What do you think?
Rate this book
Sham: How the Self-Help Movement Made America Helpless
To millions of Americans it seems like a godsend. To many others it seems like a joke. But as investigative reporter Steve Salerno reveals in this groundbreaking book, it’s neither—in fact it’s much worse than a joke. Going deep inside the Self-Help and Actualization Movement (fittingly, the words form the acronym SHAM), Salerno offers the first serious exposé of this multibillion-dollar industry and the real damage it is doing—not just to its paying customers, but to all of American society.
Based on the author’s extensive reporting—and the inside look at the industry he got while working at a leading “lifestyle” publisher— SHAM shows how thinly credentialed “experts” now dispense advice on everything from mental health to relationships to diet to personal finance to business strategy. Americans spend upward of $8 billion every year on self-help programs and products. And those staggering financial costs are actually the least of our worries.
SHAM demonstrates how the self-help movement’s core philosophies have infected virtually every aspect of American life—the home, the workplace, the schools, and more. And Salerno exposes the downside of being uplifted, showing how the “empowering” message that dominates self-help today proves just as damaging as the blame-shifting rhetoric of self-help’s “Recovery” movement.
SHAM also
• How self-help gurus conduct extensive market research to reach the same customers over and over—without ever helping them
• The inside story on the most notorious gurus—from Dr. Phil to Dr. Laura, from Tony Robbins to John Gray
• How your company might be wasting money on motivational speakers, “executive coaches,” and other quick fixes that often hurt quality, productivity, and morale
• How the Recovery movement has eradicated notions of personal responsibility by labeling just about anything—from drug abuse to “sex addiction” to shoplifting—a dysfunction or disease
• How Americans blindly accept that twelve-step programs offer the only hope of treating addiction, when in fact these programs can do more harm than good
• How the self-help movement inspired the disastrous emphasis on self-esteem in our schools
• How self-help rhetoric has pushed people away from proven medical treatments by persuading them that they can cure themselves through sheer application of will
As Salerno shows, to describe self-help as a waste of time and money vastly understates its collateral damage. And with SHAM , the self-help industry has finally been called to account for the damage it has done.
Also available as an eBook
Based on the author’s extensive reporting—and the inside look at the industry he got while working at a leading “lifestyle” publisher— SHAM shows how thinly credentialed “experts” now dispense advice on everything from mental health to relationships to diet to personal finance to business strategy. Americans spend upward of $8 billion every year on self-help programs and products. And those staggering financial costs are actually the least of our worries.
SHAM demonstrates how the self-help movement’s core philosophies have infected virtually every aspect of American life—the home, the workplace, the schools, and more. And Salerno exposes the downside of being uplifted, showing how the “empowering” message that dominates self-help today proves just as damaging as the blame-shifting rhetoric of self-help’s “Recovery” movement.
SHAM also
• How self-help gurus conduct extensive market research to reach the same customers over and over—without ever helping them
• The inside story on the most notorious gurus—from Dr. Phil to Dr. Laura, from Tony Robbins to John Gray
• How your company might be wasting money on motivational speakers, “executive coaches,” and other quick fixes that often hurt quality, productivity, and morale
• How the Recovery movement has eradicated notions of personal responsibility by labeling just about anything—from drug abuse to “sex addiction” to shoplifting—a dysfunction or disease
• How Americans blindly accept that twelve-step programs offer the only hope of treating addiction, when in fact these programs can do more harm than good
• How the self-help movement inspired the disastrous emphasis on self-esteem in our schools
• How self-help rhetoric has pushed people away from proven medical treatments by persuading them that they can cure themselves through sheer application of will
As Salerno shows, to describe self-help as a waste of time and money vastly understates its collateral damage. And with SHAM , the self-help industry has finally been called to account for the damage it has done.
Also available as an eBook
289 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2005
37 people are currently reading
814 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 71 reviews
July 22, 2014
I seldom write reviews, but this book was so disappointing and irritating that it inspired me to draft a review. 'Sham' is a bizarre jumble of legitimate inquiry and feckless fear-mongering. The book explores several legitimate problems with the self-help movement in America. Salerno points out that the techniques offered in the genre literature frequently are unproven, at best, meaning that consumers are paying for a product whose efficacy is dubious. In addition, the author points out the questionable evidence behind the disease model of addiction, including alcoholism, and discusses the growing body of research demonstrating that 'recovery' is an ineffective tool for addressing these problems. Salerno also provides a competent review of the credentials (or lack thereof) possessed by the key players in the self-help market, and the connection between the cult of self-esteem and the epidemic of narcissism that has swept this country. But that's where Salerno runs off the rails.
In the section titled "Looking for Love...on All the Wrong Bases" Salerno discusses the ways self -help contributes to the high rate of divorce, decline of the nuclear family, and the resultant social chaos. He refers to alternative families as "broken homes" and alleges that these types of arrangements can't be good for children, claiming that "statistics on crime, drug abuse, and teen pregnancy leave scant room for dissent." Finally, after criticizing "artificial" approaches to dating and marriage that are recommended by self-help, Salerno quotes Sarah Allen of Divorce Forum. Asking her why we have so much divorce, she answers "we have more divorce because marriage isn't based on unconditional love."
And there ya go. It's that simply. Except it isn't. First, the nuclear family is only one of many family forms found throughout human history, so simply assuming that the nuclear family represents the default natural, healthy arrangement for rearing children (while other family forms represent a dire decline) is an unwarranted leap in logic. In fact the "traditional family", idealized in the 1950s, is a historic flash in the pan. Additionally, Salerno fails to quote the statistics about crime, drug abuse, and teen pregnancy that we're supposed to be so concerned about, most likely because doing so would substantially weaken his argument. Teen pregnancy and birth rates reached a historic low in 2012, according to the CDC and the Guttmacher Institute. Teens are delaying sexual activity, and when they do become sexually active, are more likely to use contraceptives. Drug abuse and crime have also declined, leaving one to wonder exactly what statistics are supposed to keep us up at night.
Then there is the question of the "artificial" approach to marriage, as offered by such self-help books as 'The Rules: Time-Tested Secrets for Capturing the Heart of Mr. Right'. Salerno implies that these contrived approaches stifle true love, thereby creating unstable unions, leading to high divorce rate and on and on. But the notion that romantic love should be the impetus for marriage is as much a new, 'artificial' idea as any other. In other times and places, the idea of basing a lifelong commitment on something as ephemeral as an emotion would seem ludicrous. In point of fact, arranged marriages (obviously not based on unconditional love and clearly manufactured) enjoy some of the highest rates of longevity and satisfaction, so Salerno's causal connection between self-help, lack of true love, and high divorce falls apart.
He does point out that selfishness is also a factor in divorce, and alleges that self-help advocates selfishness. Perhaps this is true in some cases, but it should be noted that the connection between self-help and selfishness is unproven- it's Salerno's personal thesis. This is significant because that's the biggest issue that Salerno takes with the self-help genre; the books/seminars/videos/web sites make untested, unproven claims regarding their treatment. If we shouldn't believe self-help authors when they claim their treatment produces desirable results, why should we simply take Salerno's word that it does the opposite?
Salerno also addresses alternative medicine, recounting the sad story of a woman named Debbie Benson who died of cancer because she refused biomedical treatment, opting for alternative medicine instead. He then attempts to terrify his readers, informing them that 86 percent of Americans have sought out alternative medicine at some point in their life. 62 percent of Americans are at risk of being the next Debbie Benson! But wait- the story of Debbie Benson is relatively rare. Obviously 62 percent of Americans don't eschew all Western medicine; according to the CDC, 82.1 percent of American adults saw a physician last year alone and the figure is even higher for children (92.8 percent). So it's clear that alternative medicine must be used in conjunction with biomedicine, not in place of it. But still, the mere fact that there are cases like the Debbie Benson case... Preventable medical errors, that's biomedicine folks, result in anywhere from 98,000 to 195,000 deaths a year (making it the sixth leading cause of death in America if these numbers where counted as an independent category). Alternative medicine doesn't even make at top 20. In comparison to Western biomedicine, alternative medicine is rather innocuous.
But the danger posed by each respective practice is only part of the story. Another important aspect of medicine is whether or not it works. Biomedicine works, and alternative medicine doesn't. Except it does (at least within a limited sphere). Major medical studies have demonstrated that numerous alternative practices (acupuncture, prayer, therapeutic touch, etc) are successful at reducing the subjective experience of pain. The catch is that these effects are psychosomatic. However, psychosomatic relief is STILL relief. This brings us closer to what people like Salerno actually mean- alternative medicine doesn't work through "appropriate" biomedical mechanisms and is therefore bad. Opponents of non-Western medicine want you to feel better, but only is it's on their terms, and the trumped up dangers of alternative medicine provide a convenient smokescreen.
Salerno also fails to present any solutions to the perceived self-help problem. He seems quite content to criticize the genre's patrons and the American lay-population, implying that they're naive, lazy, and that they're only seeking easy answers. He even manages to squeeze in some racism, saying this of the decline in verbal scores on the SAT: "we've also incorporated into mainstream expression increasing amounts of street dialect (think Ebonics) and other linguistic corruptions...Moreover, American schools contain an ever-larger population of immigrant children whose parents are disinclined to give up their native tongues." This book is a huge disappointment, leading me to believe that perhaps Salerno should help himself to a hearty portion of his own advice.
In the section titled "Looking for Love...on All the Wrong Bases" Salerno discusses the ways self -help contributes to the high rate of divorce, decline of the nuclear family, and the resultant social chaos. He refers to alternative families as "broken homes" and alleges that these types of arrangements can't be good for children, claiming that "statistics on crime, drug abuse, and teen pregnancy leave scant room for dissent." Finally, after criticizing "artificial" approaches to dating and marriage that are recommended by self-help, Salerno quotes Sarah Allen of Divorce Forum. Asking her why we have so much divorce, she answers "we have more divorce because marriage isn't based on unconditional love."
And there ya go. It's that simply. Except it isn't. First, the nuclear family is only one of many family forms found throughout human history, so simply assuming that the nuclear family represents the default natural, healthy arrangement for rearing children (while other family forms represent a dire decline) is an unwarranted leap in logic. In fact the "traditional family", idealized in the 1950s, is a historic flash in the pan. Additionally, Salerno fails to quote the statistics about crime, drug abuse, and teen pregnancy that we're supposed to be so concerned about, most likely because doing so would substantially weaken his argument. Teen pregnancy and birth rates reached a historic low in 2012, according to the CDC and the Guttmacher Institute. Teens are delaying sexual activity, and when they do become sexually active, are more likely to use contraceptives. Drug abuse and crime have also declined, leaving one to wonder exactly what statistics are supposed to keep us up at night.
Then there is the question of the "artificial" approach to marriage, as offered by such self-help books as 'The Rules: Time-Tested Secrets for Capturing the Heart of Mr. Right'. Salerno implies that these contrived approaches stifle true love, thereby creating unstable unions, leading to high divorce rate and on and on. But the notion that romantic love should be the impetus for marriage is as much a new, 'artificial' idea as any other. In other times and places, the idea of basing a lifelong commitment on something as ephemeral as an emotion would seem ludicrous. In point of fact, arranged marriages (obviously not based on unconditional love and clearly manufactured) enjoy some of the highest rates of longevity and satisfaction, so Salerno's causal connection between self-help, lack of true love, and high divorce falls apart.
He does point out that selfishness is also a factor in divorce, and alleges that self-help advocates selfishness. Perhaps this is true in some cases, but it should be noted that the connection between self-help and selfishness is unproven- it's Salerno's personal thesis. This is significant because that's the biggest issue that Salerno takes with the self-help genre; the books/seminars/videos/web sites make untested, unproven claims regarding their treatment. If we shouldn't believe self-help authors when they claim their treatment produces desirable results, why should we simply take Salerno's word that it does the opposite?
Salerno also addresses alternative medicine, recounting the sad story of a woman named Debbie Benson who died of cancer because she refused biomedical treatment, opting for alternative medicine instead. He then attempts to terrify his readers, informing them that 86 percent of Americans have sought out alternative medicine at some point in their life. 62 percent of Americans are at risk of being the next Debbie Benson! But wait- the story of Debbie Benson is relatively rare. Obviously 62 percent of Americans don't eschew all Western medicine; according to the CDC, 82.1 percent of American adults saw a physician last year alone and the figure is even higher for children (92.8 percent). So it's clear that alternative medicine must be used in conjunction with biomedicine, not in place of it. But still, the mere fact that there are cases like the Debbie Benson case... Preventable medical errors, that's biomedicine folks, result in anywhere from 98,000 to 195,000 deaths a year (making it the sixth leading cause of death in America if these numbers where counted as an independent category). Alternative medicine doesn't even make at top 20. In comparison to Western biomedicine, alternative medicine is rather innocuous.
But the danger posed by each respective practice is only part of the story. Another important aspect of medicine is whether or not it works. Biomedicine works, and alternative medicine doesn't. Except it does (at least within a limited sphere). Major medical studies have demonstrated that numerous alternative practices (acupuncture, prayer, therapeutic touch, etc) are successful at reducing the subjective experience of pain. The catch is that these effects are psychosomatic. However, psychosomatic relief is STILL relief. This brings us closer to what people like Salerno actually mean- alternative medicine doesn't work through "appropriate" biomedical mechanisms and is therefore bad. Opponents of non-Western medicine want you to feel better, but only is it's on their terms, and the trumped up dangers of alternative medicine provide a convenient smokescreen.
Salerno also fails to present any solutions to the perceived self-help problem. He seems quite content to criticize the genre's patrons and the American lay-population, implying that they're naive, lazy, and that they're only seeking easy answers. He even manages to squeeze in some racism, saying this of the decline in verbal scores on the SAT: "we've also incorporated into mainstream expression increasing amounts of street dialect (think Ebonics) and other linguistic corruptions...Moreover, American schools contain an ever-larger population of immigrant children whose parents are disinclined to give up their native tongues." This book is a huge disappointment, leading me to believe that perhaps Salerno should help himself to a hearty portion of his own advice.
February 5, 2011
The premise is interesting, and he takes it in some intriguing directions. But his research and level of discussion is every bit as bad as those he purports to be exposing. Conflates correlation with causation on a regular basis, makes sweeping generalizations based on little to no evidence, etc.
Also surprisingly axe-grind-y about feminism, for a book that is not about feminism. Feminism shows up 8 times in the book, and always as the bad guy.
I'm sure Salerno doesn't actually hate women and the feminist movement. But it sure comes off that way.
Also surprisingly axe-grind-y about feminism, for a book that is not about feminism. Feminism shows up 8 times in the book, and always as the bad guy.
I'm sure Salerno doesn't actually hate women and the feminist movement. But it sure comes off that way.
November 28, 2009
“To be honest…I don’t think there’s been any profession that has wreaked more damage on the culture than psychology.” (John Rosemond, quoted in “SHAM”) Ouch.
In this book, Steve Salerno takes on what he calls SHAM – the Self-Help and Actualization Movement. As you can see from his chosen acronym, he’s not a fan. In fact, parts of the book read like an angry diatribe with ad hominem attacks. “Her doctoral dissertation was titled ‘Effects of Insulin on 3-0 Methylglucose Transport in Isolated Rat Adipocytes,’” carps Salerno about Dr. Laura, “In other words, the usual background for relationship counselors.” Salerno also reveals Dr. Phil’s reaction when his first wife confronted him about his alleged adultery – not a denial, but his famous “Get real!” John Gray was also married more than once, and his Ph.D., you know, is highly questionable. And Salerno just loves pointing out, at every opportunity, how much money these people make – dollar amounts are frequently provided. But to be fair, Salerno’s attacks on the self-help gurus are not only personal. He points out, correctly, that many of them use circular language, endorse dubious products, and abuse their power in damaging ways.
Salerno casts his SHAM net quite wide, extending his reach to athletes and gangsters turned motivational speakers, twelve step programs, life coaching, alternative medicine, and self esteem curricula in the public schools. Unfortunately, he does not address parenting books (I’d love to hear his thoughts on THOSE) or books on improving your household management skills (I don’t care what you say, Steve, FLYlady changed my life), which I believe are just as prominent within the self-help genre and arguably more legitimate. His argument, then, is perhaps a bit more one-sided than necessary.
Salerno divides self-help into two categories. According to the first, victimization, you are not responsible for what you do; your behavior is determined by childhood traumas, societal factors, and/or the disease that is addictive behavior. In contrast, according to the empowerment school of thought, you can achieve anything you want to achieve if you simply try hard enough; success is a function of desire and/or commitment. Thus, when the self-help books or gurus fail to achieve the desired results, it’s either because you’re a victim of your dysfunctions or you didn’t try hard enough. The possibility that the self-help book or guru was inadequate is neatly eliminated. And Salerno shows us, rightly, that neither of these attitudes is a particularly healthy or efficacious way to go through life.
Salerno blames SHAM for all kinds of societal ills (although he acknowledges that SHAM is probably one factor of many), including the elevated divorce rate, increased selfishness (sure beats co-dependence!), declining academic performance, an unrealistic belief that “wanting to succeed” is the main prerequisite for success, unwillingness to take responsibility for one’s actions, punishing masculine behavior and rewarding feminine behavior for both boys and girls, etc., etc. His arguments are interesting, if imperfect, especially when it comes to cause and effect. After all, is SHAM the problem or the symptom? Is it SHAM that’s causing this mess, or is it people’s gullibility? Or their desperation? And if they’re desperate, why? Is SHAM to blame for that too?
It’s difficult to tell exactly where Salerno stands when it comes to psychotherapy. On the one hand, he seems to acknowledge the usefulness of credentialed therapists when it comes to recognized mental health disorders (Salerno emphasizes the danger of people’s relying on dubious SHAM artists when serious mental health assistance is what’s needed). On the other hand, much of what he says might be applied to therapy, at least in some cases. And the quote with which I began this review says it all, doesn’t it?
I do recommend this book – it’s readable and interesting, and quite provocative. Salerno sometimes overstates his case, but all in all, he gives you a lot to think about.
In this book, Steve Salerno takes on what he calls SHAM – the Self-Help and Actualization Movement. As you can see from his chosen acronym, he’s not a fan. In fact, parts of the book read like an angry diatribe with ad hominem attacks. “Her doctoral dissertation was titled ‘Effects of Insulin on 3-0 Methylglucose Transport in Isolated Rat Adipocytes,’” carps Salerno about Dr. Laura, “In other words, the usual background for relationship counselors.” Salerno also reveals Dr. Phil’s reaction when his first wife confronted him about his alleged adultery – not a denial, but his famous “Get real!” John Gray was also married more than once, and his Ph.D., you know, is highly questionable. And Salerno just loves pointing out, at every opportunity, how much money these people make – dollar amounts are frequently provided. But to be fair, Salerno’s attacks on the self-help gurus are not only personal. He points out, correctly, that many of them use circular language, endorse dubious products, and abuse their power in damaging ways.
Salerno casts his SHAM net quite wide, extending his reach to athletes and gangsters turned motivational speakers, twelve step programs, life coaching, alternative medicine, and self esteem curricula in the public schools. Unfortunately, he does not address parenting books (I’d love to hear his thoughts on THOSE) or books on improving your household management skills (I don’t care what you say, Steve, FLYlady changed my life), which I believe are just as prominent within the self-help genre and arguably more legitimate. His argument, then, is perhaps a bit more one-sided than necessary.
Salerno divides self-help into two categories. According to the first, victimization, you are not responsible for what you do; your behavior is determined by childhood traumas, societal factors, and/or the disease that is addictive behavior. In contrast, according to the empowerment school of thought, you can achieve anything you want to achieve if you simply try hard enough; success is a function of desire and/or commitment. Thus, when the self-help books or gurus fail to achieve the desired results, it’s either because you’re a victim of your dysfunctions or you didn’t try hard enough. The possibility that the self-help book or guru was inadequate is neatly eliminated. And Salerno shows us, rightly, that neither of these attitudes is a particularly healthy or efficacious way to go through life.
Salerno blames SHAM for all kinds of societal ills (although he acknowledges that SHAM is probably one factor of many), including the elevated divorce rate, increased selfishness (sure beats co-dependence!), declining academic performance, an unrealistic belief that “wanting to succeed” is the main prerequisite for success, unwillingness to take responsibility for one’s actions, punishing masculine behavior and rewarding feminine behavior for both boys and girls, etc., etc. His arguments are interesting, if imperfect, especially when it comes to cause and effect. After all, is SHAM the problem or the symptom? Is it SHAM that’s causing this mess, or is it people’s gullibility? Or their desperation? And if they’re desperate, why? Is SHAM to blame for that too?
It’s difficult to tell exactly where Salerno stands when it comes to psychotherapy. On the one hand, he seems to acknowledge the usefulness of credentialed therapists when it comes to recognized mental health disorders (Salerno emphasizes the danger of people’s relying on dubious SHAM artists when serious mental health assistance is what’s needed). On the other hand, much of what he says might be applied to therapy, at least in some cases. And the quote with which I began this review says it all, doesn’t it?
I do recommend this book – it’s readable and interesting, and quite provocative. Salerno sometimes overstates his case, but all in all, he gives you a lot to think about.
August 24, 2015
Steve Salerno needs to be commended for gathering such a vast amount of material for this book.
The part I personally like the most was the one about the self-esteem movement in America's schools. As someone, who attended Austria's (discriminating) tier school system at a time when it was considered to be the 8th best school system in the world, and also the mother of two American children, who attended American schools, I have thrown quite a few temper tantrum about the American school system. While, in 12th grade, I myself translated Pliny the Elder's work from the original (7 errors in a translation of 300 words earned "barely a D", 8+ error earned an "F") my children talked about traditional garbs in Ancient Rome. ( really ? ? ? ) Even though Latin was not my favorite subject I was outraged at how the supposedly excellent school did not offer a more rigorous curriculum.
Quite fabulously, Salerno offers Chicago teacher Mrs. Daugherty's story.
Believing that she was cursed with a class of 6h grade students with learning disabilities, Mrs. Daugherty looks into her students' files to check their IQ scores while the principal is off premises. She "discovers" that most of her students' IQ scores are 120+, near genius level. She therefore concludes that it is "her fault" that the students aren't learning and imposes a rigorous curriculum, topped with vast amounts of homework and strict punishment for misbehavior and engineers a 180 degree turnout. That surprises even the principal. When he asks Mr. Daugherty how she managed to do this, Mr. Daugherty confesses that she looked up the IQ levels and then adjusted her teaching method accordingly.
(quoting from SHAM) "... Oh, by the way," he whispered as she turned around to retreat to her classroom, "I think you should know: those numbers next to the kids' names? It's not their IQ scores. It's their locker numbers..."
It's a brilliant story which illustrates the whole problem: Originally Mrs. Daugherty follows the adopted system of "high expectations will automatically destroy the children's self-worth." Only when Mrs. Daugherty believes (incorrectly) that she herself destroys these "gifted" kid's futures she imposes the toughest rules on (regular) children and (not surprisingly) succeeds.
Sadly, Salerno does not really analyze Mrs. Daugherty's psychological state of mind ; then again maybe it is s not known. At least to me it seems quite possible that Mrs. Daugherty too was a victim of SHAM and therefore acted the way she did.
As for the rest of the book: Basically, the author makes the case that with all these vast amounts of money poured into self-help our society should see results, yet it doesn't, but instead we see a society depended on more self-help, which may not lead to anything.
While I agree with many parts of this book, I do not agree with its portrayal of Oprah Winfrey. Also, while I believe that Tony Robbins can be found guilty of writing extremely long-winded and boring books, which lead to people buying his action loaded (and much more expensive) seminars, (nobody wants having "to work" reading through Mr. Robbins' ridiculously boring books but plenty of youtube videos suggest that Mr. Robbins seminars are lots of fun) I do not believe that all people Salerno names in his book are in the same group of SHAM artists, which takes away from the book.
Still, the worst problem of the book is: What's the solution? Pointing out (major) flaws of a system is good but it should be complimented by a solution. If SHAM functions like a drug for its users (as Mr. Salerno kind of suggests) wouldn't a different powerful system be needed to "wean off SHAM users"?
Maybe Mr. Salerno will write a 2nd book describing alternatives.
Gisela Hausmann, author & blogger
The part I personally like the most was the one about the self-esteem movement in America's schools. As someone, who attended Austria's (discriminating) tier school system at a time when it was considered to be the 8th best school system in the world, and also the mother of two American children, who attended American schools, I have thrown quite a few temper tantrum about the American school system. While, in 12th grade, I myself translated Pliny the Elder's work from the original (7 errors in a translation of 300 words earned "barely a D", 8+ error earned an "F") my children talked about traditional garbs in Ancient Rome. ( really ? ? ? ) Even though Latin was not my favorite subject I was outraged at how the supposedly excellent school did not offer a more rigorous curriculum.
Quite fabulously, Salerno offers Chicago teacher Mrs. Daugherty's story.
Believing that she was cursed with a class of 6h grade students with learning disabilities, Mrs. Daugherty looks into her students' files to check their IQ scores while the principal is off premises. She "discovers" that most of her students' IQ scores are 120+, near genius level. She therefore concludes that it is "her fault" that the students aren't learning and imposes a rigorous curriculum, topped with vast amounts of homework and strict punishment for misbehavior and engineers a 180 degree turnout. That surprises even the principal. When he asks Mr. Daugherty how she managed to do this, Mr. Daugherty confesses that she looked up the IQ levels and then adjusted her teaching method accordingly.
(quoting from SHAM) "... Oh, by the way," he whispered as she turned around to retreat to her classroom, "I think you should know: those numbers next to the kids' names? It's not their IQ scores. It's their locker numbers..."
It's a brilliant story which illustrates the whole problem: Originally Mrs. Daugherty follows the adopted system of "high expectations will automatically destroy the children's self-worth." Only when Mrs. Daugherty believes (incorrectly) that she herself destroys these "gifted" kid's futures she imposes the toughest rules on (regular) children and (not surprisingly) succeeds.
Sadly, Salerno does not really analyze Mrs. Daugherty's psychological state of mind ; then again maybe it is s not known. At least to me it seems quite possible that Mrs. Daugherty too was a victim of SHAM and therefore acted the way she did.
As for the rest of the book: Basically, the author makes the case that with all these vast amounts of money poured into self-help our society should see results, yet it doesn't, but instead we see a society depended on more self-help, which may not lead to anything.
While I agree with many parts of this book, I do not agree with its portrayal of Oprah Winfrey. Also, while I believe that Tony Robbins can be found guilty of writing extremely long-winded and boring books, which lead to people buying his action loaded (and much more expensive) seminars, (nobody wants having "to work" reading through Mr. Robbins' ridiculously boring books but plenty of youtube videos suggest that Mr. Robbins seminars are lots of fun) I do not believe that all people Salerno names in his book are in the same group of SHAM artists, which takes away from the book.
Still, the worst problem of the book is: What's the solution? Pointing out (major) flaws of a system is good but it should be complimented by a solution. If SHAM functions like a drug for its users (as Mr. Salerno kind of suggests) wouldn't a different powerful system be needed to "wean off SHAM users"?
Maybe Mr. Salerno will write a 2nd book describing alternatives.
Gisela Hausmann, author & blogger
July 8, 2015
Rarely does a book get me so worked up I get out of bed and turn my computer on just to get my thoughts out.
Let's start with the star review. I gave it two, although I feel it was much more deserving of one, I added it at the end of the day because he still might of successfully pulled me away from Self-Help books and gurus. It seems only fair.
Salerno in the course of this book jumps from providing evidence to back up his points, to wildly going off on school reform, the breakdown of the nuclear family, and even political atmosphere with barely a strand of thought connecting his main argument to his current topic. Sure, with the subtext of the title being "How the Self-Help Movement Made America Helpless" you should expect big picture conclusions. However, he rarely IF EVER explains how SHAM directly influences these statistics relenting on multiple occasions how he could never realistically quantify "the damage."
At its core Sham is a scathing series of diatribes (some well argued and resources cited) against everything that victimization and empowerment encapsulate and have, as he has concluded, tainted with its message. In many places throughout the book I found myself agreeing with him. In others I exclaimed out loud "Oh what the actual f**k" because I was in such disbelief that he could come to such outlandish conclusions.
This book has some value simply because its a dissenting voice in sea of stronger nearly screaming voices, which is good, and frankly I'd like to see someone more even-keeled bust down and argue against the Self-Help types. Although Mr. Salerno did nothing to convince me that the likes of Dr. Phil and Tony Robbins are ruining the nation as a whole (although I've met a few people they've undermined), I am far more cautious of the industry and the messages that they sell. I figure that this is at least a partial victory for Salerno, even though the admission comes begrudgingly due to his at times completely unnecessary alarmist tone.
In conclusion, this is a book that I wanted to love but clearly hated due to the author's inability to back up his claims with any legitimate proof, just as many other reviewers have stated CORRELATION DOES NOT EQUAL CAUSATION and that is one of this book's worst offenses. To be honest he had a few great arguments and points I agreed with, even if it was on a basic and possibly unfounded level (confirmation bias is a powerful thing). Like I said at the beginning of the review, rarely does a book leave me this conflicted upon conclusion.
Let's start with the star review. I gave it two, although I feel it was much more deserving of one, I added it at the end of the day because he still might of successfully pulled me away from Self-Help books and gurus. It seems only fair.
Salerno in the course of this book jumps from providing evidence to back up his points, to wildly going off on school reform, the breakdown of the nuclear family, and even political atmosphere with barely a strand of thought connecting his main argument to his current topic. Sure, with the subtext of the title being "How the Self-Help Movement Made America Helpless" you should expect big picture conclusions. However, he rarely IF EVER explains how SHAM directly influences these statistics relenting on multiple occasions how he could never realistically quantify "the damage."
At its core Sham is a scathing series of diatribes (some well argued and resources cited) against everything that victimization and empowerment encapsulate and have, as he has concluded, tainted with its message. In many places throughout the book I found myself agreeing with him. In others I exclaimed out loud "Oh what the actual f**k" because I was in such disbelief that he could come to such outlandish conclusions.
This book has some value simply because its a dissenting voice in sea of stronger nearly screaming voices, which is good, and frankly I'd like to see someone more even-keeled bust down and argue against the Self-Help types. Although Mr. Salerno did nothing to convince me that the likes of Dr. Phil and Tony Robbins are ruining the nation as a whole (although I've met a few people they've undermined), I am far more cautious of the industry and the messages that they sell. I figure that this is at least a partial victory for Salerno, even though the admission comes begrudgingly due to his at times completely unnecessary alarmist tone.
In conclusion, this is a book that I wanted to love but clearly hated due to the author's inability to back up his claims with any legitimate proof, just as many other reviewers have stated CORRELATION DOES NOT EQUAL CAUSATION and that is one of this book's worst offenses. To be honest he had a few great arguments and points I agreed with, even if it was on a basic and possibly unfounded level (confirmation bias is a powerful thing). Like I said at the beginning of the review, rarely does a book leave me this conflicted upon conclusion.
Read
February 7, 2014This may be unnecessarily hostile but should be essential reading for anyone who has ever read a self-help book. It's important to realize that self-help publishing is an industry with the same motives for self-perpetuation as any other industry.
November 24, 2013
Mr. Salerno makes a good argument against almost all of the "self help" movements and especially those who make themselves millionaires promoting nonsense. A lot were obvious, easy targets, but there were a lot of surprises, too. Who would have guessed AA's published numbers could be interpreted as meaning you're better off quitting on your own than joining AA? He also gets into a lot of side topics that aren't so obviously self help, such as "alternative medicine" and the "self-esteem" movement. I found it a very interesting read. I fear that those who most need to read and think about these topics won't read or think about it.
May 27, 2025
4.5 Stars!
“After listening to the complaints from drunk people, fat people, sad people, oversexed people, incest survivors, divorce survivors, people who can’t get a date, people who wish they could stop dating partners who hurt them, and on and on, we become jaded. Sick of trying to sort through the mess, we begin to assess the various (self) interest groups without meaningful regard to the merit of their claims, we simply assign the greatest value to the squeakiest wheel.”
Welcome to the weird and often hilarious world of SHAM, a quirky, confusing and often contradictory landscape where qualifications are optional and self-delusion and self-promotion everything. Salerno is on storming form here as he takes various gurus and their respective strains of snake oil and takes them apart and shows them to be looking a tad “off-brand”.
“Once you start making allowances based on people’s weaknesses, where do you draw the line? And who gets to draw it?”
His analysis and critique of Victimization was particularly engaging and refreshing, as he challenges the slow but insidious reframing of appalling, selfish, hurtful, and often criminally destructive behaviour as merely the symptoms of helpless victims. And shows how an entire (and highly lucrative) industry has swept in to exploit this, pronouncing themselves as saviours and healers, often with little to no scientific evidence to back it up.
“We have the Recovery movement to thank for the fact that nowadays the people who criticize wrongdoers are the sinners, while the wrongdoers themselves are simply “being human”.”
Salerno has produced a fine piece of work here, and even though this is now more than twenty years old it still presents many relevant and relatable cases with many of the guilty egos, still getting away with hawking their tired and recycled snake oil and other BS to millions of desperate, needy and gullible paying people.
“If Victimization teaches us to deny our faults, Empowerment teaches to revel in them.”
I certainly don’t agree with all of the conclusions he arrived at, with many of them drifting dangerously close to right wing ideas which resemble Republican soundbites, but there’s a lot of great stuff in here and we would recognise many of the issues discussed under new names today – like “snowflake” and “toxic positivity”.
“Recovery’s bedrock assumption-that you’re not evil or venal, you’re simply exhibiting symptoms-lays the groundwork for an amoral view of life. It explains why today’s society goes to extraordinary semantic lengths to separate the criminal from the crime.”
“The focus-as in most areas where self-help has done its dirty work-is on feelings over thoughts, intent over outcome, contentment over productivity. School districts have methodically disconnected pride from performance.”
“The leaders of the self-esteem movement borrowed freely from the available rhetoric. They created a garish patchwork of unproven theories and inconclusive data, using whatever small shreds of material helped their cause while discarding the large bolts of tightly rolled fabric that didn’t fit their free-form patterns.”
“We all want so badly to believe in miracles. That’s what makes us vulnerable. And that’s what makes them rich.”
July 1, 2013
Steve Salerno writes a blistering accusatory book about the self-help and actualization movement (ironically nicknamed SHAM) but his arguments sometimes fall flat. I kept thinking, “Yes, but…” as I was reading through this book, and in the interest of full disclosure I am not a fan of the movement, but I have read some of Dr. Laura’s books (Ten Stupid Things…) and Suze Orman’s books as well.
Salerno does follow the money in some instances and hits pay dirt. One example is that of the Hooked on Phonics series, which is promoted by Dr. Laura Schlessinger. Turns out that it was created by one of the partners in the company that also owns Dr. Laura’s show. So the individuals at the forefront of the SHAM movement aren’t so much about helping individuals as they are about satisfying their corporate masters.
Salerno avoids actual claims of causation, which would require solid proof and instead relies on connections between cause and effect. Coincidences are sometimes just that: coincidences, and there’s no real evidence to connect one thing to another. But Salerno does this throughout the book, and this weakens his argument considerably.
He also castigates some of the biggest personalities in the SHAM movement including Dr. Laura, Dr. Phil, Tony Robbins, et al, but instead of showing how their advice harms instead of helps, he resorts to ad hominem argumentation, which proves nothing. He might not personally like these people, but that has nothing to do with whether or not they are qualified to counsel people or give advice. I was surprised to learn that both John Gray (Mars and Venus) and Barbara DeAngelis, who have both written books about relationships, have doctorates from a nonaccredited university.
I agree that the SHAM industry is out of control; every week it seems that there’s a new book telling us how to think, feel, or act. Its profits come at the expense of desperate people. However, by using faulty logic, his conclusions are easily dismissed. Still, for what it’s worth, it is a good read.
Salerno does follow the money in some instances and hits pay dirt. One example is that of the Hooked on Phonics series, which is promoted by Dr. Laura Schlessinger. Turns out that it was created by one of the partners in the company that also owns Dr. Laura’s show. So the individuals at the forefront of the SHAM movement aren’t so much about helping individuals as they are about satisfying their corporate masters.
Salerno avoids actual claims of causation, which would require solid proof and instead relies on connections between cause and effect. Coincidences are sometimes just that: coincidences, and there’s no real evidence to connect one thing to another. But Salerno does this throughout the book, and this weakens his argument considerably.
He also castigates some of the biggest personalities in the SHAM movement including Dr. Laura, Dr. Phil, Tony Robbins, et al, but instead of showing how their advice harms instead of helps, he resorts to ad hominem argumentation, which proves nothing. He might not personally like these people, but that has nothing to do with whether or not they are qualified to counsel people or give advice. I was surprised to learn that both John Gray (Mars and Venus) and Barbara DeAngelis, who have both written books about relationships, have doctorates from a nonaccredited university.
I agree that the SHAM industry is out of control; every week it seems that there’s a new book telling us how to think, feel, or act. Its profits come at the expense of desperate people. However, by using faulty logic, his conclusions are easily dismissed. Still, for what it’s worth, it is a good read.
May 30, 2012
Very good points, not argued that well.
September 4, 2021
This books fits my confirmation bias. Yes, I have one…evolved, matured, earned, and obviously acknowledged. I laugh at the old bookstore joke “Q: Can you direct me to the self-help section? A: If I told you, that would defeat the purpose.” Sharks hawking books, silly seminars (oops…that bias again), videos… yeah, no thanks. Really, … no thanks. Published in 2005, the message is still relevant. Probably even more so, given the explosion of “social” media in the intervening years since. Salerno has a dire warning: “To describe SHAM as a waste of time and money vastly understates its collateral damage.” He has the pedigree, and the experience, and the inside track - he shares that when working at Rodale “Another important lesson in self-help theology: SHAM’s answer when its methods fail? You need more of it. You always need more of it.”
The history is longer than we think:
Then there’s this astute anecdote
On Robbins, a minor dig, but it punctuates the point that he’s really a serious SHAM
It’s still a huge industry 16 years later, with dragon moms, and minimalists, and feng shui, jeez, look at even the artisanal waters out there… I know I’m not their target audience because I am so rarely as to be considered not influenced by advertisements. But they have a lot of targets who shell out a lot of money. One problem is
One incredibly lucrative SHAM that Salerno doesn’t talk about is the televangelists (but he does talk about faith healing). That's probably a whole other book.
The history is longer than we think:
In fact, by 1983, so substantial were sales figures for books of this genre that the lofty New York Times Book Review, which for decades fought the good fight on behalf of books written by actual writers, threw in the towel and added another category, “Advice Books,” to its distinguished best-seller list.
Then there’s this astute anecdote
Archie Brodsky, a senior research associate for the Program in Psychiatry and the Law at Harvard Medical School. “Psychotherapy has a chancy success rate even in a one-on-one setting over a period of years,” observes Brodsky, who coauthored (with Stanton Peele) Love and Addiction. “How can you expect to break a lifetime of bad behavioral habits through a couple of banquet-hall seminars or by sitting down with some book?Chancy. Yep, fits my bias. And we’re not even out of the Introduction. Anyway…Salerno rightly observes SHAM “is a religion whose clerics get very, very rich by stating the obvious in a laughably pontifical fashion.” Sound like I’m grousing because I didn’t think of any of these scams, um, SHAMs, um… No, my ethics don’t allow me to prey on the gullible. Not so with all of the SHAMs Salerno exposes here…Dr. Phil, Dr. Laura, Dr. John Gray (who apparently got his paper from a degree mill), Suze Orman, to name a few… whose hypocrisies have no shame. The Tony Robbinses, sports figures and the plethora of saccharine nonsense that they and the media spout (I may have paraphrased that a bit…), life coaches, motivational speakers, and then there’s the Recovery business (“As you can see, they’re big on toxicity in Recovery circles. And they’re huge on shame; thousands of self-help books have focused directly on the concept.”)… preying even more.
In sum, Victimization and Recovery have relentlessly encouraged ordinary people with ordinary lives to conceive of themselves as victims of some lifelong ailment that, even during the best of times, lurks just beneath the surface, waiting to undo them.Don’t think Salerno is minimizing actual victims…that’s a mistake. He’s calling out the snake oil peddlers who are manufacturing their target audiences.
On Robbins, a minor dig, but it punctuates the point that he’s really a serious SHAM
For someone whose stock in trade is the precise, life-changing use of language, Robbins can be surprisingly careless with it. Promotional materials describing his new line of nutritional products twice refer to one of the key ingredients as collodials instead of colloidals.And then there are the psychics and pseudoscience health quack. Some are semi-savvy … on Silvia Browne’s Larry King show appearance: “Undeterred by her lack of any formal credentials except a master’s degree in English literature, Browne used medical terminology freely, and sometimes even correctly.” Most are dangerous.
It’s still a huge industry 16 years later, with dragon moms, and minimalists, and feng shui, jeez, look at even the artisanal waters out there… I know I’m not their target audience because I am so rarely as to be considered not influenced by advertisements. But they have a lot of targets who shell out a lot of money. One problem is
…what mostly distinguish[ed] self-help gurus from laypeople is the former group’s ability to “write well enough to get a book deal.” The Internet eliminates even that “credential,” modest as it is, thus further lowering the bar. It allows people who couldn’t get a book deal to direct-market their self-published (or, increasingly, e-published) wares and become viable niche players in the burgeoning relationships market.(Not just SHAM books… pretty much anything)
One incredibly lucrative SHAM that Salerno doesn’t talk about is the televangelists (but he does talk about faith healing). That's probably a whole other book.
June 15, 2009
I found this book very interesting. The author devotes entire chapters to Dr. Phil and Oprah, two people that I absolutely cannot stand. He points out that many "self-help gurus" are trying to help people with the very thing that plagues them. In Dr. Phil's background, he has an ex-wife on whom he cheated. When she confronted him, he said, "Get over it", one of his famous one-liners. Dr. Laura Schlessinger's harsh stance against extra-marital sex and pornography is highlighted by her past of breaking up a marriage and riske pictures from that relationship being on the internet.
The author also went into how the SHAM outlook that started in the 60's has infiltrated our schools. Children's self-esteem has been made the priority versus academics, which has shown in the US's test scores over the past several decades when compared with international test scores -- SAD!
The author also went into how the SHAM outlook that started in the 60's has infiltrated our schools. Children's self-esteem has been made the priority versus academics, which has shown in the US's test scores over the past several decades when compared with international test scores -- SAD!
September 13, 2007
Mr. Salerno would have better served his work had he taken a mor humorous tack (like Peter Washington's history of the new age movement in Madame Blavatsky's Baboon). Instead it's a bunch of bitter griping which I got thoroughly tired of 200 pages in and never finished. Having said that, there are some important and illuminating points he makes regarding the self-help movement. If you are interested about the facade and uselessness of said movement and/or would like a counter point to the vomitous The Secret, do read. But just be forewarned, Mr. Salerno is extremely taxing. He should keep on the sunnyside of life. maybe he could join a group...
February 17, 2011
I thought this was an interesting book. America has become obsessed with self-help. Most of the books that are out there leave us more confused than when we started. This book gave great insight to some of the ideas that have made us dependant on false hope and false promises. There were some aspects of the book that got a little boring like the chapter on "Put me in Coach". Overall very informant and worth reading.
June 6, 2008
This was an interesting, if somewhat depressing expose about how the self-help movement has virtually crippled American society. Some of it I completely agreed with, other parts I wasn't sure I did. But it was well researched although perhaps not as impartial as it could be and gave plenty of food for thought
November 10, 2007
A. Maz. Ing. This is the kind of book that confirms everything I've always suspected, and lays it out in a smart, coherent way that has the added effect of making me furious at the world.
July 29, 2018
Full disclosure, I've personally read a few books you could consider self-help, and always kept them as a valuable resource. But I always knew it's not the books, or the seminars or the blogs, that changed your life, it was your personal action. And also knew that despite your best efforts, success and happiness depend on many external factors as well as your inner attitude.
What this book highlights is the other side of that story, a multibillion industry devoted to make the world feel sick, or wrong, or a victim, and then sell them a quick fix for their hopes, dreams or (perceived or real) inadequacies. I never imagined how perverse could this world be, and how many gullible people could feel into its trap - millions who follow these cult-like organizations' empty promises based on no evidence of its effectiveness (not unlike religion, by the way).
Well written and entertaining, has no problem in putting in the same bag of charlatans such apparently separate topics as life coaching, recovery programs, pseudo-medicine, and other "alternative" (ie. fraudulent) therapies.
On the minus side, I think the book puts too much blame on the industry and not enough on its consumers, who shouldn't be just considered shameless victims (as per the book's own thesis). Also, the connection it makes to broader societal changes (such as victimization of criminals, self esteem education or alternative medicine support) feels a bit forced - obviously the author wants to use SHAM as the influence that lead to all these anomalies, but the proof he gives is speculative, based on anecdote, and as he admits there are many factors at play - or maybe the causality goes in the opposite way, and the rise of SHAM comes from the societal mindset changes in the first place.
Other than that, an eye-opening reading that makes me question not just the frauds and deceptions I already knew, but some I never expected (AA and support groups!).
What this book highlights is the other side of that story, a multibillion industry devoted to make the world feel sick, or wrong, or a victim, and then sell them a quick fix for their hopes, dreams or (perceived or real) inadequacies. I never imagined how perverse could this world be, and how many gullible people could feel into its trap - millions who follow these cult-like organizations' empty promises based on no evidence of its effectiveness (not unlike religion, by the way).
Well written and entertaining, has no problem in putting in the same bag of charlatans such apparently separate topics as life coaching, recovery programs, pseudo-medicine, and other "alternative" (ie. fraudulent) therapies.
On the minus side, I think the book puts too much blame on the industry and not enough on its consumers, who shouldn't be just considered shameless victims (as per the book's own thesis). Also, the connection it makes to broader societal changes (such as victimization of criminals, self esteem education or alternative medicine support) feels a bit forced - obviously the author wants to use SHAM as the influence that lead to all these anomalies, but the proof he gives is speculative, based on anecdote, and as he admits there are many factors at play - or maybe the causality goes in the opposite way, and the rise of SHAM comes from the societal mindset changes in the first place.
Other than that, an eye-opening reading that makes me question not just the frauds and deceptions I already knew, but some I never expected (AA and support groups!).
April 4, 2023
Reading this book made me rethink some of my "pop" psychology ideas. I have to say Steve was ruthlessly honest with his book. Americans spend billions of dollars on self help every year, and they are creating followers instead of independent souls.
October 22, 2019
"But if this book achieves nothing else, my most fervent hope is that it provokes some thought about the things you always took as 'givens'" says the author who's book seems to take an awful lot as given. This book really annoyed me. Mostly because, while it has some interesting critisisms on the SHAM industry, it does less about working with those criticisms and more of trying to tie them to some right wing, conservative talking points. This book could have honestly been about 50 pages and even that may be more than needed for the parts that are worth reading.
The SHAM industry and the alternative medicine that it incorporates is very worthy of critique. They are after all full of grifters and phonies with no real substance or evidence behind them. This book does point this out. But then veers off to complain that divorce rates are up, that masculinity and men aren't appreciated as much, that corporations aren't a ruling machine to act as they please, that there are "touchy feely" things being tought and strangely enough that women are deciding to have children a bit later in life. The author seems to have a wet dream kind of love for family life in the 1950's and prior along with a bunch of misogyny. I'm not interested in this. I'm not interested in hearing talking points that have little to nothing to do with the subject at hand. I don't care for the author making sweeping statements that he doesn't, because he can't, support with evidence himself, sounding like an old Denis Leary stand up or a Tucker Carlson/Bill O'Reilly show.
I picked up this book thinking that it was going to be a good critique of the SHAM industry and that the author would spend time debunking or actually going through some of it. He doesn't really. He lists how much money some key figures make. He let's you know that AA groups don't release comprehensive data on their success or failure. That alt medicine doesn't work and is dangerous. But he doesn't actually go into any of it. You are better off watching Adam Ruins Everything or even old Penn and Teller Bullshit episodes on these subjects. You'll get a more comprehensive critique of them there and they will actually work with the evidence they have.
It doesn't help that the author doesn't seem to be interested in much actual research either. He prefers to mention things, preferably without references , that seem to support his conservative views and then move on. For instance naming the famous Stella Liebeck Mcdonalds coffee spill case as a "lawsuits gone wild", even though coffee causing 3rd degree burns on someone might be cause for an investigation. He does say that the case was more complicated than it was often made out to be, but then goes right into claiming that people should realise that their own hot coffee is hot. The woman needed skingrafts after the ordeal. If you Google the case you can get, not only the whole story, but you can also see the pictures of what happened. It's not pretty. This sort of shoddy 'reaserch' really shouldn't be uplifted. But I guess since he does hit the right talking points, it is.
I can't give this book more than 1 star. Simply because that the critique he offers is better done elsewhere. He doesn't actually go very deep into the problems of the SHAM industry, preferring to talk about other issues with many underlying causes in a conservative talking point way, and what he does of it feels like it could have been condensed into a much shorter and, ultimately, better book.
The SHAM industry and the alternative medicine that it incorporates is very worthy of critique. They are after all full of grifters and phonies with no real substance or evidence behind them. This book does point this out. But then veers off to complain that divorce rates are up, that masculinity and men aren't appreciated as much, that corporations aren't a ruling machine to act as they please, that there are "touchy feely" things being tought and strangely enough that women are deciding to have children a bit later in life. The author seems to have a wet dream kind of love for family life in the 1950's and prior along with a bunch of misogyny. I'm not interested in this. I'm not interested in hearing talking points that have little to nothing to do with the subject at hand. I don't care for the author making sweeping statements that he doesn't, because he can't, support with evidence himself, sounding like an old Denis Leary stand up or a Tucker Carlson/Bill O'Reilly show.
I picked up this book thinking that it was going to be a good critique of the SHAM industry and that the author would spend time debunking or actually going through some of it. He doesn't really. He lists how much money some key figures make. He let's you know that AA groups don't release comprehensive data on their success or failure. That alt medicine doesn't work and is dangerous. But he doesn't actually go into any of it. You are better off watching Adam Ruins Everything or even old Penn and Teller Bullshit episodes on these subjects. You'll get a more comprehensive critique of them there and they will actually work with the evidence they have.
It doesn't help that the author doesn't seem to be interested in much actual research either. He prefers to mention things, preferably without references , that seem to support his conservative views and then move on. For instance naming the famous Stella Liebeck Mcdonalds coffee spill case as a "lawsuits gone wild", even though coffee causing 3rd degree burns on someone might be cause for an investigation. He does say that the case was more complicated than it was often made out to be, but then goes right into claiming that people should realise that their own hot coffee is hot. The woman needed skingrafts after the ordeal. If you Google the case you can get, not only the whole story, but you can also see the pictures of what happened. It's not pretty. This sort of shoddy 'reaserch' really shouldn't be uplifted. But I guess since he does hit the right talking points, it is.
I can't give this book more than 1 star. Simply because that the critique he offers is better done elsewhere. He doesn't actually go very deep into the problems of the SHAM industry, preferring to talk about other issues with many underlying causes in a conservative talking point way, and what he does of it feels like it could have been condensed into a much shorter and, ultimately, better book.
June 23, 2010
This is the same review I left on amazon.
__________
There is a lot in this book worthy of merit. In cases where the author has cited real facts, studies and professionals in the field of psychology, he builds a compelling case that the self help movement is flawed at its core. I will admit that I am already biased against self-help and its big name proponents so I was a pretty easy sell on these things.
But where there are strong cases that the self esteem movement has been harmful to children and motivational speakers and 12 step programs have shown no meaningful results in improving businesses and treating addiction, respectively, some of his other claims seem to be more wild editorializing instead of actual fact. For instance, his insistence that self-help has a causal relationship to divorce rates. Divorce rates have steadily risen as women have become more independent and been able to support themselves as well as the advent of readily accessible birth control that no longer ties a woman to a life of giving birth to and raising countless children. It's nice to be able to state that the self help movement is at fault for divorce and we'd all be happier if the movement never started, but the author makes no reference to evidence that this is the case. I believe this stems more from the author's desire to directly link each major area of SHAM to a real life effect that we can all relate to, but I feel it really cheapens his entire book.
Worse, though, than these cases, are his comments about the "feminization" of schools and businesses. He accurately points out that females have fared better in schools that have focused more on verbal and emotional aspects of learning and less on competitiveness and his points that this happens at the expense of the wellbeing of males is a fair point, but this book would lead you to believe it'd be better to set the progress of females back and return to a time that preferentially favored males. Clearly, improvement is needed but the solution is not to go back to another failed system. I also resent this same sort of Mars/Venus line of delineation between the genders. The truth is much more subtle and all individuals will fall along a continuum of learning styles. A good teacher will present information in a variety of ways to target a number of learning styles. Yes, boys statistically do better in one learning environment and girls in another but this oversimplification of learning difference is exactly the sort of faulty thinking the author is trying to debunk throughout the book, so why use it as justification for his theory?
The result is that the overall tone of this book feels slightly misogynistic and self serving, which is especially frustrating since I very much would like to be able to recommend this book overall. I give it three stars because I feel there is some excellent information contained within, but I I cannot give it more because I would prefer the author stick more to fact and less to speculation.
__________
There is a lot in this book worthy of merit. In cases where the author has cited real facts, studies and professionals in the field of psychology, he builds a compelling case that the self help movement is flawed at its core. I will admit that I am already biased against self-help and its big name proponents so I was a pretty easy sell on these things.
But where there are strong cases that the self esteem movement has been harmful to children and motivational speakers and 12 step programs have shown no meaningful results in improving businesses and treating addiction, respectively, some of his other claims seem to be more wild editorializing instead of actual fact. For instance, his insistence that self-help has a causal relationship to divorce rates. Divorce rates have steadily risen as women have become more independent and been able to support themselves as well as the advent of readily accessible birth control that no longer ties a woman to a life of giving birth to and raising countless children. It's nice to be able to state that the self help movement is at fault for divorce and we'd all be happier if the movement never started, but the author makes no reference to evidence that this is the case. I believe this stems more from the author's desire to directly link each major area of SHAM to a real life effect that we can all relate to, but I feel it really cheapens his entire book.
Worse, though, than these cases, are his comments about the "feminization" of schools and businesses. He accurately points out that females have fared better in schools that have focused more on verbal and emotional aspects of learning and less on competitiveness and his points that this happens at the expense of the wellbeing of males is a fair point, but this book would lead you to believe it'd be better to set the progress of females back and return to a time that preferentially favored males. Clearly, improvement is needed but the solution is not to go back to another failed system. I also resent this same sort of Mars/Venus line of delineation between the genders. The truth is much more subtle and all individuals will fall along a continuum of learning styles. A good teacher will present information in a variety of ways to target a number of learning styles. Yes, boys statistically do better in one learning environment and girls in another but this oversimplification of learning difference is exactly the sort of faulty thinking the author is trying to debunk throughout the book, so why use it as justification for his theory?
The result is that the overall tone of this book feels slightly misogynistic and self serving, which is especially frustrating since I very much would like to be able to recommend this book overall. I give it three stars because I feel there is some excellent information contained within, but I I cannot give it more because I would prefer the author stick more to fact and less to speculation.
February 11, 2013
It's a real shame this book wasn't a best seller, but then again that would make it just another SHAM book (people reading this to cure themselves of all the SHAM books they've read over the years).
The author made a lot of very good points and provided a good look behind the curtain at the biggest names in the game. There were a few occasions where he might have went a bit far, the notion that none of these books or authors have any value is a bit extreme. A good example of that was his view towards, Dale Carnegie "How To Win Friends And Influence People." While the title is terrible there is reason why this book has continued to sell well and so many people swear by it. That the material and impacts are obvious does not diminish the value of the work.
However he well within bounds when he takes on and exposes the hypocrisy and self serving nature of numerous other leaders in the SHAM field. This is actually a book that could be broken into three or four books and expanded on greatly. While the material was well covered, one can feel there is much bigger story underlying things.
Worth reading, it has given me some things to examine in much greater depth.
The author made a lot of very good points and provided a good look behind the curtain at the biggest names in the game. There were a few occasions where he might have went a bit far, the notion that none of these books or authors have any value is a bit extreme. A good example of that was his view towards, Dale Carnegie "How To Win Friends And Influence People." While the title is terrible there is reason why this book has continued to sell well and so many people swear by it. That the material and impacts are obvious does not diminish the value of the work.
However he well within bounds when he takes on and exposes the hypocrisy and self serving nature of numerous other leaders in the SHAM field. This is actually a book that could be broken into three or four books and expanded on greatly. While the material was well covered, one can feel there is much bigger story underlying things.
Worth reading, it has given me some things to examine in much greater depth.
April 4, 2013
This is an expose of the self help and actualization movement, which forms the acronym SHAM. The author worked for a magazine that published their own self help titles and that the publishers knew the information did not work but the whole idea was to keep people buying. It has become known as the 18 month principle. Every 18 months put out a new self help title. There are chapters on Tony Robbins and Phil McGraw and many others showing that in most cases the so called "experts" really have little to no expertise in the areas. One of my favorite bits is about John Gray, the author of "Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus". Turns out he has been married five times, including fellow self-help guru Barbara DeAngelis and could not make these work. Some relationship expert! His PHD is not worth the paper it was written on as it was bought from a diploma mill which has since been shut down by the U. S. government. He has admitted to the PHD purchase.
Some of this has been repeat information. I have seen at least a couple of other items which have exposed Tony Robbins, including the great debunker James Randi.
Some of this has been repeat information. I have seen at least a couple of other items which have exposed Tony Robbins, including the great debunker James Randi.
January 1, 2012
This is a book about the Self-Help and Actualization Movement. It describes such people as Tony Robbins, Dr. Phil, Dr. Laura, Suze Orman, Tommy Lasorda, John Gray ('Men are from Mars...') and Marianne Williamson. It describes how shallow their advice often is and these people often inflate their resumes. He is especially vicious in skewering Dr. Laura.The book is a little unfocused however. He tears down a number of prominent experts, but does not give us any guidance about how to tell useful from useless self-serving advice. Some of the advice available out there is certainly of some use. He also gets heavily into the political aspects of the self-help industry, about how it makes us all into victims. It's hard to see exactly where he is coming from, other than criticizing pretty much everything.
November 2, 2010
Steve Salerno nails exactly self-help is complete and utter bull@#$. He does it from the start, when he reports that market study shows the key demographic of self-help book buyers are--wait for it--self-help book buyers. He nails down motivational speakers like Tony Robbins and Stephen Covey. He nails down talk show hosts like Dr.'s Phil and Laura. And he is merciless, laying bare the fraud that is the Self Help and Actualization Movement.
October 28, 2021
Interesting perspective thats for sure!
August 23, 2024
A SHARP ATTACK ON THE "SELF-HELP AND ACTUALIZATION MOVEMENT" (SHAM)
Author Steve Salerno wrote in the Introduction to this 2005 book, "For more than a generation, the Self-Help and Actualization Movement---felicitiously enough the words form the acronym SHAM---has been talking out of both sides of its mouth: promising relief from all that ails you while at the same time promoting nostrums that almost guarantee nothing will change (unless it gets worse).
"Along the way, SHAM has filled the bank accounts of a slickly packaged breed of false prophets, including... high-profile authors and motivational speakers, self-styled group counselors and workshop leaders, miscellaneous 'life coaches,' and any number of lesser wise-men-without-portfolio who have hung out shingles promising to deliver unto others some level of enhanced contentment. For a nice, fat, nonrefundable fee. Self-help is an enterprise wherein people holding the thinnest of credentials diagnose in basically normal people symptoms of inflated or invented maladies, so that they may then implement remedies that have never been shown to work." (Pg. 2)
He asserts, "A growing body of evidence challenges SHAM's ability to do what it says. For one thing, despite all the talk of personal empowerment, limitless potential, and a world in which glasses are always at least half full, Americans have become more dependent on chemical modification... we live in a culture in which some of the most profitable products are named Prozac, Paxil, and Xanax. Evidently a great many Americans don't think that they're all that 'OK.' In the final analysis, it's not the thousands of seminars of millions of books with their billions of uplifting words that Americans seem to count on to get them through the day. It's the drugs." Pg. 12)
He points out that "By the time the most powerful woman in American media plucked him from obscurity and conferred the Oprah Touch, Phil McGraw had given up on clinical psychology, in part because, he later said, he was 'the worst marital therapist in the history of the world.' But McGraw, at least, holds a degree to practice what he now preaches." (Pg. 14-15)
He suggests, "the self-help movement still divides, roughly, into two camps. There is EMPOWERMENT---broadly speaking, the idea that you are fully responsible for all you do, good and bad. And, in contrast, there is VICTIMIZATION, which sells the idea that you are NOT responsible for what you do (at least not the bad things)." (Pg. 26) He argues, "But for all its acceptance in so many settings, the Recovery movement suffers from the same problems that plague the rest of SHAM: It hasn't been shown to provide much help to those whose needs it supposedly addresses. And it could actually be doing them---society as a whole---real harm." (Pg. 134)
He summarizes, "If there's an overriding message to this book, it is this: Even if you've never turned a single page of a self-help tome or heard the first word of wisdom depart the lips of some newly ordained self-improvement deacon, the way you live your life has been affected, if not transformed, by SHAM and its canons... Over time... SHAM's program for better living has a way of sounding plausible, inevitable, 'normal.' The most incorrigible skeptics fall prey to passive reinforcement." (Pg. 161)
This is a passionately-argued attack on the self-help movement, which includes a wealth of information.
Author Steve Salerno wrote in the Introduction to this 2005 book, "For more than a generation, the Self-Help and Actualization Movement---felicitiously enough the words form the acronym SHAM---has been talking out of both sides of its mouth: promising relief from all that ails you while at the same time promoting nostrums that almost guarantee nothing will change (unless it gets worse).
"Along the way, SHAM has filled the bank accounts of a slickly packaged breed of false prophets, including... high-profile authors and motivational speakers, self-styled group counselors and workshop leaders, miscellaneous 'life coaches,' and any number of lesser wise-men-without-portfolio who have hung out shingles promising to deliver unto others some level of enhanced contentment. For a nice, fat, nonrefundable fee. Self-help is an enterprise wherein people holding the thinnest of credentials diagnose in basically normal people symptoms of inflated or invented maladies, so that they may then implement remedies that have never been shown to work." (Pg. 2)
He asserts, "A growing body of evidence challenges SHAM's ability to do what it says. For one thing, despite all the talk of personal empowerment, limitless potential, and a world in which glasses are always at least half full, Americans have become more dependent on chemical modification... we live in a culture in which some of the most profitable products are named Prozac, Paxil, and Xanax. Evidently a great many Americans don't think that they're all that 'OK.' In the final analysis, it's not the thousands of seminars of millions of books with their billions of uplifting words that Americans seem to count on to get them through the day. It's the drugs." Pg. 12)
He points out that "By the time the most powerful woman in American media plucked him from obscurity and conferred the Oprah Touch, Phil McGraw had given up on clinical psychology, in part because, he later said, he was 'the worst marital therapist in the history of the world.' But McGraw, at least, holds a degree to practice what he now preaches." (Pg. 14-15)
He suggests, "the self-help movement still divides, roughly, into two camps. There is EMPOWERMENT---broadly speaking, the idea that you are fully responsible for all you do, good and bad. And, in contrast, there is VICTIMIZATION, which sells the idea that you are NOT responsible for what you do (at least not the bad things)." (Pg. 26) He argues, "But for all its acceptance in so many settings, the Recovery movement suffers from the same problems that plague the rest of SHAM: It hasn't been shown to provide much help to those whose needs it supposedly addresses. And it could actually be doing them---society as a whole---real harm." (Pg. 134)
He summarizes, "If there's an overriding message to this book, it is this: Even if you've never turned a single page of a self-help tome or heard the first word of wisdom depart the lips of some newly ordained self-improvement deacon, the way you live your life has been affected, if not transformed, by SHAM and its canons... Over time... SHAM's program for better living has a way of sounding plausible, inevitable, 'normal.' The most incorrigible skeptics fall prey to passive reinforcement." (Pg. 161)
This is a passionately-argued attack on the self-help movement, which includes a wealth of information.
April 14, 2025
The calendar reads 2025 as I write this, so it's been a full two decades since this book came out. Some of the info might be dated, but it remains a poignant warning about the dangers of the mass self-help movement, and the damage that legions of popular psychologists, uncredentialed advice-givers, and intellectually vacuous "motivational speakers" have done to the fabric of society.
That is, when the book manages to stay focused on those topics, and when the author holds back from becoming too preachy and pedantic. He has it out for Alcoholics Anonymous, claiming that their multi-step recovery programs have little to no evidence that they work. To my understanding, however, having had relatives in that program, AA groups themselves are not supposed to stop or even curtail drinking- they offer those with drinking problems safe places to be open about their addiction and discuss with those in similar positions. They are entirely voluntary, and it is of course possible to become sober without them. But the author doesn't really offer much in the way of better alternatives; at one point he cites a study which claimed to show that alcoholism treatment in general may not even be as effective as "just letting the addiction run its course." What is that supposed to mean?!?
There are a few other head-scratchers, such as some wonky passages about women and careers, and the chapter on ex-convicts or other former scofflaws who turn themselves around and hit the lecture circuit. I get the issue with forming a whole industry around the reformed-criminal-turned-motivational-speaker thing, but the big question he draws from this is why these people "deserve a platform ahead of people who always followed the straight and narrow?" I think the answer is pretty simple- supply and demand, right? Less than a percent of the US population is incarcerated, and only a small percentage of THAT number has the wherewithal to educate the public on their experiences and life choices. In short, there are not very many people who can do what they do. Not every role model HAS to be squeaky clean; sometimes, people need to hear from people who have hit the very bottom of rock bottom too.
So those are my gripes. I still found the book very enlightening and well-argued, those faults aside. It remains a worthwhile read even now; we seem not to have learned anything as a society, so until we do this book will be relevant.
That is, when the book manages to stay focused on those topics, and when the author holds back from becoming too preachy and pedantic. He has it out for Alcoholics Anonymous, claiming that their multi-step recovery programs have little to no evidence that they work. To my understanding, however, having had relatives in that program, AA groups themselves are not supposed to stop or even curtail drinking- they offer those with drinking problems safe places to be open about their addiction and discuss with those in similar positions. They are entirely voluntary, and it is of course possible to become sober without them. But the author doesn't really offer much in the way of better alternatives; at one point he cites a study which claimed to show that alcoholism treatment in general may not even be as effective as "just letting the addiction run its course." What is that supposed to mean?!?
There are a few other head-scratchers, such as some wonky passages about women and careers, and the chapter on ex-convicts or other former scofflaws who turn themselves around and hit the lecture circuit. I get the issue with forming a whole industry around the reformed-criminal-turned-motivational-speaker thing, but the big question he draws from this is why these people "deserve a platform ahead of people who always followed the straight and narrow?" I think the answer is pretty simple- supply and demand, right? Less than a percent of the US population is incarcerated, and only a small percentage of THAT number has the wherewithal to educate the public on their experiences and life choices. In short, there are not very many people who can do what they do. Not every role model HAS to be squeaky clean; sometimes, people need to hear from people who have hit the very bottom of rock bottom too.
So those are my gripes. I still found the book very enlightening and well-argued, those faults aside. It remains a worthwhile read even now; we seem not to have learned anything as a society, so until we do this book will be relevant.
January 5, 2020
3.5 stars, rounded up.
What a thought provoking read. I’ve been reading a lot of non-fiction the past few years. Some of that non-fiction has included books in the self-help genre. I sometimes found myself through piles of self-help fluff to try to find the gems that are actually useful. This book does a great job of outlining so many of the problems I’ve encountered in such books and in the “guru” entrepreneur culture I’ve noticed developing online. The goal is often not to help you actually improve your life, but to upsell another book, another course, another retreat. The book also made me to reconsider the consequences of self-help on society at large. Though I was aware of some of these, such as how the increase in selfishness and narcissism has led to a lot of problems in relationships, and the “war” on men and boys that has resulted in a lot of lost young men, I hadn’t really considered how empowerment or victimization resulting from self-help played so heavily into politics.
That being said, there were also significant parts of the book that I disagreed with, especially in the chapters toward the end of the book.
Though I agree that there has been a rise in people being coddled and oversensitivity toward what might be considered offensive, I felt as though the author didn’t really consider the people who are indeed struggling with an issue that might be considered stigmatizing or that people don’t believe is “real.” What about people who are struggling with a mental illness and just trying to function in life? It’s not that those people are being over sensitive or exaggerating their symptoms - they have a legitimate problem that might require accommodation, and they might feel rightfully offended when people don’t take it seriously. They’re not simply making excuses for why they are having difficulty functioning, which is an attitude that is all too common in our society. Additionally, while the fields of psychology and psychiatry have their share of problems, they aren’t just sham fields where anything goes. Though we have a lot to learn still about the human mind, therapists and medicine can be life savers for a lot of people and help improve their quality of life.
That said, I would probably still recommend this book to anyone who’s taken a dive into the self-help genre to rethink how helpful any of this advice actually is.
What a thought provoking read. I’ve been reading a lot of non-fiction the past few years. Some of that non-fiction has included books in the self-help genre. I sometimes found myself through piles of self-help fluff to try to find the gems that are actually useful. This book does a great job of outlining so many of the problems I’ve encountered in such books and in the “guru” entrepreneur culture I’ve noticed developing online. The goal is often not to help you actually improve your life, but to upsell another book, another course, another retreat. The book also made me to reconsider the consequences of self-help on society at large. Though I was aware of some of these, such as how the increase in selfishness and narcissism has led to a lot of problems in relationships, and the “war” on men and boys that has resulted in a lot of lost young men, I hadn’t really considered how empowerment or victimization resulting from self-help played so heavily into politics.
That being said, there were also significant parts of the book that I disagreed with, especially in the chapters toward the end of the book.
Though I agree that there has been a rise in people being coddled and oversensitivity toward what might be considered offensive, I felt as though the author didn’t really consider the people who are indeed struggling with an issue that might be considered stigmatizing or that people don’t believe is “real.” What about people who are struggling with a mental illness and just trying to function in life? It’s not that those people are being over sensitive or exaggerating their symptoms - they have a legitimate problem that might require accommodation, and they might feel rightfully offended when people don’t take it seriously. They’re not simply making excuses for why they are having difficulty functioning, which is an attitude that is all too common in our society. Additionally, while the fields of psychology and psychiatry have their share of problems, they aren’t just sham fields where anything goes. Though we have a lot to learn still about the human mind, therapists and medicine can be life savers for a lot of people and help improve their quality of life.
That said, I would probably still recommend this book to anyone who’s taken a dive into the self-help genre to rethink how helpful any of this advice actually is.
August 25, 2019
I had a hard time with this book. It has some really interesting information and context for the self help movement. And it was frankly scary to read how this movement has gained legitimacy to the levels it has now, without much proof that it's actually helping. Some snippets of the book were relevant to the present day, but some other bits really haven't aged well. And much of it is simplistic. I would have liked to see more historical context and more discussion about linguistic determinism rather than just a list of people and topics discussed one by one.
My main beef is with how much the author is present in the text. At first he just seemed super salty about the self help movement, which was occasionally funny but often seemed like he had an axe to grind. But in later parts of the book he also starts to add in moral judgements on all kinds of issues, which was really annoying. And worst of all pretty much EVERYTHING is the self help movement's fault. Alternative explanations get short mentions but mostly it's self help that creates or maintains the problem. Unfortunately there's not nearly enough evidence or sources listed to adequately prove the author's claims.
My main beef is with how much the author is present in the text. At first he just seemed super salty about the self help movement, which was occasionally funny but often seemed like he had an axe to grind. But in later parts of the book he also starts to add in moral judgements on all kinds of issues, which was really annoying. And worst of all pretty much EVERYTHING is the self help movement's fault. Alternative explanations get short mentions but mostly it's self help that creates or maintains the problem. Unfortunately there's not nearly enough evidence or sources listed to adequately prove the author's claims.
April 12, 2018
I picked this one up after James Fell (usually a pretty a marvellous chap) recommended it. I was basically on board with this book in the beginning. Yes the thriving self help industry can be a problem. Yes telling people that they can be and do anything without any real kind of plan or hard work on their part is unethical. But then... suddenly a diatribe about "PC culture". Where the hell did that come from? My heart sank. And then: oh, right. This guy is actually just a total prick. How dare feminists tell single mothers (note that the fathers aren't even mentioned here) that they're ok people when they don't have a man? How dare disabled people try to press others to have a more positive attitude towards disability, instead of acknowledging that we're really all train wrecks? People of colour pointing out that racism is a thing? Get out, you pathetic victims!
I don't know what happened after that because life is too short to waste on this kind of nasty drivel. This is gonna be one of those "refund me, Audible" moments.
I don't know what happened after that because life is too short to waste on this kind of nasty drivel. This is gonna be one of those "refund me, Audible" moments.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 71 reviews