$10 a FootShould we stop Paul Morgan from amputating his feet on the Web?
Posted Monday, Nov. 26, 2001, at 2:40 PM ET
Paul "Freck" Morgan insists it's not a hoax: On Jan. 5, 2002, live on the Internet, he'll cut off his feet with a guillotine. For $20, you can watch.
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUponFreck, whose nickname recalls his childhood freckles ("the freckles went away but the nickname stuck"), says his goal is to raise enough money to buy prosthetic feet. His own feet haven't worked since they were run over by a trailer 15 years ago, when Freck was 18. With newly available prosthetics, he expects to be able to run again.
Here's what you get for your $20: For several days prior to Jan. 5, you can watch via Web cam while Freck builds his guillotine. Then, on the big day itself there will be an hourlong professionally produced Web extravaganza complete with prepackaged interviews, online polling, and of course the big event. Freck will sever his feet at the ankle (he has no feeling from the ankles down), bleed for a while, and cauterize the wounds.
To wear the prosthetics, he'll actually need to have his legs amputated closer to the knee—where he still has some feeling. That will be done afterward at a hospital, assuming he raises enough money to be able to afford the surgery.
Freck says he's had relatively little trouble with law enforcement—local authorities have asked him where he plans to set up his guillotine, he's declined to answer, and they haven't pressed the matter. The police have indicated that if they knew the location, they might try to shut it down under Mississippi's "mayhem law," but they haven't threatened to arrest anybody.
Is it for real? Of course we have no way of knowing until Jan. 5 comes and goes—and in fact, the big event has already been postponed twice (as of this writing, Freck's Web site still advertises a date of Nov. 30). Freck says that's because his conception has become increasingly elaborate: The professional producer and director, audio support, and so on have all been added in the past three weeks. If it's a hoax, I'm at least reasonably certain that it's not a hoax of the take-the-money-and-run variety, not just because you can't run without feet but because Freck's too easy to find. I had no problem reaching him at his home phone number, which I got using standard tools on the Internet. (Earlier attempts to reach him by e-mail went unanswered.)
So far, Freck hasn't got many takers, but based on typical pay-per-view patterns, he's expecting a last-minute rush. Where will those viewers come from? Aside from what he calls "a few freaky bloodlust types," Freck anticipates that the majority will be "just very curious"—with their curiosity, of course, aroused by Freck himself. There's no ready pool of customers already shopping for the best price on a foot amputation Webcast. Instead, in the time-honored tradition of the entrepreneur, Freck is trying to create a need and then fill it.
Whether or not he goes through with it, how should we feel about Freck's brand of entrepreneurial capitalism? Are we witnessing a triumph or a travesty of the free market? More concretely, should he be allowed to do it?
The usual defense of free markets is that everyone's preferences get accounted for because everyone's dollars are valuable. Nobody tears down a movie theater or builds a supermarket without explicitly accounting for profits and therefore implicitly accounting for the desires of moviegoers and grocery shoppers. Restaurant owners set smoking policies by weighing the preferences of their smoking and nonsmoking customers. Therefore we don't need zoning laws that favor grocery stores over movie theaters, and we don't need laws that regulate smoking in restaurants.
But that argument breaks down in a case like this. Freck and his customers are voluntary participants, but according to my informal survey, there are a lot of other people who are vaguely disturbed by the whole business and have no way to make their voices heard. In principle, those people could band together and pay Freck to reconsider, but aside from all the practical difficulties involved, they'd risk inspiring a dozen imitators to threaten even more gruesome self-amputations unless they got paid off as well.
So, this looks like what economists call a market failure—a case where some people's preferences get ignored. And technically, I suppose it is a market failure. But it's not a market failure that concerns me. That's because I'm OK with ignoring the preferences of busybodies.
Now, the standard doctrine of economics is that we don't judge people's preferences; we take preferences as given and whatever they are, we treat them with respect. By that doctrine, a busybody's preferences should count just as much as anyone else's. But I am inclined to deviate from that doctrine for two reasons. First, we can't account for a preference if we don't know how strong it is. Busybodies can be very vocal, but as long as complaining is free, the volume of a complaint is a poor measure of how much the complainer really cares. Second, I am inclined to believe that it's relatively easy to train oneself into or out of busybodyism, so that by catering to busybodies we will only spawn more of them.
Therefore I'm inclined to ignore the concerns of those who are vaguely uncomfortable about Freck's initiative, just as I'm inclined to ignore the concerns of those who are vaguely uncomfortable about the market in healthy kidneys or about drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. There will always be things that discomfort us. The best thing we can do is get over it.
Happy Birthday, Smokey Bear
Are Gas Grills More Eco-Friendly Than Charcoal Ones?
He-Man: Briefs of Rage and Other Toy-Inspired Movies We're Dying To See
Kaus: Seven Possible Theories Explaining Palin's Resignation
The U.S. Embassy in Djibouti Cordially Invites You to a Fourth of July Cookout
The Week's Best Editorial Cartoons
Notes From The Fray Editor:
We are very squeamish here at Fray HQ, so we approached this one with some caution. And we were right to: tasteless jokes abound, but we're not giving links, you have to find them yourself. Best (repeatable) post title: Schmuconomics, from GavinL, here.
Comments:
I could care less who watches, given he's not going to be in pain, and he seems to need the money. But shouldn't the U.S. try to have some semblance of a health care system, in which perhaps a doctor might help this poor man get new feet?
--Ferdinanda
(To find or answer this post, click here.)
So, I heard that a self-professed cannibal wanted to buy his feet. Hey! it's a fund-raiser, for a worthy reason, in a free market. Is this OK? If I were a "less government", individual responsibility type guy, I would say yes.
--RWC
(To find or answer this post, click here.)
Our queasiness with the dismemberment concept (MTV's "Jackass" taken to its logical conclusion) is supposed to be counter-balanced against our sympathy for a man with a disability attempting to re-make his own future. The only interesting observation I can draw is that the Internet and high technology have not destroyed the ageless charm of the freak show. Freck Morgan comes across more as a cyber geek than anything (and I mean "geek" in its historic, carny sideshow sense). With its ability to reach millions, Mr. Morgan might make better use of the Internet with a Web site that explains his problem and asks for donations. That his stunt does not appear to be an economic success is not surprising, as the freak show has always been in the side tent and not the center ring. For all the fascination it supposedly generates with life's odd and grotesque side, it is simply not the attraction for which people shell out the big bucks.
--The Bell
(To find or answer this post, click here.)
(11/28)