The Representation of Illegal Drugs and Drug Use in American Media
Since the epoch of media, in all its many facets, there has been growing concern as to what effect it has on the general public. Scholars have progressively studied this phenomenon we call media and its influence on society. Although much conjecture abounds as to whether or not the media has a direct effect on people, we can fortunately draw our conclusions and base them upon empirical reasoning. Over the past several weeks, I have asked a similar question albeit less vague and more direct in nature. How is substance abuse framed or exposed in the media? This is a question of substantial legitimacy not only in the professional world of media and scholarly study, but also to the hearts and minds of Americans raising families in the 21st century.
In order to help shed greater light on the possible impact of portrayals of substance abuse, this report examines research on how the use of alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drugs--some of the most controversial and imminent threats to the fabric of this nation--are depicted through this very irrefutably powerful tool, the media. One can also ask, “Through what scope do we look at substance abuse?” Through the analysis of several sources directly related to this topic and compiled through my research over the past several weeks, I have been able to answer questions to the posed hypothesis, debate varying opinions and draw conclusions as well as extrapolate information that will be useful in my field. Most importantly, I have come to a more coherent understanding of the topic being addressed, and subsequently am more able to concisely and coherently arrive at a satisfactory answer to how the media exposes us to a growing epidemic.
Recent studies confirm that substance use is a regular occurrence amongst members of society. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention referenced various reports from approximately ten years ago that proved “the abuse of alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drugs is the single most serious health problem in the United States, straining the health care system, burdening the economy, and contributing to the health problems and death of millions of Americans every year” (Ericson, 2001). Yet, more importantly, this fact sheet hones in on the role the media plays in shaping perceptions about the risks of substance use. The increased abuse was linked to the reduction of the commonness of warning and anti-drug messages combined with the increased promotion from the entertainment industry and advertising. A more recent government statistic reveals the growing estimate of 22.5 million people in the U.S. to have used some kind of illicit drug in the past 30 days (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2011). The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), a yearly interview of 67,500 people, provides the most accurate estimates of drug, alcohol and tobacco use in the population. Based on these sources and these numbers alone, for all intents and purposes, we see that there is in fact a problem with drug abuse in America.
The survey aforementioned also found children at the age of twelve consuming drugs. This evidence was similar to an article written by Victor C. Strasburger, MD, The Council on Communications and Media, where he draws a direct correlation between the media and children using substances:
The causes of adolescent substance use are multifactorial, but the media can play a key role. Tobacco and alcohol represent the 2 most significant drug threats to adolescents. More than $25 billion per year is spent on advertising for tobacco, alcohol, and prescription drugs, and such advertising has been shown to be effective. Digital media are increasingly being used to advertise drugs. In addition, exposure to PG-13– and R-rated movies at an early age may be a major factor in the onset of adolescent tobacco and alcohol use (p. 791, 2010).
Supporting Strasburger, Ericson cited media research connecting the depiction of substances within popular movie rentals in high percentages during the studied period with alcohol appearing in 93%, tobacco in 89%, and illicit drugs (primarily marijuana and cocaine) in 22%. Strasburger (2010) references a combined $25 billion spent on advertising for tobacco, alcohol, and prescription drugs compared to Ericson’s $6.7 billion on tobacco advertising and product promotions alone in 1998. A year prior, the alcohol industry spent just more than $1 billion on television, radio, print, and outdoor advertising. The drastic increase in spending over the past decade shows that there has most definitely been an expansion of substance use representation. Ericson makes a bold statement that the media is progressively in fact “framing” illicit drugs and alcohol as, in the very least, socially acceptable. Let us be clear. When we say media, we mean film, television, radio, print, and the recent addition of the Internet to name a few. Here, they are all being vilified as proponents of a drug user-friendly society, portraying it as socially acceptable in order to serve their purpose.
One of the problems seems to be the nature of how substance abuse is being presented in the media as “a very different monster than how it exists in the real world” (Hayden C., 2012). Although substance abuse is often glamorized, Hayden reflects upon the characterization of drug addicts as “the scum of society; the gum stuck on the bottom of the successful man’s shoe.” Often, these characters are stigmatized and looked down upon, and Hayden blames the media for these feelings. This presents an interesting question. One that is worthy of its own literature review, maybe. If drug addiction is bad, but portraying drug addicts negatively is just as bad, then where does that leave the media in terms of portraying the truth? The media’s proverbial hands would appear to be tied. However, what could possibly be wrong with, at long last end, just presenting the truth?
Understanding that the media, as a whole, is a powerful tool for controlling the masses. One would assume that we would use this technology for good, as a champion of truth. Well, in fact, the powers that were, when television was still a child and film as well; there was intercession at the hands of the media, as referenced in this next excerpt: “The first films to actually depict drugs/drug use were in the 1930’s. These anti-drug propaganda films such as Reefer Madness made vast generalizations about the dangers of recreational drug use in order to scare children into abstaining from said substances” (Hayden C.). This helped answer one of our questions, “What is the media doing to help the problem?” It appears from this article that anti-drug propaganda films are as old as the medium itself! If the media has been alerting the public of the dangers of illicit drug abuse since the 1930’s, why then are we in the new millennia faced with the challenge of understanding how and why substance abuse is framed in the media?
Anti-drug propaganda films may have served their purpose in the 1930’s, but today, directors who are contributing to the cause are much more equipped and arguably more advanced than their predecessors, and are using those strengths to their advantage. Darren Aronofsky, a maverick director known for his rather disturbing, dark films, attacked the problem of substance abuse in America with an Oscar nominated film titled Requiem for a Dream in 2000. In this film, he chronicles the lives of five severely drug-addicted personalities and not particularly in a positive light. The movie is very dark and hard-hitting with the reality and utter despair of the subject matter. The title can be interpreted to mean a song for the dying of America. America is dying at the hands of drugs, whether pharmaceutical or illegal, and this movie is its requiem. It is a depressing movie to say the very least, but it is nonetheless a flawless attempt by the media to portray drug abuse as unglamorous and deadly as possible. In addition, films with similar messages where illicit behavior is portrayed as something to be warned about are all an extension of the 1930’s films where their sole purpose was to alert the general public of the risks of substance abuse.
Earlier, it was briefly mentioned how children are targeted for the consumption of illicit drugs. Many of the sources researched by our team talk at least about the effects of media on the children in relationship to our main topic. Some are staggering. A new contender and a very formidable component in the media market is the video game industry. The video game industry is an 18 billion dollar juggernaut that recently grossed more than Hollywood (Armstrong, Bush, & Jones, 2010). Understanding the immense impact of video gaming on children is imperative as media majors and coming to terms with video games as a legitimate facet of media is as well. A survey of Kentucky elementary school students revealed that “approximately one-third of respondents indicated substance use, which was defined as alcohol use, illegal drug use, smoking/tobacco use, or sniffing solvents” in children who consumed higher exposure to TV/video games (Armstrong et al.).
As we saw with video games, music is another form of media that throughout time has been incredibly influential, not only on society, but more especially on the youth. Interestingly though, in this next study, the conclusions were not what the hypothesis proposed. One hypothesis suggested that “exposure to music-related media content will prospectively predict association with substance-using peers and initiating use of (a) cigarettes, (b) alcohol, and (c) marijuana among younger adolescents” (Slater & Henry, 2013). Their findings support the hypothesized direct prospective effects of music-related media exposure on associating with substance-using peers, alcohol, and cigarette uptake. Hypothesized direct effects on marijuana initiation, however, were not found. It appears at least some forms of popular music and music-related media content--just as exposure to video games and TV-- have a role in socializing youth to substance-use initiation via involvement with substance-using peer groups.
Aside from how adolescents are influenced by the framing of substance abuse in the media, the issues surrounding regulation raises other concerns, which was not mentioned in any of the sources. Regulators, like the FCC, are surely not oblivious to this fact. Subsequently, substance abuse on television is considerably less risqué than on film. From here, we deduce that we can conclude two things. Firstly, the media does portray substance abuse and with great frequency. Secondly, it is not only the general public that is being subjected to the promotion of risqué behavior, but children and adolescents as well. Third, there is no significant evidence that shows that being exposed to said element, in this case substance abuse actually causes a person to act and begin or continue to use drugs. From previous literature reviewed however, we have also learned that the media have a significant effect on the decisions we make on a daily basis. Health researchers and communication researchers have worried about the degree to which media seem to legitimize, glamorize, or otherwise encourage a variety of health-related risk behaviors, and conversely, the degree to which media can be used to help prevent these behaviors.
As noted previously, the power of the media is exponential and really cannot be denied. The glimmer of hope is that researchers are aware of the need to regulate how we are exposed to substance abuse, drug abuse and illicit behavior. Our own focus draws its concern from a desire for a healthy, drug-free society. It shows concern for our most precious commodity, our children; the malleable minds of children can be a nation’s greatest asset or its cancer, and thus, carefully monitoring the information absorbed by the future leaders of our free world would seem to be important. Lang et al. investigated how sensation seeking and age both influence television viewers’ online information processing of substance-abuse public service announcements (2005). College students and adolescents viewed 30 PSAs that varied in terms of what they call “arousing content” and “production pacing”. Results show that high-sensation seekers prefer all messages, remember more, and exhibit lower arousal compared to low-sensation seekers. The study also revealed that adolescents remember more information from the PSAs than college students. The message was getting through to the children and adolescents, who comparatively remembered the PSA’s more so than adults--proving the susceptibility of children. On the other hand, when children are given the skills to critically evaluate portrayals of violence and substance abuse, Bickham & Slaby (2012) discovered the effectiveness of the media’s power on youth in regards to health-focus. Their study of fifth-graders indicated that post media literacy, they understood that media violence is often glorified and that advertising of smoking and the like can affect their desires and behaviors.
Traditional media, like public service announcements aforementioned, television airtime, and press releases, attempt to reach and spread awareness among consumers. Celebrities are often used to convey these messages. For example, through public service announcements, soccer player Diego Maradona’s drug-related health crisis increased drug abuse awareness (Brown & Matviuk, 2010). Contrastingly, the analyses from the study by Hornik et al (2008) showed no effects from public service announcement campaigns in regards to the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign. At one round, however, more ad exposure predicted less intention to avoid marijuana use. Yet, there is a new encroaching methodology and space upon these mediums - that is social media. Creighton (2010) focuses on inhalant abuse and the Alliance for Consumer Education’s efforts to prevent it. Using social media, they launched a strategy engaging discussion between parents and teens on YouTube, MySpace, Wikipedia, and message boards. The campaign proved to clear up misconceptions and prevent misuse of products. Just as mentioned in this study, Kyu et al. (2011) also demonstrated the effectiveness of narrative health messages. Subjects proved to be moved towards health promotion and were reliant on interest, realism, and identification with others. Simons-Mortion & Donohew (1997) also confirmed the effectiveness of instituting multiple intervention programs using the unique perspectives on media to reach remote audiences.
Ultimately, based on the literature reviewed, the articles compiled, the data analysis in terms of statistics and the empirical reasoning of some of the top minds in mass media, communications and substance abuse professionals, the answer to our original question posed in the introduction was simple. The media, whether it be film, television, radio, video games, music or the Internet do not have a magic spell on us. We enjoy the different genres of media according to our taste and our senses are heightened when we are experiencing them, as evidenced in the study quoted earlier. There is no evidence that matter of factly proves that what we are exposed to in the media is the direct cause for our case of substance abuse and illicit behavior. On the question of substance abuse and how it is framed or exposed in the media, the most imminently logical answer is, dependent on the level of regulations enforced, the media portrays substance abuse as it is viewed in everyday life. Or at least that is the goal. A good question raised from this study is, “Are substance abusers exploited in the media?” The media cannot be either vilified or glorified in its role in the portrayal of substance abusers. On the one hand, they should be responsible as one of, if not the most influential sources of information known to man and utilize this powerful tool to inform and to prevent substance abuse.
The reality of the matter is where is the profit in that? In case anyone has forgotten, the media is in the business of making money. If there is a profit to be made from the manner in which they frame drugs and drug abuse, then they are going to frame it how they see fit, remembering once again that the media is strictly regulated, arguably. In short it comes down to that age old question, “Does art imitate life or does life imitate art?” When we portray images of substance abuse, when we report on the news the latest drug bust or new initiative to stop the spread of substance abuse, when the numbers are reported about drug abuse in the country, the media is not the villain in this equation. This is real life being played out before our eyes. What complicates this conclusion is advertisers, alcohol and tobacco companies who make a profit off of two of the leading causes of death in the United States. In this case, the media is definitely responsible for framing substance abuse in a positive light, but this is not the extent of what the media does. In other words, for every instance that you give us to disparage the media in terms of its portrayal of substance abuse, we can successfully match you with an example of how the media is triumphantly used in the fight against what was earlier noted as one of the biggest killers in America today.
The media is definitely guilty of framing substance abuse. However, they do so by portraying it as it is in everyday life. In other words, the reality of the matter is, in America, the greatest nation on Earth, people do drugs, a lot of them. The media would not be doing its job if it didn’t disseminate this information to us. How they disseminate this information seems to be to root of the dilemma, though. The question of morality rises as well--the very gray question of what is right, what is wrong. The truth is the media frames substance abuse however they want in order to make a profit, but that is the entertainment aspect of the media. The informative part of the media have proven to be effectual in getting positive messages of anti-drug sentiment to the public, more importantly, children. Which one is more effective, the negative or the positive? Well, that remains to be seen perhaps through further analysis and scholarly study. However, we can conclude the media is only the medium. That is all. We the people are responsible for the circulation of information, what gets filtered through the medium of the media. Furthermore, it is by being proactive and asking this type of relevant question, the question posed in this essay, that we could in fact monitor the media and its power.