Photo by Prem Pal Singh on Pexels.com

Cristel Antonia Russell (American University Kogod School of Business) has written an intriguing article about the prevalence of teenagers drinking in movies and television. In her article From ‘Pretty Little Liars’ to ‘The OC,’ television producers need to stop encouraging teen drinking – here’s how they can Russell writes, “you don’t have to look hard to find 16-year-olds sneaking a drink from a flask or getting drunk at a party.”

She explained this phenomena:

The majority of TV shows teens watch depict characters drinking alcohol, often heavily, with few negative consequences. Sometimes, alcohol brands that appear are placed there purposefully by alcohol companies.

Alcohol companies are prohibited from advertising their products to teenagers on billboard near schools or buying commercial time during programs in which the majority of the audience is under 21. But there isn’t an explicit ban on paying to have their brand appear in a television show. This practice is called product placement.

In the United States, alcohol promotion is largely regulated through voluntary industry marketing codes. These codes forbid alcohol advertising in media, including digital media, where 28% of the projected audience is under 21.

In the absence of independent oversight, alcohol companies have long realized that product placement provides a relatively easy way to get around these regulations, to the increasing worry of consumer advocates.

Alcohol is one of the most actively placed product categories in Hollywood TV programs and movies. The growth of product placement consistently outpaces that of traditional advertising.

She produced trial programs that were funded by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Some of the episodes which included teen drinking had epilogues that featured the main character correcting the pro-drinking message in the story.

Half the participants saw the epilogue in which a main character talked directly to the camera to say: “What you see on TV is not real. You do not need to drink to look cool and fit in.” The other half saw the episode without an epilogue.

Though viewers who were immersed in the pro-alcohol story line reported more favorable attitudes toward drinkers and higher drinking intentions following the episode, we also found a hopeful outcome.

The epilogue was able to correct this influence, but only for viewers who were aware that they were being persuaded to buy a product. In other words, the epilogue had the most corrective power for those viewers who were both transported by the story and recognized someone was selling them something.

Is there any wonder that under-aged drinking is so prevalent at schools such as the University of Alabama, which has a strict policy about alcohol use? Just as the producers of mass entertainment profit from the promotion of under-aged drinking, the providers of alcohol in Tuscaloosa also find the temptation of “easy money” hard to resist.

The legacy of the 1978 movie Animal House has been eclipsed by the ubiquitous depiction of teen drinkers in popular media. Perhaps that is why the idea of free limo rides and booze for students that voted in the Tuscaloosa school board election in 2013 didn’t seem so far fetched?

Photo by rawpixel.com on Pexels.com

Alexander C. Kafka’s article “Colleges Have Anti-Drinking Rules on the Books, but Which Ones Actually Work?” in the Chronicle of Higher Education reported on the research that was published in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research. The conclusions of the study include:

Among strategies that work best, the researchers say, are prohibiting alcohol in public places on the campus (including sports arenas) and at student-organization recruitment events, as well as banning tailgating, drinking games, and alcohol delivery to the campus. Rules like that, the report’s authors say, not only restrict alcohol consumption but also are “likely to influence social norms around drinking.” Banning drinking at events like recruiting events in the fall “sets the normative tone for the school year.”

Also important, the study suggests: Make sure students know exactly what consequences will follow which infractions. And make sure they know that if they’re cited or arrested off campus by the local police, the college will be notified.

Penalties deemed to work best have a “strong, population-wide deterrent effect,” the report says. Those include “student-organization probation and loss of student-organization status.”

Less effective, but still useful as part of a “ ‘package’ of graduated sanctions,” are suspension and probation. “Because of their severity and the extended deliberative process often required to enforce them,” they “become less swift and certain.”

The University of Alabama’s alcohol policy, if strictly enforced, would certainly curtail illegal, under-aged drinking on campus.

Kafka’s article continues:

For students to heed colleges’ alcohol rules, they have to be able to find and understand them. That’s a problem. Alcohol policies for colleges in the Maryland group could generally be found by students within 30 seconds, although the rules were spread out across multiple locations instead of just one web page.

But colleges need to simplify the language in those policies. Even the clearest rules, the study found, “would be considered difficult, confusing, and best understood by someone with at least some college education.”

He points out that the success of enforcement strategies was “deemed beyond the scope of this study.”

This nationwide problem will only be successfully dealt with when individual educational institutions begin to access how they are enforcing their own policies. Alabama’s Capstone of higher education has an opportunity to be a vanguard by enforcing its own policies.

Photo by Isabella Mendes on Pexels.com

An Atlantic article “Why It Matters Where College Students Binge-Drink” by Ashley Fetters claims that “hot spots” where binge drinking occurs are associated with campus date rape.

Some might argue that individual students’ misconduct is more to blame for sexual assault than any frat house or party hot spot. But according to a new study published in the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, party locations do play a role in increasing the frequency of sexually aggressive behavior. The study followed the partying and hookup behaviors of more than 1,000 straight men over four semesters, from the beginning of their freshman year. It found that men’s attendance at “drinking venues”—that is, bars and parties—was a better predictor of their sexual aggression than simply binge-drinking or enthusiastic attitudes toward casual sex.

The study’s authors “point to the need for better supervision—and enforcement—on the parts of bar owners and university administrators.”

At the University of Alabama where most students are too young to legally drink and there is a strict alcohol policy you might expect that fraternities would not become “drinking venues.” The question would be: Is there any significant enforcement of the Capstone’s policy on under-aged drinking and alcohol on campus?

On other campuses quite often action has been taken by University administrations only when a death due to “hazing” has resulted from alcohol use. But sometimes sexual assaults are involved as well as in the case at the University of Texas where a moratorium on all social activities by fraternities and sororities was issued.

CNN‘s 2015 documentary “The Hunting Ground” provided a harrowing look at campus sexual assaults. Indiana University’s Elizabeth Armstrong said, “Clearly there are men who think it is OK to have sex with a woman who is very intoxicated, even passed out.”

Banning fraternities outright would be one way to cope with the epidemic of college date rapes.  Swarthmore, after protests by its students over a “rape attic” and a “rape tunnel” at a fraternity on campus, has recently closed all of its fraternities. The Pennsylvania college has yet to end its leases with fraternities.

At the University of Alabama, where its Greek life is such an important campus tradition, such a ban would irreparably damage the school’s character. A better idea would be to increase enforcement of the University’s own policies and also the city codes on under-aged alcohol use.

Before the apartment that is now called University House on 15th Street and 10th Avenue was approved by the Tuscaloosa Planning and Zoning Commission there was a discussion of a sidewalk that crossed the railroad tracks being built. Much was made at the Commission meeting about the complex being accessible to the University of Alabama’s campus by students who choose to walk.

Apparently nothing had been done to establish the viability of constructing the sidewalk before the apartment was approved. A city official explained it in this way: “The walkway across the railroad tracks on 10^th Avenue was not approved by the railroad – the Planning Commission didn’t have the authority to require them to construct that walkway across a private entity like the railroad.”

According to a  member of the Planning and Zoning Commission the $100,000 that had been provided to build the sidewalk was refunded to the developer.

There is an old narrow sidewalk on the other side of 10th Avenue from where the apartments are located. It winds its way across the tracks in a serpentine fashion around the railroad crossing signal.  Asphalt covers the area where the the railroad tracks are crossed.

Many students prefer to walk on the ground and in the street to get to the apartments rather than walk on the existing sidewalk and cross the street at the traffic signal. The railroad put a “No Trespassing” sign in the area.

The phenomena of students preferring not to use sidewalks was commented on by a student leader. It was said that in one area near the campus students were known to “choose to cross the street and walk where there is no sidewalk rather than stay on the side with a sidewalk.” Hopefully a student who is paying more attention to a cellphone than traffic on the unlit path to the apartments will not be hit by a car.

Another dangerous place for pedestrians to cross the street was where the Hugh Thomas Bridge met University Boulevard  in Tuscaloosa’s downtown. For some inexplicable reason the speed limit on the bridge had been 55 MPH whereas the speed limit on either side of the bridge on Lurleen Wallace Boulevard was 45 MPH.

Since there is a rise in the bridge as drivers approached University Boulevard, the traffic signal at the junction of the bridge and boulevard could not be seen until vehicles were near the end of the bridge. Since this was considered unsafe, the speed limit for the  bridge before the rise was been lowered to 45MPH. And the lower speed limit, which was previously not posted on the boulevard for over a block after crossing the bridge, is now posted at the end of the bridge. It is now less likely that pedestrians crossing with the signal will be hit by someone driving at a faster speed limit. Theoretically the driver who has slowed down will now be able to better observe the traffic signal and come to a stop. Why the speed limit on the rest of the bridge remains at 55MPH, when the speed limit before the bridge is ten miles per hour lower, has no reasonable explanation. In a letter to the editor in the Tuscaloosa News the former City Engineer suggested that some drivers might be expected to drive at 60MPH in a a 55MPH zone.

As a way to reduce the number of pedestrians who were walking on University Boulevard and crossing at the intersection of the bridge, there were discussions years ago at Planning and Zoning Commission meetings of there being a walkway that ran behind the residential buildings located on the boulevard.

A city official has given an update on this: “The ongoing Lurleen Wallace project includes a walkway under the bridges connecting the 4th Street / Greensboro Ave intersection to near the Home 2 Suites. Sidewalks that branch from that walkway will connect to the amphitheater and University Boulevard.  The City and ALDOT are sharing in the cost of this work.”

At some time in the future the walkway that was discussed at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting may come to pass. Someone who attended the meetings could well be forgiven for thinking that the walkway as well as the sidewalk on 10th Avenue were conditions for the approval of projects. Some of the ideas that are tossed out at the meetings are spontaneous. And the Commission is limited on making any conditions for approval of projects. In the end the City Council makes the decisions.

The nomination process for Brett Kavanaugh to become a member of the Supreme Court has been complicated by tales of his alleged bad behavior as a teenager under the influence of alcohol.

Matthew Yglesias’ Vox article “Brett Kavanaugh’s slippery answers about high school partying matter” addresses the inconsistency of Kavanaugh’s claims:

Dogged by an accusation of a sexual assault in high school and pressed to defend his character, Brett Kavanaugh went on Fox News with a curious strategy. Instead of owning up to his high school drinking habits, he told what appear to be lies.

Kavanaugh insinuated that he never drank when he was underage, saying on Fox that when he was a senior, the “drinking age was 18, and yes, the seniors were legal and had beer there.”

Not only is this not true with regard to the legal drinking age in Maryland at the time, it’s also extremely hard to square with the portrait he otherwise paints of himself as a hard-partying kid. Thirty-five years ago he seemed to have joked in his yearbook about being the treasurer of the Keg City Club, and in 2015 he quipped that “what happens at Georgetown Prep stays at Georgetown Prep.”

Obviously if we disqualified people from high office for having engaged in underage drinking or some youthful drunken antics, we’d have a very hard time staffing the government. The mere fact that Kavanaugh drank to excess in high school is not relevant to whether he is fit to serve on the Supreme Court. And it certainly doesn’t prove that he sexually assaulted anyone.

Drinking to excess is unhealthy and sets the stage for potentially illegal activity, including unsafe driving and violence. However, it’s hardly unforgivable and certainly not proof that Kavanaugh committed any of the serious offenses against women that have been charged. The disparity between Kavanaugh’s statements about his high school activities and the apparent facts, however, does raise a serious question about his honesty.

Whether or not Kavanaugh sexually assaulted his accuser Christine Blasey Ford, the role of under-aged drinking has been brought to the forefront of national consciousnesses by media coverage of his nomination.

As bad as the problem of under-aged drinking in high school may be, such drinking in college seems to be a quantum step worse. As high as one in five women are sexually assaulted on college campuses. The use of alcohol is integral to this kind of abusive behavior.

It has been alleged that an inebriated Kavanaugh was involved in a gang rape in high school and indecent exposure at his Yale fraternity.

The MeToo movement has brought out that there is a national problem with sexual harassment and sexual assault.  Time magazine’s 2017 “person of the year”  featured victims of sexual assault who “broke the silence.”

Will the publicity on under-aged drinking problems brought about by the Kavanaugh nomination result in a greater awareness of a societal problem as serious as sexual assault involving under-aged drinking?  Wouldn’t a campaign to tackle such under-aged drinking be one of the most effective ways to reduce sexual assault?

At institutions of higher education such as the University of Alabama under-aged drinking is strictly prohibited on campus. Such a recognition of the problems associated with under-aged drinking is one step in curtailing sexual assault and other alcohol related problems. More effective community enforcement of the laws that prohibit under-aged drinking in conjunction with the University’s policy is needed to enhance the health and safety of University students.

An article “Binge drinking and blackouts: Sobering truths about lost learning” in The Conversation by Jamie Smolen (Associate Professor of Medicine, University of Florida) reported:

Tens of thousands of college students nationwide will cheer for their football teams this weekend. Some of those who show up for the game after tailgate drinking may not remember the highlight touchdowns that they cheered so loudly for. Others may have trouble remembering even a rousing celebration of victory. Binge drinking, the leading type of alcohol misuse for college students, is the culprit. Drinking too much too fast can cause memory loss, sometimes called a blackout, erasing any recollection of an enjoyable life event.

What’s more, research is suggesting that binge drinking in the college brain can impair not only learning but memorizing. Deficiencies in both of these crucial neurocognitive processes would probably make studying very difficult, and far less productive. In such a case, maintaining a high academic standing might be impossible.

While many young people may euphemistically refer to binge drinking as “partying,” those of us who study addiction know that it is a serious health risk for young people. We have long known of the immediate risks from assault, death by motor vehicle and suicide linked to drinking. But the effects of binge drinking affect learning inside and outside the classroom and can have adverse effects on making successful transitions throughout life.

Binge drinking can have an immediate and neurotoxic effect on the still developing and susceptible college-age brain. And, the damage done by heavy drinking can worsen from one party to the next, harming the brain at an accelerating pace beyond what would be expected from chronic dependence on alcohol. When a heavy episode of drinking has ended, and the hangover has cleared, there is still a great concern about the neurological insults that can interfere with the accumulation of text book and classroom facts. It can result in neurocognitive deficits that are likely to cause serious academic problems. Beyond that, if a young vulnerable brain is subjected to four years of undergraduate partying, the development of maturational skill sets, necessary for a more successful shift into adulthood, may be impeded.

What has been a common, expected and celebrated relationship with alcohol for college students should continue to be viewed with great concern. Enough of the facts are in from neurobiological research to understand that alcohol has a substantial impact on the brain’s ability to transfer information into long-term memory. Binge drinking students experiencing blackouts could be compromising an opportunity to take advantage of a great education and perhaps diminish the probability of the success they anticipate.

The University of Alabama has a strict policy on under-aged drinking:

Individuals under 21 years of age are not permitted to consume alcohol or be in possession of alcohol. Alcohol paraphernalia (which includes but is not limited to: empty beer cans or bottles, shot glasses, etc.) are prohibited and considered a violation of policy.

The University of Alabama’s quest for academic excellence can most certainly be derailed by students who have their ability to learn impaired by alcohol use.

According to a recent Sports Illustrated article “College Football Gameday Safety” the University of Alabama had the most police incidents on gamedays in the nation:

Sports Illustrated compiled campus police records from 33 of the biggest football schools in the country to determine the number and type of incidents that occurred across campus during each gameday of the 2017 season. The results […] are an illustration of college football gameday misconduct and provide a look into the safety of campuses during tailgate season across the country.

The average total number of police incidents on campus on gamedays was 139.4 incidents. Alabama led the group of schools with the most total number of police incidents on campus on gamedays with 448, while N.C. State reported the highest incident rate among the schools.

Typically, a higher number of reported incidents was correlated with a stricter policy on underage alcohol enforcement and the schools with the highest incident rates reported hundreds of alcohol-related incidents. Universities on the opposite end of the spectrum—those reporting 50 incidents or less over the season—reported markedly lower numbers of alcohol offenses.

Information for the article was derived from daily police logs:

Due to the Clery Act, schools are required to publish a daily police log of all occurrences on campus. Sports Illustrated obtained these records online or directly from university police departments, then pulled data for each gameday.

The article pointed out that:

The main incident linked to students is widespread underage drinking on gamedays.

The University of Alabama has a strict policy on under-aged drinking.

The University’s #1 ranking may have little to do with student behavior. Most of the fans are not students. After all the population of Tuscaloosa, Alabama (99,543 in 2016), where the University is located, swells to twice that number on big gamedays.

The sheer size of the number of football fans in town may be the reason for the number one ranking in incidents on gamedays in T-Town.