The Rhetoric Behind Jenny McCarthy

 

This is Jenny McCarthy. This is the woman who is leading a movement against vaccines. Yet people still believe and trust her because she is a mom who has a child with autism. Throughout this analysis, I will be using different methodologies to study the rhetoric behind Jenny McCarthy and how she is capable of leading a movement against vaccines when she has such weak credentials.

Jenny McCarthy is a well-known American model, TV host, actress, and now anti-vaccine activist. Her son, Evan, was diagnosed with autism in 2005 and this lead her to find “a solution to the problem.” She has used her fame and her role as a public figure to spread the misdiagnosis that vaccines, specifically the MMR vaccine, cause autism. She is now the president of Generation Rescue (www.generationrescue.org). Generation Rescue is a national nonprofit organization that provides “immediate treatment assistance, information and hope to families affected by autism spectrum disorders.” Yet, before looking specifically at Jenny, I think it’s important to share what the bottom of Generation Rescue’s webpage says:

**None of the information presented here should be considered medical advice or a “cure” for autism. The information presented represents strategies for dealing with autism that have been reported as successful by professionals and/or families with autism. While we believe this information to be accurate we are not in a position to independently verify it and cannot guarantee that it will work in any particular case. No treatment for autism should be attempted without prior consultation with a physician familiar with autism spectrum disorders.

Sonja Foss states, “The first step in an ideological analysis is to identify and focus on the rhetorical aspects of the artifact that provide clues to its ideology” (Foss 214); thus, let’s examine Generation Rescue’s warning.

• “Cure” for autism – I think it’s especially odd that they quote the word “cure.” Why all of a sudden are they so unsure of their strong beliefs? And why do they feel the need to quote “cure?” Do they feel like by quoting “cure” they make it seem like they have never said such a thing before? I think the entire warning stems from this controversy over cure. And it’s interesting because the entire website is about curing and “healing” autism. So why now is the organization stepping back from the idea?
• After hearing Jenny’s story, you will agree that Jenny did not consult her “physician” on ways to “help” her son. Instead, she consulted God. I think this twist adds some more light on how they don’t follow their own advice in regards to Jenny.

This was just an intro into the controversies of Generation Rescue. Like Jenny, the organization is always trying to step back from being “anti-vaccine” while they strongly suggest that vaccines are causing autism.

Now let’s move on to the analysis of Ms. Jenny. As stated above, she is the president of Generation Rescue, so let’s use Foss’s Ideological Criticism to examine her presidential biography video on Generation Rescue.

http://vimeo.com/29349428

Within the first 20 seconds of Jenny’s video, after learning of her son’s diagnosis from the doctor, she states, “I died in that moment; especially to not even be offered a little bit of hope,” and that she finally had “A typical healthy, happy boy,” farther into the video. She continues through the 9-minute long video to use metaphors like Rain Man, “All I knew about autism was Rain Man,” people in institutions, “came out like gangbusters.” The imagery used throughout the video is also very powerful; there are videos of her son forming complete sentences (but only her son),  videos of her son playing (also no other Autistic children are featured), there are clips of women/moms crying (no men), and at the very end the video features Jenny campaigning in front of the Capitol Building. Interesting choice. Not only does the entire video use metaphors and imagery to the max, but the music choice is also noteworthy. The beginning of the video uses slow, single-beat, and dull sounds, but as the video continues and comes to the end (and as the video gains momentum) the music changes to that of an empowering female voice, a song that makes one feel outgoing and pumps them up.

Foss states that “In the second step of ideological criticism, the critic articulates ideas, references, themes, allusions, or concepts that are suggested by the presented elements.” Thus, I will go into a step-by-step analysis of the elements in the video.

• “I died in that moment. Especially to not even be offered a little bit of hope” – She compares her son’s diagnosis with death. Dying is equivalent to having a child diagnosed with autism. Autism = no hope.
• “All I knew about autism was Rain Man” – Dustin Hoffman is an autistic savant who frustrates his own brother and makes it difficult to travel across the country (at least that’s what I remember the movie being like).
• Institution “Omg this can’t possibly happen to me.” – She imagines her son going to an institution. For Jenny, before researching, autism = institutionalism = not a normal, free life.
• “Miracles happen” – Although miracles can and do happen, they are often seen as happening when someone is in a tragic car accident and makes a full recovery. Why does her son need a miracle? Why is her son’s condition equivalent to needing saved and getting a miracle performed on him?
• “I had a conversation with god” – Only god can help her through this situation; not science or medicine, only something supernatural could lead her to the cure. It’s interesting that she employs god in her testimonial. In the bible God has made all man equal and he has planned our lives before we were even born, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations” (Jeremiah 1:5, NIV). So I ask the question, who is Jenny to ask God for help in changing what he purposefully created? Does not she see that he has planned this? Until the vaccines are mentioned it seems contradictory to have such a statement of asking god for help when (in her religion) he created her son.
• “How to heal my boy” – He is not healed, he is not whole, he is not healthy.
• Receiving no hope from the doctors vs. hope from Generation Rescue – Paints a picture that all doctors look negatively at autism and have no help or hope to give to parents. People with autistic children have to find it out on their own and help their own children.
• Generation Rescue “Hope for Recovery” – The slogan for Generation Rescue is “Hope for Recovery.” It leads to the thought that autistic people need to recover and that everyone else should hope for such a great recovery. Like the “miracle” example, why are autistic people thrown into the same field as people who need to recover or receive a miracle?
• “These kids can get better; these kids can recover” – Yet again, the children aren’t healthy, they aren’t good, there is more for them that they aren’t experiencing.
• Environmental Trigger – Makes it seem like something natural in the environment is causing the autism. Makes it seem plausible…until they bring up the vaccines.
• Interviews – Shows multiple interviews, including, Larry King Live, The Doctors, and Oprah, where she is arguing that they are not an anti-vaccine movement. Oprah is influential and smart; therefore, the fact that Oprah is patiently listening to Jenny shows how true and important Jenny’s words are. Oprah, aside from being a television host, is known for her great humanity and smart friendships, so the fact that Oprah has allowed Jenny to speak on her show implies that Oprah believes in Jenny. In the small instance in this clip, we see Oprah listening to Jenny without saying a word, while Jenny is talking to Oprah and the audience. They never show anyone’s disbeliefs or reactions, so the viewers of this video only see the fact that Oprah is listening, not what she is truly thinking.
• “A typical, healthy, happy, little boy.” For Jenny, while her son has autism he is not typical, he is not healthy, nor is he happy. To be happy he must be “healed.” Then, and only then, will he finally be “typical.”
• “I learned it from the parents who came before me.” – This brings her down to a relatable level. It brings the parents in as equals to her; instead of her teaching the parents everything, the parents were able to teach her stuff as well.
• “What causes autism? I don’t know. We don’t know.” – She makes herself and the organization seem vulnerable. It makes it seem like they are all fighting as one against autism. They don’t have the answers, but then a few seconds later in the video they seem to have the answers.
• Shows parents listening and nodding their heads. Shows Jenny speaking to someone “face to face.” – The parents are listening to her; therefore, her information and speeches can’t be completely unreasonable.
• “Something happened.” These parents gave the idea to her. They’re not saying what happened (not yet, at least) but they’re building the suspicion against the vaccines.
• “Make them green.” – I’m still unsure what “making them green” does or how it works. Today, green is a very healthy color. It promotes a healthy earth and a healthy life, but are we making the vaccines green for the environment or for the health? How do we even make vaccines green? The choice of green as the color makes it healthier; especially since the vaccines are an “environmental trigger.” This is where the juxtaposition becomes confusing. Calling vaccines “environmental trigger[s]” makes the vaccines sound natural and holistic. But then she says to “make them green,” so how can we make something that is already part of the environment even more “green.” I understand that she wants kids to get tested for these vaccines, but how does that relate to making them more “green?”

• Shows Jenny speaking in front of the Capitol Building –  Authority. She is speaking to the nation’s capital. She is powerful and this is important, so important that the legislature and congress need to hear her and answer her. Everyone should be involved, not just parents.

Now, we move onto Foss’s third step, “articulate ideas, references, themes, allusions, or concepts” (Foss 216). I thought a recurring theme throughout the piece was “hope” and the problem of hope (Generation Rescue) vs. no hope (doctors). Another theme was health and happiness. For Jenny, they go hand-in-hand, which makes sense, but the only way for Jenny’s son to be happy is if he is healthy, which if you have autism you are not healthy.  Then, near the end, the video steers into the direction of power, inspiration, and hope; Jenny is in front of the Capitol Building and is with Oprah. Jenny is powerful because she is controlling the conversation with Oprah. Jenny is inspirational because she is going against the United States legislature by standing in front of the Capitol Building. 

“In the final step of ideological criticism, your task is to discover how the ideology you constructed from the artifact functions for the audience who encounters it and the consequences it has in the world” (Foss 220). To me, the ideology from Jenny’s video would function very well towards eager parents who will listen to anything in order to find answers and help. Even for me, at the end of the video I felt empowered with the inspirational music and the scene of Jenny campaigning in front of the infamous and powerful Capitol Building. So I believe for parents this video would impact their lives drastically. Unfortunately, other than seeing what other parents believe, they show no scientific evidence for any of their accusations. And that is why it’s sad that so many parents will listen to Jenny.

Let’s move on to coding the message from Jenny to viewers on her president page on Generation Rescue. In James Darsey’s article, “From ‘gay is good’ to the scourge of AIDS: The evolution of gay liberation rhetoric, 1977-1990,” we learn about different “value appeals” during the gay liberation movement. We can bring in some of Darsey’s coding words that helped him depict the catalytic events of the gay liberation movement to help code Jenny’s message.

From Generation Rescue’s Website:

A Message from Jenny McCarthy
Generation Rescue President

It’s too common a story, becoming ever more common-Unity.  A parent sees glimpses of a vibrant young child—their child. They know these glimpses are who their child should always be- Determination – Hope.

It is my story. Truthfulness – Unity. 

When my son, Evan, was diagnosed with autism in 2005, I was devastated. But, finally, there was a “tangible” place for me to start. That very same night I got on the computer and went to work. It really is work—and since you’re reading this, you most likely already know that – Work. 

My goal was to learn everything I could about autism and its treatment – Determination.I looked far and wide –Work. I dug deep. I like to use a train analogy. There’s Train A:  You do absolutely everything you can for your child, no matter what anyone tells you –Determination – Strength – Work. There’s also Train B:  Woe is me.  I’m a Train A person, and when I landed on Generation Rescue’s website, I knew I had found my home station – Achievement.

I read every single testimonial Generation Rescue posted. I tried every single option, followed every single piece of advice. I did this very methodically, and very privately—just me, a mother trying everything to recover my son. Determination – Work   

Eventually, wonderfully, I succeeded – Achievement.

But the journey wasn’t over. In profound solidarity with all the families still struggling, I decided to speak up – Unity. I wanted to give voice to options too often unspoken, and share hope for victories within reach Hope – Power.  My family was given gifts that I wanted to shareStrength – Hope 

In 2008, I called the people who had given me the best gift of all:  JB and Lisa Handley, Generation Rescue’s fearless founders. I told them I wanted to do anything and everything I could to help.  (Remember, I’m a Train A person!)  I became president of Generation Rescue, and I couldn’t be prouder.Determination – Help – Power – Achievement

Generation Rescue—including the website you’re visiting—has grown tremendously since I first gratefully discovered it in 2005 –Power – Help – Achievement. Our support of families around the world has taken root in ways I never could have imagined, and our resolve has only deepened –Power – Unity – Achievement.

Whether you’re in need at 3PM or 3AM, you have come to the right place.  We are here for you, together resolving our heartaches and celebrating our victories-Unity – Strength – Power – Hope.  We ride Train A together – Unity.

After coding Jenny’s message I found some key themes that continued to pop up throughout the entire message: unity, achievement, and determination. If you looked closely at the message you would notice that unity kind of disappears in the middle. Jenny starts the message off by using unity to draw an audience in, then she goes into her personal story that has no unity, but she ends it by bringing the audience and other parents back into the end and creates a full circle of unity. Another point is that she starts to become more power and success/achievement driven at the end. Instead of determination, which is heavy in the beginning, the end is full of strength/achievement/power. This mirrors that of the video that we just analyzed because both of them start with determination and hope, and end with strength and power (change in music and her speaking in front of the capitol building). Hope is also seen throughout most of the message, but that seems to make sense since “hope” is what drives Generation Rescue: Hope for Recovery.

Let’s use Foss’s “Ideological Criticism” to critique other scenes of Jenny McCarthy in the media and continue coding her words.

Here is another video featured on Generation Rescue’s site.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=501aAinCVik&feature=youtu.be  

The short clip opens with the quote, “Time for Action.” This, along with soft background music of a guitar, lead the viewers into a calm scene of Jenny sitting on the couch next to a pillow that is properly fluffed with the quote “People Matter” tattooed on it. Something that caught my attention was when Jenny brings up the year of her son’s diagnosis. She seems to fail to remember what year he was diagnosed. The way she says “2005” makes her seem uncertain and weary of that year being correct. This part is remarkable because there is no way that she does not remember the year he was diagnosed. There is no way that after so many interviews and written statements, and such a tragic “life-ending” moment could she not remember the year. 2005 is not a hard year to remember; it is especially not hard to remember when she has referred to it countless times. So why does she act like she can’t remember?

Throughout the beginning of her speech she seems skeptical of what the doctors have told her and she doesn’t even sound too confident in what she is saying. Within seconds I have noticed how she is pausing between words and kind of struggling to say some stuff, so I wonder if this is unscripted? Or is it scripted and she’s just having a hard time remembering? Either way, this video is quite different and far less compelling than the first one. She even stutters over the words “grant program.”

Now we can step into the second step of ideological criticism, “the critic articulates ideas, references, themes, allusions, or concepts that are suggested by the presented elements.”

• Time for Action – Implies a movement or a force. We need to act now. Implies a need to act fast, but why now? Why is now the time to act and not 10 years ago? What has happened now that is causing the need for action? Is it scientific research against vaccines because I haven’t seen anything supporting that idea yet.
• People Matter – The pillow is strategically placed next to Jenny throughout the video. The pillow shows that all people matter, not just people without autism but people with autism, and vice versa.
• “back in 2000……5”- She questions when her son was diagnosed. I have already rambled on why this is frustrating, but I’ll say it again. How could she even question what year this happened? She has spoken about it countless times and even “died in that moment,” so why is she acting like she can’t remember?
• “If you help me heal my boy”: Here she is referring to her conversation with god. Her son needs to be “healed” because he is the equivalent of sick and ill.
• “Treatment to families that can’t afford treatment”- I thought that this part was very compelling. Never once in her first video does she mention grants or having the opportunity to help families who can’t afford treatment. But I wonder, what treatment is she referring to? She doesn’t go into any detail about the treatment but it’s the only detail that I want. I want more information because now we have a video that has come from accusing vaccines to wanting to help families that may not be able to manage the bills themselves. I think this twist in Generation Rescue’s campaign is very compelling and it’s just to bad (for them) that they did not include this portion in their first video.
• “Sevenly: Young group of warriors” – The people who run Sevenly are powerful and great. But she has to mention “young.” “Young” depicts people in their teens, unfit to be considered adults, but she gives them the benefit of the doubt. Even though they are “young” they still care. I find it odd that she had to mention their age, why is that of concern when they’re helping her? The metaphor of warriors gives imagery of fighters killing and only wanting death, but in this case they are fighting for life. “Warriors” implies a war; is the battle against autism equivalent to a war?
• “Sevenly: Give a child with autism the life they deserve” -This was the logo after Sevenly when the video finished. It begs the question: are they not already living? Why do they deserve something else? This statement reminds me of Mossman’s “super-crip” analogy in his article “Visible Disabilities in the College Classroom.” Even though it would be nice if autism didn’t exist, why must we categorize it as this horrible life that the people need saving from?

The partnership with Sevenly is very interesting. Sevenly is a nonprofit organization that creates cool shirts to sell while $7 of the proceeds go to the intended charity. Sevenly has also partnered with Autism Speaks which, as we know, is a very controversial autism organization. But other than Sevenly, it is hard to find ties to other autism organizations and I think that that’s something everyone should be concerned about.

Analyzing the video leads me to see different themes. A common theme I saw was uncertainty, but I am unsure if this was planned or not. How was Jenny uncertain of her son’s diagnosis date? She was uncertain about the doctor’s words. Another theme that I saw was action. “We need to act now” was the message, and partnering with Sevenly will help people get the message and act.

I think people would feel inspired after watching this video. Even I really liked the part about the treatment because Jenny finally moved from blaming autism on vaccines and “environmental triggers” to giving actual help in the form of treatment (though I’d still really like to know what treatment they’re talking about). I think her uncertainty makes her seem more vulnerable and less powerful. She seems weak and uncertain over the doctors diagnosis, but I wonder over one major idea: could she be feigning uncertainty to make it seem like her son’s diagnosis is a thing of the past? Something so insignificant to her today? Something that Generation Rescue has helped her to forget since it’s no longer a problem? I wonder these things and I am starting to feel more confident that that’s what she is going for: Generation Rescue has saved her child and everything has worked that everything, even the date of his diagnosis, are a thing of the past.

Next, we will analyze an interview between Larry King  and Jenny McCarthy. Jenny is on “Larry King Live” to promote her new book, Louder than Words. By just looking at the cover of the book we see the word “healing.” To be healed implies that he, her son, is finally whole and healthy, so what was he before, broken? Sick?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUy77FWaDWA

Throughout the entire interview (this was just Part 1 of the interview) we see videos and images of Jenny and Evan playing: jumping on a trampoline, playing with toys, laughing, chasing each other. Yet, during the beginning of the interview we see a few clips of Evan talking and playing, all while Jenny’s face is being filmed. I wonder, since I don’t know if she was acting, if her reactions were genuine. Was she told to laugh on cue? Was she told to keep a wide smile during the entire scene? I’m not doubting her love for her son, but why did they keep the camera on her face during the almost minute long segment video? The interview continues with easy, straightforward questions that Jenny is ready to answer. A key to the video is being “cured.” Both Jenny and Larry King seem to have different definitions of what being cured is, and it seems like Jenny is scrambling to find a way to define her son’s health. Here are some of the key moments:

• Larry King – “He looks like a perfectly normal child.” Jenny McCarthy – “Thank you.” – What is the definition of a perfectly normal child? And why is she saying “thank you?” I feel like someone could take offense to this since Jenny is taking Larry’s statement as a compliment, instead of a fact, then if someone didn’t have a “perfectly normal child” wouldn’t they be hurt or offended?
• What is autism? “Its an infection, toxins, funguses on top of vaccines.” – Science is never mentioned neither is research or data. She gives medical problems without giving medical backup.
• “On top of autism (Jenny moves her hand in a broad stroke to signify weight, and then she sighs loudly) we have seizures.” – This implies that autism itself is a huge burden. The imagery of her hand and the way she sighs indicates that autism is causing such a problem to her. And then she has seizures to deal with; the problems keep coming.
• “Autism is reversible and treatable.” “Recovered from autism” – Both of these make me believe that her son is cured. She is implying that the treatment is a cure. But I am still left wondering what the treatment is? She and Generation Rescue offer grants to help people treat their children, but what is the treatment? Just changing the diet of the child? Why do people need grants to receive such treatment?
• Thousands of women and moms taught her – This begs the question: where are the dads? Moms are often dubbed as more caring and nurturing, could this be why she uses moms more in her talks?
• “It’s like getting hit by a bus, you can’t get cured, but you can recover” – So now we have moved from saying it’s treatable but you can’t get cured. I am very confused with the difference between the two. How is “treatable” different from being “cured?” She also is now comparing autism to getting hit by a bus. Getting hit by a bus is a tragedy that causes death and physical problems, but she brings it into comparison with autism.
• “Chemotherapy doesn’t help every cancer victim but it’s worth a try” – She is using this metaphor in relation to giving autism treatment a try. Now, after comparing recovering from autism to getting hit by a bus, she is comparing autism to cancer. Cancer causes one to think of death, illness, no cure, and genetic, but she is now comparing to trying chemotherapy to trying autism treatment. These are two completely different things with completely different motives. Chemotherapy is not recommended for everyone. And chemotherapy is used to kill a disease and save someone’s life. Autism is not equivalent to cancer because autism doesn’t kill someone like cancer does. For some people, chemotherapy is a matter of life or death; autism treatment is not a choice between life or death. Her comparison to cancer is ridiculous and insulting to anyone who cares about the autism community.

Some key themes that stuck out throughout the entire piece were “treatment” and “hope.” Her book seems to be the answer that every mother (not father) needs. I wonder if she refers to mothers more because Evan’s father supposedly left after learning of Evan’s autism. Could this skew her vision on who cares about a child more? Treatment is heard throughout the entire interview, but being cured is different than getting treatment. This makes sense, but normally after treatment one could assume that someone has recovered, which means is cured. But she goes into saying how being recovered and being cured are different too.

Overall, after watching this video and using Foss’s “Ideological Criticism” techniques, I am still uncertain about her speech. Because of how she goes against Evan being cured causes me to worry about the effectiveness of the treatment. Yet, she keeps using unity with other moms to make it seem like thousands of moms have tried this and have succeeded. I don’t know how other people can be convinced by watching this video, unless they are compelled by the unity and determination.

 

Unfortunately, it would take me a few months to analyze all of the videos and articles that Jenny McCarthy has been in. But after analyzing these few articles I can see why parents are compelled by her. She is a strong and beautiful human being who is very confident in her beliefs. Even though she never brings in science or research, she brings in the perspective of a mother, which I’m assuming is even more powerful to hopeless families. She uses unity and hope throughout everything she does. It is not her, but we who are fighting autism. Unfortunately, for me, I am not compelled by her; science is too important to ignore.

 

 

Works Cited

Darsey, James. “From ‘gay is good’ to the scourge of AIDS: The evolution of gay liberation rhetoric.” Communications Studies 42.1 (2009): 43-66.

Foss, Sonja. “Ideological Criticism.”

“Generation Rescue I Jenny McCarthy’s Autism Organization » Generation Rescue | Jenny McCarthy’s Autism Organization.”Generation Rescue I Jenny McCarthy’s Autism Organization » Generation Rescue | Jenny McCarthy’s Autism Organization. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Apr. 2014. <http://www.generationrescue.org>.

Mossman, Mark. “Visible Disability in the College Classroom.” College English 64.6 (2002): 645-659.