I just read the article Harry Potter and the Pint of Liquid Courage by Tara Parker-Pope of the New York Times and, while I was quite amused at the title, I was unimpressed by the article itself. Actually, I think it is a decent article that isn't very biased...a good piece of journalism; however, I think one sided arguments are more fun, so here is my take on the issue:

Not having seen the most recent of the magical cash-crop movies, I am not in a position to confirm or deny the amounts of drinking that occur in the film. It is to my benefit that all of the people the Parker-Pope interviewed seemed to acknowledge that alcohol had a noticeable role in the movie.

It has long been known that advertising (which I am going to extend to the use of certain products in popular media) does not have a direct, immediate, and powerful effect. This idea, known among media officials and undergraduates who take a communications 101 class (me), is called the hypodermic needle model. I do think that popular media, especially when directed at teens, has a powerful effect on some, but not necessarily direct or immediate. For me, it is an emotional connection. Of course I know that HP isn't real. I also know that those teen's troublesome situations are quite different from mine, and that the solutions to those situations and stresses should also be different. But stress is stress, and it seems like a little booze worked well for them, so why not give it a try?

I don't want to say that this is how it is for everyone, or that it is that bad of a thing. The acceptability of drinking alcohol and the definitions of alcoholism are socially relative*. So, in a way, this movie is simply helping acquaint the young with acceptable social standards. In this light, I think the role of alcohol makes much more sense. In many European nations, England especially, alcohol is a strong part of the culture, and there is little taboo about drinking if you are younger than legal buying age.

This idea reinforces my belief that popular media has a responsibility to promote social norms. I wrote an article about it in 2007, and I would like to warn about a few things you before you read it: 1) It involves a strong dose of Battlestar Galactica. I am a nerd. 2) It is political and annoyingly leftist. Don't judge. 3) It is written in a silly format. Again, don't judge.

Assuming you have at least skimmed that article, I will continue. For all I know, everything I see in the media is the result of extensive debate, a lot of thought has gone into it to ensure brainwashing, and great care has been taken to make sure that the viewers know that the black character dies first, the gay man has a lisp, the lesbian woman wears flannel, biracial and transgendered people don't exist, anyone from a country in, near or around the Middle East is a terrorist; and immigrants are all terrible people who steal jobs only because they can. If this is the case, I would be pretty sad. More likely, these stereotypical representations are what the majority of media watchers expect to see, so they are used to bolster viewership. Mass media is catered to the masses. In the case of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, 16 year olds grabbing a pint to wind down after their run-ins with evil wizards is a typical response in Europe, but is surely not something that any of the pure youth of the USA would do.

*What I mean by this is that the limits for drinking are social standards, until it is life threatening, and even then, I think that if that was the norm in a culture it would be socially acceptable. Our society is adverse to drinking "too much" and drinking if one is "too young".