The debate has been going on for years: is TV bad for our children or not? The questions surrounding our country's most beloved medium are placed before us like a grocery list: At what age should children begin watching? Will it ruin their creativity? Does it cause kids to become violent? Is ADHD a side effect of too much TV?
The answers, of course, are not clearcut. Talk to ten parents and you will get ten different passionate opinions about TV and personal stories to back them up. The latest news story relating to this ongoing controversy involves the popular Baby Einstein children's videos. The company, founded in 1997 and bought by Disney in 2001, became famous for its books, toys, puppets, and videos featuring classical music and colorful, simple visuals. Now, twelve years later, Disney is offering refunds for the Baby Einstein videos, acknowledging that they did not make children into geniuses like they claimed to.
What is behind this nonsense? Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, a "national coalition of healthcare professionals, educators, advocacy groups, parents, and individuals who care about children," has been fighting for years to get compensation for consumers who bought the videos. This group seems to be a praise-worthy organization with commendable goals that involve curtailing the negative impact that large corporations have on children. There is no doubt that the practice of advertisers targeting children, especially when the products are harmful to their long-term health, is deplorable. But there is a big difference between going after a company who pushes cancer-causing cigarettes and one who simply suggests their enjoyable videos will increase a child's intelligence. No matter what the issue in question, there is a fine line between the freedom given to us and the practice of blaming others for the outcomes in our personal world.
After all, it is ultimately our individual choices that determine the course our lives take. My children all watched the Baby Einstein videos. Is there any way to know if the content of them contributed to making my kids smarter? Of course not. Ideally, the world would be free of TV and all people would read more, play more musical instruments, sit by fires talking, and spend much more time outside. But for most of us, that is not reality: TV is a big part of American life. Though all modern technology can become intrusive and even harmful to a child's development, it can also be fun, exciting, and educational. Each household has an obligation to monitor the use of electronic equipment and foster creativity through other stimulating actitivites. But if adults want to let their children sit in front of a video for hours at a time, that is also their perogative.
It is up to a child's parents to make the daily decisions that impact our lives. When my son was five-weeks old I was out of my mind with exhaustion. When I took him to the pediatrician, I told the doctor how tired I had been. He told me I should stop nursing and start giving him formula. "You'll feel so much better and it's basically the same thing," he said. I discarded his advice and continued nursing. My best friend never nursed her son and was fully satisfied with her decision. We all make choices that we feel are best for our children. If parents bought a video for their children, expecting it to make them geniuses, and then are angry that it did not, well, I think those parents have bigger problems that they need to deal with.
We live in a capitalist society. Our culture will always be rife with commercial influences. Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood says it is "the only national organization devoted to limiting the impact of commercial culure on children." Instead of wasting time and resources fighting an unrealistic, up-hill battle, wouldn't it be more productive to spend energy and money eduating children and empowering them and their parents to make smart choices. Teaching them to have a healthy dose of skepticism when they see a television commercial, or to be wary of free gifts given out at a corporate party will keep their minds on guard in a world that will never be free of money-hungry companies. Disney is offering $15.99 for up to four Baby Einsein videos that were bought between 2004 and 2009. That's about $64 for each person in the country who bought a video. Imagine what better use that money could be put to?
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Mimetalker
Nick Carraway
Jeff Howe
Hawley Roddick
Evan Kessler
scanner
Salon.com
Comments
That's a good enough reason to ban the damn videos rather than a mere refund.
I never thought they claimed to turn children into geniuses-- seriously, this is news to me that Disney actually marketed them as such with a straight face. I took the "genius" part to indicate that it was "genius" of Disney to capitalize so well making simplistic videos on classic music soundtrack-- the music being part of the public domain and therefore not subject to copyright/royalties. I would imagine some of the stock footage of airplanes and boats were public domain or at least already owned by Disney. Then, all those quirky toys appearing in the videos were likely gratis since all the videos had a little blurb on where you could go buy them. Most of the videos had no specific script or governing idea beyond counting, looking at colors or building a basic vocabularly.
So, no need for a team of writers. That just leaves paying royalties to that sweet blonde lady who invented the series-- remember when George Bush honored her during a State of the Union speech??? For being a savvy enterpreneur, I think, not for her contributions to the education of our nation's pre-toddlers. Which is just fitting, considering how Bush claimed to be "the Education President."
Anyhow, Baby Einstein was such a cash cow for Disney. They can afford to take this hit.
We have ten of the videos none of which were purchased by us personally. Our kids really enjoyed the one with planes, boats and automobiles. The other videos just bored them, therefore not meeting the "can I throw in a load of laundry and get dinner started" test.
Okay, I realize I am rambling but I just want to say that I am pro-PBS kids, pro-NickJr(Noggin) and pro-Signing Time (www.signingtime.com). Yes, I started my kids on television well before two and yes, I often allow my kids to exceed the daily maximum recommended amount of television time. Not so they can be geniuses, but because it is an immediate and effective way of calming and focusing the children allowing me to get something else done. (Case in point, the last time I set my kids (3 and 1) up with something meaningful -- watercolors --and left the room for 5 minutes to get some laundry done, by the time I came back up the stairs with the still-unfolded clean laundry, my one year old had stripped naked, painted himself like a warrior, and painted the entire lower part of the basement door).
Given that television is a must, I try to teach my kids to be savvy about the purpose of commercials AND I am 100% convinced to the core that the Signing Time videos taught my kids to speak-- and speak very well from a very early age. So I shill them constantly even though no one is paying me or even asking me to do so.
Whew. I'm a little sleep-deprived, too.
And yes, I agree that TV can be beneficial to children as long as we don't abuse it.
Martha:You're right--my kids loved the Disney movies and watched them over and over--they were laden with stereotypes and violence and they definitely have the power to do more damage than the Baby Einstein videos!
Leeandra: Funny, I found a refund form under four Baby Einstein DVDs on my counter when I came home the other day--my husband had planned to get the money and we argued about it. But we weren't eligible anyway--ours were purchased in 1997!
Actually, there's objective evidence that it probably made them dumber. But that's not the point. Disney claimed that the tapes would make children smarter, and they could not make good on the claim, so it was fraudulent. The whole business could be a big can of worms for them, so they're settling to preclude a worse outcome.
There is a good deal of evidence that television is harmful for people of all ages, but so many people are addicted to it, and it's such a big business, that almost no one is going to pay any attention to that evidence. "Take a look at the studies"? Not a chance!