Inner Michael

The treatment of royals by the media speaks for itself as traditionally shameful and brutal. You’ll remember how “Fergie” was first beloved then vilified and later ridiculed and gutted in brash red headlines. She was a newlywed whose husband was off serving his country and away from home. She was left behind to navigate the demands that culture imposes on a royal without being raised in that culture and without an understanding of “appearances” and what constitutes for a royal- “dignity” and sacrifice for “country.” What young bride could navigate all that with complete grace and success? Fergie left her baby with trusted custodians and traveled to spend time with her husband. The tabloid press played on her “mistake” vilainizing her as a “bad mother” who “abandoned her child.” When that smear campaign was over, a worm held a higher opinion in the mind of the public. Was that the natural outcome of the “mistake” of youth and naivete, or was it a predictable outcome fostered by the tabloid press who used Fergie to milk a story to peddle its wares of condemnation and shadow? For Fergie, it all went downhill from there as it ended in a painful headline that instead of the “Duchess of York” called her the “Duchess of Pork.”

If you had a moment there of an involuntary *gasp* at the cruelty of that headline, that was only the beginning of the downhill ride, courtesy of the press while accompanied by those brought along for the slide into darkness– the public. More and more shocking headlines came and went (“Wacko,” “Bizarre,” “Weird”) until the public was immune to the monikers and the cruelty behind them. The tabloids, in their own defense, cite that they are only giving the public what it wants. What they don’t admit to, is their grooming of the public for consumption of what they peddle.

Nobody was immune: Prince Harry was mocked and exposed as reckless and cavalier during his young quest for identity. And Diana was hunted, hounded, stalked with camera lenses as long as the arm. She was made a caricature– a non-human devoid of flesh or feelings– a pathetic, lost figure anorexic, bulimic, depressed and delusional. They even went after her when she championed children and condemned the use of landmines that were taking their limbs and lives as unexploded ordinance littered the landscape far beyond the tenure of war. The press thought her “crazy” and had harsh and cynical words for a woman who loved children and leveraged her fame and popularity to highlight their causes.

Sound familiar? What a cynical world we have created and inherited! No wonder we weep inside for something that was lost and can’t even name. It’s an unconscious sorrow, an internal dissonance that knows ‘something’s not right’ and we share in that confusing unrest. When we reduce people to caricatures that are non-human abbreviations on our own projections and shadow, we chip away at our humanity. Public figures and celebrities became fair game without restraint under the tutelage and leadership of Rupert Murdoch when his tabloid train rolled into town. Murdoch deliberately targeted the royals for tabloid fodder as well as Madonna and Michael Jackson. He knew that featuring Michael and Madonna as well as the royals, would capture the youth  demographic. There was nothing lofty or socially redeeming about what Murdoch was doing. He did it for personal profit, power and market share. He did it for business, not to enlighten his countrymen.

Human nature is naturally curious in thought (the mind) and looks for reasons and explanations of things– mythology is an outgrowth of human curiosity. Those who appear “larger than life” tend to take on mythological proportions in the mind. But humanity coming from the intellect without the engagement of compassion and empathy (the heart) views those “mythological” larger-than-life humans as objects rather than people. And when disconnected from the heart, and feeling deprived or diminished, humans can resent wealth, fame and the perceived power of others. The longing to be loved and recognized that everyone shares, translates to a desire for fame (massive recognition and admiration) and is projected onto the “object.” That object can be viewed as an idealized self or a reminder of an unrealized self. Either way, the projection can be disturbing and the mind can mistakenly find the “object” of that projection disturbing (the famous person upon whom the projection lands.)

When the artist is provocative and deliberately challenges those projections or cultural “norms” (as Michael Jackson did) he or she confounds and disturbs the world-view of the audience– individually and/or collectively (holon.) Murdochs tabloids, instead of asking the questions and encouraging the public to ponder and offer their own contribution to the culture (enlightenment) as the artist was asking, exploited the consternation and confusion (shadow) felt by the challenge to the status quo.

Murdoch left Australia to gobble up Britain’s media real estate and his unrestrained cruel policies of how media business is conducted, and how celebrities and royals are treated has forever scarred the landscape of the communications industry. The tabloids became shadow peddlers. Their self-tasking mission was to reflect humanity’s shadow to itself. Murdoch, it is reported, took particular glee in vanquishing his “enemies;” stories abound of his deliberate annihilation of anyone he perceived as standing in his way. A modern dragoon, he lauded and lorded his power over others.

He effectively browbeat his way to a billionaire’s fortune co-opting the humanity of individuals and humanity the collective, along his journey. Instead of peddling drugs by getting his clientele hooked on Cocaine or some other highly addictive drug, Murdoch peddled human shadow to consumers. Michael Jackson and Lady Diana Spencer were the most visible of his targets. A consummate bully, he bullied them across the pages of his newspapers as well as across time. What then is his real legacy? Is it recognized for what it is? At a time when humanity could have used some encouragment during the Cold War years and under the persistent spectre of nuclear armament and the impending doom of mankind, could have used some reminders of its own power of “voice” and its abilities to change the world (Michael Jackson’s message in his lyrics and Lady Diana’s mission in the world) Murdoch chose instead to target them and twist their nobility and their desire and actions toward social change and recruitment of goodness in the world to huge red headlines that peddle shadow to humanity. Instead of proclaiming their accomplishements and drafting others into an army to uplift humanity, he chose to degrade them and all of humanity by having us accompany him on his mission of darkness. History will eventually recognize his true legacy. The mirror will shatter in shame.

“Holllywood” was not always a dirty word. The cynical connotations did not always live in the collective mindset. The glamor of Hollywood in earlier days showcased the brilliance and talent of aritsts who dared to share their gifts with the world. The likes of Fred Astaire, Gene Kelly, Carol Burnett, Lucille Ball and Desi Arnez, Ava Gardner, Humphrey Bogart, Lana Turner, Katherin Hepburn, and those that came before and after… brought magesty, magic and brilliance to the “silver screen” and they were beloved for their gifts memorialized in iconography and art. Even the traditional lighting of those glamor days of Hollywood lit up the faces and showcased an inner light that shines from the inside out (the “Inner Michael!”) that depicts the light that reflects the Creator as the talent becomes the Creator’s ambassador to the audience and to the world through the audience.

Rather than hyponotize by deceit, lies and innuendo in the service of conscripting and reinforcing humanity’s shadow, what was wrong with the Hollywood-of-old that mezmerized with true talent, frivolity, brilliance and the “inner light” (with genius lighting-wizardry) that reminded humanity of its innate brilliance, inspiring the audience to stretch toward their light that illuminates humanity (the individual and the collective) instead of pulling it down into darkness? What was so bad about a Hollywood that inspired, that illuminated, that coaxed its audience to occupy instead, its own brilliance or bright shadow?

The rise of tabloids geographically (tabloid-ography) brought humiliation and indignity to very public figures– in service to profit and to build an empire to satisfy one individual’s gigantic ego while concommitantly building an homage to human misery and shadow. Until the empire tabloid-ography spread, the curiosity and buzz about celebrities was fairly benign. The marketing of tabloid-ography was so aggressive that the industry’s flesh-eating disease took hold and became epidemic, infecting all of the media. What else to call the practice of dismembering real people on front pages for entertainment, sport and profit? To peddle purposefully disemboweled and rotting flesh of those stripped to the bone for sport and consumption to the masses? What do you call it when a civilization eats its own? What else but cannibalism?

Unconscious consumers are drawn into stories deliberately and cleverly concocted and slanted to be provocative and seductive in order to draw eyes to the page, clicks to the website and frenzies to Twitter and Facebook– all simply for profit. They leave something out of the story or add a suggestion.  They are provocative because they know provocation works. They know because they study the flashpoints. They know what draws fire and ire. Their tactics designed to manipulate the public. THAT PUBLIC IS YOU. It’s GREED that drives it– only the quest to grab for money and obscene profits; it’s YOU that buys it and if so, the damage is also on your head.

You buy it metaphorically when you give it credence and legitimacy, when you cite it as a source. And yes, it is hard to tell the legitimate press from the tabloids because they’re all infected with the tabloid germ. Mainstream media, once respected, saw how the tabloids out-scooped them every time and not to be outdone, they stooped to the same tactics– becoming “medialoid.” Charles Thomson exposed the hysterical and sheep mentality in his article “One of The Most Shameful Episode in Journalistic History.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charles-thomson/one-of-the-most-shameful_b_610258.html

What do you call those who peddle humanity’s shadow so that it consumes the imagination, screams in red headlines 7 inches tall? When it appeals to the lower instincts and seduces the soul into darkness? Do you call those who engage in that sort of thing modern day heroes? Generous souls who by their very presence in the world makes it a better place? Or a bitter place? A cause for pride and fulfillment, a conquest for humanity? A light for the soul?

When amassing the resources and the opportunity to make the world a better place, why would someone choose instead, to make the world darker? To make humanity dimmer? To spread gossip, rumor, innuendo, salacious and vile information and take glee in tearing real people limb from limb or gutting them with a devastating story? Why would someone choose to make a fortune by trading in human misery? If given a choice to lift up humanity or tear it down, why would someone choose the latter? And how could anyone think that peddling the lowest form of humanity to the masses for consumption is a good idea?

Have you pondered these questions? Asked yourself what adds to the quality of life– of yours and the planet’s? Have you considered the many people who have been instrumental in bringing you the product you are about to buy at the checkout? Ever think about who may have been helped or harmed in the making of that product? Is it friendly? Kind? And if the product you are about to buy continues, who is helped or harmed? Would you want your children doing that same thing? And in particular, since this is the subject, do you hold up the tabloid with pride after you buy it? Look everybody– look what I bought! I am a tabloid consumer! Or do you have the impules to hide it? Pay attention to that impulse– it is part of the dissonance that inhabits the soul when values, moral and ethics are compromised. That *twinge* you feel is communicating something important to you.

And there are no excuses for behaving contrary to the inner compass. Some people say that: “I don’t believe the stuff in the tabloids; I just buy them simply for entertainment, for a laugh.” Really? A laugh at who’s expense? How do you think the celebrity or public figure on the cover feels about it? Do you think he or she is having a laugh? And if you buy a product, you are supporting the industry. That means you are supporting the paper (or TV channel,) the corporation, the dismembering or lynching of people in the public square, ridiculing people for sport, bullying, lining the pockets of moguls who don’t care about social decorum or people (“They Don’t Care About Us,”) the editors, reporters, photographers, that make up the “team” that brings you the shadow. Oh, yeah, and you support the paparazzi who chase cars into the metaphorical and actual dark tunnels that kill people metaphorically and actually. When you cry “STOP!” it will stop. When the market fades and people are no longer interested, the supply of the offensive product dries up. Ask yourself if after such a purchase, do you feel pride? Do you use your product with the knowledge that the company that produced it is helping the environment? Or destroying the ecosystem? Humanity is an ecosystem. Collective consciousness is an ecosystem. The living beings that inhabit an ecosystem are impacted by the environment and mindset they live in for the mind designs it. Does the tabloid news you consume support humanity? Uphold humane principles? Would you care to take that paper to church with you next Sunday for reading material between services while you wait for the church to fill up?

Next time you go to the supermarket, pay attention. Items at the checkout are strategically placed. The tabloid industry successfully petitioned grocers to place their products at the checkouts telling the grocers that their sales would increase. It worked. If you object to the placement of these items, have you written a complaint letter to the store? To corporate headquarters? Have you widely and emphatically expressed your frustration and disgust? To your family? Friends? To the industry itself?

The tabloids, and tabloid TV and Medialoid publish gossip because they know people are curious about the stars and public figures. They also know, but will never admit out loud, that the average person’s life could use some sparkle, that people don’t see themselves as worthy or brilliant, or beautiful so they look to celebrities to project upon them their greatest hopes and darkest fears. The “hook” that grabs your emotions is deliberate. They invite comparison– you with the celebrity to that your emotions are hooked– sometimes awe, admiration and fondness but mostly for jealousy, envy anger and disgust.

When jealousy or envy is triggered by someone who has it better than you, is more famous, has more wealth, is more talented, you are being drawn in by your shadow’s wounds. Your ego is crying like a little child who feels unworthy and mad at someone else being more deserving or more loved, so it has a tantrum. The appeals are emotional– some appeal to the protective part of you, the fierce, wild, animalistic part of you: the wolfwoman, a mother bear protecting her cubs, and whether you’re male or female, you are off to chew up the offenders. (Contrary to popular opinion, most tabloid purchasers are mature, intelligent and female.)

If you allow yourself to be engaged or become pulled in, unfortunately you become guilty by association and therefore you are responsible for the resulting damage. As a bystander (who stood by and allowed it to happen without complaint) or a buy-stander (if you bought magazines or tabloids or tabloidesque publications) you succumbed to the temptation that was deliberately placed in your path. The tabloids positioned themselves successfully. Tabloid TV understands the lure and panders to it, sometimes so subtly and skillfully as to be barely noticeable.

Consider this: You were once an unwilling participant hypnotized and lured by the deliberate hooking of your emotions. You were drafted into a war of destruction for the sake of darkness that is profitable. While you weren’t paying close attention, and in a lapse of sanity, a moment of unconsciousness of your true nature, you followed a Darth Vader figure to the dark side. Who then is the Vader? He is us. He is the wounded part of us that longs for love and attention but feels unworthy. He is the part inside that questions our worth (consciously or not) and because that part is so wounded, can’t bear the self and so finds unworthiness in others for distraction and to hold in abeyance, the looming despair.

For what are we baited? For what reason do they try to “hook” our emotions? For sport, greed, “entertainment” and for MONEY. Period. It is deliberate and it is an addiction. They are the dark figures standing on the street corner waving you over to try their drug, to take a hit off the adrenalin it promises; it appeals to the primitive and animalistic nature– feeding the beast inside. It’s the antithesis of human admiration, dignity and glory. It turns your eyes from the light in you and in everyone else. It’s sorcery and a very dark art. Real people are being excoriated, careers are being destroyed, flesh and blood human beings are cut into pieces by words used as weapons. And the sliced off portions are sold to CONSUME- ers who then become flesh-eating parasites by association.

This wandering around in the darkness helps to make us forget there is light. It makes us forget who we really are. It twists our hearts into something else cold and unforgiving. And it makes us cynical. A culture gripped by cynicism is more permissible when it comes to humans—it’s more permissible to judge, to bully, to slander, libel, and to destroy another human being. Real people take their lives because bullying is so commonplace and engaged in so cavalierly. With our cell phones we are all paparazzi. And paparazzi are dangerous peddlers and pushers of shadow that feed on our baser desires and instincts. With a cell phone camera, we can all become monsters in an instant.

I think we are better than that! We can become educated, use our heads, we can withhold judgment, wait patiently for the truth, refrain from joining the hysteria and fray no matter how tempting they appear and how “hooked” and raw our angry emotions. We can remember who we are! For although it seems far off, a moment of startling realization sparks a review of our lives and an honest evaluation of self that then must answer to what we brought to the world. Facing our shame and acknowledging our shadow while vowing to be hyper-vigilant in parenting our wounded inner child, understanding our moment of insanity and unconsciousness and then cradling the ashamed and wounded part of us with compassion and forgiveness, we can transform and govern our future actions from a loving place—we can have that moment now. In fact, it’s admirable shadow work, medicine for the wounds. There is no fee for that self-determination. The only fee is courage. There is no certification required for joining the ranks of those with a self-examined life; no criteria can prepare for arrival there, and there is no graduation with that leap of evolution. There is, however, an awakening into a spiritual life—by emergency, invitation or self-determination. The lucky ones either spontaneously have that moment in trauma, crisis or near death experience, or they courageously invite that moment before their deathbed prepares them to meet it… in a moment when there is no time left to change.

If not NOW, when? If not you, then who?