Oprah’s law of stupidity

Guest Post by Morbo

If there is justice in the universe, Oprah Winfrey will one day be held accountable for her crimes, which are legion.

Winfrey’s daily program is seen by millions, and her monthly magazine adds to her reach. She has been called the most influential woman in the world.

Winfrey has incredible power — which she often uses for evil, not good. Repeatedly she allows her program to be the launching pad for a veritable army of self-help hucksters and get-rich-quick gurus who spew a litany of mumbo-jumbo that is designed to separate the gullible from their cash.

Earlier this year, for example, Winfrey hyped a book called “The Secret” by an Australian television producer named Rhoda Byrne. As The Washington Post’s Tim Watkin pointed out, the book’s premise is laughably stupid: It posits that there exists a “Law of Attraction” and that if you want good things, all you must do is hope for them and they will arrive.

As I read Watkin’s column, I had to wonder: If the good things that happen to you were attracted by your positive attitude, it stands to reason that the bad things that happen must be the result of your negative thoughts. But, I thought, that’s dumb. Did an 8-year-old with leukemia “attract” the disease? If a woman is raped, did she “attract” the assault? Surely, I thought, the book does not say that because people would not accept it.

But the book says exactly that — and people are falling for it. So if you’re the victim of an assault, if you have a fatal disease, if you’ve lost your job due to an economic downturn — get over it! You brought it on yourself.

Here are some of Byrne’s pearls of wisdom:

* “Imperfect thoughts are the cause of all of humanity’s ills, including disease, poverty and unhappiness.”

* “The only reason any person does not have enough money is because they are blocking money from coming to them with their thoughts.”

* “Food cannot cause you to put on weight, unless you think it can.”

* “It is as easy to heal a pimple as a disease. You cannot ‘catch’ anything unless you think you can….You are also inviting illness if you are listening to people talking about their illness.”

This last one is a real doozy:

“So…got any sick friends who need a shoulder to cry on? Tell ’em to bug off! As for Elizabeth Edwards — how selfish is she? By making people think about her cancer, she’s basically giving them the disease.”

Winfrey profiled “The Secret” Feb. 8 and followed up one week later, raving about this newly discovered “Law of Attraction.” Sales skyrocketed. 190,000 copies of the book sold in one week, at $16.76 a pop. (The accompanying DVD costs $34.99.)

In face of criticism, Winfrey later backed away from some of the book’s more outrageous claims. “‘The Secret,'” she said, “is not the answer to everything. It is not the answer to atrocities or every tragedy. It is just one law. Not the only law. And certainly, certainly, certainly not a get-rich-quick scheme.”

Not a get-rich-quick scheme? Then why does the book recommend you white-out a bank statement, write in the total you want, think positively and wait for the cash to come rolling in?

No, Winfrey’s “clarification” is not good enough. What she should have said was this: “There is no such thing as the ‘Law of Attraction.’ Sitting around wishing you had money won’t bring it to you. It’s best to work to get ahead. If you get sick, it’s probably because of germs or genetics. If burglars break through the locks of your house while you are away and cart off your stuff, that’s not your fault. I’m sorry I misled you by recommending this book by an obvious peddler of snake oil. I will try to do better.”

There is a part of me that thinks people dim enough to fall for “The Secret” don’t deserve to keep their money. But then I remember that at least some of Oprah’s audience is poor, not well educated and struggling to get by. These folks look to her with admiration. Many of them trust the things she says and read the books she recommends through her reading club.

Winfrey could make a real difference in the lives of these people. She could interview guests who actually have something of value to offer these folks, perhaps debt counselors, sensible money managers or professionals who recommend education, useful job retraining and so on. Instead, she offers up her flock to be fleeced by a pack of rapacious charlatans who proffer the worst form of New Age gobblygook.

How does Winfrey sleep at night? Sadly, the answer is probably very well — on silk sheets that she did not just wish for but went out and bought with all the riches her loyal fans have given her.

I contrast Oprah with Rev. Al Sharpton.

Mr. Sharpton may demagogue from time to time, but he really only wronged the public in the Tawana Brawley case (years ago). When Rev. Al ran for president in 2004, he handled himself rather well and discussed the issues intelligently.

Oprah, on the other hand, has “feet of clay” that the media never holds to account. First, she refuses to marry her long time boyfriend Stedman–thus, setting a great dis-example of adhering to traditional values (hypocrisy). Second, she’s a phony on morality–from the car give-away to building a school in Africa. And third–but no means lastly–she was one of many enablers of George W. Bush in 2000 (debate host Jim Lehrer also comes to mind) when George and Laura were on her show. Oprah—————please.

  • “all you must do is hope for them and they will arrive”

    I’d be on the floor laughing my ass off, but I’ve seen the results of such thinking in my personal, work and the “bigger” political picture that I’d rather just club those who spout this crap with the fucking book.

    What a load SHIT!! I’ve seen too many idiots and others who use this as LEADERSHIP philosophy. Sad but true. And if someone thinks that I’m just referring to women then they’re sadly mistaken. Lots of so called educated males I call boss have done the same idiot thing. And let’s not forget a certain administration led by a booze and cocaine addled half simian has pretty much done the same thing in Iraq.

    I have to admit that optimism is important, but this is beyond stupid. Does the Secret mean that if I’ve imagined myself with Bill Gate’s Billfold, Brad Pitts’ looks, and Clooney’s charm? If that it were so fucking easy then why do I always wake up to see a middle class mid 30s troll staring back at me in the mirror?

    All this book does is a salve to all those who keep believing that wishes do come true and has not happened. Perhaps the following should be literally beaten into these folks skulls:

    “If WISHES and BUTs were like candies and nuts, we’d all have a merry Christmas.”

    PT Barnum was right, there are suckers (I was one too) born every minute.

  • Oprah…Sallie Jesse…”Dr.” Phil…all good reasons for turning the sat-dish into a bird-bath. These freakazoid “enablers of America’s dumbing-down” can’t get into my house any more….

  • Unfortunately, there are enough gullible fools in this world who will buy into this silliness. Oprah ought to know better but then she provided a forum for Dr. Phil, one of the worst of the phony psychology gurus ever to pollute the TV screens.

  • Happiness is a high thread count.

    Let’s not throw out the babe with the bubbly bath water. Life is better with positive expectations than with dour ones. This book reductios it to absurdity, but there are real reasons for maintaining a level of belief in attraction. For one there is the reticular activating system that makes you notice more of what you expect. If you buy a pink hummer, suddenly you see pink hummers that you never noticed before. Think positive but tie up your camel.

  • Listening to Oprah’s snake-oil salesman’s prattle on the human brain is equivalent to eggs sizzling on a sidewalk at noon on a hot summer’s day.

  • This always struck me as one of those observable phenomena that doesn’t scale. If you go around depressed because you don’t have any friends, you’re unlikely to attract many new ones. Personally, I find that pre-visualizing a successful outcome helps overcome obstacles that I might otherwise have focused on, and thus impeded progress. But to extrapolate the influence of attitude from the micro to the macro, as Byrne does, strikes me as absurd as expecting classical physics to work at the quantum level.

    (I doubt I was alone envisioning peace and rationality under President Gore and later, President Kerry, and we all saw how that worked out. Then again, maybe there were more people envisioning the chaos of a Dubya.)

    On the other hand, there has been scientifically sound research done into the effect of outlook and prayer on health, with both yielding positive results that are statistically significant. Go figure.

  • “It stands to reason…” except that Byrne specifically argued the opposite.

    When you have to make crap up to attack a touchy feel-good non-sense author, you’re probably a good candidate for an internship at the Bush White House.

    As far as Oprah, wow, another driven overachiever finds life unfullfilled by wealth and wanders into the weird. Now THERE is a surprise…

    The funny part is that beep52 is right, the preponderance of scientific evidence regarding physical well being is actually on Byrne’s side. We’re not talking holistic hackery, but studies from Princeton, Stanford, UCLA… So, made up attacks, the depiction of someone you disagree with as evil, and a denial of the available science…

    Sounds like Morbo may have already gone beyond candidate.

    -jjf

  • Oprah Winfrey, and all the other New Age self-“help” gnus, er, I mean gurus, are all proof that Mencken was right when he said “nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”

  • Norman Vincent Peale published “The Power of Positive Thinking” in 1952. Even earlier, Émile Coué (1857-1926) was all the rage with his autosuggestive mantra “Tous les jours à tous points de vue je vais de mieux en mieux” … “”Every day, in every way, I’m getting better and better”. I’m certain some pre-Socratic Greek said the same thing and got rich by saying it. Yawn.

  • On the other hand, there has been scientifically sound research done into the effect of outlook and prayer on health, with both yielding positive results that are statistically significant. Go figure.

    Beep52, you amaze me – for the first time since I have been reading your contributions, you’ve gotten it backwards. Ever since 1893, every attempt to “prove” the value of outlook and prayer on health has yielded NO POSITIVE RESULTS. There is no demonstrable relationship between outlook and prayer and overall health.

    That said, I will subscribe to the thought that when one is doing what one likes in their life, as opposed to what they dislike, there does appear to be a relationship between that and overall health. I know when I was doing the things that were expected of me by everyone else in my life, I was sick a lot (a good excuse to not have to go do those things I didn’t like), and that once I decided I was sick and tired of being sick and tired of my life, that suddenly my paralyzing allergies and other things managed to disappear. Of late, the VA has been testing my health, and as one of the doctors said, “you’re in very good shape for a 42-year old,” which is good news when you consider I’m 20 years older than that. But I didn’t get that from wishful thinking. It’s the result of hard decisions to go against everything I was told was “right” and a lot of hard effort to withstand a lot of bad news over the years as a result. Not quite what Oprah and the rest of the New Age halfwits would have us believe.

  • I don’t disagree that one needs to have a positive outlook on things, but stuff like this:

    * “Imperfect thoughts are the cause of all of humanity’s ills, including disease, poverty and unhappiness.”

    Pray tell what are perfect thoughts? Never been able to figure that one out.

    * “The only reason any person does not have enough money is because they are blocking money from coming to them with their thoughts.”

    I don’t remember Gates, Rockefeller, or Morgan give Peter Paneseque speeches on wealth. Unless it’s a lottery or selling bunkum to Oprah fans, money waits for no one.

    * “Food cannot cause you to put on weight, unless you think it can.”

    In the case of food, you’re going against the basic laws of biology. If you eat more than you need, you get fat.

    * “It is as easy to heal a pimple as a disease. You cannot ‘catch’ anything unless you think you can….You are also inviting illness if you are listening to people talking about their illness.”

    In the case of disease, cancer cells, viruses and bacteria don’t give a damn what you wish. If it happens, it happens unless you take steps to reduce them like reducing risky behaviors like eating less, but oh, wait, can’t do that because food doesn’t add weight! Lots of folks wished they didn’t get hit with the plague, but they did.

    IS BEYOND the range of healthy optimism. We’re taking major league delusion. This is why I find these studies on the power of positive thinking so, well, negative.

    Last thing, there was a study done in the late 90s that showed that competent people are full of doubt, question themselves and have some fear of failure (not too much to cripple them) whereas incompetent folks have much much less doubt, rarely question themselves and have no fear of failure. But then again questioning, fear and doubt are probably considered “imperfect” thoughts.

    Links
    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/01/18/MN73840.DTL

  • Tom @ 11: Always glad to surprise (ha!). I’m not versed in this stuff, but according to an undisclosable source who’s a health researcher (with no patience for junk science) such evidence does exist. It may take a day or so but I’ll see if I can’t track something down for you.

  • Morbo–

    I seem to have read the same article you did. But your “doozy,” if I recall correctly, is a conclusion that the author of that article made, not something that was in the book. You have made it sounds, in your more-or-less copying of that article, as if it is actually in the book.

    You know, I totally agree that there is something profoundly wrong with “The Secret.” However, if you don’t go digging through it for the negative, you can see what attracts people to it. I remember someone telling me this secret about 30 years ago, in fact, because he felt it had helped him in his life. And my husband mentions that the creator of Dilbert uses this. So to come out bashing Oprah, as if she’s just doing this to promote hucksterism, instead of because she thinks it sounds like a good idea, is….mean.

    What do you have against the woman? Have you really tried to tally up the good she has done versus the bad? Do you really have reason to believe that she is deserving of some nasty fate? Or are you just copying somebody else’s article?

  • This last one is a real doozy:

    “So…got any sick friends who need a shoulder to cry on? Tell ‘em to bug off! As for Elizabeth Edwards — how selfish is she? By making people think about her cancer, she’s basically giving them the disease.”

    The words in quotes belong to Watkin, not the author of “The Secret.” The Carpetbagger apparently misconstrued what I wrote and edited the piece in such a way as to make it unclear. It’s my fault for not being clearer orginally.

  • “The Power of Your Subconscious Mind” by Dr. Joseph Murphy is one of the better self-help books.

  • Wow. After Oprah’s giant blooper with A Million Little Pieces [of Fiction] I would think she’d stop recommending books altogether.

    “Theories” such as Byrne-outs remind me of my bizzaro-aunts who became Fundamentalists. According to their church, if you worried a bad thing might happen it would happen and was therefore your fault. Something about calling the devil or some other crap that made the the wackiest thing I’d ever heard in the RC seem sane by comparison.

    However, such “thinking” stems from the older Puritanical notion of the elect being chosen by God who rewards them by making them prosperous. People who are poor or have bad luck, deserve it. I guess it was supposed to be a dress rehersal for hell.

    I understand that humans have a need to make sense of a world where bad shit happens for no apparent reason but scoffing at people who suffer isn’t just creepy or stupid, it’s inhuman.

    But does this mean that if I smacked Byrne across the face it would be her fault? Just askin’.

  • This is not a new idea as some of you have already stated…however there is already a church devoted to this kind of thinking…The Christian Science church. I was raised in that religion until I reached an age where I rebelled.
    Try reading the founders book…The Key to the Scriptures by Mary Baker Eddy…. It is incoherent! Her main idea, as I understand it, is that everything bad comes from wrong thinking…you’re sick, you aren’t thinking right…She didn’t, I think, believe in the law of attraction but her ideas are designed to help people be more optimistic. Which is OK in ordinary living but terrible when ones child is really sick with something that can be cured but the parent relies on the Church and the child dies.

  • Q: What makes you think that this surge will work, when the previous ones hadn’t?
    A: Because it has to.

    Remember that one? Bush at his best.

    Which, to me, raises the question: chicken or the egg? IOW,
    should Ms Byrne be paying part of her royalties to the Chimp-in-Chief or are we to believe that the CiC (boob) actually did read more than one book (My Pet Goat)?

  • I don’t agree that there is no “Law of Attraction” in a broad abstract sense, but there is no one-to-one correspondence where just thinking of something you want will magically make it appear without any effort from yourself to create the conditions that allow the desired result to manifest.

    There’s nothing inherently wrong with positive thinking. It beats the hell out of sitting around being depressed and suicidal all the time. But there are better ways of expressing it and putting it to use.

    I recommend “The Power of Now” by Eckhart Tolle for a very practical and applicable blueprint to stop being sad and start living with less of pain and suffering. I’ve been applying his principles for some time now and I can say without hesitation that they work.

    And nobody gets pissed off. 😉

  • One more thought about this: The latest addition to Oprah’s fiction book club is “The Road” by Cormac McCarthy. I made the mistake of reading about half of this book before bedtime and was so troubled by it I could not sleep. When I finally did fall asleep, I had nightmares all night. I finished the book the next day — in the afternoon. This is a very grim (but powerful) work, and I wonder how many of her viewers will get through it.

  • Morbo: You watch the show, and complain she works evil. You read the books, but sneer that it may be beyond the fans’. I can’t help but think of the old Life in Hell comic on how to be an unrecognized genius (“Idiots, those prizes should be mine…”)

    Tom Cleaver: We have plenty of statistical evidence of a correlation (you can start at the NIH and work back). What we do not know is cause and effect. See a recent UC Davis study that seems to suggest that big environmental changes like major health problems, going to prison, huge socio economic swing, etc. only have transient effects on a person’s average contentment (seems to possibly answer how folks with everything can still be such head cases).

    Similiarly, see the recent study from Harvard suggesting that certain lifestyle changes (like losing a ton of weight and exercising regularly) can shift one’s median contentment level – but even with that positive reinforcement (along with looking better and having more stamina in bed), the lifestyle changes are often not persistant.

    It isn’t even a question of Fat->Depressed vs. Depressed->Fat. The causal link may not even be direct. Both might be the indrect result of, say, genetic makeup.

    -jjf

  • (seems to possibly answer how folks with everything can still be such head cases). — Fitz, @22

    Richard Cory?

  • Thanks, Morbo, for satisfying my curiousity. The other day, I asked my hairdresser what she was reading and it was “The Secret” which she had heard about on Oprah. My hairdresser was somewhat vague as to what the book was about, saying only that the author claims we all have a positive aura. I think my hairdresser must have known that I wouldn’t be impressed with “When you wish upon a star…”

    Years ago, I wrote about why Oprah had to careful about what books she promoted. I don’t think Oprah personally would ever be on the take but she is a busy woman who relies on her staff who might be.

  • Again, Morbo, thanks for mentioning Oprah’s promotion of “The Road” by Cormac McCarthy and your take on the book. Years ago, Imus had his own book club and he heavily promoted Cormac McCarthy’s books. I tried reading one of them, (“All the Pretty Horses” maybe?) and found it incredibly boring so I never read another book by McCarthy.

    Me, I’ve long wished for Oprah to assign Gloria Naylor’s “Bailey’s Cafe” as required reading for her viewers and then bring Naylor on the show to discuss it.

  • “the secret” oversimplifies the law of attraction. bottom line… if you choose to see the glass as half full rather than half empty you are probably going to have a happier life… you will be more likely to see opportunity in challenge… you will be more likely to achieve. on a global level… it’s easy to point and criticize ( w makes it so very easy) but if you want peace… be peace. oprah may make some mistakes but she has also used her position for some very positive ends.

  • There is a story about the young Leo Tolstoy being told to go stand in a corner and not think of a white bear.

    If “The Secret” were as absolute and deterministic as it pretends, we would never have had War and Peace, because the young Tolstoy would have been eaten by the bear he couldn’t stop thinking of.

    There is a profound difference between ‘positive thinking’ and the kind of self-indulgent, self-righteous fantasy that this book promotes. The nation is already suffering quite enough from people in the White House who believe that they can make what they want to have come true, reality and compassion be damned.

  • “Mr. Sharpton may demagogue from time to time, but he really only wronged the public in the Tawana Brawley case (years ago). When Rev. Al ran for president in 2004, he handled himself rather well and discussed the issues intelligently.”

    This is a joke, right? Al Sharpton may demagogue “from time to time”? And hey, his behavior in that Tawana Brawley situation may have been slightly unbecoming, but after all, that was “years ago”. And since then, Rev. Al has “handled himself rather well and discussed the issues intelligently.”

    Al Sharpton is a hustler, and a con man. He’s got the scruples of a 3 card Monte dealer, and a resume that clearly reflects that fact. It’s a sad commentary on our times that people still take him seriously.

  • Maybe you should try digging deep in yourself so that you can see all the positive results that Oprah has so selflessly done with lives and welfare of people globally! A person with dignity and even just a little intelligence will definitely understand where she’s coming from. You need to take care of your painbody, my friend, that cunning little creature, whom you’ve allowed to creep up and take over your space of consciousness. A suggestion, if I may? Reconnect with your authentic spirituality, awaken your soul and fill it with the passion of life. Wake up to the goodness of you and you will feel so much better. Judging people will get you nowhere! Peace be with you!

  • Comments are closed.