The Joy of Pain (20 page)

Hansen appears well insulated from doubts about the appropriateness of the tactics employed by the show. In an informative 2007 book he wrote about
Predator
, he described many of his interactions with these men. He stated that it was important not to go “overboard” but granted the “prosecutorial” tone that he sometimes used. Although there were “some sad cases that come knocking on our door,”
³¹
he emphasized the manipulative features of the men's actions, the offensive aspects of their chats, the fact that they made the initial contact, the intent of their actions, and the overall threat they pose for society. With these and other arguments in mind, he admitted that none of the many exchanges inspired in him any strong sympathy.
³²

Social science research on why people watch reality TV generally fits with why certain content appears in programs such as
American Idol
and
Predator
. Media researchers Steven Reiss and James Wiltz argue that people will watch TV, or any stimulus, to satisfy basic motives and desires. In one study, Reiss and Wiltz examined the free-time activities of a large group of people. Participants indicated how much they enjoyed different types of travel, sports, and music, as well as various popular reality TV programs. They also completed a personality measure tapping 16 basic desires and their associated joys when these desires are fulfilled. Two motives were most clearly associated with reality TV viewing. The strongest of these two was
status
, or, as Reiss and Wiltz define it, a “desire for prestige” with the associated joy of “self-importance.” The next strongest was vengeance, a “desire to get even” with the associated joy of “vindication.” The greater the number of reality TV shows viewed and liked, the more important these two desires.
³³

Both
American Idol
and
Predator
invite viewers to feel good about their relative status and hence their sense of importance. With
Idol
, William Hung was given screen time more because of his inferiority rather than his talent. With
Predator
, the men profiled are already near the lowest of the low, but the show is structured to bring them down further still. As Dan Snierson and Josh Wolk of
Entertainment Weekly
commented bluntly, “Do we watch reality television for precious insight into the human condition? Please. We watch for those awkward scenes that make us feel a smidge better about our own little unfilmed lives.”
³⁴

What about vengeance? In both programs, and more so with
Predator
, participants “deserve” their humiliations. With
Idol
, these humiliated contestants are considered fools to think they could win. No one is forcing them to audition. With
Predator
, what else do these perverted men deserve but crushing humiliation—and, of course, jail time? They receive what they deserve.

In some ways, shows like
Predator
really do harken back to times when humiliation was a more general punishment of choice for many cultures.
³⁵
Nathaniel Hawthorne's
The Scarlet Letter
is a work of fiction, but it captures the spirit of the Puritans who believed that punishment
should
be humiliating.
³⁶
Until the 19th century, stocks and pillories served as a public punishment instead of imprisonment. The convicted were sentenced to stand in public sites, such as village greens, that people frequented. It was common for people to make fun of victims and throw all manner of things at them, from rotten food to dead animals. The pillory was a favorite because the victim's face was immobilized, along with his or her hands. Sometimes the ears were nailed to the wood to prevent the face from moving. For many onlookers, it must have been a feasting time for
schadenfreude
.
³⁷

Are some segments of television programming today serving a similar role?
Predator
educates viewers about a potential societal threat, but compelling entertainment seems to drive many of the choices that the producers make. The gratifications of humiliation and resulting guilt-free
schadenfreude
are a potent draw. Deserved humiliation and anticipated
schadenfreude
seem to be the formula for the show's success, and the decisions appear made to swell the gratifying effects of this pairing.

The producers of
Predator
(as well as
American Idol
and so many other reality TV shows) know there is a line that they must avoid crossing. They may test the limits of humiliation, but they surely wish to avoid the chance that
schadenfreude
is replaced by outrage over the treatment of these men, a decline in viewing, and the withdrawal of advertising dollars. The continued reruns of
Predator
suggest that this line has not been crossed, even though no new shows have been produced since the 2008 episode in which a Texas man committed
suicide rather than face arrest and public humiliation. Hansen has achieved cool celebrity status and is respected enough to testify before Congress on the problems of online sexual predators, despite using humiliation as a catapult to these achievements. This suggests that it is these men who have been effectively demonized rather than the show itself.

I admit, however, that watching Hansen orchestrate the humiliations on
Predator
is disturbing—even as I will also admit that he and his production team have created a show that captivates irresistibly. I find myself at once entertained, spellbound, and more than a little sullied. I am reminded of the ratings-hungry reporter, Richard “Dick” Thornburg, in the
Die Hard
films. He's the one who gets punched in the nose by Detective John McClane's wife, Holly, in the first movie and tasered toward the end of the second. The reporter, played perfectly by the actor William Atherton, is a caricature of the type, and yet he seems hardly exaggerated. In the first movie, when part of an office building explodes, Thornburg witnesses the explosion but doesn't know yet whether his camera man had his camera running:

THORNBURG
: My God, tell me you got that.

CAMERAMAN
: I got it, I got it!!

THORNBURG
: Eat your heart out, Channel Five!
³⁸

For Thornburg, it is all about getting the sensational story. He claims that he is a crusader for the public's “right to know,” but he will do just about anything to get the salacious scoop. If this means humiliating people on TV, so be it. Ironically, after Holly hits him on the nose, he gets a restraining order against her—because “that woman assaulted me and she humiliated me in public.”
³⁹
This was a brilliant touch.

The cut-throat demand for high TV ratings in the increasingly complex, competitive world of TV programming probably creates strong pressure to go for the entertainment jugular rather than for sensation-free edification. The gratifications of witnessing seemingly deserved humiliation—and the resulting
schadenfreude
—must be hard to resist exploiting under these intensely competitive conditions. At the same time, should we encourage programs such as
Predator
? The exposing of a societal problem and its prevention are the ostensible goals of the show, although Hansen also admits his desire to produce
absorbing television. It is not at all clear that the show uncovers a behavior that is as much a problem as the episodes suggest.
⁴⁰
Many experts claim that most sexual abuse of children occurs in the family or among people who know each other.
⁴¹
How likely is it that the majority of men who show up at the sites would have done so without the ambitious tactics of the decoys? How much do we learn about the nature of online sexual deviancy from this show? Does
Predator
create a false impression of the problem, stirring unwarranted fears, creating events rather than reporting on them, and inappropriately demonizing some individuals rather than helping the public understand the general problem of deviant sexual behavior?

Most of all, should a civilized society sanction the humiliation of people—regardless of what they appear to have done? Should we encourage shows that rely so much on the gratifications of this form of guilt-free
schadenfreude
? Make no mistake about it: Hansen inflicts extreme humiliation on these men. Although it is easy to conclude that they deserve it, there is huge collateral damage done to the families of these men, innocent people who must deal with the shame and embarrassment of the aftermath long after
Predator
moves on. Whether Hansen and the show's producers (and viewers) should feel sympathy for these men is a complex moral question. Is
Predator
a bold, groundbreaking work of investigative television or, to use Jesse Wegman's words again, a “theater of cheap morality, wrapped in an orgy of self-righteousness”?
⁴²
You be the judge.

The man who is delighted by others' misfortunes is identical with the man who envies others' prosperity. For anyone who is pained by the occurrence or existence of a given thing must be pleased by that thing's non-existence or destruction.

—A
RISTOTLE
¹

Envy … is hatred in so far as it affects a man so that he is sad at the good fortune of another person and is glad when any evil happens to him.

—B
ARUCH
S
PINOZA
²

Homer: Oh, come on, Lisa. I'm just glad to see him fall flat on his butt! He's usually all happy and comfortable, and surrounded by loved ones, and it makes me feel … what's the opposite of that shameful joy thing of yours?
Lisa: Sour grapes.
Homer: Boy, those Germans have a word for everything!

—
T
HE
S
IMPSONS
³

Koreans have a phrase, “When my cousin buys a rice paddy, my stomach twists.” This captures well the pain of envy and helps explain why a misfortune that brings an envied person down can yield emotional pay dirt in the form of
schadenfreude
. Envy is the familiar blend of painful discontent, ill will, and
resentment that can result from noticing another person enjoying something that you desire but seem unable to obtain. But when a misfortune befalls the envied person, the negative comparison drops away, bringing relief and joy. Contemplating it “untwists” the stomach. The misfortune may even provide hope for the future by hobbling the competition.

Envy is a universal human emotion. It is natural to feel envy when we lose out to someone else and must continue to gaze on the envied person now enjoying the desired thing.
⁴
As I underscored in
Chapters 1
and
2
, social comparisons matter, and envy is a special testimony to this fact. It matters when a person you love chooses someone else who is better looking and more talented than you. It matters when you aspire to compose great music but fail—in contrast to a friend who receives high praise for his recent composition. Most people can identify with the character of Salieri in the film
Amadeus
. Salieri, although accomplished in his own right, is rendered mediocre by Mozart's effortless genius. Perhaps there is no better capturing of envy than the scene in the film where F. Murray Abraham (as Salieri) looks up in pain while sight-reading the miraculous notes on the originals of Mozart's sheet music.
⁵

Social psychologist and neuroscientist Susan Fiske, whose book,
Envy Up, Scorn Down: How Status Divides Us
, I referred to in
Chapter 1
, summarizes the neuroscientific evidence on envy and suggests a consistent pattern of brain activation when people feel envy.
⁶
People responding to envied targets show brain activation in the amygdala, an area of the brain associated with reactions to something emotionally important to us, whether good or bad.
⁷
The amygdala appears necessary for the instant evaluation of another person who is superior to us in an important way. Another part of the brain linked with envy is the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). Fiske suggests that the ACC is important for envy as a “discrepancy detector.”
⁸
In a sense, we cannot feel envy unless we detect a
difference
between ourselves and another (superior) person. A third part of the brain associated with envy is the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), an area that activates when we try to understand what another person is thinking and feeling.
⁹
This seems especially important to do when confronted with an envied person who may control things we desire and whose presence matters to us more than does the presence of people with lower status.
¹⁰
In sum, as one would expect with a blended emotion such as envy, brain activation is complex. But there seems to be a signature pattern of brain activation in envy that reflects our recognition that someone has something important that we do not have and that requires our keen attention if we are to do something about it.