Quote

If we can identify exactly when these discontent ads were targeted at specific age groups of children and adolesents, we can then see if this was tied to a corresponding surge in diagnoses for depression in those same age groups.

Next, we can study how prevalent these advertising campaigns are in various parts of Europe and the UK, note which age groups were targeted and whether rates of diagnosis for depression also go up.

Yes, I think that would be very difficult to correlate. Were the ads responsible for depression? Or was a population trend towards depression noticed and marketed against by the ad agencies?

Also, is there actually more depression in the US now, or is there just greater awreness of depression and more discourse about it, so it [i:24d126c808]seems[/i:24d126c808] like there's more of it? Are more people being diagnosed with depression because it means more profit for counselors/drug companies?

I do think there's a societal condition that's making people more open to cultic influence. Or am I wrong? There is a history of cults going back through the ages, worldwide, in all kinds of different cultures, after all. This may go against some people's beliefs that the US is the "source" of most cults and that we export them to other countries -- Moon's from Korea, right? Where did TM start?

Is the preponderance/dearth of cults cyclical? Or does it tend to remain steady? I don't know. I think it would be interesting for someone to study the percentage of populations that become involved in cults in different cultures and at different points in history. I think all these questions are interesting.

But the ads started to change after Est had been around for a while ... I think that's the more important point.

Which ads?

This business of the "American Dream" is a very seductive concept. There is an excellent book called "PR! A Social History of Spin" by Ewen.
It traces back in time the advent of the PR industry, and the construction of the idea of the American Dream as a marketing tactic.
He even names names, people like Edward Bernay's and others, who were the main people to create the modern PR industry, and who's goals were to literally "create reality".
This is the type of Landscape we now live in.

The techniques of the LGAT's are very very common, and growing everyday. You can even look at people like Dr Phil, who seem to be attempting to do an LGAT on an entire town!! (or perhaps a country).
[www.drphil.com]

We all live in a ocean of these propaganda and forms of thought reform techniques.

Coz

I've heard somewhere that Dr. Phil has taken Landmark Training. It sure sounds lke it, from this bit from his website:

Quote

Life Law #1: You either get it or you don't.
Strategy: Become one of those who gets it.

Life Law #2: You create your own experience.
Strategy: Acknowledge and accept accountability for your life. Understand your role in creating results.

Life Law #6: There is no reality, only perception.
Strategy: Identify the filters through which you view the world. Acknowledge your history without being controlled by it.

Never liked the guy.

>>Life Law #2: You create your own experience.
Strategy: Acknowledge and accept accountability for your life. Understand your role in creating results.>>>



One would have thought that this one was dead in the water after Robert Preston slugged Bert Convey, (the "Werner" character in "Semi-Tough"), in the chops while shouting: "Experience this!"

Or that he would at least have tried to distance himself from Werner or used different words or something.



Ellen


Can't you just smell that decrepit old corpse of ElRon.....three lines; four Co$ "concepts:"

~Acknowledge~
~create~
~results~
~experience~

I remember the first time I saw "Dr" Phil on Oprah. I just thought, "Oh I've seen this shit before" and turned it off pretty quick. In fact, I haven't watch Oprah since. The cover of his diet book bewilders me because he's not thin. :twisted:

I hate the way the American Dream is advertised. I was never taught the American Dream was for conspicuous consumption achieved at any cost. Is not such behavior more Machiavellian? It was definitely about achieving some sort of financial success and it was for anyone to achieve, but you had to work hard, very hard to achieve it. No one was entitled to it. I also understood it's meaning was generational. My parents and grandparents' meaning was much less materialistic than the present day version. For them it was about making their children's and grandchildren's lives better. Today's is about making the person's life better without much thought to the future or consequences. The modern version is not very appealing.

Yeah, I never got the Dr. Phil/diet connection. He still looks overweight to me!

Once Oprah started hanging with Deepak Choprah (was it because their names ryhme?) she started getting weird. Dr. Phil was the final straw. Not that I've ever been much of an Oprah fan, but I do remember a time when I considered her to be an intelligent person. If you watch her show now (I try to avoid it), you'll see that she's become a Stepford person. Hardly ever smiles or reacts naturally...it seems like she's an automaton going through the motions. I wonder what training she's been through? Sad.

And the "American Dream" has been twisted, unfortunately, to sound a lot like what Landmark teaches...win at all costs, get yours, nobody really cares about you, you're in this alone...what lonely lives LECers must lead in their quests for self-actualization!