U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

83–476 PDF 2003

S. HRG. 107–797

THE IMAGE OF AGING IN MEDIA AND MARKETING

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

WASHINGTON, DC

SEPTEMBER 4, 2002

Serial No. 107–35

Printed for the use of the Special Committee on Aging

(

SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING

JOHN B. BREAUX, Louisiana, Chairman

HARRY REID, Nevada

HERB KOHL, Wisconsin

JAMES M. JEFFORDS, Vermont

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin

RON WYDEN, Oregon

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas

EVAN BAYH, Indiana

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan

JEAN CARNAHAN, Missouri

LARRY CRAIG, Idaho, Ranking Member

CONRAD BURNS, Montana

RICHARD SHELBY, Alabama

RICK SANTORUM, Pennsylvania

SUSAN COLLINS, Maine

MIKE ENZI, Wyoming

TIM HUTCHINSON, Arkansas

JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada

CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska

GORDON SMITH, Oregon

MICHELLE EASTON, Staff Director

LUPE WISSEL, Ranking Member Staff Director

(II)

C O N T E N T S

Page

Opening Statement of Senator John Breaux ......................................................... 1

Prepared statement of Senator Larry E. Craig ..................................................... 75

PANEL OF WITNESSES

Doris Roberts, Emmy Award Winning Actress, ‘‘Everybody Loves Raymond,’’

Los Angeles, CA ................................................................................................... 3

Robert N. Butler, M.D., President and Chief Executive Officer, International

Longevity Center—USA, New York, NY ............................................................ 12

Robert Snyder, Senior Partner, J. Walter Thompson Specialized Communications, Mature Market Group, Dallas, TX ........................................................... 24

Paul Kleyman, Editor, Aging Today, American Society on Aging, San Francisco, CA ................................................................................................................ 66

Dr. Becca Levy, Professor, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health,

Yale University, New Haven, CT ........................................................................ 67

(III)

(1)

THE IMAGE OF AGING IN MEDIA AND

MARKETING

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 2002

U.S. SENATE,

SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING,

Washington, DC.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:34 a.m., in room

SD–628, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John Breaux (chairman of the Special Committee on Aging) presiding.

Present: Senators Breaux, Carper, Stabenow, and Craig.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN BREAUX,

CHAIRMAN

The CHAIRMAN. The Senate Committee on Aging will please come

to order. Good morning, everyone. We are delighted that you all are

attending our hearing this morning, the hearing on the image of

aging in our media and our entertainment industries, dealing with

image of aging, both in the media as an entertainment mode, as

well as in the marketing of these entertainment programs.

I would like to thank all of our witnesses for being with us. I

know a number have traveled a good distance to be here this morning. I want to especially thank Doris Roberts who we had the

pleasure of meeting with last night. She is a special person who

won an Emmy last year and has also been nominated for her second Emmy Award this year for her performances in the television

series ‘‘Everybody Loves Raymond,’’ which I will add I love as well,

as do millions of Americans.

I also want to thank Senator Craig who will be joining us in just

a moment to talk about the issue of ageism in the media. We have

all sat through films in which a 60-something leading man is

paired together with a 20-something leading lady. We have also

seen older people mocked and younger people celebrated for the

purposes of selling a product.

It is clear that entertainment, marketing and news industries

value youth. What this hearing will address today is the fact that

often the media’s obsession with youth comes at the expense of

older Americans. In fact, 75 percent of older consumers are dissatisfied with the marketing efforts that are directed at them, and

often even avoid buying products whose ads are negative and

stereotypical.

In the quest to target youth, the media and the marketing industries ignore the purchasing power and the preferences of millions

of American baby boomers and seniors across our country, the popVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:11 Jan 08, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\83476.TXT SAGING1 PsN: SAGING1
2

ulation that incidentally controls about three-fourths of the wealth

of our nation.

Statistics are disturbing from what our committee has learned.

As an example, adults 65 and older comprise 13 percent of the U.S.

population, but only 2 percent of the characters on prime time television. An example further is that 77 of the 122 prime time television series did not employ a single writer over the age of 50. Also,

less than 10 percent of today’s advertising in our media focuses on

people over 50, although this is a group by the year 2040 will be

40 percent of the entire population of the United States of America.

Also, 50 and over adults buy 41 percent of all the new cars and

48 percent of all the luxury automobiles. Today 50-plus adults represent 80 percent of all luxury travel and spend 74 percent more

on a typical vacation than Americans between the ages of 18 and

49. Older consumers, for example, are also spending three times

the national average on health care products and services.

Many of the problems that older Americans face today are rooted

in the fact that our society simply, I think, does not value older

Americans as it should. As our witnesses will discuss today, negative images of aging in print, on television, and on the big screen

affect how older Americans themselves prepare for their retirement, spend their money, maintain their physical health and interact with their family and their friends.

Just as it is wrong to stereotype and discriminate against people

because of their race or their religion or their gender, so too is it

wrong to stereotype and discriminate against people simply because they are older. Only through raising this awareness, this

public awareness of the problem of ageism in the media, can we

begin to address the greater societal implications of our aging population.

Now is the time to embrace aging and recognize the ways in

which Americans of all ages are redefining aging and working to

eliminate ageism and discrimination. I look forward to all of our

witnesses commenting on these matters this morning.

We are delighted to welcome all of our panel of witnesses, and

first, as I indicated, in referring to Ms. Doris Roberts, she is very

familiar to us in her roles on television, in the media, on the big

screen, Emmy Award winner, and I learned last night a very active

person, not only on the screen, but also in this subject that we are

talking about today. We thank her very much for taking the time

right in the middle of shooting ‘‘Everybody Loves Raymond’’ to

come all the way to this coast to share with us her thoughts, and

Ms. Roberts, we welcome you and glad to hear from you.

3

STATEMENT OF DORIS ROBERTS, EMMY AWARD WINNING

ACTRESS, ‘‘EVERYBODY LOVES RAYMOND,’’ LOS ANGELES, CA

Ms. ROBERTS. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you very much for inviting me to talk with you about

ageism. I am in my seventies, at the peak of my career, at the

height of my earned income, and my tax contributions, I might add.

When my grandchildren say that I rock, they are not talking about

a chair.

Yet society considers me discardable. My peers and I are portrayed as dependent, helpless, unproductive and demanding rather

than deserving. In reality, the majority of seniors are self-sufficient

middle-class consumers with more assets than most young people

and the time and talent to offer society.

This is not just a sad situation, Mr. Chairman. This is a crime.

In the next 25 years, more than 115 million Americans will be 50

and over. They will become the largest older population in history.

I am here to urge you to address the devastation, cost and loss that

we as a nation suffer because of age discrimination.

Age discrimination negates the value of wisdom and experience,

robs us of our dignity and denies us the chance to continue to grow,

to flourish, and to become all that we are capable of being. We all

know that medical advances have changed the length and the quality of our lives today, but we have not, however, changed our attitudes about aging or addressed the disabling myths that

disempower us.

I would like the word ‘‘old’’ to be stricken from our vocabulary

and replaced with the word ‘‘older.’’ My contemporaries and I are

denigrated as ‘‘old,’’ old coots, old fogies, old codgers, old geezers,

old hags, old timers and old farts.

In truth, the minute you are born, you are getting older, and the

later years can be some of life’s most productive and creative. For

the last 100 years, the average age of the Nobel Prize winner is 65.

Frank Gehry designed Seattle’s hip new rock museum at the age

of 70. Georgia O’Keefe was productive way into her eighties. Add

to the list Hitchcock, Dickens, Bernstein, Fosse, Wright, Matisse,

Picasso and Einstein, just to mention a few people who produced

some of their best work when they would be considered over the

hill by current standards.

The entertainment industry, these image makers, are the worst

perpetrators of this bigotry. We must change the negative stereotypes of aging that exist in the media, and when I was a young

woman, some of the most powerful and popular actresses were

women way in their forties, women such as Joan Crawford, Bette

Davis, Katherine Hepburn and Barbara Stanwyck, who continued

to work, getting better and better in their craft as they got older,

and many of my friends, talented actresses in the 40 to 60-yearold range, are forced to live on unemployment or welfare, because

of the scarcity of roles for women in that age bracket.

A Screen Actor Guild’s employment survey showed that there are

three times as many roles for women under 40 as there are for

women 40 years old and older, even though 42 percent of Americans are older than 40. This is why some of my spectacularly talented actress friends have been forced into humiliating positions of

borrowing money to just meet their mortgage payments and health

4

insurance or begging me to see if there is a tiny part on ‘‘Everybody

Loves Raymond.’’ It also explains why younger and younger actresses are visiting

plastic surgeons; actresses in their 20’s are getting Botox injections

to prevent wrinkles from forming. Women start getting tummy

tucks and face lifts in their thirties to forestall the day when the

phone stops ringing.

When a woman hits the age of 40 in Hollywood, executives think

she is too old. Well, I have got news for them. I have been fortunate to be one of a handful of actresses who has continued to work

throughout my career, but it has not been easy. When I was in my

forties, I heard of a great part on a new series called ‘‘Remington

Steele.’’ But I was not considered for it because I was thought to

be too old, and because I was very persistent and knew the casting

director, I read for it, and I got it.

The roles for women my age frequently show seniors in insulting

and degrading ways. They make cartoons of the elderly. I recently

turned down a role in a movie for me to play a horny grandmother

who spewed foul language, exposed herself and chased after young

boys. Well, I turned that one down. But I know someone who took

that part.

There is a coalition to protect the way every other group is depicted in the media, but no one protects the image of the elderly.

Hollywood clearly is clueless when it comes to understanding today’s seniors. They are blind to the advances in medicine and selfcare, and the increases in personal income have made us a force

to be reckoned with and a market to be exploited.

I mean 20 years ago, it was accurate to show a senior coming in

for a check-up dragging his oxygen tank. Today, he would be dragging his golf clubs. Twenty years ago, older experienced writers

past the age of 50 were getting 60 percent of the jobs. Today, it has

shrunk to 19 percent. Six months ago, I developed a project with

an Emmy Award winning writer/producer. When it came time to

pitch the project to the studios, he refused to come with me. When

they see my gray hair, honey, we are finished, he said. Why do

they think that a man in his fifties does not have anything to say

about love or youth or relationships?

He has a lot to say if anyone would listen. A few years later,

rather earlier I should say, I pitched a project to a network and got

a very enthusiastic response. The executives wanted me to take it

directly into development, which was very exciting, but once they

found out that our producer/writer attached to the project was a

woman in her fifties, they stopped returning my phone calls.

Yes, there is energy and excitement and enthusiasm in the

young, but there is not any less among those in their senior years

unless society is successful in its campaign to rob us of those qualities, to diminish us. We older people control 77 percent of the country’s disposable income, yet the entertainment industry has made

age something to be feared. It is a small comfort to know that those

who have perpetrated ageism will soon face it themselves.

As General McArthur once wrote, ‘‘Youth is not a time of life; it

is a state of mind. Nobody grows old by merely living a number of

years. People grow old by deserting their ideals. Years wrinkle the

skin, but to give up enthusiasm wrinkles the soul. Worry, doubt,

5

self-distrust, fear and despair, these are the long, long years that

bow the head and turn the growing spirit back to dust. You are as

young as your faith and as old as your doubt, as young as your selfconfidence, as old as your fear.’’ Mr. Chairman, I address you today as a person young in spirit,

full of life and energy, and eager to stay engaged in the world and

fight ageism, the last bastion of bigotry. It is no different from

sexism, racism or religious discrimination. It is a tyranny that suppresses us all at any stage and serves no one.

As my late husband, the writer William Goyen, said, when we

see people who are infirmed, handicapped or older, we turn away

from them, we shun them, and take away their light. Today, the

image makers have taken away our light, and I am here to urge

you bring it back. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Roberts follows:]

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Roberts, thank you very, very much, for an

outstanding statement. You certainly are full of life and your continued involvement in this subject really offers a great deal of hope

to older Americans and really to all segments of our society who

are aware of the problem, not just older Americans, but baby

boomers as well, who need to realize the message you presented to

the Congress today.

We want to welcome now—we will take testimony from our other

witnesses—Dr. Robert Butler, who, of course, is President and CEO

of International Longevity Center and also Professor of Geriatrics

at Mount Sinai. Dr. Butler, glad to have you back.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT N. BUTLER, M.D., PRESIDENT AND

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL LONGEVITY

CENTER—USA, NEW YORK, NY

Dr. BUTLER. Thank you. I am very glad to be back here. I am

delighted that you have decided to hold such an important hearing

on ageism, the stereotyping and discrimination against people simply because they are old, just as racism and sexism accomplishes

this with skin color and gender.

What I would like to do is submit for the record my longer statement and just briefly comment upon first the extraordinary range

of discriminatory practices that occur in housing, health care—that

I have to say with great regret as a physician, that it happens in

my own field—and other services, in employment, and in a topic

you have addressed very effectively, elder abuse, which is so painful to see on the American scene.

I also would comment on the fact that you will hear about the

effects of ageism directly on health itself from Dr. Becca Levy, a

little bit later this morning. Of course, happily, you are addressing

the issues of imagery, and I wanted to take a moment to point out

that it does not have to be negative.

The chart on the right, a negative image of aging, is the ‘‘greedy

geezers,’’ which was the cover of a magazine, some years back, but

not long ago, but on the left is an example of how one can portray

older people, including older women, in very positive ways. This is

Kitty Carlisle Hart, a very distinguished New Yorker, theatrical

personality, who for many years was the head of the Humanities

Council in the State of New York, and she is 92 years of age. This

derives from the wonderful book, Wise Women, by a wonderful

American photographer, Joyce Tenneson.

Now, I would like to turn directly and in a very practical way,

to some of the things we can do to deal with ageism? First is certainly educating the public, and one of the things we can do in the

public schools is address the issues of human development so that

children see that life unfolds and that old age has its special dignity and purposes.

We can also acquaint journalists more effectively by immersion

courses such as we have been fortunate to provide at the International Longevity Center with funding from the Knight Foundation, the New York Times Foundation, immersion meetings with

journalists to help instruct them on some of the issues related to

aging.

13

Second, if we could reduce the frailty and dementia, we would

make a huge step forward, and that is why I strongly recommend

the continuing support of the National Institutes of Health and the

National Institute on Aging. It would be wonderful to make Alzheimer’s disease a memory of the past, something that we would,

in fact, conquer.

Third is we must improve lifestyles in this country. Unfortunately, we do not have as healthy a population as we should, and

George Burns, the wonderful comedian at 100 years of age, said

that people can actually carry out the old person’s act, they can actually allow themselves to deteriorate, and this does not make an

effective presentation to the world at large. We can teach children

early to address greater lifestyle improvements.

As an effort in this direction, the International Longevity Center

brings together some of our nation’s finest scientists to address

health issues. For example, maintaining healthy lifestyles. We can

all initiate healthy lifestyles everyday, but how do we maintain

them? Also we held a comparable workshop on achieving cognitive

vitality. What can we do in the way of activities and actions which

can help us maintain our own intellectual functioning?

We not only publish these, but they also appear in mainstream

journals such as the Proceedings of the Mayo Clinic, which, for instance, reaches over 150,000 physicians to help them better understand how to advise their patients.

Fourth is the economic approach, not only in the ways in which

Ms. Roberts beautifully demonstrated in terms of productive, responsible, active aging, of holding on to jobs or volunteering, but

also the realization she also commented upon that finally older persons are becoming more attractive to business. In fact, the Japanese refer to the ‘‘silver industries’’—life insurance, health, pharmaceuticals, various other industries that do a great deal of business with older people.

Fifth, and this is very painful for me, we must change the medical culture of ageism. This is how I first became interested and

first came to introduce the term. As a medical student, to my shock

older professors and others referred to older people as ‘‘crocks,’’ and

there are many other terms which are in my testimony which I will

not repeat here. We clearly need to have Congress address the creation of a cadre of teachers in every one of our 145 medical schools

so that we can have properly and effectively teaching physicians.

There is such a program called the Geriatric Academic Career

Award which should be expanded.

Sixth is we must support longitudinal studies of healthy aging.

Seventh, we must enforce the Age Discrimination in Employment

Act.

Eighth, we must ask the question, will Madison Avenue grow up

before it grows old or will it grow old before it grows up?

Finally, we really must address the entire culture’s attitude. We

must see a transformation of the way in which we regard the

stages of life including late life. Thank you very much.

[The prepared statement of Dr. Butler follows:]

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

The CHAIRMAN. Once again, thank you, Dr. Butler, for being with

us and for your contribution. Next, we would like to hear from Mr.

Robert Snyder, who has come to us from Dallas, who is a senior

partner at the J. Walter Thompson Specialized Communications

with the Mature Market Group in Dallas, and Mr. Snyder, we are

pleased to have your statement.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT SNYDER, SENIOR PARTNER, J. WALTER THOMPSON SPECIALIZED COMMUNICATIONS, MATURE

MARKET GROUP, DALLAS, TX

Mr. SNYDER. Thank you very much, Senator. Before I begin my

testimony, I would like to direct your attention to the video I would

like to play to show you firsthand some good and some bad of ads

that are happening in this country as we speak.

The CHAIRMAN. Tell me again what is this?

Mr. SNYDER. This video represents some commercials that are

being produced in this country by the media and advertising that

you will first see ads that are negative ageism or filled with

ageism, and then finally you will see some ads that are really positive. So we wanted to show both sides of the story, so if we could

roll the tape.

The CHAIRMAN. OK.

[Video presentation.]

The CHAIRMAN. OK. Mr. Snyder, what does this show us?

Mr. SNYDER. Well, first of all, it shows us that ageism is the last

socially condoned bigotry in our country. Awareness about the

problem is growing, but for the most part, our awareness of this

problem is in its infancy. The Mature Market Group, a part of J.

Walter Thompson Worldwide, sees many advertisers and their

agencies overlooking the largest, wealthiest consumer group in a

collective worshipful attitude toward youth. Stereotyping older

Americans is tolerated by many industries in ways that would

never be allowed for any other group in our country.

The videotape provides a snapshot of how older adults are portrayed in advertising today. While humor is a wonderful sales tool,

the Coke, Midas and Conseco ads over here used humor to sell a

product at the expense of a segment of our population. Dignity and

respect for elders in advertising is limited. Artists and writers with

limited life experiences meet deadlines by creating ads that contain

caricatures and stereotypes.

Consequently, stereotypes are perpetuated. This was clearly

shown in the Butterfinger, Midas and Caprisun commercials. The

image of a diminished older body is also a significant part of the

stereotype portrayed for older Americans. However, we know

healthy lifestyle choices and better health care provide for a

healthier body at any age. The Lipitor and Martex ads which are

over here are a testament to this notion.

Finally, much of current advertising has viewers believing that

fun and enjoyment of life is limited to those under 40, as was communicated by the Zima ad. While seniors often appear in pharmaceutical, insurance and financial advertising, the absence of seniors

from other categories is significant. Ads that create the full context

of seniors’ lives do resonate with all generations as shown in the

Allstate and Publix ads.

25

Since the founding of J. Walter Thompson in 1864, advertisers

have been looking for effective ways to communicate with the target market. The discovery by advertisers that consumers could be

understood better through the use of demographics and thus more

accurately targeted by advertising communications would prove to

be the key to all advertising in the final 50 years of the 20th century.

I would propose, however, that years of advertising and marketing based on demographics has created stereotypical images of this

segment of the population, which are so ingrained into our thinking

that it is difficult to see that the problem of ageism even exists.

The resulting status of marketing and advertising in the United

States can be summarized as follows: we have all been placed into

buckets according to age, income and generation. The advertising

world is dominated by youth, and companies with products to sell

are in general mesmerized by the need to capture the youth market.

Those over the age of 50 are, for the most part, labeled as spillover according to media buyers. The topic of aging is durably encapsulated in a layer in myths in our society and includes a confusing blend of truth and fancy. These single phrase assertions usually have some link to reality, but are always in significant conflict

with recent scientific data:

You get old; you get sick. You get old; you lose interest in intimacy. You get old; you can’t understand technology. You get old;

you have no social life. The list goes on.

If we accept these myths and others like them, that act itself becomes ageism in practice. It is our belief that the public in general

and advertising people in particular are programmed to think that

aging is a bad thing, and that once you are past 40, you are over

the hill and out of the game.

The Mature Market Group and Seniors Research Group conducted a study of adults 62-plus to determine how a person’s life

experiences shape their core values. Looking at human behavior

through values-based research is not only logical but it is also statistically accurate. The key difference between this segmentation

and others based on life stage or demographics is that values do

not shift, while life stage and demographics do.

Finally, the potential of values-based research is such that marketers can truly begin marketing to an ageless market. Why? Because values cut across all age groups. Values are indeed age blind.

Future advertising must stem from a foundation that is timeless

and ageless. As individuals, we need to refuse to stereotype the mature audience. As a society, we need to appreciate the experience,

wisdom and contributions they have made. Let us harness this

power and let that energy help sell our products.

Let us begin with a national public service campaign to raise

awareness of ageism and help the generations appreciate one another. I would like to conclude by expressing the sentiment of many

seniors with whom I have spoken, and is demonstrated by this

poster over here: What you are, I was. What I am, you will be. Assume nothing. Expect anything. Listen, learn; then we can talk.

Thank you.

26

[The prepared statement of Mr. Snyder and related materials follow:]

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Snyder. We are going

to have some questions about those ads, I know. I want to just recognize for the record, we have been joined by our senior ranking

Republican member of the committee, Senator Larry Craig, and by

our good friend and colleague, Senator Debbie Stabenow. I am glad

to have them here.

Mr. Paul Kleyman, we are anxious to hear your testimony, with

the American Society on Aging in San Francisco. Thank you for

being with us.

STATEMENT OF PAUL KLEYMAN, EDITOR, AGING TODAY,

AMERICAN SOCIETY ON AGING, SAN FRANCISCO, CA

Mr. KLEYMAN. Well, first, let me thank you, Senators Breaux and

Craig and members of the Special Committee on Aging, and especially your terrific staff, for shining a spotlight on this issue. I do

want to make clear that my comments this morning are strictly my

own views and not representative of the American Society on Aging

or the Journalist Exchange on Aging for which I am national coordinator.

I believe that ageism is one of the last remaining ‘‘ism’s’’ that can

be openly expressed in our society. Whether they are meant to be

playful or pointed, a headline that declares ‘‘Geezer Nation,’’ or an

editor’s reference to older people as ‘‘prune faces’’ have no place in

the news or in news rooms.

Nowhere is ageism more evident than in the business coverage

of the media itself. Newspapers repeatedly state that a television

network’s bottom line is most heavily damaged when its programs

attract older audiences. In fact, the term ‘‘old audience’’ appeared

and highlighted part of an article that ran in the New York Times

only about 2 years ago, or should I say low-lighted the article?

Not long after that, The Wall Street Journal stressed in an article, ‘‘In the past 3 years the median age of NBC’s audience has

risen to 45 from 41, a bad omen for advertising revenues.’’

This March, an Associated Press article ran across the country

about how ABC was wooing David Letterman to replace Ted

Koppel’s ‘‘Nightline.’’ The article noted that Letterman had ‘‘long

been unhappy with CBS’ older prime time audience.’’ All of these

jokes and denigrating comments have their roots in the fact that

television advertisers pay far less for every 1,000 older viewers that

a program attracts than those in the coveted 18–35 age group. That

is a program can win its rating’s war but still be considered a loser

because its audience is older. It will make less money.

Let me ask you to consider the phrase ‘‘old audience’’ for a moment. If a newspaper ran an article today that said CBS had to recover from having a black audience or a woman’s audience, this nation would be in an uproar. It is not long ago in the history of racism that real estate interests discouraged home sales to African

Americans in certain areas, because they said doing so would bring

down the property values.

Well, that was a terrible self-perpetuating myth, and I believe

that the continued devaluing of older people is tantamount to

media redlining by age. Now, news organizations are set on attracting younger audiences, and there is nothing wrong with that, exVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:11 Jan 08, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\83476.TXT SAGING1 PsN: SAGING1
67

cept that these efforts often come with an irrational bias against

both older readers and older journalists.

Let me give you two examples, one of each. One reporter at a national news organization told me that until a couple of years ago,

he dealt with an editor who wanted to minimize photos of older

people in stories. This editor thought it a big joke to call older citizens prune faces, and the news staff referred to this as the editor’s

‘‘no prune-face rule.’’

Another example: a prominent study of economic forces in the

news commended news executives who ‘‘unceremoniously ax the old

warhorses to make way for something new.’’ At least sometimes,

though, experience does count, such as after the terrorist attacks

of last September 11. A former producer at ABC news noted in a

recent article that ‘‘the only time older people are given their due

respect is when it is time for experts, experts, experts.’’

She said that such a moment for older experts came after 9/11.

At that time of national crisis, Americans wanted to hear from

those with knowledge, seasoned by wisdom and experience.

What about at newspapers? A study titled ‘‘Age and the Press’’

that was released this year by Harvard University’s Shorenstein

Center on The Press Politics and Public Policy stated that ‘‘in their

market strategies, newspapers are paying nearly no interest to

readers in the upper middle ages, in spite of the fact that this is

the fastest increasing group of readers.’’ That means the aging

baby boomers are being dismissed by newspaper marketers.

Now, I do not want to suggest that the financial issues facing the

newspaper industry are uncomplicated. However, the scapegoating

of older people is bad business, and it is poor journalism, and it is

wrong.

Before closing, I want to emphasize that there is some good news

in many American news rooms. I coordinate a group called the

Journalist Exchange on Aging which was formed about 10 years

ago. In the last 10 years, I have seen a slow but steady growth in

the number of reporters devoted to the coverage of issues in aging,

including, by the way, reporters at The New York Times and The

Wall Street Journal. There is some fine work being done there.

As news organizations aim to secure their economic growth, I believe it is also critical for them to look for ways not to stunt the

growth of their coverage about major social developments, especially about the longevity revolution. Thank you very much.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Kleyman, and finally,

but not least, Ms. Becca Levy. Dr. Levy.

STATEMENT OF DR. BECCA LEVY, PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT

OF EPIDEMIOLOGY AND PUBLIC HEALTH, YALE UNIVERSITY, NEW HAVEN, CT

Dr. LEVY. Mr. Chairman and members of the Senate Special

Committee on Aging, I appreciate your inviting me to testify on a

pressing issue, image of aging in media and marketing.

My research has focused on how the health of older adults is affected by negative images of aging that are promoted in part by the

media and marketing. The particular study I will describe to you

today found that negative images of aging may have an adverse efVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:11 Jan 08, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\83476.TXT SAGING1 PsN: SAGING1
68

fect on the survival of older adults. Before describing the study in

more detail, I would like to give a brief background to it.

In a series of earlier experiments, in which older individuals

were subliminally exposed to aging images in the form of stereotypes, we found that compared to those exposed to positive stereotypes of aging, those exposed to negative stereotypes of aging tended to function worse on a number of mental and physical outcomes,

such as memory performance and on their cardiovascular response

to stress.

Elderly individuals may be particularly vulnerable to the effects

of negative stereotypes of aging. First, the stereotypes are largely

acquired before old age, starting in childhood when they are not yet

directly relevant to the individuals exposed to them: as a result,

they tend to be uncritically accepted.

By the time old age is reached, the negative stereotypes are in

place. They have been internalized and reinforced over a number

of decades, thereby making it difficult to mount a psychological defense against them.

The second reason elderly individuals may be sensitive to the effects of negative stereotypes of aging is that as we have found in

our research, they can operate without awareness, thus making it

difficult for elders to monitor them.

Which brings us to our recent finding that I would like to share

with you. This study funded by the National Institute on Aging and

the Brookdale Foundation was just published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

In 1975, when the Ohio Longitudinal Study of Aging and Retirement began, most of the residents age 50 and older of Oxford, OH

were asked whether they agree or disagree with questions that

measure their images of aging. These self-perceptions of aging

questions included: Do you agree or disagree that as you get older,

you are less useful?

Participants were interviewed six times over the 20 years of the

project. The 660 individuals included in our analyses were matched

to survival information that we acquired from the National Death

Index.

As can be seen in the chart, we found that those who expressed

a more positive self-perception of aging tended to have a survival

advantage of 7.5 years over those who expressed more negative

self-perception of aging.

That is, when we look at the amount of time it took half of the

people in each group to die, the difference between the two groups

was 71⁄2 years.

The strength of our finding is demonstrated by those in the more

positive self-perception of aging group having better survival than

those in the more negative self-perception of aging group, among

men as well as women, among those with better as well as worse

functional health, and among those with lower as well as higher

education.

When we adjusted for a number of variables at baseline, including age and functional health, we found that those in the positive

self-perception of aging group still tended to have a significant survival advantage over those in the negative self-perception of aging

group.

69

We also examined a mechanism by which this process occurred.

More negative self-perceptions of aging predicted reduced will to

live, which in turn tended to contribute to a shorter lifespan. In

other words, those with more negative self-perceptions of aging

were more likely to consider their lives to be ‘‘worthless,’’ ‘‘empty,’’ and ‘‘hopeless,’’ whereas those with more positive self-perceptions

of aging were more likely to select the opposite terms of ‘‘worthy’’, ‘‘full,’’ and ‘‘hopeful.’’ In closing, I should note that although the prevalence of negative

images of aging is not entirely due to the media and marketing,

they seem to be the sources that are the most persuasive, identifiable, systematic and profit driven. Extolling youthfulness while demeaning the old helps to generate images that, as our research

suggests, may have devastating consequences.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Dr. Levy follows:]

70

71

72

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Dr. Levy, and thank all

the members of the panel, and I just have one or two questions and

I want my colleagues to have time to ask questions.

Ms. Roberts, thank you for a very powerful statement. I mean

one of the things that you said was that the entertainment business is one of the worst perpetrators of this bigotry in being biased

against older Americans, especially women. I mean I guess in order

to solve the problem, you have to understand why the problem exists. So I guess my question to you would be why do you think that

there is this attitude in Hollywood in the entertainment business

that somehow having older Americans in more prominent roles is

bad, I guess, for the bottom line?

I mean is it because only young people are making those decisions and do not understand? I mean I guess the question is why

do you think it is like that? I mean it was not like that always;

was it?

Ms. ROBERTS. No, not at all. I think you have to address the advertising world. I think Madison Avenue, the image maker, tells

you not only what to watch but what size you should be, like a size

zero or minus, all of which is so negative on every possible level.

The CHAIRMAN. Do they think that is what the general public

wants to see? I mean I quite frankly see some of the ads of some

of the size women that you are speaking to, and I think they all

look sick, but I mean apparently they must be selling something

that way.

Ms. ROBERTS. There is no photograph in any magazine that I can

think of other than AARP that shows a woman over the age of 45

unless she is selling Depends or Viagra. [Laughter.]

Am I not correct about that?

Mr. SNYDER. Correct. That is correct.

Ms. ROBERTS. I think it starts there. They determine what shows

they would like to see on television, and the networks make their

money in advertising, and so it comes down to their pocketbooks.

The CHAIRMAN. You mentioned friends and colleagues of yours,

like Joan Crawford and Barbara Stanwyck, and real outstanding

women actors, who are seen in very positive roles, you know, well

into their careers. But it seems like that has changed; has it not?

Ms. ROBERTS. Totally. I mean in the movies that I can think of

where Michael Douglas is married to Gwenyth Paltrow or Sean

Connery is married to Catherine Jones, who is Michael Douglas’ wife actually, it is wrong. I mean a 65- year old man does not have

to have a 30-year old wife, although they might prefer it, only because they have been taught to think that way. I am at the peak

of my life, and I am in my seventies. It is so wrong to dismiss us,

to discard us. I mean they like to airbrush us out of existence.

The CHAIRMAN. You know one of the things that I pointed out

in the opening statement, I say to my colleagues, you know, it may

be because of the writers. I mean the people who produce the stuff,

I mean stuff meaning in a very fine sense of the word. Seventyseven out of the 122 prime time TV series did not employ a single

writer over the age of 50. So if you have the writers who are all

younger than we are, you know, it is kind of an understandable

reason why they are producing stuff that does not incorporate older

Americans in those roles.

73

Well, Doris, thank you so very much.

Ms. ROBERTS. I can tell you that if you were in my business, you

would be out of a job. [Laughter.]

Would that not be terrible?

The CHAIRMAN. No job security there or here probably. [Laughter.]

Senator Craig, questions.

Senator CRAIG. Well, he has more hair, Doris, and it is darker.

So I would have been out of a job earlier.

Ms. ROBERTS. Absolutely.

Senator CRAIG. Either that or I would have had a little tucking.

Ms. ROBERTS. A little tuck.

Senator CRAIG. Little dye.

Ms. ROBERTS. Of course.

Senator CRAIG. Little planning.

Ms. ROBERTS. Is that not shocking that people, young women in

their twenties and thirties, men as well, are having Botox put all

over their faces and facelifts because they are afraid of getting

older at that tender age. That is——

Senator CRAIG. Well, what they do not understand and what

they are missing in this whole communications effort is something

that I did last Monday that no 20-year-old or 30-year-old is going

to get a chance to do. I picked up a granddaughter from her first

day in kindergarten and took her to McDonald’s for lunch, and that

was the most rejuvenating youthful experience I have had in a long

time. Somehow we need to communicate to the American people

that you are at the prime of your life, Doris, and there is this phenomenal abundance in life that can come at all ages.

Ms. ROBERTS. That is right.

Senator CRAIG. Certainly, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for holding

this hearing today. Let me ask unanimous consent that my statement be a part of the record. I thank you all for being here to testify today.

We are grabbed up in the myth of Madison Avenue that somehow youth is the only thing that sells. Yet it is the senior community of America that has the largest chunk of disposable income

today. Somehow I do not think they get the picture very well, or

at least they get a picture that only they want to project, and I

hope that we can adjust and change that some, at least by our

bully pulpits and certainly you by yours.

It would be very helpful, I think, to all of us to understand those

kinds of balances. Dr. Butler, you had mentioned in your testimony

that it is a myth that older Americans are affluent. About 70 percent of older American households have an annual income of less

than 35,000. Have you done any forecasting of what the future

household for baby boomers would be, at least what the future

holds as it relates to income? Because while I have talked about

general affluency and fixed incomes and those that do have spending capability, statistics do bear out a fact, and those that you have

stated.

Dr. BUTLER. Our center has not yet addressed it, but, as you

know, with the declining economy and the problems in the stock

market and 401(k)s, many of the baby boomers are feeling quite

frightened and unprepared, and that means that the oldest, now

74

56, is just 9 years away from turning 65. So I think it is a topic,

as you correctly imply, that must be addressed: the fear of growing

older and the fear of growing older poor.

Senator CRAIG. Well, we have seen a dramatic—let me put it this

way. We are seeing a shift now in those that are older who are now

choosing to work longer or work part-time to supplement their incomes, and while some might view that as negative, many who do

it, while they first thought it was a negative experience, in my visits with them have found it a rejuvenating experience, that it kind

of fills their life again. It gives them a kind of energy that they had

experienced in maybe the peak of their career or the career they

retired from earlier, and that, you know, if their health holds obviously, and many now it does, it is a new dynamic that we clearly

need to think about and in that there is a frustration of bias also.

Dr. BUTLER. Absolutely.

Senator CRAIG. The question of working in the marketplace.

Dr. BUTLER. If you imagine it were 1900, and the average life expectancy was 47, we might be discussing the prejudices against 50-

year-olds and 55-year-olds and whether they can work or not. In

truth, it is hard to imagine 69 million baby boomers with all that

skill, all that experience and knowledge, sitting by idly, collecting

Social Security, using Medicare, without continuing to contribute,

and we are beginning to see a slight shift of people staying in the

workforce longer, and living longer, they probably should, for their

own best interest and the country’s, indeed work longer.

But we do find in our studies that only 20 percent of adult Americans know that Social Security phase-in to full eligibility has now

been moved to 67. So many of them are operating on the assumption that they will get their retirement at 65. So we do have to

have an educational effort here to try to address the issue of working longer and, of course, part of that will actually promote health.

We know that being involved, having a purpose, does improve

health.

Senator CRAIG. Mr. Chairman, one last question, if I could, of Dr.

Levy. How did you decide to do research on how the health of older

adults is affected by negative images? What brought you to that?

Dr. LEVY. Initially, I became very interested in the topic when

I spent some time in Japan. I noticed how differently it seemed like

the elders were being treated in Japan. I started thinking, this

country has the longest life span in the world; could there be some

connection? So I think that is actually how I started becoming interested in this line of research.

Senator CRAIG. OK. How are you using or how do you plan to use

that kind of research?

Dr. LEVY. Well, I hope to continue to look at what is the mechanism, but also I think it is important to start thinking about how

to actually change images of aging. I think that a good next step

if, this kind of research continues to yield similar results, is to

think about how we can actually promote the positive images of

aging and teach skills for people to monitor the negative stereotypes.

Senator CRAIG. Well, I have had the good fortune to spend some

time in the Orient and I know that age is revered. Thank you all

very much. Ms. Roberts, I too love Raymond. [Laughter.]

75

[The prepared statement of Senator Craig follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR LARRY CRAIG

Good Morning. I want to thank Senator Breaux for holding this important hearing

on the image of aging in the media and the marketing industry. It’s important that

we raise awareness of the problem of societal bias aging and old age in the country.

Seniors are one of our greatest resources. We need to recognize the benefits that

we all gain from our seniors’ wisdom and experience.

The unrealistic images of aging the media tends to portray are a negative influence on our aging population. We often see the stereotypical picture of the feeble,

helpless senior in many commercials and ads. In fact, only 4.25 percent of seniors

65 and older live in nursing homes. This statistic shows that the overwhelming majority of our seniors are living independently.

It’s so important to our aging population to have accurate representation in the

media. Realistic messages targeted to seniors that actually show what its like to be

a senior today—strong, vital, contributing members of society will help to encourage

seniors to take better care of themselves.

The media and marketing industry are basing decisions that concern seniors on

outdated consumer research. We need to do all we can to encourage these industries

to devote more resources into studying demographics. It’s vitally important that all

industries accurately reflect changes in aging demographics, social demands and

culture. With 77 million baby boomers approaching retirement age, this group is too

important to ignore.

More importantly, we need to broaden the definition of what it means to grow

older in America. Its time we stop thinking of aging as the end of life, but as a continuation of living. Most of us are living longer, healthier, active and productive

lives and its time the media and marketing industry start accurately reflecting how

our seniors are living today.

Again, I’d like to thank the Chairman for holding this important hearing and I

look forward to hearing the testimony of our witnesses.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Stabenow, any questions?

Senator STABENOW. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to

thank you first for holding this committee hearing. This is a very

important topic and I appreciate your doing this. Thank you to everyone, and, Doris, I have thoroughly enjoyed your many roles over

the years.

Ms. ROBERTS. Thank you.

Senator STABENOW. It is wonderful to have you here. Just a couple of observations, and I welcome any comments related to them.

I find it very contradictory when we look at this situation. I agree

with everything that has been said in terms of media portrayals,

but we are also in a world where we go to constituents for support,

and the majority of people who vote are older Americans, which I

find interesting in the context of this discussion.

There is great power in older Americans from the standpoint of

voting and participating and putting people into office who make

decisions that are very important regarding resources and whether

we go to war and so on. It seems to me somehow we need to bring

that power to bear in addressing some of the issues that you are

talking about in a different kind of way.

I was also thinking about the whole debate of what is elderly

now? I look at my mother who is 76 and in two golf leagues, and

uses a computer very effectively and watches C–SPAN and debates

me on every issue, and she does a wonderful job of being aware,

and I do not consider her elderly in any sense of the word. She is

a very vivacious woman.

So I think our whole concept of what is elderly is changing, because we are talking about living longer, being healthier, and are

76

viewing age 60, age 70, age 80 in a different light as we get older

and are still very active and involved.

When the Older Women’s League did a study on Medicare, they

talked about the fact that when we look at Social Security, and

particularly Medicare, particularly for those over age 85, it is

women, we see. So I know and I appreciate the comments today,

because I think we are particularly looking at stereotypes of

women, of older women, not in every case, but in many cases.

Doris, you were talking about the really outrageous position that

somehow a man in his sixties or seventies or even eighties ought

to be married to a 20-year-old or 30-year-old. I hope he has got a

lot of Viagra.

But I guess I find it—I want to just say for the record—that I

really do believe that this is very much an issue for women, for

older women, as a result of what the media is doing, and is something that women of all ages, I think, need to be concerned about.

I think there is one exception, though, in advertising, that while

we see advertising and the push for younger people in television

and so on, that the fastest growing part of advertising is prescription drugs which is geared to older adults. I would just say as

someone involved heavily in the issue of prescription drugs that I

am concerned that we now see about two-and-a-half times more

being spent by the pharmaceutical industry in advertising than on

research. It is a very sales-focused industry now, very much focused on sales targeted to seniors for example, the purple pill.

I think in some way this advertising feeds into image of aging

in terms of medicine and the need to be younger and the need to

take medicine and prescription drugs and all of these kinds of

things, even though obviously there are many prescription drugs

that are critical and lifesaving.

But I believe very strongly that we need to be concerned about

the sales and marketing end in the pharmaceutical industry now

as it relates to prescription drugs, because this is an industry that

understands where their target is, and are, I believe, driving up

the prices of medicine as a result of heavily advertising and spending more on advertising. So I would welcome any comments there.

I would just simply ask what you believe other than holding

hearings, which are so significant in terms of the bully pulpit, are

there other recommendations that you have for us that we should

be focused on in order to address what I believe is going to continue to be a growing challenge and issue?

The CHAIRMAN. Anybody have a comment on Senator Stabenow’s

statement?

Mr. KLEYMAN. I could add a couple of notes. Thank you for asking that question. In terms of the news business, I mean, first, I

think there needs to be more public attention to this issue, and the

Special Committee on Aging has just made a great start on that.

It needs to be followed up by advocates for older people across the

country, and people individually have to begin to stand up and say

they are mad as hell and will not take it anymore. But also, they

have to begin to challenge the defensive economic arguments from

the news industry.

A second point I would like to make is that the news business

itself in terms of ageism in the news needs to invest in more reVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:11 Jan 08, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\83476.TXT SAGING1 PsN: SAGING1
77

search to reassess their very skewed view of the numbers they are

coming up with.

For example, an article published by the Newspaper Association

of America about a year ago reported that while only 40 percent

of young adults in the United States read a newspaper everyday,

the figure is much higher in other countries. For example, in Canada, it is 82 percent. Is that not interesting?

One financial expert—let me add a note on that—the reason is

that in other countries, they are finding that where the percentage

of younger daily newspaper readers is higher, they found that

newspapers are used much more in the family on a daily basis and

in the schools than happens in the United States. So there is a solution to reaching younger viewers without denigrating older viewers.

One financial expert in that article stated that ‘‘newspapers

abroad do far more research to understand reader consumer behavior than publishers in the United States.’’ In fact, they said it is

as low as two cents per reader in the U.S. with some newspapers.

A third point is that schools of journalism and mass communication really need to weigh in on aging and other cross-cutting social

issues that are under-covered in American journalism like sexism

and the women’s issues that are coming up.

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Butler. Let me get Dr. Butler in.

Dr. BUTLER. I would like briefly to support Senator Stabenow’s

point that the issues of age are very much the issues of women.

They may live now 5.4 years longer, but they pay a price of more

chronic illness, more poverty, more elder abuse, and 80 percent of

the individuals in nursing homes are women. So many of the negative attitudes toward age really focus very intensely upon women,

and I think that is very important to emphasize that.

The CHAIRMAN. I want to follow up on a point that Debbie

Stabenow made with regard to it seems that with regard to the

Congress and politicians who get elected by the masses, that we

pay a great deal of attention to older Americans, and Debbie pointed out very correctly, because they vote.

I mean that is the highest participatory segment of our population are older Americans. Younger Americans unfortunately do

not vote. Therefore, Congress tends to pay a great deal of attention

to older Americans for the very pragmatic reason as well as the esoteric correct reasons, but because they vote, and if you do not pay

attention to them, they are not going to vote for you. You are not

going to have a job.

So it is a very pragmatic connection which you made with regard

to elected officials, but it seems like there is a disconnect when it

comes to the entertainment business and media and advertising,

who do not pay attention to elderly, and what motivates them I

would suggest is economics, and I think they have the false impression that we are going to target a segment of our population who

spends the most money, and that is 18 to whatever. 18–35 category

they seem to target. If you look at all the sitcoms with the possible

exception of Doris Roberts, ‘‘Everybody Loves Raymond,’’ I mean almost all of those in prime time are basically young people in that

category, and I think it is because of the economic ties.

78

Let me ask somebody just for a little bit of a discussion on the

ads that we saw. I mean before people spend millions of dollars, before Coca-Cola spends hundreds of millions of dollars running those

ads, which you all rated as a very ageism negative ad toward how

it portrayed older people, and the Midas commercial which was deplorable, they have had to test market those ads. They do not

spend hundreds of millions of dollars without saying the ad is

going to work.

So the question is what do they find when they test market these

ads that we find today as being very discomforting and not humorous and depicting seniors in a very negative way? Did they not test

market those ads?

Mr. SNYDER. One would think that they would test market all

their ads and, in fact, sometimes ads are test marketed, but they

may not be test marketed to the right segment of the population.

They are not test marketed against those who might be offended.

The CHAIRMAN. So they test market in the Coca-Cola ad to the

group of people they think drink coke and the people who buy mufflers.

Mr. SNYDER. One of the things that we are finding that is a problem with focus groups and research such as this is that people tend

to give you the answers you want to hear when you are in that particular focus group. In fact, there is research now to support that

when you are doing focus groups, people will respond positively toward what you are trying to get them to talk about, but when they

actually are in the privacy of their own home, it is a different story.

So the coke ad is funny because in this audience this morning,

I know that a lot of people wanted to laugh, and they did not.

Every time I play that ad in an audience, everybody breaks out

laughing, and I tell them what is funny in a group setting is not

funny in the privacy of your own home or in the privacy of your

own mind, and it may be offensive to you, but because it is almost

in a comedic situation, almost like it is a comedian standing up in

front of the audience, where we have permission to laugh at ourselves, then it is OK.

The CHAIRMAN. If you test marketed that ad or got a reaction

from older Americans, what type of reaction would you expect from

them?

Mr. SNYDER. Actually we have done some research on some of

those ads, limited research, and we have gotten mixed reactions. It

depends on where a person’s values are. I will come back to that

point. If the values do not allow them to be offended by it, then

they will think it is a fine ad. What we find interesting is that the

younger audiences are the ones who are offended by them the

most.

The CHAIRMAN. Oh, really.

Mr. SNYDER. Yes. That tends to be part of what we have seen.

Some of the younger boomers and GenXers, they see that coke ad

and they say that is offensive to older people. We have mixed reactions from older people, older individuals, about that particular ad.

When it comes to the Zima ad and the other ads that we showed,

clearly they are offensive to older individuals, and you wonder to

yourself, I wonder, how did that ever get past the president of an

organization, how did that get past the marketing director of that

79

company? I will come back to this one very simple fact: we are the

product of what we see on our airwaves everyday.

We are so inundated with information that we receive continually, that we subliminally accept it somehow, and eventually it

contributes to a lack of awareness. We have to raise awareness. It

is not that younger people want to create ads that offend anybody.

That is a fact, but we have to raise the awareness of a younger

copy writer, a younger creative design person, so they have some

sense of actually walking in that person’s shoes as compared to

making up a creation that is based on a story ‘‘I heard in college.’’

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Stabenow.

Senator STABENOW. Well, Mr. Chairman, when you were speaking about the economics, and I am sure the decisions are being

made for economic reasons, but I find it still strange, because when

I think of my 22-year-old daughter, I spend a whole lot more

money than she does. I mean the idea that they are marketing to

18-year-olds or 22-year-olds because they have more disposable income is not rational. I am not sure. I find this whole thing very

perplexing, even though I am sure that is what they are thinking.

I mean it has to be economics.

The other point, just a fact I just want raise, because I want to

go back to the advertising on prescription drugs. More was spent

last year on advertising Vioxx than on Pepsi, Coke or Budweiser

beer.

Mr. SNYDER. Yes.

Senator STABENOW. Did you want to comment?

Mr. SNYDER. I did want to say, and I have forgotten what I was

going to say. So that is fine.

Senator STABENOW. Well, we were talking about the 18 to 22-

year-olds.

Mr. SNYDER. Oh. Companies are for whatever reason, and there

has been research conducted overseas as well that supports this

same notion, that companies are mesmerized by capturing the

youth market, because they feel that if they do not grab the youth

market now, they will lose market share in the future, and they

assume, companies have assumed that people over the age of 50

are theirs for life.

In other words, I really do not have to market to that person because we are going to get you anyway. You are set in your ways—

stereotype—you are not going to change, you are always going to

buy a product. We also have research—there is research that shows

that that is not the case, that people over 50 are very willing to

change products given the right information.

Senator STABENOW. Interesting.

The CHAIRMAN. One of the networks just said, and they were

contacted on this whole question of ageism, and they reported asking AARP about their thoughts about the ageism problem that we

are talking about here today, and their response apparently was

that ageism is not that big of a problem.

Do you all agree with them on that? I mean are we just doing

this and we should not be doing it? If AARP tells me it is not a

problem, should we just shut this hearing down and go somewhere

else?

80

Mr. SNYDER. I will address that, and let the rest of the panel address it as well. I am not sure who they spoke with at AARP, but

I cannot imagine that AARP would take that position. So I would

ask them to check their source and go back and find out.

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Butler, do you have any thoughts on it?

Dr. BUTLER. I have a very similar reaction. I think that I would

call Bill Novelli, who is the head of AARP, and ask him directly.

I doubt very much if they would take that position.

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Roberts, what about your thoughts about

AARP on that? Do you have any?

Ms. ROBERTS. Well, I question this. If there were laws protecting

discrimination against sexism and racism and religious freedom,

why is there not a law to protect the, you know, the horror of the

way we are described in every magazine and newspapers and on

television and movies? Why cannot that exist? Why cannot we start

there? Because it is a powerful thing that we are dealing with. I

mean it is insane.

The CHAIRMAN. I mean there are laws against age discrimination, but I mean apparently on the ways that entertainment business and all of this handles these things, it does not run contrary

to the laws on the books. Anybody have any thoughts about this

with regard to the existing laws on the book with regard to age discrimination? They are there, but apparently we are seeing a lot of

factual discrimination.

Dr. BUTLER. Even in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

of the United Nations—it goes back to 1948—age was left out. For

various reasons, it has been reintroduced recently, particularly by

the former president of Ireland, Mrs. Robinson, who introduced the

concept of looking at age discrimination and age imagery within

the world family. So I think there are beginning to be some people

that are beginning to address this.

The CHAIRMAN. I would point out, too, my staff has just provided

me with information that pointed out in Los Angeles, Ms. Roberts,

that AARP has joined as co-counsel in 23 class action age bias lawsuits that have been filed in California state court by television

writers age 40 and over against television networks and studios

and talent agencies alleging workplace age discrimination. I mean

these are writers 40 years of age having to go to court to fight age

discrimination which shows you the extent of the problem.

So I mean they are active in that. I mean they have asked the

court to dismantle the alleged discriminatory hiring system and

asking for more than $200 million in damages.

Well, I think that this has been a very important hearing in my

perspective. I think that we have heard some excellent testimony.

I mean, Dr. Levy, your point really being, I think, a positive attitude is a very positive contributing factor to how long we live, and

people who have that attitude, in fact, are living longer despite

some of the images that they may have portrayed to them, and

everybody’s testimony has been so very helpful.

Ms. Roberts, again, you have access to the bully pulpit and thank

you for taking of your own personal time to talk to us about something you believe in very strongly. Sometimes it is very easy if you

are comfortable to just remain comfortable and not rock the boat,

but as your grandchildren said, you are a rocker.

81

Ms. ROBERTS. I am and I am glad to know that I have more than

7 years of my life to look forward to.

[Laughter.]

The CHAIRMAN. Well, with that, this committee will be adjourned

and thank our witnesses for being with us.

[Whereupon, at 10:50 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]

Æ