Does this include his appearance in “Scary Movie 4”?
Given the amount of stupid behavior and responsibility-ducking evident to the most casual of observers, it doesn’t seem like this advice is necessarily wrong or redundant.
I don’t have a problem with Dr. Phil. Sure, it boils down to common sense – but common sense is an uncommon commodity, and he doesn’t pretend to do anything more than that in the context of the show; and offair, as others have observed, actual help is available.
I don’t hate him. I think he’s usually pretty good with the advice, which nine times out of ten is obvious to everyone but the perpetrator. It strikes me as more common sense than “medicine” but sometimes that’s what people need.
What’s killing me is the kind of guests he gets on the show. Are they completely clueless? I’d kill myself before I’d get on TV and discuss the fact that I didn’t think there was anything wrong with diddling my 5 year old granddaughter. Did someone drop them on their pointed heads?
Yesterday I responded to the “why do you care ?” thread with a long post in which I mentioned the lubing for the 2 week media orgy and specifically
I was off by several hours. He was on Larry King that evening. My response at the time was this post
It’s hard to remember a time when my feelings were that ambiguous on the man. Since then I’ve come to frigging hate him. (Has a hot son, though.)
I hate Dr. Phil for the same reason I hate Loveline. I dislike any institution that enforces the idea that you are not complete without someone in your life, or calls anything dysfunctional that is simply a preference.
However, I don’t hate either of them enough to really take place in this pitting. I just wanted to say that my father-in-law looks like Dr. Phil and it amuses me.
~Tasha
I have only a passing knowlegde of Dr. Phil but he seems fine by me.
Could someone perhaps assemble a set of YouTube or Google Video citations of his most egregious transgressions?
Many of his guests disgust me, but he doesn’t.
I hate him just for being annoying.
I don’t like his show, and have only seen it because my wife likes it.
However, I must say that his question “How’s that workin’ for ya?” is one that could profitably be put to a lot of people.
In my opinion, people should have that tattooed across their foreheads in reverse at birth.
I’ll say one thing for him; he doesn’t buy into the “Help! Help! I’m a victim and it’s everyone else’s fault!” mentality. Does he do more harm than good in a one hour pop psychology show every day? Dunno. If a couple of people every day watching his show realize that they aren’t alone, and other people are as messed up as they are in the same way, and can fix it, is he doing more good than harm? And if everyone else watching is entertained for an hour, isn’t that good too?
Now, if you wanted to pit OPRAH, I could get behind that.
Letterman used to do a “Message from Dr. Phil” or something like that. I kinda miss those.
Duh, that’s why he’s so popular. He plays into viewers’ prejudices, and it’s a great way to sell books and TV shows, even if it’s not an effective approach to fix psychological problems. Gee, Phil, you mean, you think I should exercise self-discipline? Wow! I hadn’t thought of that one! Americans love the notion of easy solutions and “common sense” and they hate the idea that personal change requires long-term work. Sure, everyone would like to lose weight or quit their addictions or stop being so angry or whatever - and people try, over and over, and for the most part they fail. What amazes me is that most people seem unable to make the really simple, obvious cognitive leap: trying hard and really wanting to just isn’t enough to change yourself. It requires work and in many cases it requires a long relationship with a professional.
Americans like this dumb, simplistic notion that yelling pearls of “common sense”, though, and they like the fantasy of the easy solution, and that’s what Dr. Phil markets. Of course Dr. Phil pushes people to “take responsibility” and “stop playing the victim” - because those empty-headed slogans are incredibly popular, due to the way they’ve been pushed (for political reasons) by media organizations. Dr. Phil is a nice, steaming bowl of everything that people have been programmed to think already through endless repetition, and so what he says seems like “common sense” even when it doesn’t stand up to the slightest actual scrutiny. An illustration of just how intellectually bankrupt his psychological approach is his effort to sell himself as some sort of diet guru, complete with his own line of overpriced packaged convenience foods - despite the fact that he’s obviously overweight! Gee, Dr. Phil! Seems like you could use some self-discipline, huh? Maybe you need to make a decision to change your eating habits! I can’t change for you, Dr. Phil - I would if I could, but it’s up to you. You have to want to change! If that moronic litany of “common sense” slogans actually worked, why the fuck is the dude overweight? Or at very least, why the fuck is he hypocritically trying to pretend he has something useful to say about dieting?
Dr. Phil is a symptom of the same thing that made patent medicines so popular a hundred years ago - people are stupid and they like to believe in easy solutions. Dr. Phil’s snake-oil psychology isn’t any different than snake-oil baldness remedies. He sells the easy fix and he gives his viewers the moralistic satisfaction of being told what they already believe, and that’s all.
Hee! “You don’t need five dollars to skin a gopher.”
A very close relative of mine was on Dr. Phil (and no, not for diddling anyone). She IS completely clueless in a lot of ways. Wasn’t dropped on her head, though.
From my second-hand account, it seems like the producers were pretty cool. They sent a car, put her up in a hotel, and gave her a per diem. After the show, they got her some cognitive therapy, which was definitely necessary.
However, I feel like the whole show is just exploiting the suffering of people who can’t afford care. I can’t get too worked up about it, though, because people are definitely being helped who might not have been helped otherwise. I just find the whole concept a bit distasteful.
He does neither.
The other one I really like is “How much fun are you to live with?”. I think too few people ask that of themselves.
Any group of people who can guess with accuracy the “touched at a young age” voice belongs on the air.
I’ve always seen a clear line between the content and the messenger.
His personality, his style, the fact that he has sold out and gone hollywood and is insanely full of himself…ugh.
On the other hand, with a few exceptions, the data is generally solid. He sucks up to us gals a bit too much, I think, but the core of what he has to say is hard to fault.
He’s trying to pin blame for the Virginia Tech killings on violent video games.
He’s a ridiculous blowhard who needs to have his soapbox crushed to kindling and crammed down his gibbering piehole.