The widening gap was readily apparent from the start.
Kipp Berdiansky, co-owner of the controversial Psycho Donuts, dressed in doctor's scrubs to emphasize the theme of his Campbell shop and offered host Rosy Chu a complimentary T-shirt and bubble wrap, as are handed out to his customers.
His counterpart, Oscar Wright, head of one of the state's leading mental health organizations, wore a suit and tie and spoke in a matter-of-fact tone to balance Berdiansky's light-hearted humor in defending his business.
The televised debate on KTVU's Bay Area People shed some light on the controversy over Psycho Donuts, whose pledge to take doughnuts to the "next demented level" has many mental health advocates crying foul. But more so, the much anticipated face-off perhaps showed just how far apart the two sides are.
"It's hard to say where it's going to go," said Councilman Dan Furtado. "I understand the issues and each side is stating where they're coming from, but in terms of where it ends up, I don't know."
During the half-hour show, which aired on July 25, Berdiansky defended his shop by saying there was no intent to offend anyone and that the shop's name and theme were directed at doughnuts, not people. He likened his shop to other controversial establishments such as gun shops, Hooters Restaurant and Planned Parenthood.
Berdiansky added that "99.9 percent of all doughnut shops do not have this theme" and encouraged customers to go elsewhere if they are offended.
"If a person feels they have an issue with it, please go to the other places," Berdiansky said.
Wright, CEO of United Advocates for Children and Families, spent the majority of his time hammering home the argument that the shop is particularly damaging to children.
"We've got a crisis with kids in this state and the country, and that's with mental health," Wright said.
He noted that out of the 1 million children in California diagnosed with a mental disorder every year, about 600,000 of them will not receive adequate treatment.
"So you have to ask yourself the question, 'Why is that?'" Wright said. "It's the stigma, mark of shame, mark of fear, the misunderstanding of mental illness that's apparently rapid in this country."
Although a sizeable number of people enjoy the shop's treats and are not offended by its theme, Wright argued that there are those who must deal with mental illness every day, and because of that it "should not be funny to us," he said.
At the conclusion of the program, Wright challenged Berdiansky to meet privately to discuss possible ways for the two sides to come together, arguing that a 30-minute show was not enough time to sort through the underlying issues.
At first Berdiansky didn't give a clear answer, but ultimately refused, saying he would prefer to continue meeting in a public setting.
Meanwhile, reaction from the discussion was varied.
"It was a well-balanced piece, and it seems like both sides have their points, and I think everyone has their opinions," said Psycho Donuts co-owner Jordan Zweigoron. "The point that we were making is that we're sort of an open book, and it kind of comes back to openly working with folks." However, Brian Miller, executive director of the local chapter of the National Alliance on Mental Illness, dismissed the program as "a big infomercial for Psycho Donuts."
"My ultimate fear was that it would turn into an advertisement for Psycho Donuts," said Miller, who has declined numerous requests for a public discussion on a media outlet. "Let's just not make this a media circus every time we want to talk."
Miller said the Community Alliance United to Seek Equality, a coalition of mental health organizations and advocates formed in response to Psycho Donuts, has been relatively quiet in its activity in recent months in an effort to curb attention to the shop.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
TV debate airs grievances about Psycho Donuts
From the San Jose Mercury News: ABC News also did a piece of the Psycho Donuts controversy.