TV-free life

[Geoffrey]

We have no TV -- never did and hope never to have one -- and while I'm sure there are others out there who likewise shun the box, we haven't met them yet. Even our most progressive friends in this most progressive region have one or more and even use them as babysitters. So far my son has never spent time in front of the tube and while he certainly will get some exposure as he gets older and spends time at friends' houses, we hope to continue limiting it. Meanwhile, I'm curious whether any other Waccoans manage to exist without TV

--Geoffrey

[Barry]

I have a TV but no TV reception/cable. I raised my kids without TV/video until about age 9 or so. I highly recommend it! It wasn't that hard. If you are not already in a Waldorf school, you should check it out - TV/video-free households are the standard!

Now they are allowed to watch videos only on the weekends, but the computer is getting to be a bigger pull for my 14 year old daughter. Given that my face is in one all day long, and that they are less mind-numbing, I have more tolerance of computer use (for social networking , not games), however I still insist on some un-plugged time (no video, computer, headphones) on occasion.

[Geoffrey]

If you are not already in a Waldorf school, you should check it out - TV/video-free households are the standard!

We are checking out Waldorf and I'm sure this isn't true for all (or even many) families with kids in Waldorf, but several of our acquaintenances whose kids are in Waldorf have TVs in the house and their kids do have some TV time. It may be a mistaken impression, but it seems like at least some of the parents who send their kids to Waldorf want their kids to be around other kids who don't have TV -- as good influences. I don't think it works that well to expect others to follow the guidelines when they don't follow the no-TV rules themselves.

[Barry]

I can't say what parents motivation is, but there is range of TV policies among the Waldorf households, generally getting looser around 4th or 5th grade.

[Suzanne]

Hi Geoffrey,
I've been tv free for about 7 years. I have a tv w/no cable connection to watch dvds and documentaries. It was actually pretty easy for me to transition to life w/out the box. My tv died on the 4th of July and I just decided not to replace it. The first couple days I really missed it. But by the next week I decided to go without it and eventually I cancelled the cable service. A year or so later I bought a tv to watch dvds.

I love my life without TV. I highly recommend it. The biggest thing I've noticed is I've grown into a very different person w/out all the subtle advertising and value setting that the tv does. I have no idea what the latest styles are in hair, clothes, cars etc. I don't feel deprived of earthly goods or like I don't own enough good stuff or that I'm not attractive enough. Going along with no TV is I do not have magazines, newspaper or listen to much radio. I get my news selectively on the internet and a quick
eyeball of pressdemo.com

Noam Chomsky said that TV is the main deliverer of the Capitalist message: "Our job as Americans is to shop and die."
Turn the tv off and save yourself a lot of money! LOL!

Cheers,
Suzanne

[Dixon]

I've never owned a TV, though for half my life I lived in households that had 'em. But for quite a few years now I've had no TV in my house, not even for videos or DVD's.

I first noticed the difference between TV-brainwashed consciousness and relatvely TV-free consciousness when I spent 2 years in the Army seeing very little TV, then returned to "normal" civilian life, with a TV blaring in every "living" room. I couldn't believe that people could take it seriously, especially the ads. The spectacle of a woman gazing adoringly at her toilet bowl cleaner, among many other images, seemed so obviously cynically manipulative that it blew my mind.

But I do enjoy TV on those rare occasions when I have the opportunity to watch one. That's one reason I refuse to get one--they're too seductive; I'd waste all my time being sucked into the tube. I do occasionally housesit for friends so I can get a taste of TV for a few days without buying one and getting (re)addicted. I'm wild about a couple of Japanese-dubbed-into-English shows (Iron Chef and MXC) as well as shows about science, nature, history, and then of course there are my "guilty pleasures"--Survivor, Blind Date, Elimidate, America's Funniest Videos, and even a little Jerry Springer! I can't find Beavis and Butthead anymore, more's the pity.

Seriously, I do recommend that everyone cut waaaay down on TV watching, and learn to watch with a very critical, skeptical eye. Perhaps better yet, kill your TV!

Dixon

We have no TV -- never did and hope never to have one -- and while I'm sure there are others out there who likewise shun the box, we haven't met them yet. Even our most progressive friends in this most progressive region have one or more and even use them as babysitters. So far my son has never spent time in front of the tube and while he certainly will get some exposure as he gets older and spends time at friends' houses, we hope to continue limiting it. Meanwhile, I'm curious whether any other Waccoans manage to exist without TV

--Geoffrey

[Suzanne]

https://www.sixwise.com/newsletters/...07/tv-news.htm

Just wanted to pass this on.
Suzanne

[francesca]

Dearest Geoffrey,

I have a television. I think at some level you miss educational programming on various cable networks. Such as the Discovery Channel, History Channel, PBS. I have found very valuable programming on these networks that I may not read about in printed form. However, if I had any children, there would not be television. There are very, very few programs for children that I would find appropriate. I do not get drawn to seductive programming cause I know what the sponsors are up to. This is a great topic and look forward to more. While were at it...Who has some reccomendations for good books to read??

We have no TV -- never did and hope never to have one -- and while I'm sure there are others out there who likewise shun the box, we haven't met them yet. Even our most progressive friends in this most progressive region have one or more and even use them as babysitters. So far my son has never spent time in front of the tube and while he certainly will get some exposure as he gets older and spends time at friends' houses, we hope to continue limiting it. Meanwhile, I'm curious whether any other Waccoans manage to exist without TV

--Geoffrey

[Geoffrey]

Dearest Geoffrey,

This is a great topic and look forward to more. While were at it...Who has some reccomendations for good books to read??

Glad to see this topic is still alive!

I'm currently reading about 5 different books and mags right now, ranging from Orion to architecture to Yellowstone geology (we just took a family trip there). I'm pretty sure I wouldn't touch any of them if the tube were on.

Another benefit (especially if you have a small house) is that you don't have to find space to put the beast.

--Geoffrey

[momsawake]

Hiya,
We haven't had tv in our house since the late 80's. I am absolutely floored by what's on the tube when I see it elsewhere, not having been subject to the creeping changes in quality, and omigod the commercials! Yeah, I feel like I've lost contact with my home planet when I try to watch TV now. My daughter (20) thanks me for not having the idiot uncle babbbling in the corner when she was growing up.
She sang a very different tune starting in about 3rd grade when she was socially ostracized (Sebastopol public schools) because she didn't know how to 'play' television shows. I had noticed fewer friends visiting and fewer invitations to play after school. When I asked her about it she said 'Nobody knows how to play anything except TV cartoons. So I don't care." Being the cruel and heartless mother I am, I stuck to my decision. Back then (and all through the rest of school) she wailed, begged, and complained. Now she says she would *never* have a TV with kids around.
Read "Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television" for an in-depth understanding of why TV-watching is antithetical to the young child's physical, social, and emotional development. And so you have some talking points for the 75% of your family and acquaintances who think you are some kind of nut, possibly a negligent nut if you have kids.
One anecdote: when I was taking child development classes in the early 80s, preschool teachers were adding 'tracking games' to the curriculum (in which a child tracks the movement of an object by moving their eyes only as opposed to moving their head) because *increased tv time is directly causing young children's eye muscles to atrophy*. Teachers were having to remediate. They still do. Watch kids read... they move their *heads* because their eye muscles are gone from disuse. It was the child development classes that made me decide to never have a TV and kids in the same house.
So keep your kids away from the TV Geoff - it's the right thing to do!

Glad to see this topic is still alive!

I'm currently reading about 5 different books and mags right now, ranging from Orion to architecture to Yellowstone geology (we just took a family trip there). I'm pretty sure I wouldn't touch any of them if the tube were on.

Another benefit (especially if you have a small house) is that you don't have to find space to put the beast.

--Geoffrey

[ThePhiant]

my experience with my kids going to other "waldorf" houses is that the one child only family's allow their kids to watch the evil eye more and at a earlier age

I can't say what parents motivation is, but there is range of TV policies among the Waldorf households, generally getting looser around 4th or 5th grade.

[Geoffrey]

Read "Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television" for an in-depth understanding of why TV-watching is antithetical to the young child's physical, social, and emotional development. And so you have some talking points for the 75% of your family and acquaintances who think you are some kind of nut, possibly a negligent nut if you have kids.

Though this work is quite a few years old by now, it is still powerful and reinforced my observations from growing up in a TV-free household.

I felt disconnected from many of my schoolmates (also in Sebastopol schools) when it came to television programs, but I learned to "pass" early on by paying attention to what others reported. I admit I saw enough cartoons at my friends' houses to be a little knowledgable. It helped that I didn't mind being different. I'm hoping that my son will feel similarly.

[marv3lls]

I grew up with a TV always in the house, but no cable. I am sixteen now, and I think my parents had the right idea. There would be the odd movie, but pretty much all the stuff we get with our antenna is stupid. The PS2 does eat rather alot of time, though. xP
In the end, a TV is nice for the odd game or movie (three or four a month), but not much else. Except for mush-ifying a brain or two.

["Mad" Miles]

OK all youse Anti-Vidiots!

Up until now I've withheld my comments on this subject because my past experience with this debate has not been fruitful. But...

I grew up with TV and I still watch it. There were parental restrictions on what we could watch but the TV during the sixties and first half of the seventies was far more pre-censored and innocent than today's. There were periods in my life when I didn't watch much. Especially during college, eight months traveling and living in Europe and a brief unsuccessful stint in graduate school in the mid-eighties. But other than those periods I watched television, lots of television. So much television that members of my family (who are more or less anti-TV but still watch it) have concluded that I'm addicted to TV. I assure them and you that I am not. I just like it.

I don't watch, nor do I care for, commercials. I watch television critically and generally only watch stuff that interests me and that I find enjoyable, hilarious, intriguing, educational, profound, etc. During commercials I either mute and do something else or channel surf.

(I also love movies and see many, those that interest me, on the first day or week they open, almost always at a matinee because they're cheaper and less crowded.)


I've read "Four Arguments for the Abolition of Television", I've read other articles and debates which make claims for the destructiveness, evil influences, pacifying effects, brainwashing uses, etc. of TV.

This is what I think and believe that I know:

TV is a passive medium; it is easy to watch and lulls the viewer into a state of receptivity. It operates on the brain as a tranquilizer. TV takes up time. When you're watching, you're not doing something else at the same time, except my mother who needlepointed and caned chairs while the rest of us just watched. Oh yeah, it is possible to eat while watching TV! (Sic.)


TV is the Dominant Mode of Discourse. More than film, literature, radio, newspapers, theater or any other medium (I'll get to the internet in a second) it is the place where our culture is created. By created I mean it is where the common stories that we share as a whole society are deployed and consumed.


The role of TV news in political debates and campaign advertisements in elections should be enough evidence to support this claim. Yes, TV is where "The Man" puts out "his" (their) version of reality to create and recreate the world we're all forced to live in.


So aside from its entertainment value, I watch TV in order to understand and participate (albeit passively in this specific mode) in what is going on in my society. You may think you can escape what's on television, but the world being created there is the world you live in whether you wish to acknowledge it, like it, or accept it.

Ever heard of mass culture? Television is the quintessential form of Mass Culture, and in a capitalist consumer culture Mass Culture is the dominant culture.

Punk claimed to be local, "do it yourself", exempt from the crass commercial motivations of pop culture, but anyone who knows Malcolm McLaren's biography knows what shite that hype was. The whole Indy movement is an exercise in micro mass cultures, all subject to the shifting, but predictable, rules of the marketplace.


Now, the Internet. Perhaps the access and interactivity of the net will replace television as the dominant mode of discourse. With TV on demand and enough "tubes" (Get it?) it might replace TV.

But what is a computer screen with speakers and high bandwidth?



So, do what you have to do to protect your kids and yourself. But don't kid yourself into thinking that by not watching television, you're avoiding the effects of television.


My mother bought the hysteria in the late fifties and early sixties that comic books were destroying the minds of American (U.S.) youth. My brother and I were not permitted to buy them. So I just borrowed copies from my friends and read them surreptitiously. She also had some never explained antipathy towards Chuck Connors so we weren't allowed to watch after school reruns of "The Rifleman". But she wasn't home every afternoon so guess what we watched when she was off antiquing, or Red Cross First Aid instructing, or whatever activity occupied her?


I grew up reading novels, (lots of Sci-Fi, Heinlein, Pohl, Anderson, Bradbury, Asimov, also a lot of historical fiction featuring Medieval Knights or American Indians) But I also grew up watching television. I still do (unless something is happening involving live music or political organizing that interests me and I have the time/money for.)

Some people hang out in bars and talk about sports, the weather, whatever they fancy (and can find a listener for). Other people meditate, write, paint, compose, perform, practice, work, clean, build, etc. in their spare time. Cool!

Most people in this country and every other post-industrial and industrial country in the world watch TV in the evening and their other spare time. There's a reason for that. TV is by far the cheapest, most varied, entertaining and relaxing thing available for most people to do. So they watch it. And don't kid yourself; watching DVD's of movies is watching TV.

Is most TV crap? Of course! Pretty much 80-90% of EVERYTHING is. It's that 10% you've gotta keep an eye and ear out for.

Don't kill your television, become your television. That way you can get your message onto the dominant (I repeat Dominant, as in what makes things happen) mode of discourse (i.e. where meaning is created and shared).

Yes, the forces that control TV are powerful, selfish and don't necessarily have the best interests of most of us as a priority. But with means like community access, YouTube, Podcasting, DVD burners, etc. it is becoming more and more possible to do alternative television.

And for anyone still not convinced that much of value can be found on television, I've saved my clincher for the last: "Deadwood"!!!

Cheers, Happy viewing, or not...

"Mad" Miles (A Conscious Vidiot)

P.S. For those of you offended by anything I've written above, or who are in any other way vehemently opposed to the idea that there is value to be had from television, I beg you to listen to the tone of much of the anti-TV rhetoric. It reminds me of when I was in High School and a devout Jesus Freak, one of the things that drove me away from that scene was the smug, self-righteous, convinced of the truth and brooking nothing to the contrary attitudes that some Christians had (have). After a while hearing "Whoohoo! I'm/We're Saved and all those other suckers/idiots/idolaters/poor benighted fools are going to Hell!" from a group that supposedly valued humility, love and forgiveness started to rub me the wrong way.

There's a kind of totalistic dismissal of TV out of hand from the Gerry Mander crowd that sounds very similar to me. If you want to convince someone of the evils of TV, you might want to focus on clear evidence and less on sweeping generalization.

And to the extent my tone comes off as smug and close-minded, I assure you it is unintentional, or perhaps it is the attendant effects from being emphatic and confident. I wrote this to assert things I've either read, experienced and/or feel, not to put anyone else down.

Create and Experience Culture However You Can and Will!




And for your patience, a lagniappe:

Talking Heads

More Songs About Buildings and Food

Found a Job
----------------

"Damn that television ... what a bad picture"!
"Don't get upset, It's not a major disaster".
"There's nothing on tonight", he said, "I don't know
what's the matter"!
"Nothing's ever on", she said, "so ... I don't know
why you bother."

We've heard this little scene, we've heard it many times.
People fighting over little things and wasting precious time.
They might be better off ... I think ... the way it seems to me.
Making up their own shows, which might be better than T.V.

(CHORUS)

Judy's in the bedroom, inventing situations.
Bob is on the street today, scouting up locations.
They've enlisted all their family.
They've enlisted all their friends.
It helped saved their relationship,
And made it work again ...

Their show gets real high ratings, they think they have a hit.
There might even be a spinoff, but they're not sure 'bout that.
If they ever watch T.V. again, it'd be too soon for them.
Bob never yells about the picture now, he's having
too much fun.

(CHORUS)

Judy's in the bedroom, inventing situations,
Bob is on the street today, scouting up locations.
They've enlisted all their family.
They've enlisted all their friends.
It helped save their relationship,
And made it work again ...

So think about this little scene; apply it to you life.
If your work isn't what you love, then something isn't right.
Just look at Bob and Judy; they're happy as can be,
Inventing situations, putting them on T.V.

(CHORUS)

Judy's in the bedroom, inventing situations.
Bob is on the street today, scouting up locations.
They've enlisting all their family.
They've enlisted all their friends.
It helped save the relationship,
And made it work again ...

[Magick]

TV free is the way to be. I have owned a tv, but when i got rid of it, I felt Liberated and empowered. As we al know, the crap on television is ALL THERE TO MAKE SOMEONE MONEY> I decided to stop contributing to the nonsense. I do believe that movies are artistic, and enjoy watching them at my girlfriend's house, but it boggles my mind to see what a role the squak box can play in people's lives. There are others like you out there my friend. Keep doing good for your kid.

[mykil]

I think you all need to watch a little comedy befor bed!!! If ever there was a need for a tv this is it. I mean you need to laugh at least once a day, right befor bed is the time. You sleep much better, takes away your worries of the day! Refreshes yuor ideas on life and makes you sleep sound with out worries of the day bothering you as you recharge your batterys! I have never been a better person since i have discovered this system, and to think i was about to do away with the whole tv system in general. Stupid sitcoms are the best, if not that then the comody chanell rocks!!!!!

[Moon]

We have no TV -- never did and hope never to have one -- and while I'm sure there are others out there who likewise shun the box, we haven't met them yet. Even our most progressive friends in this most progressive region have one or more and even use them as babysitters. Meanwhile, I'm curious whether any other Waccoans manage to exist without TV--Geoffrey

The only times i've watched TV since i left my parents' home were the times i ruptured a disc. I don't know about here, but when i lived in Hawai`i, no one who was in Global HOPE (Hawai`i Organization for Peace and the Environment) with me had a television either. I think there's bound to be a correlation between absence of TV and leftism, since both of
these correlate positively to optimism about people's motives and likely actions.

[momsawake]

"Mad" Miles sez: "TV is a passive medium; it is easy to watch and lulls the viewer into a state of receptivity. It operates on the brain as a tranquilizer. TV takes up time."

momsawake sez: Yes! Yes! Yes! That's the problem. There are times when we adults need a little tranquilizer (we're sick or laid up) but do we really need a tranquilizer 4 hours a day? Do we want to be passive receptors for the "capitalist comsumer Mass Culture" for 4 hours a day? That's the average daily TV time for Americans. Would we give our kids tranquilizers for 3 hours a day? Do we want our children to be passive receptors for "capitalist consumer Mass Culture" for 3 hours a day? That's the average daily TV time for American children. Children have a lot of learning and physical development on their plate - when they're watching TV they're doing neither.

"Mad" Miles sez: "TV is the Dominant Mode of Discourse. More than film, literature, radio, newspapers, theater or any other medium (I'll get to the internet in a second) it is the place where our culture is created. By created I mean it is where the common stories that we share as a whole society are deployed and consumed."

momsawake sez: Yes! Yes! Yes! That's the problem. Our culture is being created by a handful of profit-driven corporations whose legal mandate, as a corporation, is to find more effective ways to insert subliminal pro-consumption messages into our brains and our children's brains. Consumption means to "use up." Is that the primary message we want to teach our children for 3 hours a day? The fact is, we can and should expose our children to TV (just like we can should expose our children to ideas like terminal disease, child molesters, murder, and environmental destruction) so they can protect themselves from it. Where is the line between exposure and immersion? Far, far short of 3 hours a day.

"Mad" Miles sez: "The role of TV news in political debates and campaign advertisements in elections should be enough evidence to support this claim. Yes, TV is where "The Man" puts out "his" (their) version of reality to create and recreate the world we're all forced to live in."

momsawake sez: Yes! Yes! Yes! That's the problem. In the last decade in particular, we've seen TV news become a self-acknowledged mouthpiece for the government. I hate to bring this up, but that's part of the accepted definition of fascism. When government, business, and media work together to send the same message to the exclusion of other messages, that's fascism at work. TV news and coverage of political 'debates' (which are now pre-scripted press conferences) and campaign ads that stop one word short of outright lying are as bad as it gets.

"Mad" Miles sez: "So aside from its entertainment value, I watch TV in order to understand and participate (albeit passively in this specific mode) in what is going on in my society. You may think you can escape what's on television, but the world being created there is the world you live in whether you wish to acknowledge it, like it, or accept it."

momsawake sez: Yes! Yes! Yes! It's critical that thinking, reasoning adults use TV in this way - it's a form of sleeping with the enemy. It helps us 'anti-videots' understand why the neighbor can't comprehend that we don't know where Walmart is! It allows us to develop compassion for acquaintances who can't carry on a simple conversation, exercise critical thinking, or read and comprehend a book written at above the 6th grade level. But Miles, participate? Really! Trotting down to the Media Center and pulling together a program to air on public TV... that's participating. Spearheading a grassroots campaign to reduce the violence in children's programming... that's participating. Sitting back in your barcalounger and channel surfing is consuming. It's okay. I understand why you can't see the difference.

"Mad" Miles sez: "Ever heard of mass culture? Television is the quintessential form of Mass Culture, and in a capitalist consumer culture Mass Culture is the dominant culture."

momsawake sez: Yes! Yes! Yes! That's the problem. Our capitalist consumer culture is directly responsible for child slavery, environmental destruction, the disappearance of the American middle-class, the death of literacy in America, fomenting xenophobia and jingoism, blind nationalism, the death throes of democracy, and the ever-widening chasm (that means gap, like the brand) between the 98% of us that are one paycheck away from homelessness and the 2% of us that form the corporate oligarchy that controls.... television and everything else. Our dominant mass consumer culture (which you have laid squarely on the doorstep of TV) is sick, in the sense that it is destroying our world, our families, our values, our ethics, and ultimately our ability to survive as a species (which requires active problem-solving, not passive absorption).

"Mad" Miles sez: "So, do what you have to do to protect your kids and yourself. But don't kid yourself into thinking that by not watching television, you're avoiding the effects of television."

momsawake sez: Yes! Yes! Yes! Protect your children. Expose them slowly to this amazingly effective world-killer (kind of like you'd introduce them to the holocaust), watch with them and talk to them about what they are seeing and be absolutely straightforward about the reason for TV (to sell) and the subliminal messaging. Some suggestions for dialog openers are: What are they selling? (Often kids get right to it... my son answered that question with "Girlfriends" in response to a particularily egregious cars-equal-sex commercial) Is the product good for you or good for the earth? Can you or someone you know make it yourself? Is there an alternative that's better for you or better for the earth?

"Mad" Miles sez: "There's a kind of totalistic dismissal of TV out of hand from the Gerry Mander crowd that sounds very similar to me. If you want to convince someone of the evils of TV, you might want to focus on clear evidence and less on sweeping generalization. "

momsawake sez: Miles, you already gave clear evidence with every word of your post. If that's not enough, then you can also review the many, many studies on violence and television (increasing exposure to TV violence - especially violence committed by cartoon characters - is directly correlated with increased aggression in children - see

> https://www.abelard.org/tv/tv.htm or the many studies on the NIH website)

> the physiological effects of fixed forward vision (compromises the lateral eye muscles in children - see NIH PubMed for PMID: 5150049)

> the effect of children's programming on attention span (Sesame Street actually changed it's pacing when its own studies showed that the more Sesame Street children watch the higher the incidence of ADHD - https://www.limitv.org/tvaddadhd.htm, or if you want gravitas search NIH for Pediatrics April 2004 'Early Television Exposure and Subsequent Attentional Problems in Children)

> the relationship between sitting on your buttocks for hours each day (direct correlation with obesity in children and adults, with the attendant individual and public health care costs - see NIH https://www.nih.gov/news/WordonHealt...oodobesity.htm)

> TV and literacy (across the board, whether in rural US or internationally, in every study undertaken TV access has resulted in a precipitous and measurable drop in literacy in adults and academic achievement in children within one decade - see the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine at https://www.literacytrust.org.uk/Res...abstracts.html).
All the evidence is out there, but you have to climb out of the TV to find it.

[Dixon]

I just wanna applaud momsawake's articulate and well-researched contribution to this discussion. It's soooo nice to see real critical thinking so well expressed. I couldn't have said it better myself.

Just remember, folks: When you watch the boob tube, you're handing your brain over to highly-paid social scientists who are hell-bent on using their sophisticated techniques to "program" you with addictions for poisonous products you don't need, and with a stupid acceptance of brutality, injustice, imperialism and global suicide as normal and reasonable.

Keep on thinkin';

Dixon

["Mad" Miles]

Momsawake wrote:

"But Miles, participate? Really! Trotting down to the Media Center and pulling together a program to air on public TV... that's participating. Spearheading a grassroots campaign to reduce the violence in children's programming... that's participating. Sitting back in your barcalounger and channel surfing is consuming. It's okay. I understand why you can't see the difference.
...
All the evidence is out there, but you have to climb out of the TV to find it"

Dear Momsawake,

Thank you for your detailed response to my response, and for so vociferously agreeing with me! "Yes, yes, yes!" (Sic.)

Just a slight correction. Where in my screed did you read me saying that the only way to participate in the dominant culture was to watch TV? If it appears that I am implying that then the fault is mine, I wasn't clear and certainly do not think it. But a close reading of me would, I believe, not support such a conclusion. I did say that watching TV is a main, central and predominate way to observe our culture.

Observing is not actively participating, but it is a necessary prelude to such participation. How can you oppose something you do not understand?

In fact, I wrote: I watch TV in order to understand and participate (albeit passively in this specific mode) in what is going on in my society. -- Note the word "passively". Does not the use of that also imply that there is some kind of active way to participate?

And since you don't know me, or my long history of activism, you are in no position to judge what, or what I haven't, done to try and change the world for the better. Hint: watching TV is not at the top of my political CV. Note I do not exclude it as a possible entry!

As for the nefarious, hypnotizing, brainwashing effects of television watching, well that's the debate init?

Last night I watched, among other things, a PBS biography of Andy Warhol. (Two parter, the first part was on Wednesday evening). Have I now been brainwashed into thinking AW was the greatest artist of the second half of the Twentieth Century? (As the documentary claimed.) I suppose I haven't made up my mind. I'd already read a biography of him years ago, which also made that claim, even if I were to agree with it, TV would not be my only source.

Society is a complicated phenomenon. To explain the passivity and lack of intellectual rigor of the general populace by their TV consumption is what we in the theory game call reductivist. I think there are many concommitent reasons why people accept what we enlightened Waccobb.net subscribers think of as unnaceptable.

A big for instance - without a viable, attractive alternative to the present way of doing things, an alternative that appears to be a solution to our problems and not just a step back to a world of suffering that people hope we've left behind, why should people abandon their comforts and conveniences in the hope that it'll make enough difference to turn human culture away from the dangerous path it is on?

This is a very real and large question, one that I think about and struggle with and have for years. The answer, if there is one, is going to be a bit more nuanced than, "TV BAD, reject it!!!"

And to further correct the record, I recline on an IKEA couch (with my feet on a cushion on the coffee table) not a barcalounger. I've never had much affinity for naugahyde and much prefer natural fibers!

Yours in hope, in spite of all appearances to the contrary,

"Mad" Miles

[Tars]

Just remember, folks: When you watch the boob tube, you're handing your brain over to highly-paid social scientists who are hell-bent on using their sophisticated techniques to "program" you

Huh? Oh...I see, "TV' is a nefarious mind-control plot by "The Man". Heh heh...

Couldn't/shouldn't you be saying the same thing about the Internet, music , periodicals, radio, or books? All of them try to "program" us in some way. Let's all squat near our personal fire and avoid contact with any new people or ideas - they may be trying to "program" us.

More media access is better.

If you don't believe this, just look at most Islamic cultures, or any culture for that fact, where access to media is limited. TV, like any information source, is good for us. If there's a problem with it, it's that more people need to take responsibility for their own lives and exercise control over how much TV they watch. It's not "The Man" who's programming us - we program ourselves. Exercise parental control over your children; limit media access. More importantly, take parental control over yourself. Sheesh.

[momsawake]

Folks, Most everyone seems to agree that parents should be actively involved in their kids' relationship with television. I tried to respond to a post asking 'can kids be raised without tv? how does it work?' with my experience (can it be done) and then some validation for the poster's instinct to curtail their offspring's viewing. I can't figure out why the subject of raising kids without unfettered TV access keeps getting spun around to the subject of whose *adult* viewing habits are the holiest. The personal sniping is really eclipsing the point.

Miles, no one is attacking your activist creds or your furniture, nor suggesting that some external force should control your adult viewing habits. I do agree with all your points about what TV is, and simply tried to point out how the very points you made are exactly the things that have such a devastating effect on children (and ultimately the world we inhabit).

I did take exception to your statement that there is no clear evidence of TV's negative effect on child development or social systems (i:e literacy, violence), because by golly there's just tons and tons of it. If I could ask one thing of you, it would be to acknowledge that legitimate evidence exists (the NIH website and especially the various pediatric medical journals are packed with the stuff).

For me the bottom line is that as adults, we're free to eat dessert for breakfast, stay up all night, and exceed the speed limit. But we don't serve our preschooler twinkies at 7AM, let our 3rd grader pull an all-nighter, nor encourage our 16-year old to drag race. TV is just the same.

Adults with adult reasoning can and should choose whatever relationship they want to have with tv without any external control or censorship, while at the same time adults who are parents can and should educate themselves about the very real physiological, developmental, and social effects of television watching *on children* and then act on that awareness. How can awareness and informed decision-making be bad?

When Dixon said "Just remember..." it sounded to me like 'be aware', which is perfectly legitimate. When Tars said 'parent yourself' it sounded to me like 'make informed decisions' which is also perfectly legitimate.

Things get muddy when folks read 'between the lines' and respond to what they believe to be the poster's intent instead of taking the post at face value. Nowhere (in my posts for sure) did I suggest we should ban television. For the record, I don't even think it should be censored except by using the on/off button.

I'd love to see parents use this space to share their thoughts on what they may have learned from the reams of info out there and how they are or aren't applying it to their child-rearing.

[ingo]

I have not owned a TV for 14 years...life has been really good meanwhile.
Did I miss anything, or did you?
Ingo

[mykil]

I'm gonna have to say you did! There are a lot of really talented artists out there that write for a liveing and they are good. The sitcoms are so overwelmingly funny you can't stop laughing. They are on befor you go to bed. What are you doing befor bed that is so important??? Playing on your computer perhaps????

I have not owned a TV for 14 years...life has been really good meanwhile.
Did I miss anything, or did you?
Ingo

[ingo]

Well;
there are many things to do before bed...
how about conversing with your friends, children, or loved-ones...
how about reading, writing, crafting, meditating...
how about making music, dancing, moving the body...
how about making wild and passionate love with the one...
how about studying, learning, expanding the self...
how about experiencing life as it is in the moment, versus through someone else's eyes...
how about dreaming and manifesting the next visions...
how about allowing yourself to see that reality is not limited to what the box has to offer...

Ingo

I'm gonna have to say you did! There are a lot of really talented artists out there that write for a liveing and they are good. The sitcoms are so overwelmingly funny you can't stop laughing. They are on befor you go to bed. What are you doing befor bed that is so important??? Playing on your computer perhaps????

["Mad" Miles]

Momsawake, you wrote:

"I did take exception to your statement that there is no clear evidence of TV's negative effect on child development or social systems (i:e literacy, violence), because by golly there's just tons and tons of it. If I could ask one thing of you, it would be to acknowledge that legitimate evidence exists (the NIH website and especially the various pediatric medical journals are packed with the stuff)."

I don't recall ever writing that there was no evidence of negative effects from TV. Having reread my comments on this thread, I challenge you to find any such language.

There are studies which claim TV fosters violent play and imagination in children. There are studies which say the difference between those kids who watch TV and those who don't are negligeable. There are studies which prove adolescents who watch more TV are better informed about the world. There are studies funded by fundamentalist Christian groups which prove that TV is destroying morality in our country. There are studies by media companies which claim to prove that TV is an effective educational medium.

What is the quote? "There are lies, damned lies and then there are statistics." Given that my reading of the various studies, as reported over the last twenty years, is that the evidence is inconclusive and contradictory and often dependent on whose axe is being ground, I tend to discount them.

My point was that TV is here to stay. Watch it, or don't watch it, but do so knowlegeably. Don't dismiss it out of hand in a knee-jerk puritanical smug way.

What set me off originally, and it's continued in this discussion, is the totalizing, unreflective and judgmental attitude that many if not most of the people dismissing television have demonstrated. I sought to leaven the discussion through irony, descriptions of personal experience and direct observations of my own. As I originally said, this debate reminds me of one by fundamentalists over doctrine. Not much light gets in.

On the other hand, as I recently learned from a television documentary series on Channel Nine, debates about doctrinal minutia often lead to great historical change. This was demonstrated in the history of the English monarchy recently broadcast with its emphasis on the legal documents written by various parties during the Wars of succession between 1540 and 1680 (approximately, I'm ball-parking the numbers here). Little details of textual analysis had huge international repercussions.

Finally, as a professional public school teacher (my new career of the last three years) the one thing in my classes that seems to make the difference between those who have a facility for language and critical thinking and those who struggle with them, are those who read for pleasure and those who don't. But what most of my students who don't read are doing is not just watching television. They're also playing video games for many hours.

Aristotle had the concept of the Golden Mean. What is good in life comes from striking the right balance between excess or deficit in some good or virtue. While I'm not an Aristotelian (his dry emphasis on naming and classification does not strike me as a good approach to seeking knowledge) ever since I bombed the essay on the Golden Mean in sophomore Philosophy core, I've found the concept sometimes useful. It avoids the binary oppositional thinking of Good/Bad, Right/Wrong, Postive/Negative. Breaking from that trap is the beginning of real thinking. Instead, seek some kind of appropriate balance between the various axes of defecit and excess.

Cheers,

"Mad" Miles

[mykil]

Or a little laughter, let your mind relax a little and watch a sitcom! take the edge off and let your hair down dude

Well;
there are many things to do before bed...
how about conversing with your friends, children, or loved-ones...
how about reading, writing, crafting, meditating...
how about making music, dancing, moving the body...
how about making wild and passionate love with the one...
how about studying, learning, expanding the self...
how about experiencing life as it is in the moment, versus through someone else's eyes...
how about dreaming and manifesting the next visions...
how about allowing yourself to see that reality is not limited to what the box has to offer...

Ingo

[ingo]

By all means, do what you please.

Or a little laughter, let your mind relax a little and watch a sitcom! take the edge off and let your hair down dude

[tomcat]

I have really enjoyed everyones opinions and the whole TV discussion in general. I hope to see more discussions like this on many more topics here in Waccoland.

Now, to get back to the original question with my own personal experience...
I believe everyone reacts somewhat differently to TV, but there are more similarities than not.

When I was young, I was way too easily sucked into watching the tube. We lived out in the sticks, so there were not many other kids to hang with. At around 6 yrs, my parents noticed that I was spending all my free time with the tube and not reading or playing outside much and then one day the TV just 'BROKE'. I was upset at first, but soon accepted it and began to go outside and play, hike, swim, ride my bike, explore and generally just have a great time. I also discovered lots of good books and magazines and started reading more than ever before.
We did not get a TV again until I was in high school and by then I was too busy to watch much of it. I am very thankful that my parents took that action (broken TV) as I believe it helped my learning and gave me a better feel for the 'real' world around me.

Fast forward... So, when my wife and I had a child to raise, we home schooled her. We controled her eucation very carefully and used the TV for PBS type educational programing only, until she was a pre-teen and then limited TV time to a minimum. We talked with her about the commercials and marketing and even bought her a toy once that she saw advertised and just had to have. What a great lesson she learned when she found out that it was just a piece of crap and didn't do what they showed on TV. We had long discussions about it and now, at age 20, she still won't believe what they try to sell her on TV.

So, although we don't live without TV, We've used it minimally and tend to watch educational or comedy shows. TV is way too BIG a part of most Americans lives, but it's my opinion that TV can be used in many ways as an educational tool, and that the parents must control what and when their kids watch... or, not having a TV is fine too. Worked for me when I was growing up.
Tom

We have no TV -- never did and hope never to have one -- and while I'm sure there are others out there who likewise shun the box, we haven't met them yet. Even our most progressive friends in this most progressive region have one or more and even use them as babysitters. So far my son has never spent time in front of the tube and while he certainly will get some exposure as he gets older and spends time at friends' houses, we hope to continue limiting it. Meanwhile, I'm curious whether any other Waccoans manage to exist without TV

--Geoffrey

[Dixon]

[QUOTE=Tars]"Huh? Oh...I see, "TV' is a nefarious mind-control plot by "The Man". Heh heh...
Couldn't/shouldn't you be saying the same thing about the Internet, music , periodicals, radio, or books? All of them try to "program" us in some way."

Dixon:
You're right, Tars, and in fact we are all programming each other, in a broad sense, daily. Our postings on Wacco represent one way we try to program each other.

In regards to the TV discussion, I'm using the word "program" in a more specific sense: attempting to change people's attitudes/behavior not through reason, but through manipulating them in ways that bypass reason, such as by appealing to their gonads, or inculcating them with fears/insecurities that you offer a product as an antidote for, or using fallacious logic to manipulate emotions, or falsely associating a product with love, patriotism, manliness, femininity, freedom, etc.

Certainly TV is not the only offender--all the media you mention do participate in "programming" to various degrees--but I single it out here because it's the most problematical in several ways: It's virtually universal; it's most people's main source of news; it has more access to very young children (as well as childlike adults) who are impressionable and lacking in critical thinking skills; there's reason to believe that it has negative effects on brain development; it can create a trance-like state in which people are extremely suggestible; it's addictive to the point of creating physical withdrawal symptoms in heavy users who go cold turkey; its content is controlled by fewer people (virtually all of whom are rich folks who support the corporate imperialist agenda); it presents a narrower range of views than other media (i.e., it's more consistently censored).

And TV has been very successful in its dual goals of making us addictive consumers and tractable flag-waving citizens. Even though we have far more material "things" than citizens of any other country, media (mostly TV) have so successfuly inculcated us with addictions for the latest products that we now stress ourselves out working more hours per week than anyone in the world (we recently bypassed the Japanese) so we can make more $$ to buy more products which we're programmed to believe we can't live without, even though many of these "essentials" didn't even exist 30 years ago. So effective has been this consumption-programming that we're depleting and polluting our planet and starting murderous resource wars like never before in our ever-accelerating attempts to slake these addictions we're programmed with. You can be sure that corporations wouldn't be spending billions of advertising $$ annually if that advertising weren't effective in squeezing many more billions out of us "consumers".

On the political level, the average USAmerican has been effectively programmed to embrace wars of aggression and other war crimes, blatant corruption, torture, electoral fraud, and environmental degradation for short-term profit. With the possible exception of some obscure shows that air at 4 AM on some backwater channels, reasoned, balanced discussion of these supremely important issues is virtually absent on TV, while distortions, propaganda and outright lies rule the roost.

Tars:
"Let's all squat near our personal fire and avoid contact with any new people or ideas - they may be trying to "program" us."

Dixon:
You say this as if you think it's implied by my previous email, Tars, but it's not. Anyway, the kinds of "new people" you encounter on TV are pretty much limited to the newest sports hero, rock star, siliconized bimbo, or slimy politico feeding us the same old sensationalistic, consumerist, chauvinistic crapola. As far as "new ideas"--Tars, when was the last time you saw a "new idea" on TV that wasn't just a new product for sale? All I see on TV are "new" spins on the same old programming: "Buy this product and support the troops!" Do you really go to TV for new people and new ideas, Tars? If so, that's sad.

Tars:
"More media access is better."

Dixon:
Access to food is a good thing, but that doesn't mean we should eat a whole bunch of unhealthy, toxic crap food to the near-total exclusion of healthy stuff. I hope you see how apt this metaphor is re: TV. Also, habitual TV use tends to decrease people's access to (or at least their usage of) other media such as reading, which is more likely to yield intelligent, balanced, and new ideas.

Tars:
"If you don't believe this, just look at most Islamic cultures, or any culture for that fact, where access to media is limited."

Dixon:
Yeah, they're screwed up in some very ugly ways but, on balance, we're screwed up worse. We USAmerican consumer-zombies are by far the biggest per capita cause of global warming and other forms of environmental degradation, the biggest producers/sellers/users of weapons of mass destruction, the most economically unequal of the industrialized countries, the biggest source of terrorism (including wars of aggression as well as our lucrative support of murderous dictators) in the world, and all of these problems are exacerbated by the programming we receive from the "third parent" (TV). Furthermore, many countries which have less media access still have more access to more ideas because their major media aren't as censored as ours. For example, check out various other countries' coverage of the Iraq war. More media access doesn't help much when the media being accessed are presenting mostly propaganda and advertising. Google (better yet, Scroogle) Project Censored and follow their links to get a sense of what you're missing on TV.

Tars:
"TV, like any information source, is good for us."

Dixon:
Too simplistic, Tars. TV, like everything, has its positives and negatives. We're having this difference of opinion because you are in denial about the degree to which it's negative. I understand the temptation for such denial; it's really scary to realize the extent to which we are "brainwashed". Nevertheless, I must insist that denial is not the most constructive response.

Tars:
"If there's a problem with it, it's that more people need to take responsibility for their own lives and exercise control over how much TV they watch."

Dixon:
You're right, but it's not just a matter of how much of it we watch, especially if it's our main source for news, as it is for most people (including you?). Even if you watch with a critical mind, none of us is totally immune to the highly sophisticated manipulations used to program us.

Tars:
"It's not "The Man" who's programming us - we program ourselves."

Dixon:
The two aren't mutually exclusive. Both are true.

Tars:
"... take parental control over yourself."

Dixon:
That's part of what I'm saying. Recognize that TV is more toxic than you've thought and reduce the dosage accordingly. Watch with your critical thinking skills switched on to "high". And balance it with alternative ideas from alternative sources--KPFA radio (94.1 FM), for example, and check out the offerings from our local Free Mind Media.

Tars:
"Sheesh."

Dixon:
You took the word right out of my mouth, Tars.

Love;

Dixon