# Muzzy vs. Baby EInstein



## jaidymama (Jun 18, 2005)

So I have read a lot about how Baby Einstein and others are being sued for their claim that their tv programming is educational for babies etc. But I was recently shown a program called Muzzy (I think) that teaches kids a foreign language. It said it was recommended for kids age 1 and up. And there was at least one recommendation from a father who said they had been playing it to their child since infancy!

I'm wondering if this program would be considered just as faulty as the Baby Einstein's? I think I should contact someone about this... thoughts, suggestions?

http://www.early-advantage.com/


----------



## merpk (Dec 19, 2001)

No info about that, but was unaware that the Baby Einstein Industry was under attack.

My own children are working on their PhDs in Physics after repeated watching of Baby Einstein in infancy. If only they could toilet train so easily.

Okay, am being a wise-acre, will stop now.









But seriously, folks are suing over this? Wow. Nice to have so much time on your hands.


----------



## jaidymama (Jun 18, 2005)

Yeah, there are several organizations... the only one I came up with right now was Commercial Free Childhood... but they were trying to press the issue about all the videos marketed toward infancy and learning because they are misleading parents that those things are actually educational... Here is one link I found...

http://www.commercialfreechildhood.o...ccomplaint.htm

So you know, it's not a bunch of people with extra free time on their hands... it's a group of citizens who are watching out for the safety of our children. In this case... safety from the marketing strategies of big business.


----------



## Finch (Mar 4, 2005)

My kid actually DID learn from Baby Einstein.







The muzzy stuff looks interesting.


----------



## Heffernhyphen (May 3, 2005)

The last I saw on Baby Einstein was Julie Clark, its creator, being honored by the president during his State of the Nation. He apparently thinks TV designed for infants is just not only okay, but to be celebrated. That alone is enough to let you know it must not be such a good idea.


----------



## AppleOrangePear (Apr 17, 2004)

Quote:

The last I saw on Baby Einstein was Julie Clark, its creator, being honored by the president during his State of the Nation. He apparently thinks TV designed for infants is just not only okay, but to be celebrated. That alone is enough to let you know it must not be such a good idea.








well considering we do not have cable i thankfully missed that however WHAT THE [email protected](#???? Why did he begin to speak of that?

Can someone tell me where we can move thats not so backwardass and crooked?PLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEASEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Michele


----------



## dallaschildren (Jun 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Heffernhyphen* 
The last I saw on Baby Einstein was Julie Clark, its creator, being honored by the president during his State of the Nation. He apparently thinks TV designed for infants is just not only okay, but to be celebrated. That alone is enough to let you know it must not be such a good idea.

I believe it was actually more about her current project with John Walsh for which she was being highlighted at the State of the Union. I think that the protection of children is definately a positive thing.

DC


----------



## dallaschildren (Jun 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ArlyShellandKai* 

Can someone tell me where we can move thats not so backwardass and crooked?PLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEASEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Michele

I really don't understand this comment considering you admitedly didn't see the State of the Union and the Americans highlighted by President Bush (Einstein creator being only one of them). It wasn't on cable exclusively either.

DC


----------



## jaidymama (Jun 18, 2005)

Ok... well this conversation is kind of a lost cause at this point. I truly have to ask if anyone has seen the information that TV for children under 2 is not recommended by even the AAP nor is there any science behind it.

From AAP website "Until more research is done about the effects of TV on very young children, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) does not recommend television for children younger than two years of age. For older children, the AAP recommends no more than one to two hours per day of quality screen time."

No that that's a crushing statement. Here are some links to people and places that question the benefits of television. I think the point is that the amount of TV children are watching has increased over the years...

Anyways, perhaps other people who are concerned about this would be willing to chime in. If you're interested here's an article written for Mothering.com http://www.mothering.com/guest_edito...m_archive.html


----------



## Mommy2Austin (Oct 10, 2006)

My question is how does someone get there infant to watch Tv? Honestly!

My 8 almost 9 mo has the opportunity to watch the kids shows on TV everyday (because I prefer it to the stupid morning shows on the other channels) and he barely even glances at the screen. He's too busy playing with his toys and books and his mommy to bother with whats on the flashing screen. DH and I are actually trying to avoid the big flashy sing song toys because we want our son (and other children someday) to enjoy the toys that we enjoyed like lincoln logs and leggos and puzzles and sticker books and all the simple things that don't take thousands of dollars worth of batteries to run but stimulate the mind to think and do rather than sit and watch.


----------



## AntoninBeGonin (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Finch* 
My kid actually DID learn from Baby Einstein.







The muzzy stuff looks interesting.


I agree. My son loooooooooooooves Baby Einstein and has also learned from it.

Muzzy's been out for many years. I remember it from the 80s. It's a foreign language program. Supposed to be good.

~Nay


----------



## laketahoemama (Aug 29, 2006)

TV for infants seems wrong on so many levels to me. I'm not sure about the Muzzy program. Maybe you should notify the CCFC about them. I'd be interested to hear what they have to say about it since they are so passionately opposed to the other baby videos.


----------



## laketahoemama (Aug 29, 2006)

Here is the link to the article that says AAP recommends NO screen time for children under the age of 2. Its under the heading "Set media time limits"
http://www.aap.org/family/mediaimpact.htm


----------



## Aeress (Jan 25, 2005)

I believe there are many other ways for a child to learn about "things". There is also research into the effects of screen time on the nervous system. (not sure if I have the link handy)

I just wonder if the reason for letting a child watch this type of show is due to parents thinking it is good for children or what? I am not saying it is bad or anyone is a bad parent for letting children watch baby shows but what is the expectation? why did you decide?


----------



## reepicheep (Jul 19, 2004)

My son, now age 3, loved Baby Einstein- saw one when he was about 1 year old and there was no turning back. I felt awfully guilty about it. However, when I turn on public radio, at least 1/2 the time he recognizes the classical piece playing and can name the composer! I also have learned a lot about classical music and we have branched out on our own. Of course this knowledge could've been gained in other ways, too... But it wasn't. Baby Einstein, especially the less "teachy" ones, are really not all that bad!
Rachel


----------



## onelilguysmommy (May 11, 2005)

i like muzzy, i convinced my mom to buy it for my brrother...we watched it in high school french as well as some other little kids cartoons, its actually quite useful, imo....


----------



## mousemadeslings (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Woolball* 
TV for infants seems wrong on so many levels to me. I'm not sure about the Muzzy program. Maybe you should notify the CCFC about them. I'd be interested to hear what they have to say about it since they are so passionately opposed to the other baby videos.


I was under the impression that the Muzzy programs were advertised for older kids.... maybe I need to go look at their site again.

When it comes to it, I'd rather someone who is going to turn the tv on anyway let their kid watch Baby Einstein or Muzzy instead of most of the other junk marketed to kids... Some of that stuff freaks me out!


----------



## janellesmommy (Jun 6, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Heffernhyphen* 
The last I saw on Baby Einstein was Julie Clark, its creator, being honored by the president during his State of the Nation. He apparently thinks TV designed for infants is just not only okay, but to be celebrated. That alone is enough to let you know it must not be such a good idea.

Actual quote from the State of the Union: "she borrowed some equipment, and began filming children's videos in her basement."


----------



## Sonnenwende (Sep 9, 2006)

I am pretty sure Muzzy is for kids three and over. I watched the Spanish ones when I was little. They were nice. You aren't going to speak fluent Spanish from them, but it certainally is a start.


----------



## clogmama (Dec 26, 2006)

From the website it looks like Muzzy is all about advertising a product and is misusing scientific claims to promote their product. My son has learned Dutch at school because we live abroad. However, truly learning a language (even for a child) is not as easy as one thinks and this cannot be attained via television. When my son was a baby in the US he participated in a study in which babies were shown people trying to teach Chinese to babies via television compared to babies being exposed to the language via human contact. Basically the television was ineffective, and babies responded to human contact. There have also been Dutch studies which show that young children do not learn a language from television (there are cartoons in English here for example). I would have to did deeper for links to studies, but I am positive they exist. Interestingly, learning a language at a young age is not seen as something to promote here in the Netherlands as most educators and parents I have spoken with think it's important to let kids interact and be comfortable with their own language and worry about learning second and third languages later. They all do learn languages later, so waiting until the age 10 or 11 when the first foreign language is introduced at school, doesn't seem to matter.


----------



## Finch (Mar 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mommy2Austin* 
My question is how does someone get there infant to watch Tv? Honestly!

When your kid has severe reflux and has to sit upright and still for 30 minutes after each meal, you find a way to get that done no matter what, kwim? Baby in baby seat, baby einstein on tv., kid is still for 30 minutes and doesn't puke everywhere for the 100 millionth time.


----------



## jaidymama (Jun 18, 2005)

Thanks for posting. I want to clarify that, yes, Muzzy is promoting itself to kids as young as 1 year old... according to the flyer I read a few weeks ago. And it showed a bunch of kids around the age 3-4 and then their adult picture (all the adults were wearing Harvard or Yale type shirts)...

Ok... so my point is just that I'm not here to dispute whether or not kids should watch TV or if it is educational... I'm simply saying here is another organization that is marketing to parents (and their children) saying that a 1 year old would benefit from this product.

Thanks clogmama for your post. It's interesting to know how other cultures handle learning/teaching.

I am going to contact the Child for Commercial Free CHildhood, and I guess i"ll let you all know what I hear from them.


----------



## jillybean0216 (Jan 28, 2007)

My ds will be 2 in March. We were given a Baby Einstein DVD when he was 1. He didn't seem too interested in the images (animals and instruments), but he really responded to the music. He would walk away from the TV and "dance". He likes Blues Clues, but watches very infrequently. Mostly likes the CD's of Blue we play in the car.
We don't have cable, and our older boys are not allowed to watch regular TV, only videos and DVD's, and only on weekends. Most people think we're weird and rigid. But I can see a noticable difference between my ds, and my dss who when he's at his mom's, can watch all kinds of things we don't permit in our house. My ds isn't at all commercialized, and doesn't know the first thing about what the new and latest toys are....I love it!
Like most things in life, I think moderation is the key.
Blessings.
Jill


----------



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

Something I found very interesting to read was the "Plug in Drug" very much a wake up call to me. We still watch some TV, but I don't fool myslef anymore thinking that because it is educational that it is actually good for them, or me for that matter. The same for computer screens.

I have a problem with anything being marketed to parents that makes them think that their child will be a genius or "extra" smart by using their product. Especially when the product is designed to have less human contact as part of it. Everything that baby Einstein can "teach" a parent can too, and more than likely better. Heck just carrying your baby around makes them smarter.
And I have to admit 12 years ago I was a sucker for anything that would make my dd smarter. If it would light up, beep or make some sort of noise, we had to have it. After doing some research and having 3 more kids, I have learned that they learn more from you reading them a book, listening to music or whatever it is you are doing.

H


----------



## Teensy (Feb 22, 2002)

I haven't bought the Muzzy series, but I've considered it exactly beacuse it could attempt to teach something I can't - a foreign language. I speak only English. I've studied French, but my pronounication is awful and I can only imagine how badly I mangle Spanish when I attempt it.

If I were convinced it would teach my children another language, I would spend the money (it's not cheap), but so far, I haven't been convinced by their advertising that is would really so do.

I do try to expose my kids to other languages as much as I can, but my resources seem to be limited. I think that my ability to learn was hindered by beginning so late (age 12) and would like better for my children.

I have seen the brochures the OP speaks of (child studies Muzzy as a tot, child grows up to be a Harvard student), but I just don't lump Muzzy in with the Baby Eistein type videos. I can't explain why, other than one teaches something I can't while the other doesn't.


----------

