digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at businessshrink.biz —

Study: Many moms are making infants dumber w/ TV & DVD's

businessshrink.biz — It wasn't long ago that Baby Einstein DVD's were attacked & now studies say TV viewing of 2 years and under is dumbing down America. Social, motor, behavioral, cognitive and neural skills are being hurt by TV and DVD. On 5/5/08 Archives of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine study released figures that mothers were not interacting w/ infants at TV time.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • jaredmlee, on 05/07/2008, -7/+27funny - my dad used to say he was the best parent in the world - then he had kids.
    • afx1, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1dvd's what?
    • RepubOperative, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3I think the DVD problem is in how you use the DVDs. My brothers child can count to ten in five languages and say his ABCs in three languages and he is three. My brother used to watch the DVDs with him to get him trough them as quickly as possible. If you just plunk your kid down in front of the TV and walk away, I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't turn out well.
    • mariemoonpie, on 05/07/2008, -1/+6I LOVE how MOMS and not PARENTS are mentioned in the headline because fathers are free from all responsibility of caring for their children
      • lenny4422, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2And if the children are not able to eat it is the DADS and not the PARENTS who are deadbeats.
  • DermDoc, on 05/07/2008, -0/+30It will be interesting to see how many of these baby Einstein kids turn out to be adult Einsteins.
    • mal1964, on 05/07/2008, -3/+5Just think if Einstein had watched it as a baby. I'd probably be mailing you this message.
      • SurlyDuff, on 05/07/2008, -5/+1I may be wrong...but I don't think Einstein invented the internet :-/
        • pradaaddict, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2He didn't but his work had great effects on the scientific community that invented the internet to share data on their work related to physics
    • Mikhail101, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2none
    • fuzzynyanko, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1I sometimes wonder about those DVDs. One thing I remember is that all of the kids liked doing a certain task, and there was no interest for two of the kids to conduct. Every one has their place...
  • Ender008, on 05/07/2008, -2/+82This doesn't surprise me; parents need to start actually parenting their children instead of trying to get others to do it for them.
    • mal1964, on 05/07/2008, -0/+5Some Parents go overboard with every new learning method or gimmick. I didn't use fancy flash cards or a lot of electronics gadgets, I used paper plates to write letters and numbers on for him to study. They were all over the house I'd toss them like a Frisbee at him and say what is that. I still find them when moving things around the house.
      • lennybird, on 05/07/2008, -0/+6I'm teaching my nine year old sister math with the little pebbles she collects - find a balance between the kid's interest, but not overkill to the point where he or she is distracted...
      • Armitage2k, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1try those little yellow plastic BBs... they are much smaller, require more attention, and concentration to see a small number on them, and if the child isn't paying attention, you could get 'em right in the nose.
        • mal1964, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2You must not have kids those bb's are are worthless, I only use .22 cal Pellets for my attention getter
  • caferrell, on 05/07/2008, -5/+55Turn off the TV!
    Better yet, take it out into the backyard and shoot it repeatedly with a shotgun.

    "but I'm bored Daddy"
    So DO something!
    • webaddict, on 05/07/2008, -3/+10That is absolutely hilarious. :P
    • ssn697, on 05/07/2008, -3/+25Yes! Make those 1 and 2 year olds go outside and do something!

      Is it so much to ask that you read the actual article, and comment on it's information? This is about lazy PARENTS, leaving their infants in front of the TV, rather than taking the time to interact and develop their kids.
      • doctechnical, on 05/07/2008, -5/+16Nonetheless, getting rid of the TV is good child rearing advice. Maybe if the parents spent less time in front of the boob tupe (ever wonder how it got that name?) they'd spend more time interacting with and teaching their children. Or heaven forfend, read to them.
        • curme, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3Wonder how it got its name? Because it shows *****?
        • popfrogs, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2Boob tupe? So, phonetically, it's a hairpiece for boobs? Nasty.
      • Klisk, on 05/07/2008, -1/+3Uh.... Don't you think that many people live in neighborhoods where it's too dangerous for their kids to go outside? Have you ever been in the inner-city? Maybe I'm biased because that's where I grew up, but not many parents were letting their kids outside while there were drive-by reports every week in the local newspaper.
        • OriginalReplica, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4I live in NYC, in Washington Heights. There are kids on the local playgrounds 14 hours a day, easy. The "dangers of the city" aren't really a problem for the parents who spend time with their kids, they just go to the play ground with them. The parks and playgrounds are actually safer here because there is always a few parents around.
          • Klisk, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Try somewhere where parks don't exist within walking distance. I'd say Newark, Paterson, and Camden NJ are worse than most places in NYC right now.
      • dent42, on 05/07/2008, -1/+3You know, Socrates was against reading because he believed it would make people forgetful. And anyway, reading to your children is basically admitting you are too boring to make up a story on the fly.
      • diggingaround, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2Listen...we need some TV programmed and trained retards to do ***** jobs and buy "As Seen on TV" products... we can't be all rocket scientist.
    • hotsake, on 05/07/2008, -0/+9"Better yet, take it out into the backyard and shoot it repeatedly with a shotgun."

      Damn, I'm morbid. I thought you were talking about the kid.
    • diggingaround, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Just small little problem... AT&T is coming up with TV for your cell phone.. and your kids cell phone..
    • YellowSnowDemon, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2If there is no TV, how will I be able to finish Okami and GTA IV?
    • OneLess, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Sounds like the most twisted Calvin and Hobbes ever.
    • prleet, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1The person who invented the tv once remarked about this invention as the "idiot box." Lesson learned!
  • geogeer, on 05/07/2008, -1/+37Who knew you had to interact with your children instead of simply sticking them in front of the idiot box. Heck we are so disillusioned with TV that we are thinking of getting rid of cable...
    • heypetray, on 05/07/2008, -0/+13Do it.
      It's funny how hypocritical many parents are when they don't even hold themselves to the standards they hold their children to. Reading is a great example. Many parents do you know that have said they should read more, but point to the educational system when their child doesn't meet the standards... Imagine the frustration of America's elementary school teachers...

      Parent by example.
    • Nevarius, on 05/07/2008, -1/+4Same here. Much of everything on TV is dumbed down anyways (even the history and science channels), and some wonder why kids are becoming over weight and stupid.
      Probably the best thing you could do for your children and yourself, even thou they may freak out at first with no TV or limited TV.
    • SSCrow, on 05/07/2008, -1/+3Its not as bad as you would expect it to be. The only time I ever watch TV is on the weekends and even then its usually a movie.
      I don't think I've watched local news, let alone regular TV shows in Months. And I'm actually enjoying it.
  • LordSkywalker, on 05/07/2008, -4/+19I'm a big tv/movie fan, and I think saying "destroy your tv" is overreacting. As with most things, it can be good in moderation. With developing children, I do think less is better. As others have said: this is a question of responsibilities, or lack thereof by the parents.
    • prosayik, on 05/07/2008, -3/+6Agreed (though I don't like TV personally).

      Children should not have vodka, either.

      I like vodka. Please don't get rid of vodka as well.
      • doctechnical, on 05/07/2008, -1/+4Which do you spend more time with, the vodka or the kid?
        • Aensland, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4Why choose, spend quality time with the kids while sharing a bottle of vodka.
      • prosayik, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3I don't have kids.
    • heypetray, on 05/07/2008, -2/+5Take that $60+ a month and spend it on quality time with your kid/s
      Trust me, they'll thank you for it when they are older.
      • LordSkywalker, on 05/07/2008, -0/+6Don't have kids. And I get free cable. Good advice though.
      • Klisk, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2Take that $60+ a month and invest it in a vasectomy. You'll thank yourself when you're older.
      • zwaldowski, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3And, then behind your back, your damaged child will complain about his overbearing parents.
    • Arnos, on 05/07/2008, -0/+7It is possible to "destroy your TV" and not have to become a Luddite. Between torrents and Netflix we control everything our children see. Does it mean we miss Heroes, Scrubs, Doctor Who? Heck no. In fact we get some shows faster (i.e. Avatar because Nick's being stupid about releasing).
      BIG THING THOUGH- there's Never any "veg in front of TV time". If we are interested in a show, we commit time (not a Thursday night) on our own schedule to watch it.

      Oh- and for those people who think we're out of touch because "we don't watch the news"- imagine having to actively search for your own news. Fox?CNN? please.
      • moocow1452, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Whoo! I'm not the only Avatar fan on Digg!
      • timusca, on 05/07/2008, -2/+1I'm surprised your TV didn't kill itself after playing Scrubs for you.
  • DeskFlyer, on 05/07/2008, -2/+6But who else will warn us when the TV people have arrived?
  • noupsell, on 05/07/2008, -4/+5duhhhrrrr uhhh tVs done not make meez a stoopid... these peeople talk not knoe they not talk bouting
    • DeFex, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2Since both parent have to work all the time now to pay all the taxes and ***** because everyone is continuously being gouged for more and more but wages hardly increase. its no wonder a lot of them have no time for their children. but no worries, soon the children will have to work too and they can learn there.
  • BoonTobias, on 05/07/2008, -11/+2Dear Parents,
    COD4 is the answer.

    Sincerely,
    teh pwnerer
  • prosayik, on 05/07/2008, -0/+8"We're in a lot of trouble.."

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HjHwrIuqHs&feature ...

    (From 1976's _Network_)
  • brjohnson789, on 05/07/2008, -0/+14Alls I know is I have a friend with 3 kids, one that's 13, and two that are younger than 4. The 13 year old is very well adjusted (even for a 13 year old), and when they raised him, they did not plop him down in front of a TV every day. The 2 kids younger than 4 cannot sit through a car ride or a dinner w/ out a TV on somewhere. Its sad.
    • Dumbledorito, on 05/07/2008, -0/+8Very sad. It's almost like the worst fate in the universe is to be bored. I was in a Wal-Mart late at night, picking up some things with the wife, and I saw this parade of sad: A family, with young kids out past midnight on a school night, was going through the DvDs. The two children, both over 10, were somehow standing vertically while "hunching over" their PSPs from the neck up. When Mom was done and wanted to go look at housewares, the kids seemed to move by using The Force, not looking up from their games. That was quite the learned "skill."

      We're learning how to give ourselves ADD and osteoporosis at the same time.
      • Nevarius, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3I can see your point that too much of something is bad and your example is great with the zombie kids in wal-mart. But video games are abit different than TV. Where as TV is totally passive, video games require eye/hand coordination and problem solving skills.
        Of course moderation is needed for both, not disagreeing with you there as how i see it that mother needs to brush up on her parenting skills.
        As they say (not sure who they are but some odd reason adds creditability) "Variety is the spice of life".
      • ashfish, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4That sucks, I saw something similar to that at Denny's the other morning. A mom and her daughter were having breakfast, the little girl was playing on her Nintendo DS while mom was talking on her cell phone. This went on for a good part of the meal, and when they were finished, they didn't talk to each other. At the end of their meal I did see them have a small conversation before paying the tab. It was really weird. I know if I even brought up bringing a Gameboy or something to the table I would have been smacked. My family made a habit of eating together and actually -talking-, the tv wasn't allowed to be on. This same practice went on at my friends' houses. We weren't allowed to sit inside all day and watch tv or play video games, we were told to GO OUTSIDE. Parents are afraid of the outdoors now though, you know, some molestor could be behind that bush or some other stupid logic.
    • lwstagg, on 05/07/2008, -2/+0Wow, so the 13 year old is more intelligent and mature than the two toddlers? The toddlers act restless in cars and meals? Wow, that must be the TV thats doing it to them!
    • mGARANDEUR1, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1It probably has something to do with the fact that they are toddlers.
  • ForLiberty, on 05/07/2008, -0/+26TV viewing, 2 years and older, is also "dumbing down" America.
  • thereisnostate, on 05/07/2008, -2/+26Also, people are getting less intelligent because less intelligent people breed more and due to modern welfare/medicine they are passing their genes on in a more prolific manner than intelligencia. It's the Idiocracy effect.
    • heypetray, on 05/07/2008, -2/+2The child rearing license!
      Coming 2084!
      • kyeetza, on 05/07/2008, -0/+5Right, kick ass. Well, don't want to sound like a dick or nothin', but, ah... it says on your chart you're ***** up. Ah, you talk like a fag, and your *****'s all retarded. What I'd do, is just like... like... you know, like, you know what I mean, like...
    • issachar, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1Your statement has the wonderful quality of feeling true to many, many people while in reality not having any evidence to back up the claim. Somewhat like the claims made by the Baby Einstein people that their videos were educational.

      Wait a minute...

      I see what you did there! My hat goes off to your sir...
    • kenplaysviola, on 05/07/2008, -0/+7"Evolution does not reward intelligence." -Idiocracy, the movie
    • Beaver1279, on 05/07/2008, -0/+0Actually, I have been trying to find evidence that this is true. I'm kinda lazy, I've only spent about an hour and didn't find much. Are stupid people reproducing more? We do know that intelligence is heritable.
  • doshindude, on 05/07/2008, -4/+4in other news: the sky is blue, scientology sucks, and Firefox 3 is God.
    • SSCrow, on 05/07/2008, -8/+1If Firefox 3 (assuming you mean Beta) is God then why does it not support all the extensions that FF2 does?
      Oh thats right, because the extensions will all be recompiled for when the real Firefox 3 is released.
    • popfrogs, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2I like your views, how can I subscribe to your newsletter?
  • Dumbledorito, on 05/07/2008, -0/+17But it's what plants crave!
  • basye, on 05/07/2008, -1/+5Parents need to get off the internet and parent their kids.
  • ufia, on 05/07/2008, -0/+9Fake! Show us the TV report or it didn't happen.
  • whatthefu, on 05/07/2008, -2/+2People on computers criticizing people for watching TV? It isn't always an option of just "going outside," and television can definitely be a good thing if it's only for a short period each week.
    • Klisk, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Computers are interractive and require a good deal of reading skill.

      Granted, it's still hypocritical since you're sitting around passively, but it's still two very different activities.
    • Beaver1279, on 05/07/2008, -0/+0I know it is obvious hyperbole to say nothing on TV is good but it's not that far from the truth.
  • GetShorty, on 05/07/2008, -1/+3My kids usually play with their toys, go fishing, ride their bikes, etc... They like to stay very active. If they watch television, it's usually Animal Planet or Discovery.
    • BandaiRoo, on 05/07/2008, -0/+0Channels like that are a good thing once they're old enough to understand what's going on.
      TV can be a good teaching tool when used correctly.
    • Stolz25, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1I'm calling BS.
  • SSCrow, on 05/07/2008, -1/+6Is it not "More dumb" not "Dumber"?
    • dankreek, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1No, dumb is a monosyllabic word. In English, monosyllabic words use the -er and -est suffixes for the comparative and superlative degrees. (Note that my parents didn't plop me in front of the TV as a child.)
  • gryphon50, on 05/07/2008, -2/+5my child is only allowed to watch maybe 30-40 min. of tv a day. We spend more time reading books than watching tv (way more) and because of this he is an excellent reader (he's only 3) and very articulate. I can see where it would be tempting to have him zone out in front of the tv but I know that's not my job. Choosing to parent this way is exhausting and that is why most people don't do it. Baby Einstein is kind of portraying itself as the holy grail- educate your child AND take a break! But it's an illusion, you have to interact with babies and toddlers to teach them.
  • skiltonian, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1This would explain why Onetimer (1HEIMER) is the way he is. His high-strung mom should have just given him a dreidel.
  • krnldmp, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1This assumes you have a mother worth better interaction than juvenile TV programming or the internet, both of which are almost certainly chock full of a collective wisdom most "I just want a baby" types will never approach in their entire lifetimes.
    • OriginalReplica, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1"You need a license to fish, but anyone can have a child." - Sun Tzu
      • BandaiRoo, on 05/07/2008, -0/+0We should get licenses to breed, too.
        • Stolz25, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1Yes, government does a great job of figuring out what is best for people.
  • Jimgress, on 05/07/2008, -3/+8Oh its all tv's fault waaa waaa waaaa

    Television is a medium. It can be used properly to educate and entertain in ways that are enriching.

    Take pbs for example. My parents raised me watching shows like Nova, Scientific American Frontiers, and American Experience.

    It's not about cutting off tv and saying screw it, it's about managing it in a way that isn't overwhelming but still engaging to your children.

    It's all about balance...balance!!!
    • SSCrow, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2yes but see the article is about Parents leaving the TV to educate the 2 year old child and not interacting with them.
      And it summarized that if the parent is not interacting with the Child while watching these programs then they are worthless and damaging.
    • Hangly, on 05/07/2008, -1/+3Watching hours of Nova will still stunt your social skills. Who knows, ten years later your kid might turn into an angry antisocial internet addict who begins posts with "waaa waaa waaaa."
  • FearFactory, on 05/07/2008, -1/+3Reminds me of all the SUVs and minivans with DVD screens everywhere. Makes me want to watch the movie too in traffic! Of course don't forget the Fight Terrorism license plate and yellow ribbons. Fighting Terrorism!!! 1 DVD at a time!!!
  • Okari, on 05/07/2008, -0/+8I don't think it's just TV/DVDs that are making kids dumb. It's a combination of bad parents, and TV. I grew up on TV, even when I was 2, mainly because my mother worked all day. But, she still taught me things, and I turned out quite smart.
    • thedragon4453, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3I quasi-agree. I think TV is a symptom of a bigger problem - trying to get out of actually doing some parenting. TV is just one method for doing this, but I think that parents not wanting to parent is the problem.
  • mgyqmb, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1The major problem with raising your kid with TV and DVDs is that they never grow an attention span. They are bombarded by their senses in 2 or 3 minute blocks for hours a day. They certainly never have unique experiences lasting longer than 30 minutes or so. In addition, there's absolutely no interaction. The person inside the box may say "clap your hands" but infants and toddlers either don't respond, or don't connect this with actual human interaction. No wonder ADD is so prevalent.
    • OriginalReplica, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1I was with you up until, "bombarded" then I kinda lost track,,, ooohh shiny.
  • SilverBlade2k, on 05/07/2008, -1/+3This is what happens then parents can't be bothered and are too lazy, and expect the TV to teach them everything.

    If you don't want to bother teaching your kids, or too lazy/busy to take care of them, the solution is to not have them. Period.
  • TROY7, on 05/07/2008, -2/+3I smell *****...
  • Syphon8, on 05/07/2008, -1/+12I blame all my intelligence on TV.

    Bill Nye / Magic Schoolbus / Steve Irwin / Kratt Brothers 4 lyfe.
    • Jelga, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Dugg for Bill Nye, it was one of my favorite shows as a kid.
    • rtphokie, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Add to that list Magic Schoolbus and Beakman's World. My kid learned tons from those shows. But I watched with him and didn't use it as a babysitter.

      But I also let him watch Spongebob. 'Cause it's damn funny.
    • Hangly, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1I blame both my intelligence and my lack friends.
    • Hidama, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2The Kratt Brothers - Yes!
    • Coffeedemon, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1I'd say it helped me too. Wild Kingdom, Nova, Nature, Attenborough's work, along with dad taking me fishing/rabbit hunting, mom letting me help in the garden and numerous books on dinosaurs, sharks (learned all the scientific names young), books on fishing flies and technique, flowers and spiders, etc all led to my knowledge (and more importantly a desire to learn more) about the natural world. If I'd been just plopped down in front of some DVD that claims to have it all figured out for you in advance in terms of subjects and how advanced they should be I doubt I would have turned out the way I have.
  • AlucardZero, on 05/07/2008, -4/+0That's a load of *****. I have a sister who is only three, knows a hell of a lot more than babies should, and she watches TV a lot. No, not every day for 7 hours, but at least 3 hours combines on most days. She's not dumb at all, this article is *****. Her favorite show is Spongebob, and she's not stupid at all.
    • SSCrow, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2Does she get any attention from parents or siblings?
      If so then you should READ THE ARTICLE.
      If not then think about how much smarter she could be.
      • AlucardZero, on 05/07/2008, -2/+0Well, TBH, I didn't read it simply because I'm busy with guitar practice, but I skimmed some. The title should do a good job summing this up.
    • poptartrevival, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Dugg for constant reiteration of NOT DUMB NOT DUMB NOT STUPID NOT DUMB!
    • kelmaster1, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1lol, you proved their point
    • s0nicfreak, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Anyone who watches Spongebob is automatically stupid.
  • dogatemypron, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1There is no replacement for parents in the home. A lot of people will blame the media for things that kids do wrong when actually more fault lies with the parents than anyone else.
  • Flashman, on 05/07/2008, -1/+6"Making infants dumber with DVD's"

    Apostrophe Man laughs at the irony.
    • Hangly, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2I was certain you were wrong, but I looked it up just in case. By golly you're right.
      Apostrophes are legal in plurals that end in lowercase letters but not those that end in uppercase letters? We didn't cover that in 8th grade!
      • ScottMitchell, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3Apostrophes AREN'T "legal" in plurals. They're used as a contraction (i.e., it's as a form of "it is") or to represent possession, as in, "Those are Brian's shoes." They are not used on plural situations. Just add the "s" or "es" or "ies" and you're done. No need to magically add apostrophes.
        Please see http://www.angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif
  • mondain, on 05/07/2008, -5/+2I have three children (16, 14, and 1.5), the two oldest watched Barney and Timmy the Tooth almost every day until the age of 4. They are now in advanced placement classes and my oldest will attend "college" high school next year. So studies like this are a load of crap.
    • kxxb, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3Correlation doesn't equal causation.
    • Hangly, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1Also shame on you for letting the TV raise your kids.
    • ScottMitchell, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2I would bet there is a negative correlation between the number of hours kids are allowed to watch television and their parents understanding of rudimentary statistics and the difference between correlation and causation.
    • mGARANDEUR1, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1Exactly. This is bad science and will be buried. Study does not provide any real evidence.
  • LoudMusic, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1I moved two months ago and didn't sign up for cable in the new place. Life is so much better. My attention is no longer someone else's paycheck.
  • rtphokie, on 05/07/2008, -0/+5TV doesn't rewire your brain, video games dont warp your sense of reality, sugar doesn't rot your teeth, fast food doesn't make you fat. Too much of these things do those things.

    All things in moderation.
    • Hangly, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2Everything you sense rewires your brain. That's how your brain works. I rewired my brain writing this post.
  • Yage2006, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2Its not the Tv/DVD's its the parents them self passing on there stupidity to there children.
    • asspants, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2It's has an apostrophe
      TV should be capitalized completely
      themselves not them self
      their not there

      Since your parents didn't pass that "stupidity" along to you, I'll do it for them.
      • zeromous, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1It seems so consistently bad, do you think could it be intentional?
        • asspants, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1We can only hope it was intentional.
  • bobjewback, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1i am going to watch flavor of love now
  • sockfire, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1Watching Baby Einstein with your child as an educational tool is good. Using random cartoons as a babysitter is bad. There is a difference and I don't think this study sheds light on this facet.

    Must of us watched tons of Sesame Street and Mr Rogers growing up. I'm sure we suffered the same side effects illustrated in this article. But we're okay... or are we?
    • Klisk, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2When I was in grammar school as a child I would watch at least 10 hours of TV a day. My Mom was a single parent and I wasn't allowed outside because of my neighborhood. Basically I had to fend for myself, but 10 hours of my daily life was essentially Nickelodeon and MTV.

      I don't think it hurt my intelligence so much as it hurt my health, but if anything my intelligence rapidly developed itself once I started to find myself uninterested in television and more interested in computers around the age of 12. Then I spent 10 hours a day working on a computer. Now in my 20's that energy has been shifted to guitar, and I'd be a liar to say that I don't spend 10+ hours a day just playing guitar. I hate computers and television alike.

      You burn yourself out, though. Even if you end up having extreme habits like I developed growing up, you still burn yourself out, and you self monitor. Denying a child something they want will make them want it even more. Giving them free access to it will teach them that too much of a good thing is also bad. It's a lesson that's better figured out first hand rather than preached.
  • pixelguru, on 05/07/2008, -0/+6I grew up watching Speed Racer and Scooby Doo, so I'd be a hypocrite to deny TV to my daughters. Many of the shows on today are much more educational and intelligent than the stuff I watched. With that said, I don't just park them in front of the set and leave. We have conversations about what they watch, and they also spend a good amount of time away from the TV, playing, climbing, running and building. I also read to them every day.
    Show me a kid who isn't allowed to watch TV at home, and I'll show you a kid who spends a lot of time at their friend's house glued to the screen.
    • Antwan718, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3Dugg for Speed Racer, where Km/h = MPH.
    • Hangly, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4My dad beat me as a kid, so I'd be a hypocrite to deny beatings to my kids.
      • zeromous, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3dugg for high darkness factor/massive damage
  • isaactwito, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1I work in a movie store in the summers, so I can proudly say that I help pollute the minds of children. I've done my part for America, have you?
  • synapticcleft, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2Everyone here criticizing the practice of letting ones young children watch dvd's/tv a) doesn't have a child, b) doesn't have several children. If you had young kids, you would understand the utility of TV.
    • BandaiRoo, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2No, but I'm a teacher.
      Used correctly, it's fine. Over used and it becomes destructive.
  • fani, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3I agree. My wife and I let our 2 year old watch some controlled amount of TV. Anything done moderately with involvement from parents helps. She's picking up lots of words, things from the TV she doesn't pick up from us.
    Yes, TV viewing is bad if overdone. We ensure we spend lots of quality time with my 2yearold - backyard play, gardening, little gym, library etc. but everyone of those activities involves us.
    I agree with the article that there's no substituting for proper parenting.
    • zeromous, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3I agree. When I was growing up, we had cable, but VCRs weren't common place. I watched a ton of Sesame Street, 321 Contact, A-Team, Knight Rider- whatever. By the time I could walk my parents equipped me with a radio-cassette recorder, some homemade read along tapes, various rock/classical recordings, blocks and some flash cards. By 3 I had a personal music collection, random recordings, a huge vocabulary and a love for engineering and the outdoors.

      My point is TV is no worse than a cassette recorder with no parent to reinforce lessons and simple variety. Most people who vilify television are snobs, or have an agenda (like beef with the cable industry for ripping us off all of these years :) ) The bottom line is however: Kids are what they play with. Parents need to always be conscious of that during a child's most formative years.

      Oh and damn that cassette recorder- I guess I was born to be a Data Storage analyst after all. How depressing. ;(
  • busket, on 05/07/2008, -1/+3What, so dads aren't making them dumber too? It's not like the infants are actually being made dumber, they just aren't learning as much if their parents aren't interacting with them while they watch.
    • HarryBauzonia, on 05/07/2008, -3/+1Dads get none of the credit, so why should they get any of the blame?
      In case you haven't noticed, we live in a culture where women claim to be the only parent worth having and they get away with it. Therefore when something goes wrong, it's a natural reaction to blame the mom.

      Not right, not fair, whatever. The disrespect out there for fathers (and men in general) isn't right or fair either.
    • busket, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2I know a lot of dads who get credit. We must live in different cultures, you and I.
  • TomGfromCanada, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1no *****.
  • Mikhail101, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2I call ***** to this, yea sure if you leave your kid 24/7 in front of a TV he may grow up to be a total dumbass but I dont see whats wrong with a bit of TV. Look back to the days where there were no TVs do you think parents would have parented with there newborns every minute of the day, no they had crops to harvest, jobs that needed working and other kids to feed, house work etc. etc. Putting ur kid infront of a T.V is better than making him or her lie in a cot facing a blank wall
  • MissChance, on 05/07/2008, -1/+6Does anyone else have a problem with the title? Last I checked a lot of kids had two parents.
    • asspants, on 05/07/2008, -2/+2of course you'd come in here and insinuate that it's the father's responsibility to raise a child, that's ridiculous, why don't you go back to the kitchen and make your husband a sandwich and get off the internets, you don't belong here.
      • MissChance, on 05/07/2008, -2/+2You are a bit defensive. Let me simplify this so you can understand what I said. The title says "moms" not "parents". Go back to school, learn to read, and try not to be so defensive about your gender.
        • asspants, on 05/07/2008, -3/+2Perhaps you should be the one returning to school and get some reading comprehension, but women shouldnt be allowed an education in the first place.

          I was being a chauvinist pig on purpose. I understood what you meant the first time.
      • queenstarsha, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2hm. i was hearing sarcasm; do i need to get my hearing checked?

        still, "make me a sandwich" really is thrown at us in all seriousness by pigs. so i can understand missing the sarcasm.
    • bulletproofbra, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3Yep, same from me. Dugg down for blaming only the mothers.
    • tonedef83, on 05/07/2008, -2/+0The stereotypical response to your inquiry is that moms stay home and watch over kids more often than the fathers. But I am sure the study consisted of mothers hence the name of the title.
  • asspants, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/Othello/Sill ...

    So, let me get this straight, to do it right I have to be there interacting with them while watching TV?
    • monsterette, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2...that's what the study said...interation and coviewing when under 2...perhaps parenting would help...ehhh!
  • asspants, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1I'll try again, bury the other one. I'm going to hell for hotlinking.
    http://www.xdr.com/dash/posters/fatherhood.jpg

    So, let me get this straight, to do it right, I have to be there interacting with them while watching TV?
  • tonedef83, on 05/07/2008, -0/+0This is very sad...but very true. Now I know better than to sit my niece and nephew in front of the tv to watch Dora the Explorer or Go Diego Go in hopes that they sit and gaze at the set. Time to improve my parenting skills ;)
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 86 of 86 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.