Interactive Media Creating a “Pull” Economy

Compared to printed media, online publications offer several powerful draws.

  • Lower costs of publication
  • Lower cost of consumption
  • Interactivity
  • Choice/variety (an infinite number of channels)

These appeals are causing a far-reaching shift from a “push” to a “pull” information economy. The decline in ad revenues for printed newspapers and magazines is a barometer of this change. People report spending less time with traditional mass media while spending more on interactive media which enables them to find exactly what they want, not only in terms of information, but also in terms of products and services.

People can now find what they want
instead of what someone else wants them to want

As a consequence everything we consume is increasingly customized. A shift to computer-aided manufacturing is creating the ability to mass-customize goods and services. The technology of manufacturing and the technology of communication are converging in a way that allows manufacturers with unique capabilities and consumers with unique desires to find and collaborate with each other.

Push vs. Pull in the Marketplace:
The Changing Balance of Power

As a result, we’re seeing a steady shift in information/goods/services being pulled through the economy by consumers rather than pushed by publishers and manufacturers.

The “push economy” characterized by mass production in the last century anticipated consumer demand. The “pull economy” reacts to it. Small niches of consumers once dismissed by sellers are a growing market force.

You can see this trend in everything from micro-breweries to built-to-order cars and computers, personal publishing, user configurable software, customized clothing and more.

You can hear this trend in everyday language – “me” is replacing “we.” Intellectual freedom is replacing group-think. People still want to identify with groups; they just don’t want to lose their individuality in the process. Interactivity empowers them. It’s no longer about being part of the machine. It’s about controlling the machine.

Anticipating Demand vs. Collaborating with Customers

Marketing today is still about creating products and services that fit into people lives. The shift is from anticipation to collaboration. Instead of trying to guess what the largest number of people want, marketers need to be agile enough to collaborate with customers to create what each wants on demand.

Steubenville Rape and Social Media: All the Internet’s a Stage

Shakespeare begins Act II, Scene VII of As You Like It with the immortal words, All the world’s a stage.” In this play, he catalogs the seven stages of a man’s life. Among them is the competitive phase of life which Shakespeare calls “the soldier.” At this age, people seek to gain recognition, even though it may be short lived and at the cost of their own lives. As Shakespeare puts it, they are:

Seeking the bubble reputation
Even in the cannon’s mouth.

These nine words sum up the millions spawned by the Steubenville, Ohio, rape trial of two high school football players. They were found guilty of raping a teenage girl who was reportedly so drunk that she could not consent to sex, although the defense disputed her state of consciousness at the trial.

This is not the first time things got out of control at a party that mixed minors with alcohol. So what made this case so notorious? In my opinion, the case made national headlines because:

  • Teens at the party posted videos and pictures of the event on social media sites [1]
  • Those who witnessed the rape made hundreds of tweets about it, yet did nothing to stop it or report it to authorities [1]
  • Prosecutors used this trail of online evidence to convict the teens [2]
  • An online video showed males joking about the victim callously and remorselessly, exemplifying what some call a “culture of rape” and others call “cultural rot” [3]
  • Two girls reportedly threatened on Twitter to kill the victim and may now be prosecuted separately for their threats [4]
  • These teens claimed that they did not think they were committing crimes
  • Social media, rivals of mainstream media, were at the heart of the affair

It was a Shakespearean tragedy in every sense of the phrase and a perfect media firestorm. The case involved a small town, teenagers, football, rape, alcohol, the Internet, YouTube, Twitter, ruined lives, rival mediums, outrage and more. Even hackers got in on the action when Anonymous posted the video. See Anonymous Leaks Horrifying Video of Steubenville High Schoolers Joking About Raping a Teenager ‘Deader than Trayvon Martin’. (Warning: This is about ten minutes long and emotionally difficult to watch.)

The video above, even though it focuses primarily on one male, clearly shows that several were competing with each other to describe the events of that night in the most degrading terms possible. That the video was later posted online and used as evidence in a felony trial makes Shakespeare’s words seem prophetic.

“Seeking the bubble reputation, even in the cannon’s mouth.”

As I’ve been writing these 522 words, the number of search results reported by Google on “Steubenville rape” increased by more than one million (from 219,000,000 to 220,000,000). The Internet truly has become the stage where tragedies like this play out.

_____________________________

[1] http://prinniefied.com/wp/steubenville-high-school-gang-rape-case-firs/

[2] Twitter, YouTube Make Steubenville Case Even More Complicated

[3] Patricia Leavy, PhD: Boys Seeking Celebrity Prom Dates, Steubenville, and How the Media Still Don’t Get it

[4] Two charged with threats in Steubenville rape case – CBS News, Girls Threaten Steubenville Rape Accuser On Facebook, Twitter; 2 Face Charges In Ohio

The Dark Side of Cell Phones: Traffic Accidents

shutterstock_54292804What discussion of media impacts of life would be complete without looking at the relationship between cell phones and traffic accidents.  Cell phones were originally seen as on-the-road safety devices. Ironically, today The National Safety Council, CDC, U.S. Department of Transportation and World Health Organization  recognize them as one of the leading causes of traffic accidents.

The National Safety Council estimates that at least 23 percent of all traffic crashes – or at least 1.3 million crashes – involve cell phone use per year. An estimated 1.2 million crashes each year involve drivers using cell phones for conversations and at least 100,000 additional crashes can be related to drivers who are texting. Cell phone conversations are involved in 12 times as many crashes as texting.

Researchers observing more than 1,700 drivers found that three out of every four drivers using a cell phone committed a traffic violation according to the National Safety Council. At any given daylight moment, they say that 9 percent of drivers are talking on phones (handheld and hands-free).

The National Safety Council report also indicates that talking on a cell phone while driving makes you four times more likely to crash, and texting while driving increases your chances of a crash by up to 8 to 23 times.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) claims that an average of 15 people are killed each day and more than 1,200 people are injured in crashes that were reported to involve a distracted drive. The CDC recognizes three main types of distraction:

  • Visual—taking your eyes off the road;
  • Manual—taking your hands off the wheel; and
  • Cognitive—taking your mind off what you are doing.

Distracted driving activities include (but are not limited to) things like using a cell phone and texting. The CDC says texting while driving is especially dangerous because it combines all three types of distraction. Younger, inexperienced drivers under the age of 20 may be at highest risk because they have the highest proportion of distraction-related fatal crashes.

The World Health Organization (WHO) recognizes distracted driving as a serious and growing problem. With more and more people owning mobile phones, and the rapid introduction of new “in-vehicle” communication systems, they claim this problem is likely to escalate globally in the coming years.

WHO says drivers using mobile phones increase their accident risk by increasing their reaction times, inadvertently following too closely and swerving into adjacent traffic. They also claim that there is no conclusive evidence to show that hands-free phoning is any safer than hand-held phoning, because of the cognitive distraction involved with both types of phones.

The problem of distracted driving has become so serious that the U.S. Department of Transportation has set up a program to end it. See D!straction.gov to get the facts, get involved and see what the government recommends.

Impact of Media on Child Health

I have long felt that in the Information Age, media are like the air we breath and the water we drink – necessary for life, but sometimes toxic and often unhealthy. Browsing this morning, I found this group: The Center for Media and Child Health (CMCH).

videogameAt Children’s Hospital Boston, the Harvard Medical School, and the Harvard School of Public Health, this group is dedicated to understanding and responding to the effects of media on the physical, mental, and social health of children through research, translation, and education.

They have found that young people spend more time using media—TV, movies, music, computers, Internet, cell phones, magazines, and video games—than engaging in any other single activity except sleep. Their site is a treasure trove of scientific research related to these topics.

According to the Center for Media and Child Health:

The media that children use and create are integral to their growing sense of themselves, of the world, and of how they should interact with it. These pervasive, persuasive influences have been linked to both negative health outcomes, such as smoking, obesity, sexual risk behaviors, eating disorders and poor body image, anxiety, and violence, and to positive outcomes, such as civil participation, positive social behavior, tolerance, school readiness, knowledge acquisition, and positive self-image. For any given child, which effects occur depends largely on the media’s content, the child’s age, the context in which the child uses media, the amount of media the child uses, and whether that use is active and critical.”

 

To create positive rather than negative outcomes, they propose five Five Cs, which I summarize below:

  • Control time
    Limit media use to an amount appropriate for your child’s age.
  • Filter Content
    All media educate. Some teach healthy lessons, others harmful.
  • Influence Context.
    Where, when, how, why, and with whom kids use media can enrich or harm them.
  • Teach Critical thinking
    It’s essential for healthy development.
  • Create media mastery
    Show kids how to think about media they use, instead of passively consuming it.

My Take

To kids, media represent a way to explore the world, stay connected, share experiences, identify with groups, and show off. They’re a badge of belonging. They’re a gateway to information, entertainment and temptation.

Research shows that kids consume up to seven hours per day of media (ten and a half hours if you factor in multitasking). Nothing will influence the type of adults that kids become more than you and the media they consume. The wise parent will teach kids to use media time wisely. I read that in a fortune cookie, so I know it must be true.

Digital Media and Purchase Decision-Making

So I got into a debate last month with a friend who runs a very successful Internet marketing company. The subject was purchase decision models.

I argued that before people purchase a brand, they must prefer it. And before they prefer it, they must consider it. And before they consider it, they must be aware of it. The entire process is like a leaky funnel. At each step, a certain number of people fall away.Sales Funnel

My friend argued that the only things that mattered in his world were finding the right key words, optimizing web content for search engines, obtaining the top spot on page one of search results, and funneling leads to people who could close the sale. Who was right? We both were.

Awareness

There’s no argument that being the first brand people see when they begin to shop is a huge advantage. (It’s called awareness.) Being first in a Google search is like being at eye level on an end-aisle display in a grocery store, or placing your ad on the inside front cover of a magazine. You virtually guarantee people will see you. But that’s no guarantee people will buy you. You have only gained awareness.

Consideration

In most product categories, people consider three to five choices. They compare prices. They assess performance, risk, value, convenience, and many other factors. Finding the right key words for SEO is very similar to finding the right words to put on a package or in a headline. In all cases, you highlight the benefits most important to a specific target audience. The objective is to get on the prospect’s shopping list – to make them consider you. But success at this stage still doesn’t guarantee a sale. Every organization has competition. You still have to become the preferred alternative.

Preference

Becoming the preferred brand among those considered requires the customer to see your brand as the best fit with his or her needs. When prospects use search engines, they are essentially defining their needs. For instance, they may be looking for a “safe compact car under $20,000.” Search engines help sort options the same way that shoe leather and shopping trips do. “Optimizing” the pitch for a specific audience is always necessary to become the preferred choice. Before search engines, the words we used for optimizing were “market segmentation” and “targeting.”

Purchase

What it takes to win a sale varies by industry. In many, it is crucial to funnel leads to sales people. In others…not so much. Regardless, making the sale is always the final objective in the process and the amount of sales will vary relative to success of efforts earlier in the process.

Purchase Decision Process

In retrospect, I think my friend and I were arguing over semantics. I was talking about a general process. He was talking about how a specific tool worked within the context of that process.

The Internet is somewhat different from mass media in that it can simultaneously be a channel for communication, sales and distribution. Regardless, the steps that consumers or businesses go through in deciding which brand to purchase remain basically the same.

The question is not “Is awareness necessary?” The question is “How will we build awareness?” Any business leader who thinks awareness is not necessary in the Internet Age is limiting his/her potential.

The question is not “Can we skip the consideration and preference phases and send prospects straight to sales people or an order button?” If people want to consider several brands, they will. It’s important for companies to provide enough information to enable prospects to evaluate the alternatives.

Even though the technologies of selling change constantly, buyers never do.

Digital media primarily affect the efficiency with which marketers can reach people, present information and take orders.

Impact of Live TV Coverage on Conflict Management and Relief Efforts

CNN EffectAlmost two decades ago, UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali warned, “Television has become part of the event it covers. It has changed the way the world reacts to crises.” He was referring to television broadcasts from war zones like Bosnia and Somalia. Real-time satellite coverage (often referred to as the CNN Effect) had essentially changed the role of journalists from reporters to participants.

Boutros Boutros-Ghali was arguing that instantaneous, global broadcasts of atrocities put pressure on governments “to do something quickly.”

Nik Gowing writing in the UK-based The Independent raised the question, “But is this true? Does television really influence foreign policy?” For four months, he stepped back from the daily pressures of TV news reporting. He interviewed more than 100 diplomatic, military, and foreign-policy decision makers in the U.S. and Europe to test the conventional wisdom that images transmitted ‘live from the battlefield’ drive foreign policy decisions.

When he began the project, he felt that television coverage did drive foreign policy. After the interviews, he wasn’t so sure. He concluded that:

“Television’s new power should not be misread. It can highlight problems and help to put them on the policy agenda, but when governments are determined to keep to minimalist, low-risk, low-cost strategies, television reporting does not force them to become more engaged.”

Walter Strobel, a White House Correspondent for the Washington Times, like Gow, interviewed many foreign policy makers and military leaders. He published his findings in an article for the American Journalism Review. Like Gow, he concluded that “The CNN Effect is narrower and far more complex than the conventional wisdom holds.” He continues:

“To say that CNN changes governance, shrinks decision making time and opens up military operations to public scrutiny is not the same as saying that it determines policy. Information indeed has become central to international affairs, but whether officials use this or are used by it depends largely on them.”

The controversy over the CNN Effect continued for several years. In 2000, Peter Jakobsun from the University of Copenhagen’s Institute of Political Science studied the phenomenon and published his findings in the Journal of Peace Research. He titled the study, “Focus on the CNN Effect Misses the Point: The Real Media Impact on Conflict Management is Invisible and Indirect.” Jakubsen analyzed media coverage before, during and after violent conflicts. He concluded that:

“The media ignores most conflicts most of the time. The coverage of the pre- and post-violence phases is negligible at best and only a few armed conflicts are covered in the violence phase. As focus and funds follow the cameras, the 1990s have witnessed a transfer of resources from more cost-effective, long-term efforts directed at preventing violent conflict and rebuilding war-torn societies to short-term emergency relief. Selective media coverage also contributes to an irrational allocation of short-term emergency relief because coverage is determined by factors other than humanitarian need. This invisible and indirect media impact on Western conflict management is far greater than the direct impact on intervention and withdrawal decisions that the debate over the CNN effect focuses on.”

Jakubsen felt that real-time, satellite media coverage of conflicts contributes to “an irrational allocation of resources.” He observed that  resources are channeled from long-term development and regeneration projects to short-term emergency relief by media-inspired demands that funds be given to emergency ‘X’ one month and emergency ‘Y’ the next. During his study:

  • Official development assistance provided by The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) fell by more than 20% in constant dollars, and reached its lowest point in 45 years when measured as a percent of members’ gross domestic product.
  • By contrast, the funds provided for humanitarian relief by OECD members rose more than five fold.
  • Statistics from the UN Consolidated Inter-agency Humanitarian Assistance Appeals showed that appeals for emergencies covered by the media were far more successful than appeals for forgotten emergencies.

My Take

Live 24-hour news coverage of international crises seems to have had little effect on public policy. The biggest impact, according to Jakubsen is that more effort seems to be focused on dealing with the results of conflicts than preventing them in the first place.

New technologies always have unintended consequences. This seems to be one of the less foreseeable. But decades later, little has changed. Less than three months ago, a mass shooting of elementary schoolchildren in Newtown, CT, riveted the nation’s attention. Now, the cameras have moved on and so has the debate over how to prevent the next mass shooting. The lead story on tonight’s national news was the weather.

Media Proliferation, Creativity and Change

Today, I’d like to talk about how media proliferation affects creativity – specifically, how media proliferation has increased the availability of information which fuels creativity. This creativity can, in turn, foster change which fosters more media proliferation – forming a continuous feedback loop that leads to exponential growth in the rate of change.

Model for the Creative Process

Perhaps the best book ever written on creativity, The Act of Creation by Arthur Koestler, describes a model for how new ideas come into being. Koestler called this process bisociation. Bisociation occurs when two previously unrelated planes of thought suddenly intersect. In his book, Koestler gives us hundreds of examples of how this process worked for the most creative people in history.

The geometric plane below represents the beginning of a creative person’s  search for solutions. He/she explores what they already know looking for answers. However, the answers they find will, by definition, be expected and not creative.

 

However, this exercise serves a purpose. It eliminates expected solutions and prepares the subconscious for the moment of inspiration. Koestler visualizes what some people call the “Aha” or “Eureka” moment as the sudden bisociation of a new plane of thought.

Bisociation

Sudden Bisociation of Previously Unrelated Thoughts

Bisociation usually happens at times when we allow our thoughts to stray after a frustrating search of known solutions – as when browsing through a library, walking past a shop window, flipping channels, or singing in a shower. A chance encounter, a fleeting thought, a random comment, or an unexpected experience suddenly connects two previously unrelated planes of thought.

Without first having wandered through the wilderness of known solutions, the mind would never recognize the solution as the solution. The mind would see it as just another in a long stream of random, unrelated ideas.

This model works in a wide variety of creative endeavors – from the arts to comedy and even science. My experience agrees with Koestler’s. Several things increase the chances of creative success:

  • Tightly defining the problem/issue
  • Thoroughly embedding it in the subconscious mind by exhaustively searching for solutions
  • Stepping away from problem
  • Voraciously consuming information on other topics

The more we know and the more we experience, the greater the chances for bisociation. Said another way, “Chance favors the prepared and well-stocked mind.”

Media Proliferation Fuels Creativity

This brings us back to media proliferation. Today, more information surrounds more people than at any other time in history. Newspapers, bookstores, radio, TV, libraries, and the Internet bring the world to us through computers, laptops, tablets, smartphones, and more. We swim in information every day.

Media proliferation fuels creativity by increasing the chances for bisociation of ideas. It’s no accident that an exponential increase in information availability has coincided with a geometric increase in change. Each fertilizes the other in a continuous loop.

Now pardon me while I focus on some business issues and then let my mind wander.

Impact of Television Screens on Nervous Tics

According to the Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders, tics are sudden, painless, nonrhythmic behaviors that appear out of context. Simple motor tics are brief, meaningless movements like eye blinking, facial grimacing, head jerks or shoulder shrugs. They usually last less than one second, but can last longer, occur frequently and be more serious..

For those who have never witnessed this affliction, YouTube posted a video of a tic-stricken person watching TV. Tics are often related to a more severe related disorder called Tourette’s Syndrome.

Tics Related to TV Viewing and Video Games

A UK group called Tourette’s Action says that tics usually increase with stress, tiredness and boredom and are often prominent when watching television.

Many others note an association between tics and television watching. However, the cause is not fully understood. Some psychologists believe that tics can be suppressed through concentration; they attribute tic outbursts to relaxation while watching TV. Others see the flickering lights of TV and video games as the culprits. Still others see tics as a genetic disorder and believe that environmental factors may trigger them.

shutterstock_24325162

CRT flicker is imperceptible to most people but may be related to tics in others.

An article posted by The American Nutrition Association in Nutrition Digest notes several types of hypersensitivities associated with tics and says “Television and video games both have a high frequency flicker that doesn’t bother most of us, but often triggers tics. TV and computer video games watched by toddlers are linked to ADHD as well as tics.”

The Association for Comprehensive NeuroTherapy (ACN) which explores treatments for tics and other neurological disorders sponsors a forum for parents of children with tics. A review of the postings on the forum found that 20 of 27 (74 percent) of parents who eliminated screen viewing for at least a week saw a significant reduction in their children’s tics. Most children with screen sensitivity also had food sensitivities. Several parents noted that correcting food issues, such as hypersensitivity to yeast, eliminated the screen sensitivity.

A comprehensive book on the subject, Natural Treatments for Tics and Tourette’s: A Patient and Family Guide, by Sheila J. Rogers contains numerous stories from parents who found that eliminating or restricting television viewing for children with tics lessened the symptoms.

The book also refers to reports from Japan about eye twitching, muscle twitching and in rare cases, even seizures associated with playing video games. Rogers cites warnings printed in Nintendo manuals starting in 2004.

The good news: Rogers reports that tics were most frequently observed while subjects were viewing cathode ray tubes (CRTs) which have much more pronounced flicker than the LCD, plasma and LED screens being sold today.

A neurotransmitter inside the brain called dopamine may trigger tics in people with hypersensitivity to light. Light strongly affects the body’s production of dopamine. Victoria L. Dunckley, M.D., wrote in Psychology Today:
“Since video games and computer use increase dopamine, and tics are dopamine-related, it’s understandable that electronic media worsen tics.  For bothersome tics, I recommend a three week “electronic fast” to normalize brain chemistry and improve sleep (restful sleep improves tics in and of itself).”

We have all become dependent on electronic media; it’s hard to fathom life without screens. This is one more example of how media can impact life in surprising ways.

Communities Now Defined by Interests as Much as Geography

We live in a transitional age. Perhaps for the first time in human history, communities are now defined as much by interests as they are by geography.

Of course, interest groups existed before digital media. Scientists, clergy, physicians, industrialists, government leaders and other elites formed interest groups that transcended local communities. But for the average person, communities were defined by geography, or at least had roots in geography. Cultures, customs, dress, sports, taxes, voting,  language, transportation, markets and more all depended on “where.”

We identified ourselves by city, state and (more recently) country. Survival and civilization depended on binding ourselves together with those physically close to us. Usually, the first questions asked after meeting someone were:

  • Where are you from?
  • Where do you live?
  • Where do you work?

But the advent of the Internet began to change that. Now the first question asked is likely to be: What are you interested in?

The rapid rise of electronic forums, special interest groups, chat-rooms, social networks, dating sites, and more enabled people to reach out to others around the world who shared unique interests – regardless of geography.

Shared interests form a more powerful bond than mere proximity.

BlackManWorldMapI have a reclusive neighbor that I’ve seen twice in twenty years. To tell you the truth, I’m not sure I would recognize him if I met him on the street. However, I correspond daily with people all over the world who share my interests. I have more fun with them than most of my neighbors. I have deeper discussions. I feel for them. I share their pain in the same way that members of a church support each other in times of need.

Rather rapidly, humans are beginning to re-align themselves. Interests can now easily transcend geographic boundaries. We can easily reach out to like minded people on almost any topic, regardless of where they live in the world. The implications for government are profound.

  • Individuals who share narrow or unique interests can quickly find each other, form groups and gain recognition. This could have a splintering effect on political systems.
  • Those dissatisfied with unjust regimes can coordinate large protests and even bring down governments, as we have recently seen in Africa and the Middle East.
  • More people are becoming world citizens with global awareness. Nation states could be replaced by something larger, just as city states were replaced hundreds of years ago by nation states.
  • An electoral process based on geographic representation could become obsolete.

Should we apportion congressional seats on a non-geographic basis to ensure representation for gays, pacifists, and a woman’s right to choose?

This idea seems far-fetched, but 50 years ago, so did the idea of gerrymandering congressional and city council districts to ensure representation for Blacks and Latinos. Thanks to the awareness brought about by mass media, we’re already apportioning representatives according to interests, not just geography, on a limited basis. How much further will this trend go with digital media?

Television Affective Disorders

Yesterday, I discussed screen fixation and its relationship both to attention deficit disorder and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Today, I’d like to focus on several affective disorders. Psychologists have described seasonal affective disorder (S.A.D.) – depression related to shorter winter days. I have personally noted several other widespread affective disorders related to television viewing. Together, they fall under the general heading of T.A.D. (television affective disorders).

couplewatchingtvinbedAny woman who has ever tried to tear her boyfriend or husband away from Sports Center at 2 a.m. has experienced a malady called Male Affective Disorder (M.A.D.). Male symptoms include restlessness, decreased libido, excessive consumption of Doritos, general irritability when distracted, high blood pressure during fourth quarters, and loud, uncontrolled outbursts of verbal epithets when referees make idiotic calls.

These, in turn, create F.A.D. (Female Affective Disorder). F.A.D. symptoms in the female include cold shoulders, a hyperactive grumble gland, pouting, elevated temper, door slamming, excessive re-reading of Jane Eyre, sleeping at the opposite end of the house, tightly crossed legs, excessive consumption of chocolate, and expensive trips to Tiffany & Co.

In extreme cases, both M.A.D. and F.A.D. have been known to enrich divorce lawyers. Physicians urge intervention before this happens. The only known cure is for the female to confiscate the remote before the male becomes fixated on the screen and distract the male by hiding the remote in her bra.

This can sometimes lead to B.A.D. (Bedtime Affective Delight). As the male attempts to recover the remote, he playfully tears clothes off the female. This focuses his attention fully on her. Symptoms include heavy breathing; flushed cheeks; racing hearts; heightened arousal; spontaneous clutching; sudden, uncontrolled release of tension; prolonged snuggling; and deeper-than-normal sleep followed by Sports Center at 4 a.m.

M.A.D., F.A.D. and B.A.D. represent proof positive that television can affect relationships in both negative and positive ways. As these phenomena are so widely observed and well documented in households across America, I see little need for further study.