm too cynical, but this comes across as propaganda, not 'earnest invitation to take part in making things better'. Nice words, but frankly, it reeks of passive-aggressive 'Shut up unless you personally are fixing things'. Which is lovely, but.

[momentrabbit.livejournal.com]

Which is weird, because on a statement-by-statement viewpoint, I don't disagree with anything in there. (Well, perhaps "I pledge to obey Obama" scares me a bit. That's a little brownshirt for my tastes. Haven't we had *enough* blind jingoism?)

Something about the package and packaging is tripping my bovofecometer. It's too something. Too naive, maybe. 'All we gotta do is commit ourselves to doing more of what everybody who gives a shit has been doing for the last decade and everything'll fix itself!'

[morpheus0013.livejournal.com]

I think the bulk of the video is awesome. Fantastic.

I'm confused as to what the Barack Obama/presidency stuff is doing in there. The message doesn't need to be framed that way, and I think it's going to cause people to ignore what's really really good about it just out of knee-jerk political hypocrisy.

And I will never be able to take Ashton Kutcher seriously, ever. When he talks, I just want to hold my hands over my ears because he sounds like a moron.

[merlyn4401.livejournal.com]

That's my feeling on it, exactly. I was completely with it up until the whole "I pledge myself to the President" thing.

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

See, the reason I'm confused is because I can see the reasoning behind that. I don't think pledging oneself to the president as a person is necessarily a bad thing, though I'd be concerned if it were more than an almost-passing reference at the end. When a particular leader is inspirational, people tend to get inspired - not by the office but by the leader. I fully admit that I feel a bit that way about my principal. I would not be nearly as on board with the changes she's trying to make in our school and the speed with which they're being made if I didn't trust her and admire her as much as I do, and I certainly wouldn't be committing myself to the breadth of change that I have committed to if any other principal I've worked for were to ask it of me.

Maybe it's the Christian upbringing coming out, but I don't have a problem with people choosing servant language for themselves, either.

[merlyn4401.livejournal.com]

I don't mind being a servant to God or my family. I'm not about to pledge servitude to any president.

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

But why would it be wrong for someone else to do so? It's just different language for following an inspirational leader's, well, lead.

[merlyn4401.livejournal.com]

It's not wrong for other people to. I never said it was. But that also doesn't mean I have to be on board with my kids doing so, either. Other people can do what they want with themselves and their kids.

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

Of course not. I was just wondering why it would be creepy or crossing a line to watch this video in class, where (hopefully!) ads of other types are dissected fairly regularly.

[threekidsinky.livejournal.com]

IMO it's fine for other people to do so. But this doesn't belong in the school, which is the whole reason I posted it in the first place.

[morpheus0013.livejournal.com]

It's not that I mind if someone pledges themself to whatever they want to--the president, Thor, the Boy Scouts. The problem for me in this instance, at least, was that the framework there seemed to perform in an exclusionary manner.

Now, I WILL say that had the video been more about the government's community service initiative (it's mentioned, I believe, but just briefly) then the Barack Obama stuff would have made more sense. But to me, it seemed like superfluous rockstar nonsense superimposed on a really great message. And so in that regard, I suspect it isn't even the framework itself that bothers me, it's the reaction I KNOW that the framework is going to incite in my fellow countrymen. I wish they were smarter; as you've seen evidence of, they are not. I don't like giving the "other side" more ammo than necessary.

I don't have much of a problem with people choosing servant language for themselves. I DO have a problem when, in the course of doing so, they imply that those who do NOT do so are of some sort of lesser stature. I don't think it's "wrong" to pledge yourself to God, family, country, spouse, whatever. I'll admit to finding some of those ideas flat-out creepy, but my path includes the edict "what's right for you is fine, and what's right for me is fine." That doesn't just stop with my religion, it extends to everything. Michael theorizes that this is why strangers tell me their life stories on a daily basis. =)

Is this actually somehow related to the whole "I MUST SCREEN THE PRESIDENT'S WORDS TO MY CHILDREN!" whackadoodleism that's going around?

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

Only very generally. The video was linked in a journal about that. I just find the notion of pre-screening a video from the PRESIDENT to be so ridiculous that I can't wrap my head around it at all, so I didn't write about it.

[morpheus0013.livejournal.com]

Another issue, which I thought about initially but forgot to mention when I commented, is that along with the current backlash-y climate down this way comes this idea that celebrities are never legitimately politically informed, never legitimately politically active, and are always just doing it For The Fame. (Unless they're the president of the NRA, apparently. But I digress.) The first time I saw someone really go off about how "Bono keeps trying to tell people what to think!" all I could come up with was, "Are you really that threatened by BONO?!"

So the multiple celebrities thing probably sets people on edge, whether they realize it consciously or not. Famous people are only supposed to look pretty and dance for your amusement, you know. It's not like they're actually PEOPLE.

Also, I agree with you, re: it's so ridiculous that I can't even form words.

[amazonvera.livejournal.com]

It's a little "Cult of Personality" for me.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think Obama is a cult leader, and I think that it's not a coincidence that it's a bunch of celebrities, people who thrive on a culture of personality, that made it.

But I don't serve my president. He serves me, and all other Americans. I'm happy to get involved, and I love that this president sets up days of service for Americans to be a part of. But he doesn't set up events to serve him. He sets up events to serve your community, which helps you to join in his commitment to service, not make one to him.

I told a friend today that just because I elected Obama doesn't mean that I support him in everything he's doing, and that just because I don't like some of the things he's doing doesn't mean I regret electing him. We elected him President, not Jesus, you know?

[merlyn4401.livejournal.com]

I agree with all this. As usual, you say it better than I ever could.

[morpheus0013.livejournal.com]

The unfortunate side effect of things like this is that people hop on it as evidence that Obama is encouraging this type of thing. I've yet to see significant evidence of that since his election, and as I said above, I'm afraid videos that are framed this way simply give already incorrect people ammunition to speak to people who won't question the information they're spoon-fed.

[amazonvera.livejournal.com]

Exactly, the myth of the Obamabot isn't that they exist - that's entirely true. The myth is that Obama creates or encourages that behavior, or that all of his supporters follow him in that way.

[cereta.livejournal.com]

You know, to the extent that I could ever take Ashton Kutcher seriously, his concern that his tax dollars might go to help some fattie who deserves to die makes me doubt his commitment to sparkle motion.

[morpheus0013.livejournal.com]

Comment winner.

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

Oh my. How unfortunate - for him. Really, he makes a better boy toy than political commentator.

[integritysinger.livejournal.com]

well, first I certainly wont pledge to be a servant to my PRESIDENT. last I checked, my taxes pay his salary so technically, he works for ME, not the other way around.

that said, I'm a cynic, being a person of need and never having my needs met, well. these famous people making all these pledges makes me want to puke.

my local community DOES commit to serve and help others. I see it every single day. I serve in like kind in any way I can. I don't pledge to do it. I do it because I believe it is the right thing to do. I call my self INTEGRITYsinger for a reason.

now, if all those famous people actually do something, then, OK. cool. I belive to whom much is given, much is required. And famous people have a lot to give. way more than me. but I think the table is reversed. i think it is the little people with little to give that actually follow through.

I saw Courtney Cox and David Arquette. They have bio kids. because they could afford all the infertility treatments. Me? I adopted special needs kids because I COULDN'T afford infertility treatments but felt the need to parent. Are the Cox-Arquettes of the world turning around and lending a helping hand to folks like me who opt to adopt SpEd kids instead of spending tens of thousands on the chance of having a bio kid? yeah. i don't think so.

that's my 10 cents. I have about another $1.50 to offer but I don't think you really want to hear all that. :)

[the-af.livejournal.com]

i think i'm mostly just repeating everyone else at this point, but the whole thing seemed all well and good until the whole pledging to serve the president stuff. That's a tiny bit creepy to me.

I guess it's just the difference in, as stated above somewhere, service to an ideal or a cause or a specific mission or need, rather than service to a single person.

also that the president should serve the people and etc etc. it's not my fault people already made all the good points!

[ladyperegrine.livejournal.com]

The part that made me go "huh?" was the part about 21st century slavery. I thought we were still talking about the U.S., and slavery is illegal, and I just went...WTF? I'm still puzzling over what it meant exactly. I know about racism, both individual and institutionalized, but this seemed different.

So I think I was still going bwuh? over that and missed being creeped out by the whole service thing. I did wonder if Barack Obama was happy or nonplussed about the video. I couldn't quite decide for myself which I was.

A little weird

[neosis.livejournal.com]

I found the whole thing a little weird. It's just a little off. Good sentiments, I expect, but the execution would be cleaner if they focused the message a little more.