Not a member? Sign up now
Is Dr. Drew exploiting addicts?
By Jeff MillsApril 20th, 2011, 12:30 pmComments (15)
Former Guns N' Roses bassist Duff McKagan, a recovering addict, recently bashed the VH1 reality show Celebrity Rehab for what he perceives as its exploitative ways. As presided over by Dr. Drew Pinsky, an actual doctor who doesn't just play one on TV, the show captures the efforts of Pinsky and his staff to rehabilitate various individuals along the celebrity spectrum through a diet of therapy and behavioral accountability.
But McKagan isn't buying it. He may be angry after having tragically lost a good friend, fellow musician Mike Starr, to an overdose, after Starr appeared as a season-three "cast member." McKagan said in an interview:
"I cringe, I think it's the worst thing for so-called sobriety: 'Hold on, we're having a breakthrough...wait, we've gotta do make-up!' There's a reason it's (rehab) anonymous, because, if you fail (on the show) you're failing on camera. You're failing after you've been on this rehab show. Anonymous, you don't have to succeed all the time. You can fail, and you can still come back and nobody's gonna judge you. I wouldn't have wanted to try and get sober in a public forum. I don't think it's right... It's not cool."
McKagan's former G N' R bandmate, drummer Steven Adler, also displayed his zonked-out warts on the show, so McKagan's opinion isn't a frivolous one. And many people share his view. They think Dr. Drew, though earnest and well-intentioned, is misguided in attaching ratings and a healthy paycheck to the process of fixing broken people. Others see it as a mutually-beneficial arrangement. No one was forcing Gary Busey to be on the show, but it seemed to have worked, it got people thinking about him again, and he wound up on another show beginning with "Celebrity" in its title. If you count that as tiger-blood-style winning.
If you are a viewer of Celebrity Rehab, you have to at least entertain the notion of your complicity in the fact that the show's returning for a fifth season. If you're looking forward to Amy Fisher and Sean Young possibly mixing it up, or Michael Lohan punching a wall, that's understandable, and how second homes are paid for. It works for D-listers looking for a career shot-in-the-arm, but for the Mike Starrs of the world, who may not have been saved anyway, it only serves as a sad video diary of a zombie-like descent into oblivion.
So what does everyone think? Is Dr. Drew selfishly taking advantage of an opportunity for media exposure, or is he performing a positive service by shining a light on the unglamorous aspects of addiction, hopefully having a deterrent effect? Or both?
Commentarium (15 Comments)
I can't wait for his skeletons to come out...either he's a celeb or fame whore, or there's something darker in there. He is certainly a celebrity addict himself.
Both. I admire Dr. Drew and the work that he does. I've been listening to loveline since the early 90's and have no doubt that he's directly changed many lives for the better, and indirectly improved thousands of lives by giving honest discussion and information to sex and addiction and other topics that often don't get the exposure and rounded coverage that they should. That said I think the spate of MTV and VH1 collaborations really ride that line, and these days he's way to willing to make public comments on celebrities he's never met, seemingly in shameless self promotion more than awareness of the cause.
As someone in recovery, I can only say that this show is deeply sick and disturbing. Recovery is VERY serioous business. . Thisd show (I have never seen it) sounds like a decadent spectacle that mocks the audiences' humanity. I know little of Dr. Drew, but believe the comment above that he has done some good in the world. But, this is really beyond all decency.
Because you start throwing around words like "sick and disturbing", you should probably watch the show.
I've never seen it either, and I'm not defending it, but I think it's a little unfair to start ripping on things before you've seen them.
Anything with the word "celebrity" in the title is for fucktards only. Too bad a significant percentage of the population qualifies.
I was unaware that cheap entertainment was only liked by "fucktards." Sorry, next time I get the urge to watch Jersey Shore, I'll be sure to switch to BBC instead.
Of course he's exploiting addicts. I need more hands to count how many have been on his show and relapsed. Who the hell can get clean with camera crews documenting what's happening? Also, they get paid for their time on the show! And it doesnt take a rhode scholar to figure out what they buy with said money.
I would have to agree with McKagan. I think that he made a very good point about anonymity, and how if you fuck up on television, the whole world knows it. That being said, I do think that Dr. Drew has good intentions. I just don't think he's doing the right thing.
Of course he's exploiting them. That's obvious from the get-go.
It does'nt seem that awful. Yes drug addiction recovery is a very serious subject and making a show about it may not the very best for it's participants, however it does shed some light about recovery to the general public which could be extremely helpful to those who know nothing about it. Addiction comes in many forms, one that is extremely apparent is that of food. We have shows like the biggest loser and heavy that show the transformation of obese people. Sure it's fun to watch them jog and jiggle but it does show the humanity in thier efforts. It shows that in fact we are just a bunch of people with our own problems and airs lots of dirty laundry for sheer enertainment. With this being said I think it helps people who may not understand the strife of others. Morally grey yes, exploitation no. They signed up for it.
I have to say, that question headline made me not want to read this article. "Is Dr. Drew exploiting addicts?" Yes. Guess I don't need to read this article then...
You know, I think it's too complicated a question and situation to answer with just a yes or no. It's obvious that there is some exploitation going on. How can there not be? Once you put anything on TV, there is exploitation written all over it, even if it's for PBS. But who is doing the exploiting and is it that bad? Yes, Drew and MTV (Vh1?) are exploiting addicts by having this show. But they are also doing a good thing by showing what really goes on with rehab. I know I can't be the only one who has read incredibly cynical and cruel comments about celebrities who've announced they're going to rehab. The overall response from the viewing audience is that rehab is a joke or a publicity stunt designed to get one's career back or when one makes a silly mistake (Isaiah Washington used the F word? Rehab!). The idea that rehab is a serious space has been lost on the collective public in many ways.
Not to mention, people have this incredibly near sighted and stupid idea that once you become a celebrity, your life is made in the sun, you're golden and you'll never have a problem ever again. What isn't realized is that while there's a ton more money (something the majority of the public is lacking, myself included), everything about who you are is exacerbated and nitpicked. You have a lot more people around you wanting and using you and needing things from you. Celebrity in and of itself has its own issues. By focusing on celebrity rehab, he's reinforcing that there are real problems and there are real humans here who need sympathy, not derision.
There are also quite a few celebrities who have gone on that show who have come out for it the better, not just for their career, but for themselves. One of the blogs I follow occasionally is that of Jennie Ketcham, who was on Sex Rehab. She candidly mentions how she thought going on the show would be a big ole joke that she would just use for money and fun. Turned out the joke was on her because it was a real rehab. She's since quit porn, gone back to school, gotten a real job and has completely turned her life around. Check out www.becomingjennie.wordpress.com.
Now onto the exploitation factor - yes, once you add money in as well, and pay someone for something, it complicates matters. Not to mention, many celebrities (no matter what "list" they're on) have a complicated issue with the cameras and the spotlight in general. I'm not unaware that there's as much addiction to the limelight and attention in many of these people as there is to chemical substances. But one of the things Dr. Drew has said is that many of them either couldn't afford rehab themselves, or wouldn't have gone without the cameras and money as an impetus. So, he dangled the carrot in front of them to get them into what they so desperately need for their health. Exploitative yes, but necessarily a bad thing? Maybe. Maybe not.
Having never been through addiction, but having been through some deep depression, I fully understand the need for anonymity and a safe space within recovery. I know I for one said a lot of things and admitted to a lot of things I did that I would never have done if there was anyone looking over my shoulder or listening. To have a camera there recording one's foibles and vulnerabilities makes me both admire their bravery and completely aware of how bad an idea it is/can be. I also understand what he's saying about needing the space to fuck up and come back again and not feel ashamed for fucking up. I think it's rare few people who can go to rehab once and be done with it and all addictions.
As for Mike Starr, anyone who watched the show (I did), saw a deeply disturbed man. I don't feel we got even a quarter of the story of his self-destruction. However, from what I saw, he was someone who so badly needed to be important, as well as having immense guilt for the death of his friend. That his time in the limelight had all but passed and that people didn't care about him/view him as important seemed to really bother him. Add in the complication of his guilt over his friend's death, however misguided it may have been, and an inability to grow up and beyond all of that, and he was obviously going to be a difficult person to bring back from the brink. That he went over is not necessarily the fault of Dr. Drew or the team. It lies solely with Mike Starr. To remove the responsibility one has for their own choices is destructive as well. I'm not saying being on the show helped or hindered his recovery. I can't speak to that. But adults are ultimately responsible for the choices they make, including the choice to continue their usage of drugs. To blame Dr. Drew and Celebrity Rehab as the sole reason for his death would be short sighted and wrong. He had a major drug issue and major problems long before Celebrity Rehab was a glimmer in any TV producer's eye. This cannot be forgotten in the rush to lay blame.
I think it was only an amount of time before a show like this was created. It was going to happen, no matter who was at the helm, because that is the path our pop culture has taken. We have gone from a society where "you don't discuss that in polite company/public" to a culture that wants to discuss every dirty detail of humanity's existence. Add to that the intense focus on celebrity and celebrity culture and these worlds were bound to collide in a public forum eventually. And as with anything that lands in the public eye, the question will always remain, "who is exploiting whom?" And I don't think it's an easy answer, ever.
The last adult film that Ketcham made prior to participating in Sex Rehab was Celebrity Pornhab with Dr. Screw, which itself was a parody of the show Celebrity Rehab.
writing from the Betty Ford Celebrity Suite, Chevy said it was nicer... has Dr. Drew ever been successful in helping anyone on these shows?
I like Dr. Drew. It isn't like he drags the Celebrity Addicted by the hair into his Recovery Center, and the Wannabe Celebrity on the other side of the Boob Toob get to see that being famous ain't all that it's cracked up to be (pardon the pun).
No surprise to me that an addict eventually cries foul for being taken advantage of, made victim of, this show; if you watch it at all, it's clear that this behavior / reaction is indeed part and parcel of addiction, i.e. a reason to stay in it.