Whenever I encounter a criticism of the media by the media, I become IMMEDIATELY skeptical. Seems such a one has landed in my RSS Reader. I subscribe to well over a dozen blogs and journals that touch on some aspect of media literacy. One of my favorite (and oft-cited here) urls is Ypulse. It does a fantastic job of accumulating posts from other sources about our youth and media. Most times, it typically gives a little blurb about the article they’re highlighting and lets the reader figure out their own opinion on it. Sometimes, they editorialize. And, sometimes the editorial gets it wrong.
Such is the case with their link of the news that Jamie Lynne Spears (younger sister to Britney) has finally had, at the age of 17, her much discussed and anticipated baby. Ypulse takes the opportunity to use this announcement as a way to address the recent discovery of a pact made between a large group of teenage girls in Gloucester, MA to purposely get pregnant. They take the stance that part of the reason this pledge was made at all was because of all of the recent coverage of celebrities (and in the case of Jamie Lynne, underaged) glamorously caring their babies to term. They back this up with the MTV article, and then follow it with a link to a CBS News report on the pregnancy sorority. The article is loaded with assertions that have no academic data to support, but what’s worse is CBS’ inability to point the finger at themselves, and report as if they were independent of their own network’s celebrity-glamorizing programming.
This segment particularly grabbed my eye:
“Of the students who are pregnant in Gloucester High now, Ireland speculated to Chen, “Maybe they felt lonely or something.” She agreed that Hollywood attaching glamour to teenage pregnancy may also have had something to do with the situation.”
Is it just Hollywood who’s attaching glamour to teenage pregnancy, or is the Tiffany network at fault too?