I’m writing from Bend, a high desert town in Central Oregon. I love this town . . . no, I love this whole region. . . . rugged, arid, lots of wildlife. After I finished work last night and closed down my laptop, I went for a river-walk with my friend Scott. We 
admired the Ponderosa pines, stopped by the Poet’s Haus art loft, and ended up having margueritas and veggie fajitas at El Capporal in the downtown area.
Scott Schreiner is my former housemate and gardening partner, the one who used to hold the position described here. Scott recently used me as a reference as he applied to Americorps, and I’m using him as a reference as I hire Evan Wilson to be our live-in gardener (the more information and insight a person has as they enter a situation, the better).
Scott, 25, says that he’s joining Americorps because he’s had a blessed life and he wants to give back, make a small sacrifice. When I told him I respect and admire the decision to give back, he said, “Oh, it’s not easy, not that simple. I go back and forth inside myself with my willingness.” I smiled and replied, “I know what you mean. A part of me is selfish, and another part of me loves to give. Both of those parts are real.”
It’s like the Native American saying about the two dogs, one gentle and the other a snappish biter, with the owner always being able to decide which dog to feed and strengthen (I’m paraphrasing). My experience has been that the more time I spend around people like Scott (and Colleen, and Mike, and Linda, all friends of mine who live in service to others) the more I feed and strengthen the giving part of myself.
On the other hand, when I expose myself to mass media, I feed my selfishness and desire to take and consume. Research shows that people who volunteer are significantly happier than average, and also that consuming heavily does not bring happiness.
I like that President Obama intends to enlarge Americorps. The United States has been blessed these 233 years with a richer set of natural resources than probably any other nation on earth. Giving back, both to our communities and to the earth, is the right focus — and I firmly believe we will become happier in the process.
photo courtesy of Ashrunner’s Photo Safaris
In as much as any blog posting on the internet, including yours, qualifies as “mass media” you may want to think about modifying your statement above about the effects of exposure. Today we (at least all of your readers) consume mass media every day.
What seems to be most important is the quantity and quality of that media exposure. As someone who always struggles with the quantity side of things, I can attest that “this ain’t easy” especially in today’s interconnected world.
However, when we become very conscious of the effects on our self and others, including the environment, the benefits of a media diet become quickly visible. Thanks!
I agree that limiting media exposure can be a good thing, but I don’t think all media exposure is bad. There are more and more stories out there in the news about “good stuff” — people helping each other, community service, ways to live better/greener — than there used to be. Advertising will always be in the mix, but we don’t have to let it sway us to over-consume.