Kansas awards $2 million unplanned-pregnancy contract to group moored in anti-abortion politics

Former U.S. Rep. Tim Huelskamp, a Republican, signed a $2 million state contract on behalf of the newly formed Kansas Pregnancy Care Network to create an anti-abortion public awareness campaign and deliver resources statewide to encourage women with unplanned pregnancies to give birth. Gov. Laura Kelly had vetoed the appropriation, but was overridden by the 2023 Legislature. 

(Photo by Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector)

Tim Carpenter, 

Kansas Reflector

September 06, 2023

TOPEKA — Kansas awarded a $2 million contract to start a state program aimed at influencing women with unplanned pregnancies to give birth and to accept guidance of a new nonprofit organization directed by some of the state’s most vocal and dedicated opponents of abortion rights.

State Treasurer Steven Johnson, a former Republican member of the Kansas House, was given responsibility by the 2023 Legislature for choosing an entity to launch a statewide public awareness program steering women away from abortion clinics and to provide services useful in carrying a pregnancy to full term. On Tuesday, he confirmed the deal was signed last month and became effective Aug. 23. It allowed the organization to receive a $50,000 cash advance as start-up capital.

The Alternatives to Abortion bill was vetoed by Gov. Laura Kelly, but the GOP-controlled House and Senate overrode the governor.

Johnson selected the Kansas Pregnancy Care Network headquartered in Mission and founded June 30. The nonprofit’s directors include former state Sen. Mary Pilcher-Cook, former U.S. Rep. Tim Huelskamp and Vicki Tiahrt, the wife of former U.S. Rep. Todd Tiahrt. State documents indicated Huelskamp, who served in the Kansas Senate prior to Congress, was named president of Kansas Pregnancy Care Network.

Another director is Ron Kelsey, the president of Planned Parenthood Exposed who claimed the 2022 defeat of the proposed Kansas Constitutional amendment designed to restrict abortion rights could lead to an annual increase of 100,000 abortions in Kansas. His wife, Donna, is executive director of Kansas City Pregnancy Clinic, which operates in Kansas City, Kansas, and provides services the Legislature was targeting with the $2 million.

“I am pleased that a group of Kansans has organized in response to our request for proposals and submitted the successful bid,” Johnson said.

Based on Texas model

Johnson said Kansas Pregnancy Care Network was the only Kansas-based entity to submit a qualified bid to the Kansas Department of Administration. Other bidders were Real Alternatives of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania; Human Condition, of Plano, Texas; and Life Alliance Kansas, of Lawrence.

The state treasurer said the Kansas nonprofit landing the contract would collaborate with the Texas Pregnancy Care Network, which was financed through the Texas Health and Human Services Commission.

In Texas, the program provided women assistance so they could “feel supported and confident in choosing childbirth.” The network in Texas sought to engage with pregnancy support centers, maternity residences, social service agencies and adoption centers to deliver “life-affirming” aid to women and to actively discourage abortion.

“KPCN’s ability to draw on the experience of their affiliated organization in Texas will allow them to hit the ground running in implementing this program as the Legislature intended, serving women facing the difficulties of an unplanned pregnancy,” Johnson said.

State law mandates the Kansas organization submit a report on their activities to the Legislature and Johnson by June 30, 2024.
Transparency ‘crucial’

Pilcher-Cook, who served in the Legislature from 2005 to 2020, said the $2 million would bring to the forefront a network of people with a history of dedicating time and passion to women with unplanned pregnancies. She said women in Kansas deserved the counsel of “trustworthy” organizations.

“It is an honor to work with the state treasurer’s office to support and enhance the efforts of Kansas pregnancy resource centers to empower a woman to welcome her child into the world,” Pilcher-Cook said. “It will be crucial to provide transparency, while ensuring the essential care is provided for these vulnerable women and families.”

Earlier this year, the Kansas governor vetoed a budget provision that earmarked $2 million in the current state budget to an anti-abortion contractor. Kelly said she didn’t believe oversight of a pregnancy program fell within duties of the state’s elected treasurer and expressed concern the Legislature was standing up an organization that would get involved with “largely unregulated pregnancy resource centers.”

“This is not an evidence-based approach or even an effective method for preventing unplanned pregnancies,” Kelly said.

The Legislature voted to override the Democratic governor with the required two-thirds majorities on votes of 29-11 in the Senate and 86-38 in the House.

The GOP-dominated Legislature crafted the legislation after Kansas voters rejected in August 2022 the proposed amendment to the Constitution that would have made it easier for lawmakers to restrict access to abortion.

Supporters of the amendment had sought to nullify a decision by the Kansas Supreme Court identifying a foundational constitutional right to bodily autonomy, which included the right of a woman to terminate or continue a pregnancy. Prior to that statewide vote, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Roe v. Wade decision establishing the nationwide right to abortion.

Kansas Reflector is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Kansas Reflector maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sherman Smith for questions: info@kansasreflector.com. Follow Kansas Reflector on Facebook and Twitter.

Gay conservative podcaster: Republican Party still 'inherently hostile' toward LGTBQ+ Americans

A gay pride march in Baltimore in 2018 

(Creative Commons)

Alex Henderson

September 04, 2023

Over the years, members of Log Cabin and other gay Republican groups have argued that the gay community limits itself by being closely allied with the Democratic Party. And many Democrats have responded that they are naïve to downplay the anti-gay attitudes that are so common in the GOP.

Conservative podcaster Brad Polumbo, who is openly gay, believes that homophobia has grown worse among Republicans than it was during Donald Trump's presidency. During an interview with New York Times opinion writer Jane Coaston published on September 4, Polumbo argued that "the trans debate" has led to an "extreme backlash and reaction on the right, which is catching up to gay rights."

Polumbo told Coaston that the Trump years brought "something of a détente on gay rights issues on the right."

"After Trump was elected president, and despite his many faults on many things," the podcaster noted, "he had a more tolerant approach on gay issues than most Republicans had at that time…. He's a narcissist. So if you like him, whether you're gay or whatever, he'll like you. But he came in saying he was fine with gay marriage."

Polumbo went on to say that the right has long had a division between libertarians and social conservatives.

"I think it's deeply divided, and there's different pockets," Polumbo told Coaston. "There's a pocket of the right that always is and always has been homophobic, that thinks gay people or transgender people are degenerate and disordered. That's part of, although not all of, the Religious Right, I would say. There's a part of the right that's always been pretty socially moderate or libertarian and has been fine with gay people and continues to be fine with gay people."

The podcaster added that "a lot of gay people aren't on board with the excesses of woke politics."

READ MORE:'I was shaken': Gay NY broadcaster fears new 'threats of violence'

"They would be gettable by the GOP if they didn't feel that the Republican Party was inherently hostile to them," Polumbo argued. "A lot of Republicans aren't. But parts of the official party platform still are."

READ MORE:'Homophobia always will be' a key part of 'MAGA populism': journalist

Read Brad Polumbo's full interview with the New York Times at this link (subscription required).

WITH FRIENDS LIKE THESE...

Infamous neo-Nazi blog praises Mayor Adams’ claim that NYC is being ‘destroyed’ by migrant crisiss

New York City Mayor Eric Adams greets students and parents at Concourse Village Elementary School in the Bronx on Jan. 3, 2022.

 - Timothy A. Clary/Getty Images North America/TNS

2023/09/08

NEW YORK — Mayor Eric Adams is receiving praise from some unsavory corners of the internet over his claim that the migrant crisis will “destroy” New York City.

The Daily Stormer, a neo-Nazi blog operated by notorious far right conspiracy theorist Andrew Anglin, published a post Friday that said Adams’ comments made him “based,” a phrase used in online chat forums to describe a proudly unfiltered person.

The post went on to claim that Adams’ remarks were also “insightful.”

Asked whether the mayor’s office wanted to distance itself from the Daily Stormer post, Adams spokeswoman Kayla Mamelak accused the Daily News of “legitimizing Nazi websites.”

“The Adams administration is deeply proud of the compassion and care we’ve provided to more than 110,000 asylum seekers who have come to our city asking for shelter for well over a year now,” Mamelak said. “But, as the mayor has said repeatedly, while our compassion is limitless, our resources are not. We simply cannot continue to do this without substantial support from our state and federal partners, and New Yorkers agree.”

Adams made the controversial comments during a town hall event on Manhattan’s Upper West Side Wednesday evening while lamenting the financial strain the city’s facing from sheltering and providing services for the tens of thousands of mostly Latin American migrants who have arrived since last year.

“I don’t see an ending to this. This issue will destroy New York City — destroy New York City,” Adams said of the crisis. “All of us are going to be impacted by this. I said it last year when we had 15,000 (migrants), and I’m telling you now with 110,000 — the city we knew, we’re about to lose.”

While 110,000 migrants have arrived in the city since spring 2022, less than 60,000 are currently in city-run shelters and emergency housing facilities, according to the latest data from City Hall. Hundreds more migrants are arriving every week, according to City Hall data.

Adams has faced withering criticism over his latest comments about the migrant crisis from fellow Democrats, who say they are xenophobic and dangerous.

In light of the Daily Stormer praise, Sophie Ellman-Golan, communications director for Jews for Racial and Economic Justice, said the mayor should’ve known better than to make his Wednesday comments.

“It was immediately clear that MAGA Republicans appreciated and agreed with the mayor’s anti-immigrant statements. Then Donald Trump approvingly echoed his words,” said Ellman-Golan, whose left-leaning group frequently criticizes the mayor. “And now we see that actual Nazis are also praising the mayor for his xenophobic comments. Division, fear, and the mayor’s billionaire buddies are what pose a threat to New York City — not the newest New Yorkers.”

Natalia Aristizabal, a deputy director of the immigrant advocacy group Make The Road, echoed Ellman-Golan’s sentiment.

“We knew as soon as Mayor Adams spoke yesterday that he was fanning the flames of hate in our city,” she said. “Now there are literal Neo-Nazis praising him for it. Enough is enough, Mr. Mayor: stop the horrifying scapegoating of asylum seekers immediately.”

_____

© New York Daily News

Americans are leaving the church in droves — and these scholars explain why

A Florida megachurch in 2013 (Creative Commons)

Alex Henderson

September 08, 2023

The Christian nationalist movement is not only hoping to coerce Americans into becoming more religious — it is also hoping they will embrace the severe and extreme form of Christianity favored by far-right evangelicals.

But according to the new Jim Davis/Michael Graham book "The Great Dechurching: Who's Leaving, Why Are They Going, and What Will It Take to Bring Them Back?," the opposite is happening. The United States on the whole, David and Graham report, is becoming less churchgoing.

Religion News' Bob Smietana, in an article published on September 7, points out that Davis and Graham offer plenty of data to back up their "dechurching" argument. And they used research conducted by Eastern Illinois University's Ryan Burge and Denison University's Paul Djupe.

Smietana explains, "The dechurching study eventually yielded profiles of different kinds of dechurched Americans: 'cultural Christians,' who attended church in the past but had little knowledge about the Christian faith; 'mainstream evangelicals,' a group of mostly younger dropouts; 'exvangelicals,' an older group who had often been harmed by churches and other Christian institutions; 'dechurched BIPOC Americans,' who were overwhelmingly Black and male; and 'dechurched Mainline Protestants and Catholics,' who had much in common despite their theological differences."

Smietana notes, however, that according to the book, "many dechurched Americans might return to churches if they found a stable and healthy congregation."

Find Religion News Service's full report at this link.

Satanic Planet to perform at Indiana Statehouse following religious freedom spat

Satanic Planet, a band affiliated with The Satanic Temple, will perform at the Indiana Statehouse this month. Above, a sign publicizes the event on an Indianapolis light pole. (Courtesy Riley Phoebus)
Leslie Bonilla Muñiz, Indiana Capital ChronicleSeptember 08, 2023


A band with ties to The Satanic Temple (TST) will perform at Indiana’s Statehouse this month, averting a legal challenge.

Satanic Planet first asked about performing in May, within days of a conservative Christian activist’s prayer rally at the site. After months of back-and-forth — including a legal threat — administrators signed off on the band’s use agreement on Wednesday.

Now, the band — fronted by TST co-founder Lucien Greaves — will perform for an hour at noon on September 28, at the Statehouse’s north atrium, according to the Indiana Department of Administration. The event is free.

“We are beyond thrilled to exercise our fundamental First Amendment rights with such an impactful display of religious pluralism and liberty,” TST Indiana Chapter Congregation Head Riley Phoebus said in a statement to the Capital Chronicle.

The organization, recognized as a church by the federal court and tax systems, advocates for the separation of church and state.

Event modeled after Christian activist’s rally
Satanic Temple-affiliated band cites ‘religious liberty’ in seeking Indiana Statehouse performance



The show is part of TST’s “Let us burn” tour, and it comes after Sean Feucht’s multi-year “Let us worship” tour touched down in Indiana’s capitol building.

Feucht, a preacher-influencer who prayed over former President Donald Trump in the Oval Office in 2019, began his ongoing tour as a protest of pandemic-era restrictions on in-person religious services.

His May 7 stop in Indiana was meant to be outside, but when faced with inclement weather, Lt. Gov. Suzanne Crouch helped get the event inside, according to a Crouch spokesperson.

In video footage of the event, Feucht prayed over Crouch, telling a crowd she’d be “filled with favor” for her efforts.

TST leaders were paying attention — and wanted inside the Statehouse, too.

“Feucht is openly a theocrat who courts the attention of politicians and seeks to proselytize through his performances,” Greaves said in a June news release announcing the band’s performance request. “He has his opinions, and we have ours, but one thing the government can not do is preference his viewpoint over ours by giving him exclusive access to perform a concert on the Capitol grounds.”

“Satan has never had creative ability,” Feucht posted in response. “He only tries to pervert what has already been created.”

Group pushes for permission

By May 11, TST Indiana’s Phoebus had made an initial voicemail inquiry about a Satanic Planet performance to the Indiana Department of Administration’s (IDOA) director of Statehouse events, according to emails obtained by the Indiana Capital Chronicle.

That’s Tracy Jones — who denied the request May 16. After an extended back-and-forth, TST had its legal counsel send a demand letter to the agency on July 5.

Phoebus said that’s when IDOA’s own counsel, John Snethen, asked TST to complete a questionnaire “to process our reservation request.” After that was in, Snethen blocked out time for the event.

That month, Satanic Planet announced its new performance date on X, the platform previously known as Twitter.

By August, TST had signed and submitted its Statehouse use policy agreement. Jones signed off as IDOA’s representative on Wednesday, according to Phoebus.

A campaign to finance the tour surpassed its $15,000 goal and closed. Phoebus thanked supporters in a statement to the Capital Chronicle, adding, “We look forward to seeing you in Indianapolis this month.”

On stage at the Statehouse

Satanic Planet’s lunchtime performance includes an hour before and after for equipment setup and removal, IDOA spokeswoman Molly Timperman wrote Wednesday.

IDOA made no restrictions, accommodations or other policy changes for the event.

“The event organizer must abide by the standard terms and conditions of the Statehouse use agreement and comply with all applicable laws and policies, the same as any event organizer that requests to use public space in the Statehouse,” Timperman wrote.

The event is free to attendees — and the space is free to the band.

“With the exception of weekend leases of the Statehouse for weddings, IDOA does not charge the public to use public spaces and is not charging this event organizer to use a public space,” Timperman wrote.

TST and the band, meanwhile, are getting ready.

“This performance will be different from Satanic Planet’s typical setup to accommodate for the building’s unique sound and to equate Feucht’s performance in terms of instrumentation and noise level,” Phoebus told the Capital Chronicle.

Phoebus said TST has embarked on a social media campaign about the event and spread the word to members across the country.

“We hope to bring the Let Us Burn tour to Capitals all over the nation as a display of religious pluralism and our First Amendment rights,” Phoebus added.

Indiana Capital Chronicle is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Indiana Capital Chronicle maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Niki Kelly for questions: info@indianacapitalchronicle.com. Follow Indiana Capital Chronicle on Facebook and Twitter.

Christian nationalists’ new anti-divorce campaign risks increasing domestic violence: report


Alex Henderson

September 08, 2023

In the past, heated debates about divorce were common among Catholics and Mainline Protestants. Catholics tended to be anti-divorce, while Mainline Protestants (Lutherans, Episcopalians, Presbyterians) were all for marriage counseling but were more likely to believe that divorce was a valid option if a marriage was beyond repair.

But in 2023, an anti-divorce movement is growing among far-right white evangelicals. Journalist Katie Herchenroeder examines the Religious Right's campaign against no-fault divorce in an article published by Mother Jones on September 7. And she warns that this campaign risks encouraging domestic violence.

"The push for no-fault divorce began in California in the 1960s ostensibly to alter a system that required public discussion of wronged parties, infidelity, and other private matters for a legal separation," Herchenroeder explains. "Couples fought bitterly in public; some fabricated fights to get divorce papers. No-fault divorce helped simplify the process."

Critics of no-fault divorce, the journalist notes, have ranged from former Trump Administration official William Wolfe to PragerU/Daily Wire pundit Michael Knowles. And the Texas GOP platform calls for ending no-fault divorce.

But ending no-fault divorce, Herchenroeder warns, would "put even more obstacles in front of" women trying to escape from abusive marriages.

The journalist explains, "The most dangerous time for women experiencing abuse is when they attempt to escape, according to research…. Abusers often isolate their victims, cutting off communication with other family members, friends, and support systems. A 2003 working paper in the National Bureau of Economic Research found that total female suicide declined by around 20 percent in states that allowed one partner to solely push for divorce."

Brooke Axtell of The SAFE Alliance, a Texas-based organization that helps victims of domestic violence, told Mother Jones, "Imagine finally leaving a person who's emotionally and physically assaulted you, betrayed you, violated you — and then being forced to combat them in court, sometimes for years, to prove this just so you can be free of them and claim what belongs to you."

Find Mother Jones' full report at this link.

READ MORE:

Suspect in killing of storeowner over LGBTQ flag was far-right conspiracist who promoted Christian nationalism

CA gov signs executive order to prevent 'mass casualty events and environmental emergencies' by AI

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA - 

 California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during a press conference 

(Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images).

Brandon Gage

September 06, 2023

California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) signed an executive order on Wednesday laying out a plan to regulate the rapidly accelerating advancement of artificial intelligence, which scores of scientists and industry leaders have warned poses an imminent threat to human civilization.

"This is a potentially transformative technology – comparable to the advent of the internet – and we're only scratching the surface of understanding what GenAI is capable of," Newsom said. "We recognize both the potential benefits and risks these tools enable. We're neither frozen by the fears nor hypnotized by the upside. We're taking a clear-eyed, humble approach to this world-changing technology. Asking questions. Seeking answers from experts. Focused on shaping the future of ethical, transparent, and trustworthy AI. Doing what California always does – leading the world in technological progress."

Newsom's office said in a press release that he seeks to maintain the Golden State as the "global hub" for developments across several economic sectors, including "education, innovation, research, development, talent, entrepreneurship, and new technologies."

Within 60 days of issuance of this Order, the Government Operations Agency, the California Department of Technology, the Office of Data and Innovation, and the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development, in collaboration with other State agencies and departments and their workforce, shall draft a report to the Governor examining the most significant, potentially beneficial use cases for deployment of GenAI tools by the State. The report shall also explain the potential risks to individuals, communities, and government and state government workers, with a focus on high-risk use cases, such as where GenAI is used to make a consequential decision affecting access to essential goods and services. Additionally, the report shall include but not be limited to: risks stemming from bad actors and insufficiently guarded governmental systems, unintended or emergent effects, and potential risks toward democratic and legal processes, public health and safety, and the economy. The report shall be regularly assessed for any significant developments or necessary updates and as appropriate, be done in consultation with civil society, academia, industry experts, and the state government workforce or organizations that represent state government employees.

It continues:

No later than March 2024, the California Cybersecurity Integration Center and the California State Threat Assessment Center, both established within the Governor's Office of Emergency Services, and inclusive of the California Department of Technology, the California Military Department, and the California Highway Patrol, shall perform a joint risk analysis of potential threats to and vulnerabilities of California's critical energy infrastructure by the use of GenAI, including those which could lead to mass casualty events and environmental emergencies, and develop, in consultation with external experts as appropriate from civil society, academia, and industry, a strategy to assess similar potential threats to other critical infrastructure. Once this analysis is completed, these agencies shall provide a classified briefing to the Governor and, where appropriate and without divulging classified information, make public recommendations for further administrative actions and/or collaboration with the Legislature to guard against these potential threats and vulnerabilities. These recommendations shall address how to ensure systems are regularly tested and monitored to detect and avoid unintended behavior, and how to ensure they remain under effective human control. At a cadence deemed appropriate by the Governor's Office of Emergency Services, the analysis and public recommendations should be updated to reflect changes to the technology, its applications, and risk management processes and learnings.


Newsom's directive also instructs state agencies to explore "procurement and enterprise use opportunities where GenAI can improve the efficiency, effectiveness, accessibility, and equity of government operations" while considering "relevant stakeholders, including historically vulnerable and marginalized communities, and organizations that represent state government employees, in the development of any guidelines, criteria, reports, and/or training as directed by this Order."

READ MORE: Scientists and tech leaders sign open letter to prioritize 'mitigating the risk of extinction from AI'

Start at the top: Why 'expensive' CEOs should be the first ones replaced by AI

Alex Henderson

September 11, 2023

Back in 1914, the ultimate capitalist CEO, Henry Ford, made an argument that liberals, progressives and union leaders are still echoing in 2023. Ford said, in essence, that workers needed a living wage in order to afford the products he was producing.

Ford's argument still rings true at a time when a wide variety of workers fear that artificial intelligence (AI) will make them unemployed.

In an article published by Business Insider on September 11, reporter Ed Zitron argues that if AI should put anyone out of work, it's CEOs.

"From writers and teachers to bankers and lawyers, most jobs seem ripe to be replaced by artificial intelligence — with one notable exception," Zitron explains. "The only job that seems to be safe from the rise of ChatGPT and other AI tech is, oddly enough, the most expensive and easily automated role: CEO."

The journalist continues, "Chief executives have recently spent a lot of time threatening to replace their lazy, entitled and unproductive workers with AI, but they never seem to face the same level of scrutiny other employees do. Look a little closer, though, and it becomes clear that the role of the modern CEO is not only broken, as I've pointed out before, but it could easily be done by the technology we have now."

Zitron goes on to note that CEOs typically "make over 300 times more than the average worker" despite not being an "actual contributor to a company's bottom line." CEOs, he writes, operate based on "spreadsheets" that are "fed to them by consultants" yet lack a "real understanding of the business."

"The solution is fairly simple: We must hold CEOs accountable in the same way that we do their employees or dissolve the role entirely," Zitron emphasizes. "A chief executive must meaningfully contribute in a way that is measurable and delivers clear value for the company. Failing that, I would argue that the opaque role of the CEO should be the first one to be replaced by artificial intelligence."

Scientists use AI to uncover the deep connection between self-relevance and art appreciation

A team of scientists recently utilized generative AI software to demonstrate a strong link between self-relevance and what people find visually attractive in art. The findings, published in Psychological Science, provide evidence that when a piece of art is connected to something meaningful in our own lives, we’re more likely to perceive it as aesthetically appealing, independent of the specific qualities of the artwork itself.

Aesthetic judgments of faces and natural landscapes tend to be relatively consistent across individuals, but shared taste in art accounts for only a small percentage (10% to 20%) of reliable variance in aesthetic ratings. This suggests that there is a substantial amount of variability in how people perceive and appreciate art.

The researchers hypothesized that an essential factor in determining the aesthetic appeal of art is its capacity to resonate with an individual’s self-construct. They propose that artworks that speak to a person’s self-schema, which includes their self-perception, past experiences, and personal identity, are more likely to be aesthetically appealing to that individual.

“Aesthetics affect so many aspects of our lives. Not only what we buy, who we spend time with, or where we live or go on vacation, but also in small and big ways every day,” said study author Edward A. Vessel, the Eugene Surowitz Assistant Professor of Psychology at the City College of New York.

“The aesthetics of our environment affect how we feel, how we heal, and how we relate. Aesthetics reflect more than just whether something is “pretty”, but really tell us about how well the world fits, or doesn’t fit, our _model_ of the world.”

“There’s been a flurry of work recently showing that when you use the most sophisticated machine-learning models available, you can predict a degree of aesthetic appeal from the features of images (though I would note that even in this work, those ‘features’ that are most predictable are in fact really-high level meanings that we, as a culture, agree on). But it’s clear that, especially with artwork, people can have really unique tastes that differ a lot from ‘average’ ratings of appeal.”

“We wanted to try to get inside people’s heads and understand what internal representations lead to such divergent aesthetic tastes. This led us to start doing research on self-relevance: how much a particular image or experience relates to your self-construct.”

The researchers conducted a series of three experiments to investigate the relationship between self-relevance and aesthetic appeal.

The first two experiments, which included 33 German-speaking participants recruited through a research participant database maintained by the Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics and 208 English-speaking participants recruited online via Prolific, aimed to establish whether there was a relationship between aesthetic ratings of visual art and self-relevance judgments.

In the first experiment, the participants viewed a diverse selection of artwork, spanning various time periods, styles, and cultures. After viewing each image, the participants indicated the extent to which something in the art related “to you, your experiences, or your identity” (self-relevance) and how “moved” they were by artwork (aesthetic appeal). The second experiment followed a similar procedure, with slightly different questions.

In both experiments, the researchers found a strong and positive relationship between individual ratings of self-relevance and aesthetic appeal. Despite differences in which artworks participants personally found appealing or self-relevant, the correlation between these two measures was robust.

Next, Vessel and his colleagues aimed to further investigate the relationship between self-relevance and aesthetic appeal using novel AI-created artworks. To do this, they used a deep convolutional neural network to perform style transfer on existing artworks, creating new synthetic artworks with personalized content based on each participant’s responses to a questionnaire. These new artworks were designed to be highly controlled for both content and style, without explicitly asking participants about self-relevance.

The experiment involved 40 German-speaking participants aged 18 to 55. The participants first completed a Cultural Background and Lifestyle Questionnaire that assessed “significant locations associated with autobiographical experiences, aspects of their personal identity, and personal interests in topics such as the arts, style, and cuisine.”

The participants were then paired with others whose questionnaire responses were sufficiently divergent to create self-relevant and other-relevant images. They then viewed and rated a total of 80 artworks, divided into four conditions:
Real Artwork: 20 paintings selected from a diverse set of styles, genres, periods, and cultural origins.
AI-Generated Control Artwork: 20 novel artworks created using the style-transfer algorithm. These were the same for all participants.
AI-Generated Self-Relevant Artwork: 20 artworks uniquely generated for each participant based on their responses to the Cultural Background and Lifestyle Questionnaire.
AI-Generated Other-Relevant Artwork: 20 artworks generated for each participant’s paired partner, with matching artistic styles but different content.

The researchers found that participants rated the AI-generated self-relevant artworks as significantly more self-relevant compared to other categories of artworks. This confirmed that the manipulation of self-relevance was successful.

Importantly, artwork generated from self-relevant content were consistently rated as significantly more aesthetically appealing than matched other-relevant artwork and AI-generated control artwork. This finding further supported the idea that the subjective, personal connection individuals have with artworks plays a crucial role in shaping their aesthetic judgments.

“The primary finding is pretty straightforward,” Vessel told PsyPost. “When an image contains self-relevant content, such as things that relate to memories about yourself, to how you identify, or to your core life experiences (e.g. where you grew up), a person tends to like it more. But someone else with different life experiences, will tend to like the same image less.”

“We think this works because self-relevant content acts like a map or a key. It allows a person to unlock deeper levels of meaning, even when the art is actually about someone else’s experience. And this makes the experience more pleasurable, because we are learning about the world, about ourselves, and about our relationship to the world.”

The researchers also classified AI-generated self-relevant artworks into different subclasses based on the nature of the questionnaire items from which they were derived. They found that artworks related to specific autobiographical memories, aspects of personal identity, expressed preferences, and interests were rated as most appealing. However, artworks related to common activities did not show the same effect.

“I think these results are really interesting for several reasons,” Vessel said. “In addition to their usefulness for understanding a basic aspect of human experience, they also point the way to how we might create more impactful art therapies, which are increasingly being recognized as an effective and cost efficient tool for addressing physical and mental health challenges.”

“But they also present a cautionary tale about the increasing use of AI by tech and media companies to generate self-relevant content from models of their consumers,” the researcher added. “Personalized content is hard to turn away from, and in this way, has the potential to be addictive and maladaptive. We need to recognize this potential for harm and consider public policies for protecting consumers from a digital version of Harry Potter’s ‘Mirror of Erised,’ serving us an idealized view of ourselves and our world.”

The study, “Self-Relevance Predicts the Aesthetic Appeal of Real and Synthetic Artworks Generated via Neural Style Transfer“, was authored by Edward A. Vessel, Laura Pasqualette, Cem Uran, Sarah Koldehoff, Giacomo Bignardi, and Martin Vinck.

2023/09/08
© PsyPost

The most American pop culture phenomenon of them all

Photo by Jason Rosewell on Unsplash

The Conversation

September 06, 2023

“American Idol” was “born” exactly nine months after 9/11. The timing was significant, because since its premiere on June 11, 2002, the show has become an integral part of the country’s coping strategy – a kind of guidebook for our difficult entry into the 21st century.

By carefully curating a distinctly American mix tape of music, personal narratives and cultural doctrine, “American Idol” has painted a portrait of who we think we are, especially in the aftermath of tragedy, war and economic turmoil.

As the show concludes after 15 seasons, it’s worth looking at how the past and present collided to create a cultural phenomenon – and how we’re seeing shades of the show’s influence in today’s chaotic presidential race.
All our myths bundled into one

“American Idol”‘s premise – the idea that an ordinary person might be recognized as extraordinary – is firmly rooted in a national myth of meritocracy.

This national narrative includes the dime-novel, rags-to-riches fairy tales of Horatio Alger, which were intended to uplift Americans struggling to get by after the Civil War. Then there was the American Dream catchphrase – first coined in 1931 by James Truslow Adams in his book The Epic of America – that promoted an ideal of economic mobility during the hopeless years of the Depression.

Indeed, decades before host Ryan Seacrest handed out his first golden ticket to the first golden-throated farm girl waiting tables while waiting to be “discovered,” we’d been going to Hollywood in our dreams and on screen.

The show has shown us archetypes of immigrant narratives, like when Season Three contestant Leah Labelle spoke of her Bulgarian family’s defection to North America during Communist rule. It has demonstrated how to rely on faith in the face of hardship, exemplified by Fantasia Barrino’s victory song, “I Believe,” performed with a gospel choir. Meanwhile, it served as a stage for patriotic passion, broadcasting two performances of Lee Greenwood’s “God Bless the U.S.A.” when the United States entered Iraq in 2003. Meanwhile, the many “Idol Gives Back” specials remind us of American philanthropic values.

The show has celebrated failure as both a necessary stumbling block and a launchpad to fame. Many singers needed to audition year after year before they earned their chance to compete. For others, such as William Hung, their televised rejection brought fame and opportunity anyway.

For contestant William Hung, fame blossomed out of failure.

“American Idol” has also served as a course in American music history, featuring discrete genres like Southern soul and Southern rock, together with newer, blurrier categories like pop-country and pop-punk.

Making the old new again

In one sense, “American Idol”’s format was nothing new. In fact, British entertainment executives Simon Fuller and Simon Cowell – who shepherded in a 21st-century version of the “British Invasion” – fashioned their juggernaut show as a new take on old business models.

There is something distinctly American about contestants standing in a Ford-sponsored spotlight, judges sipping from Coca-Cola glasses, and viewers sitting in front of television screens texting their votes on AT&T phones. The show’s conspicuous commercialization recalls the earliest days of television, when programs were owned and produced by advertisers. And “Idol,” like that early programming, was intended to be “appointment television,” bringing families together at the same time every week.

“Idol”’s production model is also a throwback. It’s structured like Berry Gordy’s Motown – a one-stop fame factory that offers stars a package of coaching, polishing, a band, album production and promotion.

The format also draws from amateur regional and national radio competitions of the early 20th century. (Frank Sinatra got his start winning one on “Major Bowe’s Amateur Hour” in 1935, with the Hoboken Four.) Another influence is the half-ridiculous and totally political “Eurovision Song Contest,” the hugely popular and mercilessly mocked annual televised event that pits nation against nation in (almost) friendly singing competition.
A vote that counts?

“Eurovision,” which originated in 1955 as a test of transnational network capabilities and postwar international relations, introduced telephone voting a few years before “Idol” premiered.

And like Eurovision, the impact of “American Idol” extends far beyond our annual crowning of a new pop star. The show’s rise has taken place at a time when the boundaries between entertainment, politics and business have become increasingly blurred.

Season after season, “American Idol” fans have placed votes for their favorite contestants – options which, somewhat like our presidential candidates, have been carefully cultivated by a panel of industry experts looking for a sure bet.

The initial success of “Idol” heralded not only an era of similar television programming, but also a new era in which we’re given the opportunity to “vote,” whether it’s for dum-dum pop flavors or the world’s most influential people.

Considering these trends, it’s not so farfetched to suggest that the wild popularity of shows like “American Idol” played some role in setting the blinding chrome stage and slightly “pitchy” tone for this year’s election.

It isn’t just that Donald Trump presided over “The Apprentice,” a reality competition that rode in on “American Idol”’s coattails.

His persona also seems to meet the same sadistic public need satisfied by original “Idol” judge Simon Cowell: the executive heir, the imperious arbiter of taste who owes his fortune at least as much to his superiority complex as to any financial acumen. At the same time, personas like Cowell and Trump deign to give an ordinary, hardworking American a chance.

That conceit, though, is mitigated cleverly by both moguls: they capitalize on what Cowell has identified as a universal desire to feel important.

The crux of their personal appeal is that they understand that everyone wants to matter, and we are willing – as TV viewers or as citizens – to risk an awful lot just to feel like we do. We each want to imagine our own sky-high potential, and laugh in relief when we see others who will never get off the ground. We want to be judge and jury, but also be judged and juried.

“Idol” gives Americans permission to judge each other, to feel like our opinion makes a difference. Trump’s unfiltered rhetoric has done something similar, giving his supporters implicit and sometimes explicit permission to mock, dismiss, exclude and even attack others based on racial and ethnic identity, religion or ability.

And so now, as “Idol” makes its final journey from Studio 36 to the Dolby Theatre, we deliberate over whose victory will herald the last “Seacrest – out.”

Whatever happens, and whichever way our presidential election goes, the U.S. is on the brink of something new, a major cultural shift. Wherever we’re going, “Idol” has served its purpose, and we don’t need it in the same desperate way anymore.

I think, though, that we’ll always be searching for the next big thing. And we’ll always be glad we had a moment like this.

Kelly Clarkson, the first winner of American Idol, performs ‘A Moment Like This.’

Katherine Meizel, Assistant Professor of Ethnomusicology, Bowling Green State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.