First things first. Oprah Winfrey is an amazing woman. She gets people excited about reading, started her own school, and on and on. She does wonderful things.
But I was dismayed to see Oprah's intense passion when talking about Jaycee Lee Dugard during her promotional press conferences for the start of her new season. "This is the one that I want," she told television's "The Insider." Oprah was practically salivating over the possibility of this once in a lifetime scoop. "I want that interview," she said once more. Really? You purposely want this young victim to talk about her trauma to the whole world?
I understand that this is a huge story. Dugard's rescue is a story that interests countless people. But it's also a story of imprisonment, rape, abuse, terror, and a lost childhood. I am glad we haven't seen what Dugard looks like today. I'm glad we don't know where she and her daughters are. I hope we never know. I hope her family, counselors, and psychologists are able to shield her from the questions, the press, the news media following her every move.
This was an 11-year-old girl who disappeared. She lived with her kidnapper for 18 years and fathered his two children. We don't know what she began to believe after years of imprisonment or how she mentally coped with the torture.
I don't want Jaycee to have to explain what happened, talk about giving birth, or talk about living in a shed. I don't want her words to be turned into sound bites on "Entertainment Tonight" and "Access Hollywood." I don't want Oprah (or anyone) leaning forward in their chair, face filled with concern, eyes open wide, and asking, "What was it like?"
Of course, Dugard must answer questions from the police and hopefully she's surrounded by a group of therapists and counselors to help guide her. But these conversations should be conducted in private, not on a sound stage with someone fixing her makeup under the heavy lights. There are times when television shows and reporters need to realize that not getting the "exclusive" interview is actually a positive thing.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Please, Oprah...Don't do the interview.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/16078
Hmm... I don't know. I think if there was one person she would want to do a TV interview with, it would be Oprah, since Oprah was sexually abused as a child herself. I would think that would give Oprah better insight on how best to ask questions. Plus Oprah's just a good interviewer all-around. I understand where you're coming from, but I think even with all the trauma Dugard's endured, she would still be able to figure out what's best for her. But I realize Dugard doesn't owe anyone anything and I would understand perfectly if she never wanted to speak to any media person. The only question I would have is what does Oprah want to learn about Dugard? As in... what would it help people understand? What to do/not to do in that situation... signs someone is harboring a missing child... or would it be just for ratings and shock value?
Isn't that kind of a paternalistic attitude? Maybe Oprah's a vulture and maybe she's not, but Dugard isn't being forced into this.
I see what you're saying. In situations like this it is tough to know whether the interview would have been conducted for altruistic ends or merely to bring ratings for the show. Media exposure can be a double-edged sword at times.
As for me, there are certain things I'd just rather not know, because it feels like an invasion of privacy on my part. I know that in these days where supposedly public is the new private I'm supposed to expect things like this, but I still would rather not see this.
I completely understand where you're coming from, but I think the concept of 'free will' needs to come into the conversation. Like someone said above, "if" she's not being forced into this, it should be her choice; she is still an adult. Traumatized or not, she's not an 11 year old girl anymore. Whether or not her experiences and trauma allow her to make an educated, well thought out choice is still up to her to decide. Maybe she will decide that going on Oprah and discussing her experience will be the most therapeutic thing imaginable; maybe she will decide the opposite. Either way it's not up to us to dictate.
I completely understand where you're coming from, but I think the concept of 'free will' needs to come into the conversation. Like someone said above, "if" she's not being forced into this, it should be her choice; she is still an adult. Traumatized or not, she's not an 11 year old girl anymore. Whether or not her experiences and trauma allow her to make an educated, well thought out choice is still up to her to decide. Maybe she will decide that going on Oprah and discussing her experience will be the most therapeutic thing imaginable; maybe she will decide the opposite. Either way it's not up to us to dictate.
For all those who'd like us to consider the free will aspect: Okay, you've been kidnapped for years, deprived of an education, saddled with two children-- how much money do you have? What is your earning power? Then Oprah comes knocking at you door with a couple thou at least. There's a difference between do the interview or don't do the interview, and your end result is the same, versus a situation in which doing the interview is an enormous economic benefit. And don't tell me the media is not pressuring this girl in every way they can in order to get an interview.
What's wrong with offering $?
Choice A- She stays at home and doesn't get the $.
Choice B- She does an interview and gets $.
Either way, she's already been raped. May as well have some good come out of it.
If I was her I'd certainly take the money. But my point isn't that. My point is, with money involved, and given how much she probably needs it at this point, the choice between A and B, as you listed it, is really loaded. Sure, she has free will. Between a choice that does not benefit her at all and a choice that promises an enormous economic benefit. So the deck is really stacked in terms of her taking choice B.
So she's not going to make a choice based (entirely) on whether she wants the world to respect her privacy or know her story; she's not making a choice based on whether she wants people to forever associate her adult face with a pretty crap history-- all the considerations she should be making her choice based on are suddenly compromised by this money factor. Currently, I can't imagine her life situation is great. I'm her age, have a college degree, have traveled, have no children, and I'm still very afraid about making ends meet. So I'd imagine that for her, there is an enormous pressure to do this for the sake of the money, and if media people are permitted to talk to her at all she's feel enormous pressure to "let other people who've been through this know they're not alone" or some other to my mind fairly meaningless platitude.
But the fact remains that if she does make this choice and her face becomes publicly associated with this story and she keeps her name, etc., strangers that she meets are going to know a story that, ideally, should be completely within her rights to disclose. And, again, she does have some agency to make this decision-- she did not have the agency to disclose her name, however. But her agency is certainly being compromised by the economic benefit and the pressure the media is exerting.
So when you say she's already been raped and there may as well be some good to come out of it, it's obvious that you've failed to consider the negative consequences that actually do exist for those who become famous for being raped.