Never go grocery shopping when you are hungry, or how the media influences society.

Oreos are like television programming.

When the television is off, we are tantalized, enticed, and seduced by what lays buried beneath the dark screen. Once we succumb to the alluring promise of the light, we find that it is nothing more than a fatty concoction of useless fillers combined to make a sickening paste.

Yet, when we are beckoned to the rich dark cover again, we invariably yearn for more of the addictive creamy delight.

Disclaimer: Although I am admittedly addicted to television, I strongly feel that television offers a powerful source of information that provides an enlightening window to the world. The benefits of television, when viewed with some intelligence and objectivity far out way the "fatty concoction of useless fillers."

Everyone has done it. Gone to the grocery store for milk, or eggs, or some insignificant item, only to end up buying many more items than anticipated.

If you made the mistake of going to the store when you were hungry, the likelihood of your buying more items increased. I try to resist, but Iím seldom able.

In short, I'm hungry and those Oreos look damn good. Forget the fact that they are filled with fat and other non-nutritional ingredients. They taste good. I'm hungry. So I put them in my shopping cart and eat several while I continue my primal quest. Certainly, I know better, but I'm not talking about knowing better. I'm talking about basic physiological needs, instinct, and emotion. I'm hungry and when I see that bag of Oreos my stomach screams to my brain, eat them now!

What the hell do Oreos have to do with the media?

The correlation of Oreos and the media is that many times our cravings and actual consumption defies rational thought.

Many theories exist to tell us how we should behave within certain circumstances, but that the processes that determine the outcomes of our behavior are so complex that we can only, at best, attempt to make general predictions.

• Rational choice theory is that individuals predict outcomes associated with the choices available to them and choose a course of action based on those forecasts. Rational choice theory is an excellent guide to how decisions should be made, but it does not reflect how decisions are made (Harvey, 1996).
•  Demographics quantifies consumer attributes such as age, gender, race, education, income, etc., where psychographics qualifies psychological information such as opinions on abortion, religious beliefs, music tastes, personality traits, etc. (Matador, 1997).
•  Psychographics and lifestyles are terms that are somewhat interchangeable, but psychographics usually refer to a formal classification system such as Stanford Research Institute's (SRI) Values and Lifestyles (VALS), that categorizes people into eight specific types (Actualizers, Fullfilleds, Achievers, Experiencers, Believers, Strivers, Makers, and Strugglers) (SRI Consulting, 1997).
• Systems dynamics: an arrangement of component processes (steps or objects) so related or connected as to form a unity or organic whole. Within each of these broadly named components are subsystems, which are systems in themselves. Anything that happens in one part of the system (subsystem) has an effect on other parts of the system. To understand the whole system one must look at the interrelationships among all the other parts (systems and subsystems) (Moore & Kearsley, 1996, Websterís, 1976).

The more we feed our cravings the more we demand. As Rothenberg wrote, "The less we have known about how advertising and the media work, the more advertising and media there have been." (Rothenberg, 1998)

Does the media impact our society, and if so why?

Just as history has been told with a bias, I too have applied my own filtering process. I have selected bits of information from sources to make certain points about how we react to the media. I have confidence in the credibility of the sources that I have used, but again, someone filtered through history to chronicle their perspective and I, in turn, am doing the same.

During the 1950s, 60s, and continuing on to today, the myths which had been perpetuated from power base to power base throughout the years collided with a series of events that changed how we view traditional information and their delivery systems.

Certainly the media has been as Rothenberg suggests, "as familiar and invisible as the air we breathe." We allow the media to permeate every aspect of our lives. It is impossible to go anywhere and avoid what Daniel Boortsin calls pseudo-events, events that are often fabricated to "sell" the media (Rothenberg, 1998). Whether it is the alleged sexual exploits of President Clinton or the ongoing controversy about O.J. Simpson's innocence or guilt.

By the nature and cost of television, the players have traditionally been big and powerful. Perhaps no different from the wealthy ruling classes and the church of the pre-modern era. However, with the proliferation of the Internet, we have created a worldwide democratic forum possibly taking the place of previous media. Then again, possibly only giving the illusion of being democratic.

As information grows exponentially we may, by necessity, rely on the similar sources of information. We may send out our automated agents to sources that ultimately are being controlled by similar pre-modern era power brokers.

To predict the future would be as difficult as it would be to predict if I was to again succumb to the Oreos, or do the rational thing and pass them by.