Brian Williams and the Cultural Context in Which We Live

There has been a great deal of interest in well-respected NBC newscaster Brian Williams’ revelation that he “misspoke” about an incident 15 years earlier, when he was covering the war in Iraq. The details of the incident are not as important as the fact that Williams had told his viewers, over the years and in different settings, that the helicopter in which he was riding came under fire when, actually, it had not.

Because Williams was such a celebrity, with more than 9,000,000 viewers nightly, this story attracted much more interest than similar news involving lesser public figures. Now, Williams has been suspended from NBC while they sort out what actually happened. Some believe that he also exaggerated what he saw in New Orleans while he was reporting on Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath. By the way, he was one of the only national reporters to be there.

This is neither an attempt to further vilify or to be an apologist for Williams. There has clearly been a failure of leadership in Williams’ reporting. However, his gross exaggeration is neither an isolated event in the history of celebrities, nor is it uncommon. In our culture of seeking bigger, better and more, there seems to be a general propensity to be dissatisfied with what we have, where we are in life and with ourselves, in general. The use of exaggeration to buoy our personal stock happens regularly as we try to “one-up” our colleagues, friends and, especially, our enemies.

Exaggeration is also common in the world of business, with companies whose CEOs have allowed the overstating of profits or minimizing and rationalizing shortfalls in order to benefit their company’s stock price. A recent example of this includes the SEC fining Office Depot $1 million for overstating earnings in 2010. Other examples of companies guilty of financial irregularities include WorldCom, Tyco, Global Crossing, Enron and Adelphia. These financial irregularities were particularly true before the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation that gave the notion of a CEO in pinstripes a different meaning! The root problem in all of these situations involves similar attempts to pretend to be something more than we are.

As David Brooks noted in an op-ed piece regarding the Brian Williams’ faux pas, “…no matter how high you go in life and no matter how many accolades you win, it’s never enough. The desire for even more admiration races ahead. Career success never really satisfies. Public love always leaves you hungry. Even very famous people can do self-destructive things in an attempt to seem just a little cooler” (New York Times, Feb. 10). After the Williams revelation, the Huffington Post cited NBC as promoting a culture where newsroom reporters became more celebrities than they were journalists such as Edward R. Morrow and Walter Cronkite.

Williams was subject to a most basic of human deceits, the misplacing of personal value. When we value ourselves on the basis of our accomplishments and not on the basis of our intrinsic value, we are on a slippery slope indeed! At the root of this is what noted theologian John Claypool called “casting the sideways glance.” There is always someone more—and less—successful, wealthier (except, I guess Bill Gates), smarter, more attractive, more charismatic, who has a nicer house or car or more accomplished offspring. In other words, this “casting the sideways glance” always leads to misery and an unending cycle of despair. I am getting depressed just writing this!

To confuse what we have, or have accomplished, with who we are is a misplaced, but common—unfortunately, accepted and, even, rewarded—belief. The feeling of being perpetually dissatisfied with what we have or who we are begins early. Go to any youth sports event and watch parents cheering for their children. You do not see parents shouting out “have fun,” “enjoy your time on the field,” “be nice to the players on the other team.” When children score, parents admonish them to do it again. If one score is good, then two is twice as good and so on. When the child does not score, get a hit or block a shot, the parents admonish these “underachieving” children to practice more or try harder so that then can do better next time.

In a similar manner, our preoccupation of pushing children to get good grades to get into the best schools becomes an obsession. Children always take their cues from their parents, so getting better grades becomes an outcome in itself rather than being rooted in enjoying learning. The joy of learning becomes sabotaged by the pursuit of a perfect report card. This skewed pursuit of grades is further reinforced when children overhear their parents brag to other parents about their accomplishments (or lament when their grades have lagged).

To be sure, most parents are well-intentioned. They want what is best for their children. They want to give them every advantage in life so they can be successful and happy. However, these well-intentioned parents are operating on a fundamentally flawed assumption about happiness and contentment: the assumption that, if one of something is good, more of the same thing can only be better. Then if more is better, you will be happier. This false premise creates insecurity about what we have and who we are, adding to the fallacy that “the grass is greener on the other side of the fence.” This desire to have more is deeply rooted and very difficult to overcome once its hooks have taken hold. Such desire is pursued in the name of happiness and, as Harvard psychologist Dan Gilbert has observed, our mind works in such a way that each time we experience success, we simply move the goalposts. If happiness is on the other side of success, we can never get there! (Stumbling onto Happiness, 2006). Wasn’t this the dilemma that Brian Williams faced?

There is very clear research on happiness by a number of sources. Multi-year studies carried out with a variety of populations, including entire countries, have determined that there is only a slight relationship between financial success and happiness. This relationship is linear, up to the point where people are able to cover basic needs with their level of income. Below this level, there is a lower degree of happiness as people struggle to have basic needs met. However, once this level is met there is not an appreciable increase in happiness for a commensurate increase in financial accumulation. This research has been repeated time and again with the same results. The same is true for success in getting a new position, new car or a beautiful home. The enjoyment of the success is short-lived and, once the thrill of the new success or acquisition has abated, people return to their previous levels of happiness, rather than a higher level of happiness.

If it is not financial success that makes for happiness, it must be living in great circumstances, or having the position and status that Williams achieved—right? According to this line of thinking, those that have lost significant positions, influence, freedom and even significant physical capabilities should see life as less happy than those who have not lost such things. However, Dan Gilbert has provided many anecdotal accounts of individuals who have lost their jobs, their status, all of their lottery winnings, been to prison and lost opportunities to be rich or famous or had significant physical losses. Innumerable such people claim that their misfortune were blessings in disguise. These individuals believed that their lives were better because of their significant losses. These examples fly in the face of what we, as a society, believe about the link between success and happiness. Contrary to what most people believe, psychologist Sonja Lyubomirsky has estimated that only 10% of a person’s happiness is derived from external circumstances. The other 90% is determined by their internal world or the way their mind processes the world (The How of Happiness, 2007). To quote Shakespeare’s Hamlet, “There is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so.” If we want to be happy, we must reverse the formula for happiness and success.

So what is a person to do? What does account for happiness, if not financial success, comfortable circumstances, elevated position or status? A new field of Positive Psychology has emerged in the past 20 years that has addressed this very issue. In the research conducted by psychologist Martin Seligman and his associates at the University of Pennsylvania, they have found three unique and intuitive areas that contribute to happiness.

Their first conclusion was that people who experience happiness are those that want what they have, rather than having they want. People who are content with what they have and are not seeking more, better or different have been found to have a level of happiness that is significantly greater than the population as a whole.

The second conclusion from this research is that happiness and deep satisfaction are found when you extend yourself on behalf of another, through either acts of service or generosity. In several clever research studies looking at the relationship between getting and giving, the results are unequivocal that those people who share what they have with others experience a level of personal satisfaction that is greater than those that do not. Giving fundamentally changes how people view themselves and their positive connectedness to others provides great contentment.

The final conclusion had to do with maintaining an attitude of gratitude. People with the ability to regularly reflect on those things, or experiences, for which they are grateful are happier than those who do not take the time to appreciate what they have. Whether it is family, friends or flowers, the ability to appreciate the benefits of everyday life seems to be a key to having contentment and happiness. When looking at ratings of general happiness in various countries, the United States is far down that list, and countries such as Mexico rise to the top!

This takes us back to Brian Williams and his false statement. In a society and culture that mistakenly believes that achievement, acquisitions, power and status bring ultimate happiness, we are all at risk for exaggeration and “puffing-up” our accomplishments to get the accolades of our friends, family and, even, competition. When we look in the mirror to see our own tendency to exaggerate or lie, we can be less critical of others’ tendency to do the same. Being our best selves resides in accepting who we are honestly and facing life with authenticity. Adding money, status and power will not move the needle in our quest for happiness. Wow!