The Lounge Guidelines Help Search Members Calendar Blogs

Welcome Guest [ Log In | Register ] ]

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Kill Your Tv? "the Big Turn-off", Reduce or eliminate TV for your kids, if not yourself?
missladyj
post Nov 10 2007, 01:36 PM
Post #1


Hardcore BUSTie
***
Posts: 1,103
From: chi town


most kids are watching tv alone in their rooms where they sometimes have computers and video games there is little to no parental interaction or guidance. the same goes for the internet. kids need supervision with both forms of media and are not getting it. there is more about this in the kaiser family study also Jane Brown from UNC chapel hill has done studies on this as well.

As for me, I don't have kids but am about to finish my master's degree in educational media with a media literacy concentration so this is a subject that is near and dear to my heart.


The American Academy of Pediatrics says that kids under two should not watch tv
here is some research that relates tv viewing with attention problems later

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/...tract/113/4/708




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tommynomad
post Nov 5 2007, 05:28 PM
Post #2


Hardcore BUSTie
***
Posts: 331
From: Auckland, ANZ!


Hallooooo BUSTies! Loooong time no see!

I would hope that smart parents would keep the internet in plain view of the family, just as they do the tv.

I think there's huge difference between TV habits as sybarite describes, and TV as most people experience it. Let's face it, the mere existence of the term "electronic babysitter" is indicative of how pervasive and overused the idiot box is in our culture. I just moved to New Zealand. We have a studio apartment, with a wall bed, but the giant TV takes up 20% of the "living room!" We've been here a month and haven't turned it on yet. For the last three years I lived in Korea and there was not a single kind of urban public space spared--not public squares, not food courts, not bookstores, not even parks--the intrusion of commercial tv. Think about where people congregate where you live: is there a screen there, telling you to watch & buy?

When we were kids, we too were allowed 30 minutes of commercial tv a day. News and PBS were unlimited. All tv was watched in the living room, where the family was present. Deconstruction of shows watched was part of the experience. Even with those limits, my second adolescence (20s) consisted of hours and hours of TV. Hours I wish I'd spent doing almost anything else.

I've been without a connected tv for four years now. I download and watch TDS maybe once a month, same with Real Time, South Park, and Weeds. If the mood takes me, I watch some sports. Everything else I pass on, simply because I'd rather be doing yoga, playing ulti, guitar, or board games (our family time will gravitate around the game table, not the boob-box) to relax.

Is TV evil? Of course not. But the people who run it, plan it, and legislate on its behalf seem to be. Broadcasting used to be the right of all people. Then the airwaves were carved up by the FCC and licenses for air were sold. Freecasting was made a crime. (Network conglomerates have already effectively killed local radio, and they're petitioning governments to kill PBS and local access cable as we speak.)

More than 200 studies have identified a clear cause-and-effect relationship beteen TV violence and real viloence. Every credibly agency from the AMA to the Surgeon General to the U.N has accepted the conclusion. But parents largely don't know. Why? "Because the most powerful and far-reaching delivery system for the message won't broadcast it." (Kalle Lasn, Culture Jam) Just this is enough to illustrate TV's overall (outside the bounds of violence) influence. PBS aside, I've never seen *any* programming that wasn't either inappropriate for kids, or laced with advertising aimed at them, which is definitely out-of-bounds in my book.

I firmly believe that the obesity epidemic among children of this generation (and at the risk of sounding like a fogey, when I was in school, there was a "fat kid"--a horrible, cruel epithet, but the fact remains there was only one) can be traced to three simple factors:

1. TV and the soporific state it promotes and induces (thank you, missladyj)
2. The shitty food choices it (and everything else) generally advertises at kids
3. The passenger car

No one is farther from perfect than I, but I have all but eliminated these three from my life. I hope that I can instil in my future kids the same awareness of, and contempt for those things. But there is a HUGE difference for contempt for the medium and contempt for the viewer: if people choose TV as their medium of entertainment, then good on them--more space in my FNBS for me. Besides, I'm sure lots of people would take issue with my love of....almost anything: board games, e-fora, pornography, parks, activism, paper-based entertainment, air travel, the list goes on. I may not want to talk about Desperate Housewives with you, but that doesn't mean I think less of you for watching--jeez, how self-important can one get?


McLuhan was right. What many people forget is that the central lesson of 1984 is not that "Big Brother is Watching," but that the citizenry voluntarily purchase telescreens that enable him to do so.

In the postmodern age, what we allow on, and how (much) we use and deconstruct our TVs is much more important than whether we own them.


--------------------
"If I help women to have babies when they can give them love and affection, [those babies] will not grow up to be rapists or murderers.
They will not build concentration camps."
--Dr. Henry Morgentaler
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kaylafresh
post Nov 4 2007, 05:07 PM
Post #3


BUSTie
**
Posts: 60


I wonder if parents will monitor the computer as much as some monitor TV. I have soooo cut down on my TV intake but I'm obsessed with the internet. It feels like my parents could monitor TV watching easier because it sat there like a giant plastic behemouth in the room. But with their computer a kid can say, "I'm doing my home work!" It seems more insidious what kids can be exposed to on the internet too.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sybarite
post Nov 3 2007, 01:24 PM
Post #4


it's cards on the table time
***
Posts: 1,993


Our TV watching as kids was restricted to certain shows: PBS programmes, some movies and 60 Minutes every Sunday with dinner. Looking back I think this was a good approach, as it made us really pay attention to the programmes themselves, because there was a stated reason for watching them. However, my sister would watch hours of TV if she was allowed--such as saturday morning cartoons, before anyone else was up yet. As an adult, she'll quickly turn on the TV when she's staying in a hotel but won't have one at home.

I didn't watch much TV growing up; I hid in my room and read instead. Now, though, I will watch it for hours, but only if there's something specific on I want to see. If the mister or his daughter are watching something I have no interest in, I'll usually leave the room.

Now that we have the mister's daughter living with us I am newly conscious of how many references there are to sex on TV. She's 13, so can watch most things, but even Friends has recurring sexual references. I don't think seeing these is harmful at all, but I do think it embarasses her--or maybe it just embarrasses us. She's been somewhat sheltered but probably not as much as we think. She'll watch TV from the moment she gets home until it's time for her to go to bed, which I think is excessive, but it's not my call.

I think if I had young kids I would seriously restrict their TV watching. It can be hard though, simply because while they're awake, if they can't watch TV it means you can't either...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bustygirl
post Nov 3 2007, 11:03 AM
Post #5


Hardcore BUSTie
***
Posts: 2,561
From: bible belt baby


I have TV on in the background when I work because the voices soak up my nervous energy in a way that music doesn't. I don't think TV causes all the harmful effects it's purported to; I think the equation is far too complex for that. My kid will grow up with TV, as I did, and since I still read, write, draw, paint, work, and interact with others, I'm sure he will too.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
olivarria
post Nov 2 2007, 09:34 PM
Post #6


Hardcore BUSTie
***
Posts: 163
From: San Antonio, TX


I don't think being anti-TV is "elitist," anymore than being pro-TV is. I want to raise my future kids without TV mostly because i want them to have a healthy self-image, instead of wondering why they don't look plasticized and orange-tinted, or end up having Paris Hiton for a role-model. Also I keep in mind the fact that most two-year olds can recognize the McDonald's symbol by two years, and they see thousands upon thousands of ads each year telling them to consume consume consume. I find this quite sad, and also, i grew up with a family who "filled themselves up" with TV and food, and usually keep the TV on just to block out the awkward silence in the room. Everytime I would try to utter even a word to my dad, he was literally like, "Shhh! CSI is on!" and turn the TV louder until it deafened us, so maybe that's why I'm biased against TV. That and I want to be a librarian.


--------------------
"There came a time when the risk to remain tight in the bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom." -Anais Nin
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
missladyj
post Nov 2 2007, 05:49 PM
Post #7


Hardcore BUSTie
***
Posts: 1,103
From: chi town


the kaiser family foundation just did a study call generation M media in the lives of 8 -18 year olds and one of the findings was that kids who watch less tv, read more and do better in school . Some people would say this makes them smarter than kids who watch more tv. It makes great nonfiction reading if you're into that kinda thing.

http://kff.org/entmedia/index.cfm


Media theory is not " anti-tv-elitism"

Maybe you should look into starting a thread about your love for Dancing with the stars.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pinkpoodle
post Nov 2 2007, 08:59 AM
Post #8


Nobody puts poodle in a corner
***
Posts: 3,005
From: Land O' Lakes


That sounds very true, ladyj. The way I figure it though, is that I spend 8 hours a day looking at a spreadsheet and tinkering with numbers, so the last thing I want to do when I get home is to look at more linear information. TV helps me relax or "cool down" my brain after engaging it all day long. I rarely just sit and watch TV though. I'm always doing something else. I almost always have the TV on at home when I'm awake because I live alone and the silence feels weird. Music doesn't provide the same comfort for some reason. I read often, by the way. I'm just playing devil's advocate. Still, anti-TV elitism really pisses me off. I don't think that my heavy-reader friends are any sharper or more intelligent or enlightened than I am just because they read more. I dunno, maybe I do read just as much, but not long texts. I'm more into short pieces of information on different non-fiction topics. Anyway...


--------------------
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and it may be necessary from time to time to give a stupid or misinformed beholder a black eye." - Miss Piggy
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
missladyj
post Nov 1 2007, 04:00 PM
Post #9


Hardcore BUSTie
***
Posts: 1,103
From: chi town


Member,
the official quote from the media guru Marshall McLuhan is " The medium is the Message"

content is not important it is the form in which that content comes to you.

He would also disagree with Poodle about a fiction book being the same waste of time as television. A book is totally different expierence than watching tv. He divides media into hot and cool media. A hot media is one in which it requires the viewer or reader to actively enagage with the medium. TV does not require the same type of engagement as reading, he considers print an extension of the eye which requires linear, tv is cool. He also considers any electrical medium as an outering of our brains or nervous system which can have a numbing effect. All media produce an environments that work us over in different ways. The is a HUGE difference between the environment a book creates than compared to tv. It is not about which is good or bad or about demonizing television it is about understanding the different environments and how the affect us differently.

I could go on about more media theory but I wont bore you. Instead I suggest you read Mc Luhan's Understanding media. and anything by Neil Postman.


P.S.
I watch tv too. so fuckin what? Micheal Franti was right.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pinkpoodle
post Nov 1 2007, 03:06 PM
Post #10


Nobody puts poodle in a corner
***
Posts: 3,005
From: Land O' Lakes


Like I said, it's a preference thing. I would rather spend an hour watching Dancing With The Stars than reading a fictional book. I've always hated reading fiction because I feel like I can't do anything else but sit there and I'm not learning anything that I consider useful. I do enjoy reading, but only non-fiction. When I was little, I preferred reading my bro's college anatomy textbooks more than the fictional novels I was assigned for school. Actually, when I was a kid, I didn't like to read or watch TV. I spent most of my time playing in the woods or drawing in the living room. That involves a LOT of imagination and creativity.

Anyway...I'm not saying that you're wasting your time reading fiction. I'm just saying that your time reading isn't any better spent than my time watching Wayne Newton do a Paso Doble. They're both forms of entertainment/media that we enjoy. If reading works for you, then fine, but don't judge me for finding pleasure in a TV show.


--------------------
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and it may be necessary from time to time to give a stupid or misinformed beholder a black eye." - Miss Piggy
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
erinjane
post Nov 1 2007, 02:05 PM
Post #11


Hardcore BUSTie
***
Posts: 1,301
From: Winnipeg


I would hardly say reading fiction is just as big of a waste of time as watching tv. As a kid I loved reading fiction, it really allowed me to expand my imagination. I constantly had my nose in a book and really loved being able to have total freedom with my imagination. And now when I read fiction depending on what I'm reading, it's the same thing. I mean, if I'm reading Anne Rice, clearly I'm in it for the fluff of the book, but when I read something like "Everything is Illuminated" or "A Short History of Tractors in the Ukraine" I definately feel like I'm getting more out of it then watching an hour or reality tv.


--------------------
I Could Tell You Stories That Would Make Your Ears Curl
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pinkpoodle
post Nov 1 2007, 12:33 PM
Post #12


Nobody puts poodle in a corner
***
Posts: 3,005
From: Land O' Lakes


Awww....shucks, superstar!! That's sweet.

By the way, I'm a huge Dancing With The Stars addict and have been for the last few seasons!! I'm still pissed that Sabrina was voted off this week...grrr...


--------------------
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and it may be necessary from time to time to give a stupid or misinformed beholder a black eye." - Miss Piggy
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Reality SuperSta...
post Nov 1 2007, 12:06 PM
Post #13


Newbie
*
Posts: 1
From: Chicago


Hi,

I am a long time LURKER, I had to come out of hiding to say BRAVO Poodle.

I'm at work, Busting, so I have my window small to only show a little at a time, but I was so in agreement with your post that I maximized my window, switched to Lo-fi version, and created a user name, etc. so that I could post to you and tell you how much you RAWK for pointing that out...

People are so serious about things at times. I guess everyone just wants to declare a position or choice....Sometimes about important things, but most times about trivial things...

I too, love TV, Reality TV in particular.... While I don't really watch much TV during the week, due to work and having other things to do, on the weekend if I have no plans I definetly catch up. Will plan my whole weekend around all of the shows that I have autotuned my TV for...

Currently I am watching Keeping Up With The Kardashians, A Shot At Love With Tila Tequila, America's Next Top Model, Dancing With The Stars, Salt N Pepa, Gottis Way, Kimora Lee Simmons: Life in the Fab Lane, and my favorite Dexter (on Showtime)...Others include Tyra Banks Show, Oprah, and Extreme Home Makeover....

I really enjoy watching TV. It relaxes me. Depending on what I'm watching it inspires me, it motivates me, it teaches me... (Not any of the shows I listed I'm currently watching, but other shows and movies)

Everyone has a vice or addiction, drugs, alcohol, TV, food, shopping, it goes on and on.


Poodle you are smart and sassy. I heart you!


--------------------
To Whom Much Is Given, Much Is Expected

...Much Is Required
...Much Is Tested

You know...Whichever one fits.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pinkpoodle
post Oct 31 2007, 11:31 AM
Post #14


Nobody puts poodle in a corner
***
Posts: 3,005
From: Land O' Lakes


I love TV and I'm not ashamed to admit it. I think it's weird to sit down and actively watch it for several hours though. Like mouse said, it's about moderation.

For me, TV fits into a wider pop culture fascination that I have. I'm the same way with movies and music. I enjoy laughing with people about the Saved by the Bell episode where Jesse becomes addicted to caffeine pills or the episode of Happy Days where Fonzi jumps the shark on his water skiis--which, by the way, started the term "jump the shark" to denote the point at which a TV series goes downhill (i.e. "Good Times jumped the shark when James Sr. died.") TV is interesting, because it reflects the mindset and politics of a period of time. Same goes for music, movies, fashion, art, literature, and so on. It's not inherently evil and I don't think it fucks up the mind nearly as much as some people like to argue. Really, anything in excess is not all that great for you. Isolating a kid from culture messes 'em up to the same extent that placing them in front of a TV all day does. I wouldn't want my kids to hang out in front of the TV all day watching reality TV, but I also don't want them to be totally out of the loop.

On books...Reading fiction is just as much of a "waste of time" as watching TV is. When a kid is young, it's important to develop their reading skills by reading a lot, but other than that, literature isn't any more relevant than a TV series or movie. There's nothing inherently "better" about a book versus other media. It's a preference thing.

ETA- You're gonna mess your kids up somehow, anyway, so you might as well throw 'em a bone and allow them to watch Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles every so often. I would be more worried about the impacts of my personality flaws and history on my child than the influence of Michelangelo and his numchucks.


--------------------
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and it may be necessary from time to time to give a stupid or misinformed beholder a black eye." - Miss Piggy
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
member
post Oct 29 2007, 10:28 PM
Post #15


BUSTie
**
Posts: 13
From: Ont


Its the message, not the medium!
Entertainment, education, commercial, etc...
We (my family) prefer educational and mute any commercials...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
EllieJay
post Oct 29 2007, 09:25 PM
Post #16


Newbie
*
Posts: 2


Sounds like a great conference. I've heard good things about it.
Ellie



QUOTE(missladyj @ Oct 27 2007, 06:23 PM) *
There is a conference coming up about Consumer Culture and kids sponsored by Commercial Free Childhood
if anyone is interested and has the time to attend.

here is the link

http://www.commercialfreechildhood.org//events.htm

CCFC's 6th Summit
Consuming Kids:
The Sexualization of Children and Other Commercial Calamities

April 3-5, 2008
Wheelock College
Boston , MA



Registration is now available for CCFC's 6th summit: Consuming Kids: The Sexualization of Children and Other Commercial Calamities on April 3-5, 2008 in Boston !

Featuring an all-star lineup of presenters, CCFC's 2008 Consuming Kids summit promises to be our best ever.



On Thursday, April 3rd, the summit will kick off with the presentation of the 3rd Fred Rogers Integrity Award to Morgan Spurlock, director and star of the acclaimed film, SuperSize Me. Friday and Saturday will feature presentations and workshops on the impact of commercialization on children - and what we can do to stop it.

We expect this year's summit will sell out early so register now and take advantage of early bird rates.



Confirmed speakers include: Michael Brody, American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry - Nancy Carlsson-Paige, author, Taking Back Childhood - Gail Dines, co-author, Pornography: The Production and Consumption of Inequality - Julie Gale, Kids Free 2 B Kids - Allen Kanner, co-editor, Psychology and Consumer Culture - Tim Kasser, author, The High Price of Materialism - Joe Kelly, author, Dads and Daughters - Jean Kilbourne, author, Can't Buy My Love - Diane Levin, author, Remote Control Childhood - Susan Linn, author, Consuming Kids - Alex Molnar, author, School Commercialism: From Democratic Ideal to Market Commodity - Alvin F. Poussaint, MD, co-author Come On, People - Michele Simon, the Marin Institute; author, Appetite for Profit - Juliet Schor, author, Born to Buy - Susan Gregory Thomas, author Buy, Buy, Baby - Ana Lucia Villela, Instituto Alana - and many, many more!

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
missladyj
post Oct 27 2007, 05:06 PM
Post #17


Hardcore BUSTie
***
Posts: 1,103
From: chi town


There is a conference coming up about Consumer Culture and kids sponsored by Commercial Free Childhood
if anyone is interested and has the time to attend.

here is the link

http://www.commercialfreechildhood.org//events.htm

CCFC's 6th Summit
Consuming Kids:
The Sexualization of Children and Other Commercial Calamities

April 3-5, 2008
Wheelock College
Boston , MA



Registration is now available for CCFC's 6th summit: Consuming Kids: The Sexualization of Children and Other Commercial Calamities on April 3-5, 2008 in Boston !

Featuring an all-star lineup of presenters, CCFC's 2008 Consuming Kids summit promises to be our best ever.



On Thursday, April 3rd, the summit will kick off with the presentation of the 3rd Fred Rogers Integrity Award to Morgan Spurlock, director and star of the acclaimed film, SuperSize Me. Friday and Saturday will feature presentations and workshops on the impact of commercialization on children - and what we can do to stop it.

We expect this year's summit will sell out early so register now and take advantage of early bird rates.



Confirmed speakers include: Michael Brody, American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry - Nancy Carlsson-Paige, author, Taking Back Childhood - Gail Dines, co-author, Pornography: The Production and Consumption of Inequality - Julie Gale, Kids Free 2 B Kids - Allen Kanner, co-editor, Psychology and Consumer Culture - Tim Kasser, author, The High Price of Materialism - Joe Kelly, author, Dads and Daughters - Jean Kilbourne, author, Can't Buy My Love - Diane Levin, author, Remote Control Childhood - Susan Linn, author, Consuming Kids - Alex Molnar, author, School Commercialism: From Democratic Ideal to Market Commodity - Alvin F. Poussaint, MD, co-author Come On, People - Michele Simon, the Marin Institute; author, Appetite for Profit - Juliet Schor, author, Born to Buy - Susan Gregory Thomas, author Buy, Buy, Baby - Ana Lucia Villela, Instituto Alana - and many, many more!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pepper
post Oct 19 2007, 07:17 PM
Post #18







dude, the princess was staring at the computer screen today, i had her on my lap while typing something somewhere. did it ever freak me out! no more computer on while she's awake! prolly for the best anyhow, i'll spend even more time talking straight at her, she loves that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aquagirl3
post Oct 19 2007, 06:05 PM
Post #19


Hardcore BUSTie
***
Posts: 104


My baby is 3.5 months and already he really seems interested in the TV! I have decided as of today no more TV on when he is awake. The Washington Post has had a couple of articles lately about TV and kids, and Baby Einstein:
article
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dustoverroses
post Oct 19 2007, 10:57 AM
Post #20


Newbie
*
Posts: 1


I never had a TV growing up, and I did not really miss it. I am not a parent, but I have noticed that there are a lot of kids these days that are really addicted to tv. Some of my friends who are in school with me have children and they let their kids watch tv so they can get their homework done. I think this may not be the best child rearing technique, but it can be hard when people are busy with other things. It is easy for me to say that I would never do that, but as I said, I don't have kids yet.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: April 23, 2014 - 10:58 PM