-
Website
http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/ -
Original page
http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2009/07/obama-fatherhood-commercial-sends-terrible-messages.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
Despite one sentence out of context, it's been clear that his focus has been to make men think about ways of becoming more responsible. Spending more time with their children is a good thing for fathers -- and it's something that costs nothing but time, so it's not hard, considering the rewards -- but he never suggested that a few minutes a day is ALL that's required to be a responsible dad.
I read his words within this context: “We need fathers to recognize that responsibility doesn’t just end at conception. That doesn’t make you a father. What makes you a man is not the ability to have a child - any fool can have a child. That’s doesn’t make you father. It’s the courage to raise a child that makes you a father.”
Your concept of context appears to be everything he has ever said or done with regards to fatherhood. That is not the context with which most people hear this ad. In fact, this ad is most likely the entire context viewers see on the issue as most people don't know that much about or receive many political messages. They do watch TV though.
Obama actually chose this particular message to be his primary context on fatherhood, a fifteen second summary to broadcast to millions of people over and over again.
I am not disputing whether he is or is not a good father or whether he has or has not said other things about fatherhood that are OK. I am simply taking issue with this choice of message. I think it is a poor choice of words for the reasons stated above.
Just because you say or do something good doesn't mean you shouldn't be criticized when you don't, especially when you push a bad message in a commercial that gets aired as much as this one.
Going back to his own words, maybe he should've "calibrated" his words differently.
There wasn't any *parsing* going on here. It is such a short commercial and so wrong on its face that there really isn't a need to do so.
Like I said to Jim, Obama may have a great fatherhood message underneath, but this isn't a good summary of it or a good choice of words for it. And yet these were the words he chose to distill his message and broadcast to millions of people, most of which will receive the commercial as his only message on the subject.
There's the context in the text and then there's the larger context.
The larger context here is not only that Obama is a good father (he clearly seems to be) or that he has said lots of things about being a responsible father (he clearly has), it's who he's targeting. You aren't the audience. It's the deadbeat dad, the neglectful dad and the absent dad. That's a serious national problem and that's who he's trying to convince that it's not so hard to be better. It only takes a little time to change from being absent to being present, from being neglectful to being there, if only for a few moments each day. That can make a huge difference in a child's life. He's not telling great, or even good, dads how to be better dads. He's telling non-dads how to take the first steps to becoming a dad. He's telling them that the first step is doable. We all know that the more we engage with our kids, the more we want to engage. I don't think he's concerned about making great dads out of good dads. That's not the national crisis that has resulted in too many unwanted and unloved children and ultimately unproductive and troubled adults.
It's like telling a child that swimming isn't hard -- give it a chance. Well it is harder than you're suggesting, but that's not the issue -- you want the child to try it. To give it a chance. Success will be its own reward, but you have to overcome the inertia and the fear. Same issue with this commercial. In this context, the larger (and arguably more important context) the commercial and the message do not offend me and make a lot of sense to me. I think it's terrific that Obama is taking on this issue.
The target audience knows very well that Obama is talking about stepping up and becoming a responsible parent. I don't think the target audience is missing the message at all. Obama has been talking about this issue a lot in front of a lot of groups, including most notably the Black community.
However, I still think he uses terrible diction to convey his underlying good message. As Erica on FB pointed out, he should have said something like "even a little time spent together can make a [huge] difference" instead of saying in just a few minutes you can be a great dad. A few minutes is a great *start,* but it doesn't make you a great parent.
Additionally, while the ad isn't targeting me, it is certainly targeted *at me.* I've seen it on Sunday morning watching political talk shows and on Hulu watching Royal Pains, a show about a doctor in the Hamptons. I've probably been forced to watch it over 20 times at this point. At some point I get entitled take issue with it :). I didn't seek it out; it seems to be seeking me out.
As for Obama being a good father, I've been thinking about that a lot today. Certainly he is a *good* father. He clearly cares about his kids, spends time with them, etc. But is he a great father? I don't think so. I actually don't think you can be a great father and also be president of the United States, or even a United States senator. I need to think more about it, and I'd be interested in your thoughts, but it seems being a great father (as opposed to just good) involves putting your kids well-being ahead of your own. In making the choice run for national office, let alone hold it, I think it is clear his kids' well-being is not his top priority.
I haven't seen or heard the commercial once. Maybe the Philadelphia market is a target area -- or maybe you're just watching all the irresposible dad stuff on TV :-).
Being a good dad does not mean not working. Very very few dads have the luxury of not being very very busy with their work and careers. The issue is as much quality as quantity. Reading to your children (Obama has read all of the Harry Potter books to his children), playing with them, listening to them, respecting them and ,most importantly, openly and demonstratively loving them are all vitally important to being a good parent.
We don't know what goes on inside the Obama family, but all outside indicators are that the Obama's are loving and good parents. The opportunity to expereince what the Obama kids are experiencing, if handled well, is a once in a lifetime chance that could be fantastic for them. You may not have wanted it for yourself as a child, or want it for your children, but that does't mean that it's bad per se. I don't think that here are rules here.
Society once thought that a dad could never be a stay at home parent and a mom could never work outside the home. If she did, she couldn't be a good mom. And the dad had to be flake. We know that's not true. One's own experience can't be projected to all. I've seen great child/parent relationships and healthy happy children in very unusual set-ups with lots of challenges. I've seen disasters in situations where the parents were very attentive and everything looked good. In short, I don't think that one can generalize about form. I think one can generalize somewhat about substance, i.e, children need love, attention, respect, freedom within boundaries. Those kinds of things really matter, but what job the parent has or how busy they are, can all be worked around if the substance is there. It may not look like your plan or your ideal, but there are lots of formats that can, and do, work.
Also, I really wasn’t trying to project, and I apologize if my statements came across as such. I’m now more interested in the theoretical question of what distinguishes a good from a great parent. The commercial is an example of many situations where these words get used interchangeably, but they are not interchangeable concepts.
Your logic above seems to imply that you could be a great parent on just a few minutes a day if you meet all the basics (loving, listening, keeping promises, etc.) and also gave your children decent experiences, like Obama. Where is the line in your mind? What if you sent your kids to the best boarding schools and visited on parent's day and called them a decent amount, i.e. met all the basics + good experience, but from afar? Could you still be considered a great parent? Can it be done most of the time remotely?
You said "Those kinds of things really matter, but what job the parent has or how busy they are, can all be worked around if the substance is there." Work is a reality and I think even both parents can certainly work and still be great parents, especially when their kids are in school. But job choice matters, and that is the point, it is a choice. I think your comment gets to the heart of a good parent vs a great parent. You can be a good parent with any career if you put effort into it, as Obama seemingly has done. But I don't think you can get to great parent status with all careers, and certainly not President of the United States. You seem to think it is possible in any career and that seems to be a remaining point of difference.
It seems the line is really putting your kids ahead of you. Those aren't the exact right words, but that is the sentiment. When you think about decisions in that context, I think things become clearer. Great parents shouldn't smoke, which Obama does by the way. Great parents wouldn't commit adultery if they were thinking of the implications on their kids—they would get divorced first. Great parents would choose a job that affords them more time with their kids, even though it might compromise their careers.
I'm also not trying to suggest that we are now or will become great parents. On the contrary, we've already chosen work in some cases. I feel bad about it, but the choice was made. Granted these were one-off hours or nights and not career decisions, but I can recognize the choice.
The other aspect of this that is really interesting me is the sexist double standard being applied. I don’t think there are any great parents in the boarding school example above. It seems at least one parent needs to spend more than a few minutes a day with the children. But society still seems to assume this is the mother and if it isn’t then that person isn’t a great mom while the dad can still be a great dad in the same few minutes.
As for my TV habits, that was my point—they shouldn’t be broadcasting those commercials on those shows (or hulu at all for that matter) if they are intended for deadbeat dads. The more I look at the campaigns I think they are not just intending them for deadbeat dads. Yes, that was the original core of the message, but it seems to have been expanded to cover all dads. Given that expansion *choice* I would like to see a useful broader message, like we already discussed.
As for Obama, he could have a cushy professor job in Chicago and spend tons of time with his kids. I think that is the choice where he separates from a great to a good dad, and the smoking, which really bothers me. Instead, in choosing to run for President, he essentially went on the road for two years straight. He put his family, including his children, in the media spotlight. Yes, he tries to protect their privacy within that spotlight, but he put them in it in the first place. He then uprooted his family. They all have bodyguards. He is constantly traveling and constantly has “more important” things to deal with than them, as we should demand of him (being our President). This career choice was certainly not made solely with the kids’ best interest at heart. If that is indeed the line, then that is where it was crossed.