# Why do people feel the need to justify themselves (re: tv)



## Heavenly (Nov 21, 2001)

I know many people on here are against tv. That is their opinion. Others are not. But even those who aren't against tv always make little disclaimers in their posts like, "But I don't let him watch that much," or "I know tv is wrong but I let them watch a bit when I am really needing a break." People go on about how they know their child is too young or that tv is bad and seem to feel the need to justify themselves to others on here. That drives me insane. If your kids watch tv - so what?! Who cares? I let my kids watch tv and I have no guilt about it. My 19 month old is watching Dora as we speak. I could write a reason but I see no need to justify myself. Why are people so worried about what other people think? If you want your kids to watch tv then let them. I guarantee you will enjoy parenting a lot more if you stop letting other people make you feel guilty about really stupid things.


----------



## ThreeBeans (Dec 2, 2006)

I think people justify because they feel guilty. And they feel guilty because the preponderance of evidence suggests that tv is bad for young children.

I do let my children watch tv, and I don't feel great about it.


----------



## shayinme (Jan 2, 2005)

Initially when I got involved with AP parenting I would feel guilty until my eldest who is almost 16 reminded me that I allowed him to watch tv and his brain didn't rot.









My 2 yo dd does watch tv and honestly its a saving grace, she is highly spirited and even when she watches a video I pretty much am right there with her talking and playing. Frankly before I started allowing tv, there were days when I thought I was gonna lose my mind always being on. A few minutes of tv here and there allow me to catch my breathe. She simply is not a child that willl play with her toys and allow me breathing room. So when she has a rare 10 mins when she is engaged in the telly, its a time for me to decompress.

Needless to say I no longer feel guilty, I have been parenting for almost 16 years and there are enough things to feel bad about but the occasional frency fry and a little tv are not the things to feel bad about for me. Everyone though has their own comfort level though when it comes to these matters.

Shay


----------



## newmommy (Sep 15, 2003)

<donning the flaming suit>

See, I think it is about the type of person you are. It's also about cliques and jumping on the bandwagon for fear of not being "accepted" into an elite circle if you will...not going against the grain...

DS watches alot a TV. Alot. And I refuse to justify my decision and make no apologizes to anyone. Here or IRL.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

* putting on flameproof suit*

Imagine this post...

"I l formula-feed and I have no guilt about it. I could write a reason but I see no need to justify myself. Why are people so worried about what other people think?. I guarantee you will enjoy parenting a lot more if you stop letting other people make you feel guilty about really stupid things."

Hmm.

(Yes, I know that the evidence isn't nearly as strong against TV as it is against FFing. If you prefer, substitute "feed my kids junk food" or "spank" or any other parenting practice that has some evidence against it.)


----------



## embers (Mar 24, 2006)

DS CIOs . Alot. And I refuse to justify my decision and make no apologizes to anyone. Here or IRL.

DS is neglected. Alot. And I refuse to justify my decision and make no apologizes to anyone. Here or IRL.

DS is spanked. Alot. And I refuse to justify my decision and make no apologizes to anyone. Here or IRL.

....


----------



## LeftField (Aug 2, 2002)

Ok. I just have one question. Are we talking about TV or are we talking about nearly identical TV-like devices? Because in these anti-TV bash-fests, it often comes out that the anti-TV folks use a VCR, DVR, or computer games (gasp! but it's Starfall!). And honestly, screen time is screen time. I just want all the cards on the table, since there's usually some fudging on this.

Oh, and my kids watch TV. And yeah, I don't feel horrible about it. I'm not living my life by this massive checklist that some people keep. I honestly do NOT feel totally Ok with the TV all the time. I'm aware that it sometimes borders on vegging out that seems negative to me. But my kids see lots of good things on TV too, like classical concerts, mechanical shows, documentaries about space...things that are best seen either in person (not realistic 99% of the time) or on a screen. And they have fabulously long attention spans (case in point, my 6 year old listened to 3 hours of Henry Huggins on tape yesterday).

I mean, there are lots of things that are less than ideal, according to research. It's best for a baby to have a pristine gut for as long as possible. My kids had a pristine gut until well after 8 months. Maybe we should compare things like that and then we can all feel good for feeling bad.

I think the TV discussion is a good one. And I think it's good for us to all look critically at what we do, so that we can continually improve and expand our minds. But when the AP/NFL police start comparing TV to CIO or spanking, 99.9% of the other side tunes them out anyway. And then the conversation ceases to be productive.


----------



## Neldavi (Jun 28, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ThreeBeans* 
I think people justify because they feel guilty. And they feel guilty because the preponderance of evidence suggests that tv is bad for young children.










:


----------



## Heavenly (Nov 21, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *embers* 
DS COIs . Alot. And I refuse to justify my decision and make no apologizes to anyone. Here or IRL.

DS is neglected. Alot. And I refuse to justify my decision and make no apologizes to anyone. Here or IRL.

DS is spanked. Alot. And I refuse to justify my decision and make no apologizes to anyone. Here or IRL.

....


That post is ridiculous and offensive. Letting your child watch TV is not abusive. All of the practices you mentioned are. But if you have to insult others to feel better about your parenting then go for it.


----------



## GuildJenn (Jan 10, 2007)

I can only answer for myself, but I sometimes do say something like that.

I think it's because I think television, like chocolate, is okay but should be consumed in moderation, in my opinion. Because it's so ubiquitous in our culture - my commuter train has television on it now! - I do feel the need to talk about how I limit it and why. At the same time I would never really want to give the impression that we are a totally no television family. We actually don't get broadcast tv (no cable and we live in a weird pocket where airwaves are concerned) but we do watch DVDs and sometimes I have watched YouTube with my son for videos of animals (there are some really cute ones).

So I guess for me really it comes down to accuracy. We watch some television/engage in some screen time. But we do limit it. That's not a judgement on anyone else's family.


----------



## Heavenly (Nov 21, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loraxc* 
* putting on flameproof suit*

Imagine this post...

"I l formula-feed and I have no guilt about it. I could write a reason but I see no need to justify myself. Why are people so worried about what other people think?. I guarantee you will enjoy parenting a lot more if you stop letting other people make you feel guilty about really stupid things."

Hmm.

(Yes, I know that the evidence isn't nearly as strong against TV as it is against FFing. If you prefer, substitute "feed my kids junk food" or "spank" or any other parenting practice that has some evidence against it.)

See but that sentence could be a valid argument. I formula fed my first child. I almost died at his birth and didn't even see him until he was 4 days old. I was then confined to bed until he was 4 months old. I was so sick I could barely function and as well my bipolar went crazy and I had to be on lithium. I KNEW I had to formula feed and I made no excuses about it to anyone.

However, I do not consider feeding choice - which is a health issue - to be anything the same as tv. I have not seen compelling enough evidence to convince me that television is as seriously detrimental as some seem to think.


----------



## Heavenly (Nov 21, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LeftField* 
Ok. I just have one question. Are we talking about TV or are we talking about nearly identical TV-like devices? Because in these anti-TV bash-fests, it often comes out that the anti-TV folks use a VCR, DVR, or computer games (gasp! but it's Starfall!). And honestly, screen time is screen time. I just want all the cards on the table, since there's usually some fudging on this.

Oh, and my kids watch TV. And yeah, I don't feel horrible about it. I'm not living my life by this massive checklist that some people keep. I honestly do NOT feel totally Ok with the TV all the time. I'm aware that it sometimes borders on vegging out that seems negative to me. But my kids see lots of good things on TV too, like classical concerts, mechanical shows, documentaries about space...things that are best seen either in person (not realistic 99% of the time) or on a screen. And they have fabulously long attention spans (case in point, my 6 year old listened to 3 hours of Henry Huggins on tape yesterday).

I mean, there are lots of things that are less than ideal, according to research. It's best for a baby to have a pristine gut for as long as possible. My kids had a pristine gut until well after 8 months. Maybe we should compare things like that and then we can all feel good for feeling bad.

I think the TV discussion is a good one. And I think it's good for us to all look critically at what we do, so that we can continually improve and expand our minds. But when the AP/NFL police start comparing TV to CIO or spanking, 99.9% of the other side tunes them out anyway. And then the conversation ceases to be productive.

Exactly!


----------



## jeteaa (Jan 23, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Heavenly* 
I guarantee you will enjoy parenting a lot more if you stop letting other people make you feel guilty about really stupid things.

you are soooo right about this. I find this very idea my biggest stress as a mother. But for me its a matter of fitting in to what I feel is the idea parenting style CLUB.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Where is this club and how can I join?







DD is TV-free, and I don't know anyone else locally who is. And I know a LOT of very crunchy moms.

I don't think TV is the worst thing in the world, but I find it weird (and, btw, a reflection of how incredibly pervasive TV is) that people on MDC don't get why people are concerned about it, or think that people who have a concern are only worried about what other people think.

Quote:

However, I do not consider feeding choice - which is a health issue - to be anything the same as tv. I
TV use is a health issue. Childhood obesity is correlated with TV use.


----------



## newmommy (Sep 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *embers* 
DS COIs . Alot. And I refuse to justify my decision and make no apologizes to anyone. Here or IRL.

DS is neglected. Alot. And I refuse to justify my decision and make no apologizes to anyone. Here or IRL.

DS is spanked. Alot. And I refuse to justify my decision and make no apologizes to anyone. Here or IRL.

....


Call me naive... but are you being sarcastic? Or are you serious?

What's the point of your thread?


----------



## lovingmommyhood (Jul 28, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *embers* 
DS COIs . Alot. And I refuse to justify my decision and make no apologizes to anyone. Here or IRL.

What is COIs?


----------



## Lady Madonna (Jul 2, 2004)

Eh, DD watches TV. Regular ole TV. We've got flexible limits on quantity, and stricter limits on quality/content, but TV happens in our house. I don't feel guilty about it in the least, because it's a conscious decision.

Just because you don't like it, letting a child watch television is not abusive. The comparisons to actual abusive practices like spanking are not only offensive to me, as a parent who allows television viewing, but also to those who have been subject to real abusive treatment.

Yes, vegging out in front of random television programming is not healthy. But an hour of Sesame Street or a little Food Network Challenge (DD's choice last night) is not going to rot a kid's brain, make her fat, or lead to the downfall of civilization.


----------



## lovingmommyhood (Jul 28, 2006)

I think people do it here because if they don't add a disclaimer they will get flamed. <--- period.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

FTR, I compared TV to spanking, but I don't consider (traditional, mild) spanking abuse. (I am completely anti-spanking, but I have friends who spank and would not consider them abusive.) I didn't intend to compare it to actual abuse. I would, however, compare it to a number of other parenting practices--not abuse, but not considered ideal, and with evidence against them--that would not be defended on MDC.


----------



## wannabe (Jul 4, 2005)

If you don't care, that's fine, but I would say other people justify it because they DO care, and they feel guilty that their kid watches too much, and want to point out that they KNOW it's not good.

I'd justify myself, too, because I think that no TV would be an ideal situation, and by choosing to have some TV I'm not living up to my ideals.


----------



## incorrigible (Jun 3, 2007)

.


----------



## hubris (Mar 8, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Heavenly* 
That post is ridiculous and offensive. Letting your child watch TV is not abusive. All of the practices you mentioned are. But if you have to insult others to feel better about your parenting then go for it.

I think the poster's point was that some people DO believe that television viewing is harmful to children, and some of them might even believe that it is *as* harmful as crying it out, spanking, formula feeding, or generally neglecting a child.

Not everybody agrees about that, but it's important to realize that some parents do feel that strongly about television viewing, and data does exist to back them up.

As for the OP's question about why people tend to qualify their TV viewing statements - the same reason people qualify statements about supplementing with formula, or give the background of why their son was circ'ed and the fact that their future children won't be, or ask for no flames when they mention vaxxing. They understand that some parents disagree with their decision and they realize that sometimes people get flamed for their parenting choices when they're looking for support. They're trying to avoid getting flamed.

I don't really see a point to assuming that people feel guilty for their choices. It's possible to feel shame or think that other people expect you to feel shame even if you do think you made the right choice. Guilt and shame aren't the same thing.


----------



## bellymama (Apr 15, 2007)

i watch tv sometimes. i don't feel bad about it anymore than i feel bad about eating some cookies...my son doesn't watch it now, cause hes only 8 months old, and we usually have time to watch during the day anyway, but i am sure he will watch tv when he is older. i don't think tv=bad.
check out "the goddess vs. the alphabet" or maybe it's "the alphabet vs. the goddess" one or the other







...great book. discusses the importance of image and icon in terms of having a balanced left and right brain relationship. interesting theory with lots of great supporting evidence. made me stop feeling guilty about the tv i watch.


----------



## alaskaberry (Dec 29, 2006)

I do a lot of things I always thought I would never do.

--Disposable diapers (just too disgusting to cd without running water! for me, anyway! and there's no diaper service in town, and i don't have a washer or dryer)

--TV

I just stopped feeling guilty over the tv bit. I need a lot of time to myself to recharge when I am feeling po'd/tired/overworked, and if it buys me that time, well, so be it. it's not like I let him watch Yu-Gi-Oh or other violent cartoons, just run-of-the-mill pbs shows.


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

They feel guilty and judged by people who think TV is bad or wrong or unhealthy. That's my guess anyway.

We watch TV with no guilt and no excuses.


----------



## mistymama (Oct 12, 2004)

I think people justify because it's pretty well known that tv is not beneficial and that our kids could be doing much more productive things with their time.

That said, mine watches tv and I don't justify it or feel guilty about it. Sometimes we even play xbox 360 together.









I ususally avoid tv thread all together .. I don't have much to add .. I agree no tv is best, but we are not a tv free family and it's also something I choose not to feel guilty about.


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mistymama* 

I ususally avoid tv thread all together .. I don't have much to add ..

I enjoy the TV threads quite a bit actually. I think it's because I feel like being a bit of the voice of support for those who love TV. _"See, we can watch a lot of TV and still string sentences together!"_


----------



## momz3 (May 1, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *newmommy* 
<donning the flaming suit>

See, I think it is about the type of person you are. It's also about cliques and jumping on the bandwagon for fear of not being "accepted" into an elite circle if you will...not going against the grain...

DS watches alot a TV. Alot. And I refuse to justify my decision and make no apologizes to anyone. Here or IRL.


You took the words right out of my mouth. That is one thing (and ppl who read my posts can tell you) I *do not* jump on any bandwagon about anything I beleive or do. I really do not try to fit into any group...especially an online message board where I will most likely not ever see/meet anyone. Life is too short to worry about saying things other ppl want to hear and not what you feel.

My kids watch tv.

Peace.


----------



## marybethorama (Jun 9, 2005)

And we don't want to stop









Also I know so many awful kids who don't watch tv I'm not at all convinced it's better not to watch.







:

Seriously I don't think the choice not to watch is necessarily better, just different.


----------



## BellinghamCrunchie (Sep 7, 2005)

They offer up excuses because they anticipate being judged.

Probably rightfully so. Humans tend to be a judgmental lot.


----------



## lovingmommyhood (Jul 28, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UnschoolnMa* 
I enjoy the TV threads quite a bit actually. I think it's because I feel like being a bit of the voice of support for those who love TV. _"See, we can watch a lot of TV and still string sentences together!"_
























True!


----------



## 4evermom (Feb 3, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UnschoolnMa* 
We watch TV with no guilt and no excuses.









Same, here.

I was so glad when ds would actually WATCH tv! I got to dump him on the couch and GO PEE and BREW COFFEE instead of walking his 35 pounds around the house for an hour while he woke up. My theory is he doesn't want to watch much tv because he knows I want him to.


----------



## shayinme (Jan 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *4evermom* 
Same, here.

I was so glad when ds would actually WATCH tv! I got to dump him on the couch and GO PEE and BREW COFFEE instead of walking his 35 pounds around the house for an hour while he woke up. My theory is he doesn't want to watch much tv because he knows I want him to.

















Ain't that the truth.. I feel the same way about my dd especially on Sat mornings.. HELLO, watch that dang tv so I can veg for 10 mins.. Doesn't happen that way to often though.

Shay


----------



## ~PurityLake~ (Jul 31, 2005)

I don't feel guilt for the fact that we watch tv.
I think the reason some people use disclaimers may be due to guilt, and it may also be due to the fact that some people pass harsh judgement on other people who don't do things the way they want them to. Judgement can be a form of control, or a desire to control others.
Sometimes judgement is good, though, as long as it's not being used to control other people's choices when their choices have no affect on you or your children/loved ones.


----------



## boatbaby (Aug 30, 2004)

I think the thing that people don't realize when discussing TV is that it is addictive. We live in a society where we can talk openly about alcohol being addictive, or food, or heck even the internet. But nobody will admit TV is.

Here is an interesting read from Scientific America:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?art...A8809EC588EEDF

and another read...
http://www.turnoffyourtv.com/healthe...addiction.html








:


----------



## treqi (Dec 31, 2006)

cause we feel guilty....







:


----------



## devster4fun (Jan 28, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *boatbaby* 
I think the thing that people don't realize when discussing TV is that it is addictive. We live in a society where we can talk openly about alcohol being addictive, or food, or heck even the internet. But nobody will admit TV is.

I'm a firm believer in "all things in moderation."

Unless (of course) addiction is an issue. And, people can get addicted to just about anything. TV, video games and certainly the internet are all potentially addictive activities.

I sometimes wonder about vehemently anti-TV folks with post counts in the 10's of thousands.

We enjoy the TV as adults and expose DD most of what we're watching. (Which is mostly sports...usually tennis) I will be shocked if this girl doesn't play tennis. We watch it constantly. Otherwise, its cooking shows, home improvement and the weather channel.

I watch crappy reality shows after her bedtime.


----------



## hippymomma69 (Feb 28, 2007)

Thank you OP for your posting! My kids watch too much TV (yes it's all COMPLETELY educational - how's that for a qualifier?) and I feel guilty ALL the time about it - I keep trying to structure our days to cut it out more and more but I'm just not successful. By 4pm on some days I just need a BREAK and on comes the TV for like 2-3 hours! (While I'm making dinner, etc)

But the reason I would qualify my TV habit on here is because sometimes I might want to post and just *not get into* the TV debate. Sometimes I think that some posters assume you just fell from the moon and are clueless about the whole TV thing. And I don't want to deflect a thread by just putting out a statement about using TV without qualifying it so that I don't get a post back lecturing me on the dangers of TV. I guess that's why I'd do it...

Now, anyone who has NO GUILT got some good things I can tell myself to get rid of my own guilt? Clearly stopping TV watching is NOT working for us - so I'd at least like to feel okay about it! LOL
peace,
robyn


----------



## Heavenly (Nov 21, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *incorrigible* 
CIO and spanking are right on par with screen time for small children and excessive screen time for older ones.


You are actually serious?







: That blows my mind. So my daughter watching Dora is as damaging to her as me hitting her or me leaving her to cry herself to sleep. Wow. Just..wow.


----------



## Heavenly (Nov 21, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hippymomma69* 
Thank you OP for your posting! My kids watch too much TV (yes it's all COMPLETELY educational - how's that for a qualifier?) and I feel guilty ALL the time about it - I keep trying to structure our days to cut it out more and more but I'm just not successful. By 4pm on some days I just need a BREAK and on comes the TV for like 2-3 hours! (While I'm making dinner, etc)

But the reason I would qualify my TV habit on here is because sometimes I might want to post and just *not get into* the TV debate. Sometimes I think that some posters assume you just fell from the moon and are clueless about the whole TV thing. And I don't want to deflect a thread by just putting out a statement about using TV without qualifying it so that I don't get a post back lecturing me on the dangers of TV. I guess that's why I'd do it...

Now, anyone who has NO GUILT got some good things I can tell myself to get rid of my own guilt? Clearly stopping TV watching is NOT working for us - so I'd at least like to feel okay about it! LOL
peace,
robyn

I had tons of guilt about letting my kids watch lots of tv, mostly because of posting on here! How I let go of the guilt was I read through the data and decided what I did and did not agree with. I saw my kids and that it wasn't affecting them negatively. I knew that them watching tv made me a better mom because I am a loner and an introvert and I am just not a good mom if I don't get some quiet time. I just made a conscious decision to stop stressing over it. My kids are happy and healthy. The older ones do dance, gymnastics, judo, swimming, soccer, etc and play outside every day. They eat healthy, they are incredibly smart and they are generally great little people. I allow them to self-regulate their tv viewing. Well the little one is still young enough that I do regulate her - although I do let her watch it. She loves Dora and I get some quiet time. Yay!







:







 The older ones...well I just stopped controlling it. They will watch some and then they themselves will choose to turn it off and go do something else. We don't have any issues.


----------



## boatbaby (Aug 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *devster4fun* 
Otherwise, its cooking shows, home improvement and the weather channel.










: And the grand irony is... I am a TV producer/ writer (used to be director before DS) and work mostly for home improvement show and The Weather Channel


----------



## RainCoastMama (Oct 13, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *devster4fun* 
I sometimes wonder about vehemently anti-TV folks with post counts in the 10's of thousands.


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

I agree that for some TV _is_ an addiction. That would be a problem...as any addiction would. But all people who enjoy TV are not addicts and that includes kids.


----------



## almama (Mar 22, 2003)

I put that in to avoid the comments of: You need to monitor his TV/screen time.

When you ask for advice for a low-elec kid and get a page full of replies about monitoring screen time, it is annoying, unhelpful and exhausting.


----------



## SquishyKitty (Jun 10, 2005)

Everything in moderation. Nothing wrong with a cookie or a bit of candy (DS is 6, not an infant) or a show he likes every now and then. He's a very active, healthy child, and we recognize that sometimes it's okay to just chill and watch 30 mins of cartoons after a long day. We don't force it on him, and he's just not the type to be "Distracted" by it either way.


----------



## Needle in the Hay (Sep 16, 2006)

I'm another one who doesn't feel any guilt. I tend not to be very controlling of my DS. He's a great kid and we have a lot of fun. He is not by any stretch neglected because he chooses to watch a DVD when he wants (we don't actually have any TV reception at home, but lots & lots of DVDs and some are not even educational).

I find it a bit funny that TV and video games are responsible for childhood obesity/inactivity but sitting at a desk 6 hours a day is just fine for a child's health. I'm referring only to restriction of movement, here, this has nothing to do with school vs. homeschooling so please don't anyone think I'm going in that direction.


----------



## waiflywaif (Oct 17, 2005)

TiVo or another DVR-type device is one of the best things to ever happen to kids and TV, IMO. For little kids, it means you can totally choose what they watch---we record my daughter's favorites (mostly things from Noggin or PBS, plus she loves the re-runs of "Magic School Bus") and she gets to choose from a "menu" of stuff when it's TV time. She gets one half-hour show in the morning and one in the evening (when we're winding down and headed toward bath/story/bed).

But the "control" feature about TiVo isn't the most important thing---to me it changes the whole nature of how we use TV. It encourages you to watch the one show and turn it off, since it's more like watching a video than just surfing the airwaves. No channel flipping, no watching something that you don't really love "just because it's on." Add that to the convenience factor of not being tied to the TV schedule and I think it's a fabulous tool for those who do use TV. I'm sure we actually watch less television with TiVo than we did without, since we catch our favorites and that's it.


----------



## marybethorama (Jun 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hubris* 
Not everybody agrees about that, but it's important to realize that some parents do feel that strongly about television viewing, and data does exist to back them up.

I don't agree with the data, most of which is anecdotal anyway. I've even read George Gerbner (Annenberg School) but while I think he is right, I really don't think it matters that much.

There is plenty of criticism of the studies that have been done.


----------



## alexysmommy (Mar 9, 2005)

I totally agree with one of the previous posters...people try to justify it because they know they will get flamed. I am an AP parent, and i let my kids watch TV. Do i think it makes me any less AP? Not at all. I dont care what anyone thinks about my kids watching tv, they are smart, well adjusted kids, which is more important to me than what others think. Yet i am sure someone will still have to comment about it because it is hard for people to understand something THEY dont believe in could possibly be okay. We all do things that others dont understand/believe in, and as long as WE as parents are okay with it, then it shouldnt be a problem. But most of the time it still is.


----------



## alexysmommy (Mar 9, 2005)

as far as data, you can always find some sort of "data" to back up ANYTHING if you look hard enough. Doesnt always mean it is right.


----------



## sushifan (Jun 20, 2007)

There are studies that show lots of things are harmful. For example, giving your child tons of sugar is harmful. So is TV in very large doses. But occasional TV and occasional sugar isn't going to hurt your child. It also depends on what kind of TV and what kind of sugar, KWIM? I think we can all agree that a daily diet of Pixy Stix and Jerry Springer is not the best for your child. But putting a little whipped cream over a bowl of strawberries and letting your kid watch Discovery Channel seems fairly harmless.

Sometimes I think people take hard-line stances on things just to make themselves feel superior to others.


----------



## devster4fun (Jan 28, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *waiflywaif* 
TiVo or another DVR-type device is one of the best things to ever happen to kids and TV, IMO. For little kids, it means you can totally choose what they watch---we record my daughter's favorites (mostly things from Noggin or PBS, plus she loves the re-runs of "Magic School Bus") and she gets to choose from a "menu" of stuff when it's TV time. She gets one half-hour show in the morning and one in the evening (when we're winding down and headed toward bath/story/bed).

But the "control" feature about TiVo isn't the most important thing---to me it changes the whole nature of how we use TV. It encourages you to watch the one show and turn it off, since it's more like watching a video than just surfing the airwaves. No channel flipping, no watching something that you don't really love "just because it's on." Add that to the convenience factor of not being tied to the TV schedule and I think it's a fabulous tool for those who do use TV. I'm sure we actually watch less television with TiVo than we did without, since we catch our favorites and that's it.

Wow! We do the exact same thing...and I agree about the benefits of Tivo. We select what we want to watch and don'tend up watching junk. (Well, I like *some* junk, but I Tivo it and watch during DD's naps) Also, we skip through the ads which (IMO) are half the problem.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *alexysmommy* 
as far as data, you can always find some sort of "data" to back up ANYTHING if you look hard enough. Doesnt always mean it is right.

Abso-frickin'-lutely. Having spent more than a decade in big pharma, trust me. Don't believe something just because it's in JAMA, NEJM, Scientific American etc... Even peer-reviewed journals have been wrong. Really wrong. Everyone has an agenda. If you dig deep, I mean really deep, you will find it.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sushifan* 
There are studies that show lots of things are harmful. For example, giving your child tons of sugar is harmful. So is TV in very large doses. But occasional TV and occasional sugar isn't going to hurt your child. It also depends on what kind of TV and what kind of sugar, KWIM? I think we can all agree that a daily diet of Pixy Stix and Jerry Springer is not the best for your child. But putting a little whipped cream over a bowl of strawberries and letting your kid watch Discovery Channel seems fairly harmless.

Sometimes I think people take hard-line stances on things just to make themselves feel superior to others.

To me, that's the bottom line. If you sit you DC in front of the TV for 8 hours a day, they might end up with some issues.








I do love Pixie Stix


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

See we don't have _occasional_TV. We don't have occasional sugar either. We watch TV, in general, for a couple hours each day on the low end. We have sugar in our coffee and tea daily, and then maybe again in a dessert of some sort.

Sure some days we go without TV if we are super busy or involved in other things like company visiting, an outing, or etc but that's not the norm. I don't think my kids have been harmed at all by more than occasional exposure. No little one has ever been abandoned to the TV in our family or left completely alone to navigate sugar consumption without some helpful input. That's what matters, IMO.


----------



## nonconformnmom (May 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UnschoolnMa* 
I agree that for some TV _is_ an addiction. That would be a problem...as any addiction would. But all people who enjoy TV are not addicts and that includes kids.









That's true. However, how do you know until after you've allowed them to become exposed to this potentially addictive behavior? We know that not everyone becomes addicted to cigarettes; but would we intentionally provide cigarettes to our kids in the misguided belief that they *most likely* won't become addicted to it?

As parents, it is our job to shield our children from harmful activities. Granted, nearly every kid in the world is, at some point, exposed to tv. But we as parents shouldn't be the "pushers". IMO.

That said, my objection to encourage tv viewing (including DVDs and videos) is only strong in the cases of children under 2 years old. Over 2 years of age is more acceptable IMO, because their brain synapses have had a little time to make the necessary connections, etc. It's still not ideal, no matter the age (partly because of the obesity link and ADD and etc.), but at least over 2 years old it seems more reasonable to let them watch.


----------



## dubfam (Nov 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sushifan* 
Sometimes I think people take hard-line stances on things just to make themselves feel superior to others.

This is so true...about many other issues besides just tv!!

Even here on MDC...it is really too bad. We end up judging each other instead of collaborating.


----------



## mammal_mama (Aug 27, 2006)

Great thread! I don't have a chance to read it all now, so I'm subbing to remind myself to come back later and catch up ...

Please, oh, please: no one violate the UA! I'll be really







: and







if it gets pulled before I can come back.


----------



## ~PurityLake~ (Jul 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *boatbaby* 
I think the thing that people don't realize when discussing TV is that it is addictive. We live in a society where we can talk openly about alcohol being addictive, or food, or heck even the internet. But nobody will admit TV is.

Sure, TV can be addictive, as can alcohol, cigarettes, WOW (which my husband IS addicted to), chocolate, the computer, etc.

Just because something can be addictive, doesn't mean someone who uses it is addicted.

I use the television. I'm certainly not addicted to it because I can go days without ever using it and not even care.

I have occassionally drank alcoholic beverages, but certainly can live without them.

Same goes for just about any other addictive item or substance.

As someone said, everything in moderation.

To suggest anyone who uses a TV is addicted is far from reality.


----------



## veggiemomma (Oct 21, 2004)

Well, I have avoided reading this thread until now because I generally don't read TV threads, but I finally broke over and read ALL THREE PAGES!









I will agree with the pp'ers who have mentioned moderation. We don't do a whole lot of anything (except reading books!) We don't watch a lot of TV (but, yes, some) we don't eat a lot of junk food (but, yes, we do make cookies and cupcakes together every now and then and on Fridays I allow them to eat **gasp** french fries and chicken nuggets). There are a lot of things that we don't do in our house that others see as just fine. There also are things that we do that others don't agree with. So, where is the line between being concerned about the children of our society and being a tyranical so-and-so who shoves their personal beliefs on everyone else? I'd say that, even on MDC this line is crossed WAY too often.

Generally, the qualifiers (ie we only watch educational tv, or only for an hour) are added because people have grown weary of being attacked over every topic imaginable from cutting your toddlers' hair to what food you should be feeding your dog (both of which I have seen people Royally Flamed for on this forum).


----------



## jamsmama (Jul 16, 2005)

Shrug useless guilt!


----------



## GooeyRN (Apr 24, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *4evermom* 
Same, here.

I was so glad when ds would actually WATCH tv! I got to dump him on the couch and GO PEE and BREW COFFEE instead of walking his 35 pounds around the house for an hour while he woke up. My theory is he doesn't want to watch much tv because he knows I want him to.









I laughed when I read your post. I only WISH my dd would watch tv for a little bit. A shower without huge messes when I got out would be nice, eating a sandwich without a tantrum would be nice, to sit and read 5 minutes without the book/magazine being torn from my hands would be nice, to make a two minute phone call in peace would be nice, if I can only have one of these things once a day, boy I can dream! Maybe someday she will watch a little tv. And no, I won't feel guilty. I also think she doesn't watch tv /v she knows I want her to.







I don't see how watching 15 minutes of educational tv a day would hurt too much. I don't like the idea of kids vegging out for hours on end in front of a tv, but I don't think 15 minutes of tv a day will kill a kid or leave them mentally scarred for life.


----------



## nina_yyc (Nov 5, 2006)

Well...people feel the need to justify it because they're usually anti-TV threads. On a Pro-TV thread (probably not found on MDC...) they wouldn't need to justify it.

slightly OT - when I was looking for a day home last week, I mentioned to all providers I interviewed that I didn't want DD watching TV. I'm not going to freak out about 1/2 hour a week or something, but I don't want her exposed to much TV. (DD will be 1 when she goes.) When I was at one home, the provider's DD put on a DVD and I turned DD away. The provider says, "Oh, that's not TV, just a music video for them to dance to."







. (No worries, I found a different, very AP day home. Oh, and I'm going back to my job as a television editor.)


----------



## hubris (Mar 8, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *marybethorama* 
I don't agree with the data, most of which is anecdotal anyway. I've even read George Gerbner (Annenberg School) but while I think he is right, I really don't think it matters that much.

There is plenty of criticism of the studies that have been done.

Yup, not debating that or saying which way I fall on believing it or not believing it. I'm just saying that some people DO believe that data and feel just as strongly about the TV issue as some people feel about circ or CIO or whatever.


----------



## SneakyPie (Jan 13, 2002)

We justify ourselves because the climate seems to ask for it. Also sometimes it's just an explanation, not a justification.


----------



## mata (Apr 20, 2006)

when I speak about my children's tv habits it's not to justify anything-it's simply descriptive language in a conversation.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

In my case, it's because I only know one mom IRL who lets her kids watch much tv...and they watch it 24/7, so that she can totally ignore them and not interact with them. Even though nobody here knows her, I always feel this urge to separate my parenting from hers in my own mind, because she's...really not interested in her kids at all. They get fed (junk) and clothed and that's about the extent of her involvement. I'm always afraid I'll come across that way..


----------



## erin_d_a (Jun 27, 2007)

I never felt any guilt or the need for qualifiers until I started reading posts like the ones on MDC about these perfect AP parents who never let their children watch TV, wear them until they are nine, have never let them have a bit of refined sugar or flour etc...









I'm kinda serious though. The ladies here are SOOO judgmental. The ones who talk about how tolerant they are are usually even more judgmental.

On a similar topic I was formula feeding my DD in Berkeley one day. It was a beautiful day and we were outside enjoying the sunshine. A woman came up to me and asked me why I even had a child if I wasn't going to love them enough to breastfeed. She had on a tee that said "peace, love and tolerance"

My daughter is adopted, and we couldn't breastfeed (we tried, as I feel I have to justify here)

So perhaps people here feel they have to justify because they know those "perfect" moms will tell them what horrible mothers they are if they are honest. And those "perfect" moms lead to a LOT of fear on these boards.


----------



## Finch (Mar 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *erin_d_a* 
I never felt any guilt or the need for qualifiers until I started reading posts like the ones on MDC about these perfect AP parents who never let their children watch TV, wear them until they are nine, have never let them have a bit of refined sugar or flour etc...









I'm kinda serious though. The ladies here are SOOO judgmental. The ones who talk about how tolerant they are are usually even more judgmental.

On a similar topic I was formula feeding my DD in Berkeley one day. It was a beautiful day and we were outside enjoying the sunshine. A woman came up to me and asked me why I even had a child if I wasn't going to love them enough to breastfeed. She had on a tee that said "peace, love and tolerance"

My daughter is adopted, and we couldn't breastfeed (we tried, as I feel I have to justify here)

So perhaps people here feel they have to justify because they know those "perfect" moms will tell them what horrible mothers they are if they are honest. And those "perfect" moms lead to a LOT of fear on these boards.

Amen to that.

These threads always make me just shake my head. As always, I give my usual answer....I used to be very judgmental and on my high horse. Then I had a special needs kid.







Changed my universe, changed my perspective. I find it's much easier to not sniff at everyone from my ivory tower.


----------



## Upside (Jun 27, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *devster4fun* 
I'm a firm believer in "all things in moderation."

I sometimes wonder about vehemently anti-TV folks with post counts in the 10's of thousands.


----------



## Upside (Jun 27, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Finch* 
These threads always make me just shake my head. As always, I give my usual answer....I used to be very judgmental and on my high horse. Then I had a special needs kid.







Changed my universe, changed my perspective. I find it's much easier to not sniff at everyone from my ivory tower.










I've seen you say that in other posts. One of the reasons I read this thread is because I saw that you were the OP and I tend to like your logic.


----------



## Finch (Mar 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Upside* 
I've seen you say that in other posts. One of the reasons I read this thread is because I saw that you were the OP and I tend to like your logic.









Aw, thanks....but you mean because I was the last poster, not the OP, right?

It's just so sad the way moms pick eachother apart for stuff like this. Oh well. One day, one fine day, something will happen and the lightbulb will go on for them, just like it did for me.


----------



## kamilla626 (Mar 18, 2004)

Dd is watching Spongebob as we speak.

TV is something all 3 of us enjoy - even when it's not educational.


----------



## marybethorama (Jun 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hubris* 
Yup, not debating that or saying which way I fall on believing it or not believing it. I'm just saying that some people DO believe that data and feel just as strongly about the TV issue as some people feel about circ or CIO or whatever.

That's okay with me <shrug> Then they're free not to watch. I just get annoyed when they assume that I'm not aware of the arguments against TV.


----------



## marybethorama (Jun 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *erin_d_a* 
\
On a similar topic I was formula feeding my DD in Berkeley one day. It was a beautiful day and we were outside enjoying the sunshine. A woman came up to me and asked me why I even had a child if I wasn't going to love them enough to breastfeed. She had on a tee that said "peace, love and tolerance"

That was SO rude of her.


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

The reason people feel they have to put disclaimers in their TV-related comments is the same reason they feel they have to put disclaimers in anytime they make a comment about ANYTHING they do which is not letter-of-the-law AP or NFL.

Because they will be judged and condemned by people on this board without anyone know what their exact situation is or why they've made the choices they do.

Just take a look at some of the posts by us formula feeding moms. If we don't put in there a disclaimer about WHY we had to formula feed, we would have been judged, condemned and generally left wanting as parents.


----------



## Upside (Jun 27, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ShadowMom* 
The reason people feel they have to put disclaimers in their TV-related comments is the same reason they feel they have to put disclaimers in anytime they make a comment about ANYTHING they do which is not letter-of-the-law AP or NFL.

Because they will be judged and condemned by people on this board without anyone know what their exact situation is or why they've made the choices they do.

Just take a look at some of the posts by us formula feeding moms. If we don't put in there a disclaimer about WHY we had to formula feed, we would have been judged, condemned and generally left wanting as parents.

This is true. Somedays after reading a particularly nasty thread, I don't know why I come here because I'm not a letter-of-the-law AP. Perhaps I'm attracted by the drama, even though I try not to participate in it. The soap opera addiction of my youth is rearing its ugly head, but that's probably what's wrong with me to begin with, too much tv when I was little







.


----------



## mammal_mama (Aug 27, 2006)

I think sometimes we add extra details to justify ourselves and avoid getting flamed -- and sometimes we add details because this is our online community and we want people to know us, to get a picture of what we're like.

Just as some of us add some descriptive stuff to our signatures.

I used to be on more of a high-horse, and talk about how creative my children are because they watch so little TV. Now we're a free-TV household, meaning they watch it whenever they want -- and when I share about this, I often find myself adding that they're *still* creative and still do tons of imaginary play and outdoor play, yadayada.

I know, I shouldn't feel a need to qualify: I guess I just want people to know we still have brains and we're not just sitting vegged out, absorbing "passive entertainment" all day. I actually don't find that watching tv is passive at our house. We talk about stuff, we act it out, sometimes dance or sing along.

And when I hear about people "setting toddlers in front of the tube for hours at a time" -- I wonder, do they drug them first? I've never known even older children to spend "8 hours" sitting there watching and doing nothing else. Since we have lots of other options in our house, the TV may be on all day sometimes, but that doesn't mean that's all the girls or I are doing.

Okay, now that I've gone all in-depth and tried to "justify" myself (but I actually love getting flamed so go ahead, just don't violate the UA 'cause I really like this thread), I'll say there's one "qualifier" that always gives me an inner chuckle: "We only watch educational TV." As an unschooler, I see learning in everything. I don't see "Scooby-Do" as any less educational than "Sesame Street" or "Animal Planet."

As long as my children enjoy it, it's all good. Same with sweets.







(Guess you can tell I'm just itchin' to get flamed. Bring it on!)


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mammal_mama* 
And when I hear about people "setting toddlers in front of the tube for hours at a time" -- I wonder, do they drug them first? I've never known even older children to spend "8 hours" sitting there watching and doing nothing else. Since we have lots of other options in our house, the TV may be on all day sometimes, but that doesn't mean that's all the girls or I are doing.

I'm just going to respond to this, as I do know a mom who does it. No - the kids don't technically spend 8 hours sitting there (although the tv is on _all_ day, not only for 8 hours).

Her kids alternate _all day_ between zoned-out zombies and not watching the tv at all. They run riot all over the living room, throwing food, and fighting each other and trashing stuff (any given toy in that house has a life expectancy of about three days...and I've seen more than one destroyed in less than 12 hours). However, _if_ the tv gets turned off (rarely happens - she had it on while entertaining family on Christmas Eve), they freak out and protest until it gets switched back on. They don't want to do anything without the tv on, and there's usually at least one of the four actually zoning out on it. The mom listens to music on her computer, and if the tv is too loud, she just turns it up.

It's possibly the loudest, least restful, and least creative environment I've ever been in.


----------



## dawn1221 (Sep 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *boatbaby* 







: And the grand irony is... I am a TV producer/ writer (used to be director before DS) and work mostly for home improvement show and The Weather Channel









I am a media planner. I actually have something to do with the evil empire that is marketing. In fact, my client is a film studio (and it ain't Disney). Of all, they could ( and rightfully so ) be considered the worst of the worst. Some of the stories I am not allowed to tell would shock most.

We watch TV in our house. First off, it is sort of my job to know the state of television. And second, we like it.

When DD was little, we limited TV and I did have some guilt about how much sesame street we allowed. But I got over it. I am more confident in my parenting now that I haven't killed DD with my mistakes. I no longer feel guilty about TV.

And all us computer users are the same as the TV users. So just because you are TV free does not mean you are marketing free. We market on the internet too. IN fact, more and more these days. It's all media.

What you can do is be aware of what your kids are watching. Allow some things and not others. And get a TiVo.


----------



## mammal_mama (Aug 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dawn1221* 
What you can do is be aware of what your kids are watching.

Yes! And they so much, really, really want us to be aware and involved. One thing my daughters and I like, now that I've lifted all limits on TV, computer, and other media, is that I spend more time watching programs, and playing computer games, with them (well, my 2yo doesn't play computer games yet).

It used to be that the few hours of "screentime" I allowed per week (yes, I really did insultingly lump it all together as "screentime"), was "my" time to do something I wanted, such as lie in bed and read one of my books (while Daddy hosted the long-awaited computer game or "movie night"). I still do that sometimes, but am also enjoying some time just hanging out and enjoying their shows with them.

We also get to enjoy more PBS stuff now. When I used to think I had to keep all "screentime" within a 6-hour-a-week limit (I wanted to feel I was "better" than those just following the AAP recommendation of not more than 2 hours a day, which allowed for a whopping *gasp* 14 hours a week







),

my 7yo preferred to save all her "screentime" for movies and the occasional computer game, plus we saved "screen-times" for evenings or weekends when Daddy was home, so he could get a little TV-time, too. This left PBS out in the cold.







:

We missed out on so much fun. I'm glad my girls know who Elmo is now.







And my 7yo even knows about Shakespeare because of "Wishbone."









Storm Bride, I can't speak for your friend's situation, buy my guess is that her children's problems are more related to her lack of interest in them, than they are to the TV being on a lot.

I say this because sometimes I get kind of wrapped up in my computer-stuff, but at some point my daughters always remind me of their need for me. I really never forget them, as I'm often holding one of them, or nursing my 2yo, while I "blog" and discuss.

I like it that our computers and TV are all in the same room; we have lots of toys in here, too. It makes us all feel so companionable as we pursue our various interests together.


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

DD is watching a Barney video as we speak









I have come from both perspectives. When I was pregnant I was extremely anti-TV ... I was one of those mamas who judged people who's children watched TV. I do have to say though without judgment, I am an advocate of not introducing TV until around age two. We did that with dd and I felt really good about it. Up until that time I didn't feel comfortable introducing TV.

However....

Now dd (27 months) watches TV and I am completely at peace about it in every way. We parent consensually and are radical unschoolers and there is no way in the world I could say out of one side of my mouth "I trust my child to choose how she learns" or "I trust in the amazing self regulation of children" -- then sanction TV "for her own good".

Imposing the will of someone in power over someone who is weaker with the excuse of "doing it for their own good to save them" is the reason we are fighting an endless war in Iraq but that is another kettle of fish all together...

Anyway, dd is an awesome kid in every way. Extremely gifted, extremely AWESOME and it is neither because of, or in spite of TV. It is just the way it is.

She enjoys TV. That is our justification. That should be the ONLY justification in my opinion. I would feel so insulted if someone refused me something I enjoyed, especially if it wasn't affecting my health in any way (and no, it isn't...I don't buy into "studies"... I know my child







). I would be so insulted if someone called something I enjoyed "silly" or a "waste of time" or "damaging" and then proceeded to refuse me that enjoyment.

The core of our whole family system is mutual respect and the trust that each one of us is invested in meeting the needs/wants of the others. If we don't have that, we have nothing.

ETA: I wanted to echo a pp who mentioned the fact that it is sort of funny that many of the posters who are so anti-TV (not in this thread, but in general) have profiles like: join date: March 2007 Posts: 6,000


----------



## solomonj (Aug 30, 2007)

This is so interesting. I'm new here (as is my 3wk old daughter to the world), and haven't read through all the TV threads here so my apologies if this is something people address all the time.

I would probably add justifications, though I would prefer calling them qualifications, to the television watching I would allow a child (I assume with my child, but when I was a live-in nanny I practiced this with my ward).

Unlike a few of the posters in this thread, I do see a significant difference between DVDs and broadcast television. That's because my fear isn't neglect; my main fear/concern about television is in regard to exposure to advertising, not necessarily the show itself. I worked in advertising in my early years and grew to despise it, believing that its hegemonic purpose is to make us unquestioning consumers and leave us feeling want and dissatisfaction. I believe that advertising is pervasive and seductive and that companies continuously pour money into it because it really works.

Stanford University News Service

Quote:

Numerous studies have shown that young children are unable to understand that advertising, product placement and co-branding with popular toys are meant to get them to choose one product over another. For them, "truth in advertising" has a very literal meaning.
Advertising and marketing is brainwashing, and I feel that I'm responsible for choosing how brainwashed a child under my care becomes.

One of the studies that really stuck with me recently was done by Thomas Robinson, a professor of pediatrics at Stanford University:

Quote:

The study included three McDonald's menu items - hamburgers, chicken nuggets and french fries - and store-bought milk or juice and carrots. Children got two identical samples of each food on a tray, one in McDonald's wrappers or cups and the other in plain, unmarked packaging. The kids were asked if they tasted the same or if one was better. (Some children didn't taste all the foods.)

McDonald's-labelled samples were the clear favourites. French fries were the biggest winner; almost 77 per cent said the labelled fries tasted best while only 13 per cent preferred the others.

Fifty-four per cent preferred McDonald's-wrapped carrots versus 23 per cent who liked the plain-wrapped sample. The only results not statistically clear-cut involved the hamburgers, with 29 kids choosing McDonald's-wrapped burgers and 22 choosing the unmarked ones.
If you just take a scan down the list of Dr. Robinson's recent journal articles and studies you'll see the remarkable connection between commercial viewing and food preferences of preschoolers, as well as product preference.

So, I think making a qualification between DVD and broadcast television viewing is perfectly valid.

Solomon


----------



## RomanGoddess (Mar 16, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Heavenly* 
Why are people so worried about what other people think? If you want your kids to watch tv then let them. I guarantee you will enjoy parenting a lot more if you stop letting other people make you feel guilty about really stupid things.

There is an easy answer to that question. This board is about Natural Family Living. Television is not exactly what some might call a "natural" way to entertain one's child. In fact, many doctors and educators claim that for a very small child, it is most unnatural and unhealthy.

Caroline (whose three year old now watches the French version of Franklin the Turtle every evening at 19h00, while Mommy makes supper)


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

Advertising... *shrugs*

I know all the *evils* of course. At the same time I would wager to say that the children who didn't choose the McD wrappers in the above study didn't do so because they weren't exposed to ads, but because they probably had parents who talked to them about such things.... as we plan to.

And truthfully, who cares if my child wants things that she sees on TV? I want things I see -- not just on TV, on MDC, on someone else (like a cool t-shirt) or things I hear about through the grapevine... it doesn't mean I am obligated to buy it ...

Also, why is it that certain brands of diapers go for more on the trading post -- or you can go into the natural living reviews section of MDC and hear certain brand names over and over and over? Is marketing only "evil" when it is McDonalds or do *crunchy* products like Burts Bees and the like count?

I want an i-phone. Good luck affording it right now... but it looks like the coolest sh!t I have ever seen







... I won't compromise my morals for it (steal or take from our family funds), I won't expect anyone else to buy it for me.. .and if I never get it... I will live and I will continue to be happy as a clam. Certain products enhance my happiness or bring me enjoyment, but they aren't the core of my happiness.... and I doubt they ever will be for dd ---

My daughter knows how to be happy without products... she recognizes produts in stores and such but it has never been an issue -- more recognition than actual desiring of it --- but if she sees something she thinks looks cool on TV, no whoop...

DH and I are very knowledgable in the tricks of the trade regarding advertising. We just don't think it is the big bad wolf that will eat you (like most people do). We don't think it is ethical in a lot of cases, or even clever







but we know we always have a choice whether to buy into it or not. Sometimes we do (i-phone







) , most times we don't.


----------



## bigeyes (Apr 5, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *boatbaby* 
I think the thing that people don't realize when discussing TV is that it is addictive. We live in a society where we can talk openly about alcohol being addictive, or food, or heck even the internet. But nobody will admit TV is.

Here is an interesting read from Scientific America:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?art...A8809EC588EEDF

and another read...
http://www.turnoffyourtv.com/healthe...addiction.html








:

meh

when I didn't have a tv I drank and smoked pot a whole lot more.









Just because you don't watch tv doesn't mean you are using your time to do something productive.

FTR, we rarely watch commercials because we DVR everything we watch.


----------



## solomonj (Aug 30, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *captain crunchy* 
We don't think it is ethical in a lot of cases, or even clever







but we know we always have a choice whether to buy into it or not. Sometimes we do (i-phone







) , most times we don't.

Hmmm... interesting. So, what evidence could ever convince you that your choices aren't as flexible as you might think they are?

Real question, not trying to bait you.

Solomon


----------



## shayinme (Jan 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *captain crunchy* 
Advertising... *shrugs*

I know all the *evils* of course. At the same time I would wager to say that the children who didn't choose the McD wrappers in the above study didn't do so because they weren't exposed to ads, but because they probably had parents who talked to them about such things.... as we plan to.

And truthfully, who cares if my child wants things that she sees on TV? I want things I see -- not just on TV, on MDC, on someone else (like a cool t-shirt) or things I hear about through the grapevine... it doesn't mean I am obligated to buy it ...

Also, why is it that certain brands of diapers go for more on the trading post -- or you can go into the natural living reviews section of MDC and hear certain brand names over and over and over? Is marketing only "evil" when it is McDonalds or do *crunchy* products like Burts Bees and the like count?

I want an i-phone. Good luck affording it right now... but it looks like the coolest sh!t I have ever seen







... I won't compromise my morals for it (steal or take from our family funds), I won't expect anyone else to buy it for me.. .and if I never get it... I will live and I will continue to be happy as a clam. Certain products enhance my happiness or bring me enjoyment, but they aren't the core of my happiness.... and I doubt they ever will be for dd ---

DH and I are very knowledgable in the tricks of the trade regarding advertising. We just don't think it is the big bad wolf that will eat you (like most people do). We don't think it is ethical in a lot of cases, or even clever







but we know we always have a choice whether to buy into it or not. Sometimes we do (i-phone







) , most times we don't.

Can I hug you for this?







You really summed up a lot of my thoughts on this matter. I have often sat here wondering what's the difference between lusting after some 100% handmade gnomes versus a Dora toy? KWIM? Heck sometimes living naturally is just as pricey as being a mainstreamer if you don't pay attention to your consumption.

Shay


----------



## mammal_mama (Aug 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *shayinme* 
Can I hug you for this?







You really summed up a lot of my thoughts on this matter. I have often sat here wondering what's the difference between lusting after some 100% handmade gnomes versus a Dora toy? KWIM? Heck sometimes living naturally is just as pricey as being a mainstreamer if you don't pay attention to your consumption.

Shay









I absolutely agree. It would actually be a lot more pricey for us. Going to the health food store is kind of a luxury treat when we have extra money.


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

Advertising is a tool. We can evaluate it just like we would any other thing.









_"That looks cool. I wonder if it would break easily though?"

"That's the dumbest commercial I've seen in ages."

"What the crap are people thinking? I'd never buy that because..."

"Ooooh now that looks fun."

"OMG you guys have you seen that commercial yet? It's so funny..."_


----------



## solomonj (Aug 30, 2007)

Developmentally, I think I'll be willing to let a child under my care make choices about interpreting advertising campaigns sometime after I trust them to walk across the street without holding my hand.

Solomon


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

Well firstly, dd doesn't see much advertising as we don't have cable and also because she self regulates her TV viewing beautifully....

To answer your other question, I know the tremendous flexibility of my choices and embrace that. I use advertising for my own purposes, not the other way around and I can say that confidentally. The evidence of that is the fact that I am truly happy inside independent of what I have or don't have. I have had much, and I have had little, and a world of in between and I can truly say that I have been at my happiest with having the least -- not because I live simply, but because I found inner joy and contentment.

I know that no ad campaign can give that to me and no ad campaign can take that away from me. I am the master of my experience and though I know it is so easy to fall into blame, that is not what I am about.

There is a point in one's life where they would be better served to look within themselves rather then outside of themselves to find peace.

You may say, 'but that is what I am saying, look within yourself and realize ad campaigns are evil!'

and I say, 'look within yourself and realize that your belief that they are evil and hold so much power is what makes them hold so much power'.

Ad campaigns hold no power over me... not because I am so enlightened -- but because I make a simple choice that they will hold no power over me... and so I create my reality.

My daughter will have her own path to walk. I pray that she will seek my wisdom in such things as she seeks my guidance most things as someone she trusts and who treats her as someone who can be trusted.

However, there is no way I can claim to trust someone or even allow them the opportunity to explore how they feel about a subject if I never allow them to be exposed to said subject (in this case, TV).

Quote:

Can I hug you for this?
Thanks!! ... and yes! I always accept hugs!


----------



## captivatedlife (Aug 16, 2006)

I think, because they know there are so many better things for them to be doing.

Like I feel guilty because I am on MDC so often







:

As a side note, I put TV and videos on the same line (non interactive)

Video games (xbox and such) and internet usage (no streaming videos - informational sites, webcamming with the grandparents, starfall - all interactive or informational) I think are acceptable.

My dd is only 7 mos though. We've been TV free for over a year and I'm proud of that. I was addicted to it. (I *had* to be home to watch certain shows.......)

We'll probably add tv back into our house in little bits. Some pbs, some local news and such. Probably not network dramas, etc.


----------



## dubfam (Nov 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UnschoolnMa* 
Advertising is a tool. We can evaluate it just like we would any other thing.









_"That looks cool. I wonder if it would break easily though?"

"That's the dumbest commercial I've seen in ages."

"What the crap are people thinking? I'd never buy that because..."

"Ooooh now that looks fun."

"OMG you guys have you seen that commercial yet? It's so funny..."_


And just like a lot of other tools, children don;t understand them and they are not safe. I do no think that a young child understands that they are being manipulated to buy things. If young children are so independent and can make all these decisions for themselves, even at 2 YO, then why do they need us?

DS sees commercials occasionally and we have explained it to him, but I wouldn't want him to watch a lot of commercials, especially if I was not in the room. I don't think that advertising is evil, but I don't think that it is appropriate for young children. They simply do not have the same reasoning skills as an adult.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *captain crunchy* 
I do have to say though without judgment, I am an advocate of not introducing TV until around age two. We did that with dd and I felt really good about it. Up until that time I didn't feel comfortable introducing TV.

I think that's a great guideline. It does, unfortunately, become much more complicated when there are multiple kids of various ages in the home. I can't quite see myself telling my 14-year-old that he can't watch tv because his brother is too young, yk?


----------



## Heavenly (Nov 21, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *shayinme* 
Can I hug you for this?







You really summed up a lot of my thoughts on this matter. I have often sat here wondering what's the difference between lusting after some 100% handmade gnomes versus a Dora toy? KWIM? Heck sometimes living naturally is just as pricey as being a mainstreamer if you don't pay attention to your consumption.

Shay

Exactly! People are paying $80 for one diaper or $200 for a pair of longies because they are the current "in" brand in the NFL world. How is that any better than my daughter wanting Dora crocs (which I did buy for her by the way and she looks darn cute!







).


----------



## Heavenly (Nov 21, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dubfam* 
And just like a lot of other tools, children don;t understand them and they are not safe. I do no think that a young child understands that they are being manipulated to buy things. If young children are so independent and can make all these decisions for themselves, even at 2 YO, then why do they need us?

DS sees commercials occasionally and we have explained it to him, but I wouldn't want him to watch a lot of commercials, especially if I was not in the room. I don't think that advertising is evil, but I don't think that it is appropriate for young children. They simply do not have the same reasoning skills as an adult.

That's the odd thing though. My kids watch a lot of tv (we don't place limits on amount, just make sure they are watching appropriate programs) and they have NEVER asked me for something because they saw it on a commerical. My youngest daughter likes Dora stuff because she loves Dora but how is that any different than someone liking a certain brand of cloth diaper because they keep seeing ads for it here on Mothering and then they see someone has posted a picture of them and oooh, they have to have it! I have never, not even once, had my children come to me and say they want such and such an item because they saw it on tv.


----------



## ~PurityLake~ (Jul 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *captain crunchy* 
Well firstly, dd doesn't see much advertising as we don't have cable and also because she self regulates her TV viewing beautifully....

To answer your other question, I know the tremendous flexibility of my choices and embrace that. I use advertising for my own purposes, not the other way around and I can say that confidentally. The evidence of that is the fact that I am truly happy inside independent of what I have or don't have. I have had much, and I have had little, and a world of in between and I can truly say that I have been at my happiest with having the least -- not because I live simply, but because I found inner joy and contentment.

I know that no ad campaign can give that to me and no ad campaign can take that away from me. I am the master of my experience and though I know it is so easy to fall into blame, that is not what I am about.

There is a point in one's life where they would be better served to look within themselves rather then outside of themselves to find peace.

You may say, 'but that is what I am saying, look within yourself and realize ad campaigns are evil!'

and I say, 'look within yourself and realize that your belief that they are evil and hold so much power is what makes them hold so much power'.

Ad campaigns hold no power over me... not because I am so enlightened -- but because I make a simple choice that they will hold no power over me... and so I create my reality.

My daughter will have her own path to walk. I pray that she will seek my wisdom in such things as she seeks my guidance most things as someone she trusts and who treats her as someone who can be trusted.

However, there is no way I can claim to trust someone or even allow them the opportunity to explore how they feel about a subject if I never allow them to be exposed to said subject (in this case, TV).

Thanks!! ... and yes! I always accept hugs!

I really liked your posts, also wanted to say, my oldest daughter is the same age as your daughter.

solomonj, it is true that advertising can be much worse than the actual shows, but as captain cruncy says, how can a child learn good judgement if they're never exposed to an opportunity to make that judgement.


----------



## solomonj (Aug 30, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Abi's Mom* 
solomonj, it is true that advertising can be much worse than the actual shows, but as captain cruncy says, how can a child learn good judgement if they're never exposed to an opportunity to make that judgement.

I've never felt a lack of exposure to ads, even if the TV was never turned on. A four block walk from one subway stop to the next when I lived in New York City as a nanny to a 3 yr old gave more "opportunities" for discussion of billboards than could fill a week. In a big city, standing in one place on a street corner places you in the sight line of two dozen colorful advertisements, easy.


----------



## shayinme (Jan 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
I think that's a great guideline. It does, unfortunately, become much more complicated when there are multiple kids of various ages in the home. I can't quite see myself telling my 14-year-old that he can't watch tv because his brother is too young, yk?

Having a 2 yo and a 15 yo I struggle with this as well. It was one of the factors that played into me deciding to ease up as far as tv with the 2 yo. My son told me he felt I was being hypocritical since when he was 2 he watched a lot of tv ( I was 21 at the time)







. Oddly enough the more tv time we allow dd she could care less.

Shay


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *shayinme* 
Having a 2 yo and a 15 yo I struggle with this as well. It was one of the factors that played into me deciding to ease up as far as tv with the 2 yo. My son told me he felt I was being hypocritical since when he was 2 he watched a lot of tv ( I was 21 at the time)







. Oddly enough the more tv time we allow dd she could care less.

Shay

DS1 was exposed to quite a lot of tv when he was little, too...but it was because of my ex. We watch almost no actual television programming, and do DVDs, instead. One of the reasons we watch so little tv these days is because I got SO sick of it when I was with my ex. There's something about coming into a room where a tv is on and nobody's there, turning the tv off and going to change, and coming back out to find the tv turned back on and _still_ nobody there that made me a little nuts...


----------



## ~PurityLake~ (Jul 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *solomonj* 
I've never felt a lack of exposure to ads, even if the TV was never turned on. A four block walk from one subway stop to the next when I lived in New York City as a nanny to a 3 yr old gave more "opportunities" for discussion of billboards than could fill a week. In a big city, standing in one place on a street corner places you in the sight line of two dozen colorful advertisements, easy.

Not everyone has lived in NYC, I haven't.
Not everyone has lived in large cities, although I have.
I don't now, therefore neither do my daughters.

I was just saying I agree with you that media is everywhere, and tv commercials are bad, but I also agree with captain crunchy that we can't over-protect our children and never give them the opportunity to learn about things they are bound to come across in their life.
My mother was over-protective, to my detriment.


----------



## hippymomma69 (Feb 28, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Heavenly* 
they have NEVER asked me for something because they saw it on a commerical. My youngest daughter likes Dora stuff because she loves Dora ...

You are LUCKY! My DD saw one commercial on our "on demand" choice of some Sprout show with Mr. Clean and now we can't leave the supermarket without going to visit Mr. Clean!

And they now have Dora on some food product on the cereal isle that is so hideous I couldn't even bear to look at the ingredients! Makes it very difficult to go down the cereal isle...she always spots Dora and wants her - she doesn't even know what is in the package!

OTOH, the sesame street characters are on some Earth's Best products which has helped us entice her to eat some crackers on days when she won't eat anything....










Advertising - can't live with it, can't live without it....LOL
peace,
robyn


----------



## solomonj (Aug 30, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Abi's Mom* 
I was just saying I agree with you that media is everywhere, and tv commercials are bad, but I also agree with captain crunchy that we can't over-protect our children and never give them the opportunity to learn about things they are bound to come across in their life.
My mother was over-protective, to my detriment.

I agree with you, and hope I didn't come across as combative. I'm just responding to the OP as to a reason why some people would offer qualifications or justifications when they say they watch tv with their kids--to acknowledge to other readers in a forum that there are issues with television that increase on complexity the more television is watched. During one kid's half-hour show there might be fifteen commercials, so talking with your child about body issues, about improper gender stereotypes, whatever religious or political issues a family might hold important, proper nutrition, other ways to resolve conflict, how to interact with friends and handle peer pressure, and all the other things that might come up in the sixteen pieces of that half-hour (15 commercials and one show) are sometimes addressed on a hit and miss basis. One might start talking about how little girls were grossly misportrayed and not be able to talk about the real-life consequences of calling a peer mean names. So whatever isn't discussed is left as a model of how people interact with others and themselves in the mind of a child continuously learning how to live. I think I understand one reason why a poster would offer justifications for their kids viewing.


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dubfam* 
And just like a lot of other tools, children don;t understand them and they are not safe. I do no think that a young child understands that they are being manipulated to buy things. If young children are so independent and can make all these decisions for themselves, even at 2 YO, then why do they need us?

 I think children can use tools safely. Of course they need us around to help show them and guide them and just generally be involved. And we are.







With TV advertisments, food, friends, music, and any number of things. I remember discussing product placement with my Dd when she was quite young. Maybe 4 or 5 ?

So yeah, I agree that being there to explain is great.


----------



## solomonj (Aug 30, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UnschoolnMa* 
I think children can use tools safely. Of course they need us around to help show them and guide them and just generally be involved. And we are.







With TV advertisments, food, friends, music, and any number of things. I remember discussing product placement with my Dd when she was quite young. Maybe 4 or 5 ?

So yeah, I agree that being there to explain is great.

And I agree that verbal discussions and explanations are a useful and necessary and respectful part of tv viewing. But as much I explain the consequences of getting hit by a car and get total agreement from a child on the necessity of looking both ways and crossing the street carefully, when we're in the middle of the crosswalk I use physical restraint (harsh description, but true) by holding his hand. At some point in the child's maturity, I let go and just watch carefully. But if I can't explain physical injury consequences to a 3 or 4 year old and assume that's enough for them to understand it and walk safely across unrestrained (harsh), why would I think my discussions of something esoteric like economics and capitalism would be more easily absorbed and understood and don't also require my shaping and limiting the world she encounters, expanding her options slowly over time?


----------



## dubfam (Nov 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *solomonj* 
And I agree that verbal discussions and explanations are a useful and necessary and respectful part of tv viewing. But as much I explain the consequences of getting hit by a car and get total agreement from a child on the necessity of looking both ways and crossing the street carefully, when we're in the middle of the crosswalk I use physical restraint (harsh description, but true) by holding his hand. At some point in the child's maturity, I let go and just watch carefully. But if I can't explain physical injury consequences to a 3 or 4 year old and assume that's enough for them to understand it and walk safely across unrestrained (harsh), why would I think my discussions of something esoteric like economics and capitalism would be more easily absorbed and understood and don't also require my shaping and limiting the world she encounters, expanding her options slowly over time?

ITA....put much more articulately than I could have.

I


----------



## LeftField (Aug 2, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hippymomma69* 
And they now have Dora on some food product on the cereal isle that is so hideous I couldn't even bear to look at the ingredients! Makes it very difficult to go down the cereal isle...she always spots Dora and wants her - she doesn't even know what is in the package!

I have this discussion (with Dora being the #1 offender) all.the.time.







: And while my kids do watch TV, I fast-forward through the commercials. Sometimes, I forget to catch one and the kids will often yell, "Mama!! It's a commercial!" My 3 year old has no idea what's going on with commercials. But with my 6 year old, I've been working on him for a few years to understand what marketing means. I, personally, loathe commercials and I'm really picky about what I buy. So, I've told my 6 year old that commercials are sneaky ploys. People are trying to trick us into buying something that we wouldn't otherwise buy.

We were in Target the other day and we passed some disgusting looking over-processed snack with Dora's happy face on it. Of course, the kids instantly wanted it. I said, "What's inside that box?" "A snack.", they replied. "Yeah", I said, "But what kind of snack is it? What does it look like? What does it taste like? Is it good?" I said, "Someone is trying to sell those snack boxes and it might not even taste very good. So they figure if they put Dora's face on it, people who like Dora will want to buy it. Isn't that sneaky? It's a trick." It's a constant educational process and I guess it will take years to really help them see past the smoke and mirrors.

I would prefer for them to not see commercials, because I'm aware they are powerful. But even PBS advertises with that stupid Chik Fil A cow that is constantly on there. And when you get DVDs, they often have tons of commercials up front, even if it's just marketing for more videos. If you watch the Leapfrog Letter Factory 'educational' video, well, it's also marketing for Leapfrog products. Your child will recognize the characters and the logo and bug the crap out of you when you go to Toys R Us. Marketing is very pervasive and annoying. It does provide a good opportunity, however, for kids to learn how to be critical consumers.


----------



## solomonj (Aug 30, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LeftField* 
We were in Target the other day and we passed some disgusting looking over-processed snack with Dora's happy face on it. Of course, the kids instantly wanted it. I said, "What's inside that box?" "A snack.", they replied. "Yeah", I said, "But what kind of snack is it? What does it look like? What does it taste like? Is it good?" I said, "Someone is trying to sell those snack boxes and it might not even taste very good. So they figure if they put Dora's face on it, people who like Dora will want to buy it. Isn't that sneaky? It's a trick." It's a constant educational process and I guess it will take years to really help them see past the smoke and mirrors.

Awesome job, mom! Kudos.


----------



## imahappymama (Feb 17, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LeftField* 
But even PBS advertises with that stupid Chik Fil A cow that is constantly on there. And when you get DVDs, they often have tons of commercials up front, even if it's just marketing for more videos. If you watch the Leapfrog Letter Factory 'educational' video, well, it's also marketing for Leapfrog products. Your child will recognize the characters and the logo and bug the crap out of you when you go to Toys R Us. Marketing is very pervasive and annoying. It does provide a good opportunity, however, for kids to learn how to be critical consumers.

No kidding! We watched PBS last week and the commercials were just as bad as reg tv. At this point, my 10yo ds has been educated his entire life and will readily say that ads are a ploy to get us to buy more crap. True, that. It is such a matter of educating yourself and your family into not being a voracious, uneducated consumer. BTW, my kids watch tv, limited to certain channels, and are certainly well-educated and well adjusted. TV can be an amazing tool and a way to experience things that we would otherwise never see. Discovery Channel, History Channel, love em!


----------



## merpk (Dec 19, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ThreeBeans* 
I think people justify because they feel guilty. And they feel guilty because the preponderance of evidence suggests that tv is bad for young children.

I do let my children watch tv, and I don't feel great about it.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *GuildJenn* 
I think it's because I think television, like chocolate, is okay but should be consumed in moderation, in my opinion. Because it's so ubiquitous in our culture - ).


Quote:


Originally Posted by *UnschoolnMa* 
They feel guilty and judged by people who think TV is bad or wrong or unhealthy. That's my guess anyway.


Yeah to all of that.

So we live in a community that is mostly TV-free. Some families have videos, but most do not have actual channel reception. _We do_. We have cable, even. So our home has become the place for kids in DS#1's class to watch various TV shows. (All on one channel, and no, there are no commercials ... except for other TV shows.)

_That_ makes me feel guilty. As all get-out.

We're trying to figure out how to stop being "the TV family" without actually having to turn off the cable. A friend suggested charging the kids for the TV time ...


----------



## thebarkingbird (Dec 2, 2005)

we are a TV watching family. i like it. i have worked in low/no budget film production before and enjoy good storytelling. a good movie moves me just as much as a good book. i want my son to be able to have that same experience of enjoying the media. i'm going to look for a quote from edward r. murrow on TV i can never remember it properly. basically he was sad that we use it to rot our brains when there is such great potential for it to be something that brings us together and allows us to share stories, news, and information.

i do limit his TV watching and i encourage him to watch the best quality shows out there. i'm a movie buff. you think i pay 8 bucks a pop to watch crap films? no i learned how to choose the best on which to spend my time and money. we love fosters home for imaginary friends here. the design is great, the jokes are sophisticated works of absurdest humor and it fits well with our family morals (dh is a subjini). we watch some animal shows and he learns quite a bit.

as far as video games and other forms of screen time DS has been sitting on DH's lap to play World of Warcraft lately. He's really improved hand eye coordination skills which his daycare teachers have noticed by learning how to fly dragons in game. he points to colors of sky he wants to see and flys into them. it's a positive thing. the lines between real reality and virtual will blur beyond our recognition in our children's lifetimes. DS needs to develop at least some concept of the AI that make video games work. He needs to be able to think about the distinction between reality and fantasy/ natural and artificial in a different way than his parents and grandparents did.

i felt just as neglected as a kid being left to my books as i did being left to my movies. neglect has more to do with just leaving a kid in a corner to rot rather than helping choose enriching and/or enjoyable activities. i really think that providing high quality programming, books, toys, and video games to preschoolers is useful to their development. how can we expect our children to have healthy interactions with media if we don't give them healthy experiences with it early on? barring nuclear disaster or 'borg take over video games and tv are here to stay. they have ceased to be diversions and are making their way into every part of our interaction with each other. i respect people who choose to live without but it seems like an odd choice to me.

of course this all applies after a child is capable of grasping a narrative. tv for babies seems a bit silly as it's just flashing lights for them and there is some evidence that that can be quite unhealthy.

i think i list these reasons because i see a major shift coming in our culture and i want others to see it coming too. nanobots and AI won't be sci fi for too much longer and it's important that we adjust our concept of reality and "natural" appropriately.


----------



## bigeyes (Apr 5, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LeftField* 
I have this discussion (with Dora being the #1 offender) all.the.time.







: And while my kids do watch TV, I fast-forward through the commercials. Sometimes, I forget to catch one and the kids will often yell, "Mama!! It's a commercial!" My 3 year old has no idea what's going on with commercials. But with my 6 year old, I've been working on him for a few years to understand what marketing means. I, personally, loathe commercials and I'm really picky about what I buy. So, I've told my 6 year old that commercials are sneaky ploys. People are trying to trick us into buying something that we wouldn't otherwise buy.


I really like that. _Commercials are people trying to trick us into buying something we wouldn't otherwise buy._ I'm *sooooo* using that!


----------



## mammal_mama (Aug 27, 2006)

Another thought: it kind of bugs me to think that whenever someone shares details about her various choices, these details are always construed by some as "she doesn't feel good about her choice so she's 'justifying.'"

I'm sure that sometimes it IS justifying. But sometimes, at least for me, it honestly is just _sharing_. Putting a piece of myself into the equation.

After all, this isn't called an online _community_ for nothing.

So, if you really want to understand someone's motives, why not ask the person, "Hey, are you sharing all these details about your TV viewing habits because you don't feel good about what you're doing -- or is it that you assume we're all interested in your life and want to know you better?"

Okay, that doesn't exactly work, does it?







I guess *this* is one case where asking an individual on-the-spot is really not the best plan.


----------

