to wonder what's so bad about tv?

[CailinDana]

I've been on MN for a while and every so often I see posts mentioning tv as though it's poison. I'm just wondering why people have that view of it. I used to be a developmental research psychologist and never came across any evidence that it does children any harm in moderate doses. Of course, if a child is sitting in front of the tv for hours on end it's going to affect their fitness and their social skills, but if a child is only watching an hour or so a day, where's the harm in that?

Obviously I am aware that allowing children to watch programmes that aren't suitable for their age can be damaging. On the other hand I think that some programmes can be beneficial - a few posters have mentioned their children learning makaton from Something Special and some spanish from Dora the Explorer. That's a good thing surely? Just wondering what others' views are on it.

Tv is the best thing ever ever ever

Well... After books

It's all about balance innit

I've always shamelessly abused the TV as an electronic babysitter, when they were small (twins) sometimes it was the only way I could get anything done! I've also always had them out and about during the day and done lots of craft, baking etc so the TV has never dominated. They're 5 now and seem to be bright as a button and doing really well at school so far, so I doubt it's done them any harm. Everything in moderation.

It's bad because it's so passive and uses such a miniscule amount of brain power to watch it. People have deemed that to be bad. It's little more than a distraction and children would be better off doing something that requires more of an active role. But, I think it's fine when they're tired or sick or have a favourite programme that they're following. We also like to sit and watch a movie together

We don't have it on if we're not watching something specific. It gets on my nerves if it is left on. Same with the radio.

IME it effects kids differently. It was very positive for dd. She would watch endless episodes of Alphablocks on iplayer and I think that was responsible for her being a very early reader.
The tv was on a lot when she was little but she would take little notice of it. DS on the other hand gets absolutely absorbed so we don't have it on a lot anymore. I think the current advice is that under 2's should watch no tv whatsoever which I think is slightly unobtainable especially if there are older siblings in the house.

I have it on during the day, in fits are starts and combined with Woman's Hour and the Archers, because I'm bored. I have a 9 mo and she's wonderful but I need a bit of stimulation to get me through! I also like to watch the Big Bang Theory with her so she can relate to her uncle

Maybe I'm doing terrible things to my daughter but I'm knackered and need a break and I speak three languages with her other than english so hec, it'll be fine.

I've wondered this. Does anyone know what the 'no TV for under 2s' advice is based on. I can obviously see how too much would be bad, but if it's just a smallish part of the day then what's the problem?

I don't agree that tv takes very little brain power to watch. If a child is following a story then it takes quite a lot of brain power to keep the story in mind and follow what the characters are doing. I don't think anybody just sits there and plants their eyes on the screen without engaging their brain - that would get very boring very fast.

It's interesting what you say about it affecting children differently Secret. I hadn't heard the advice about no tv under 2 - do you know who issued that advice and why?

I seem to remember an American paediatric body issuing this advice - but American kids TV is not of the same quality as our home grown stuff.

Personally I find TV very useful for stopping siblings fighting when tired or allowing DP a lie in a weekends. I have fond memories of watching TV as a child with my family and my cousins and as a shared experience I think it is very positive.

I think there are concerns about speech and language development in children who never have a conversation but are always passive in front of TV.

But not everything has to be active or 'improving' - sometimes it's nice to watch some nonsense together or have it on in the background while doing another activity.

I had a little girl over to play today whose TV watching us very limited indeed - and of course all she wanted to do was watch the box on first arrival

I think scientists have measured brain activity whilst watching television and it's very low compared to other activities. In fact, I think they said it was marginally more stimulating than being asleep

I think that most tv programs aimed at children are good.
I think that watching a movie is a wonderful experience for a child, and it doesn't need to be a passive experience at all, actually my children have always staged movies they've seen to make sense of them.

What I think is "bad" is spending too much time in front of the telly, having it on constantly and watching unsuitable things.

We now live in Italy and aerial tv is crap here, so we don't have an aerial. But the children have access to our dvds, we have many from Peppa Pig to Little Women via Harry Potter.
I am totally OK with them watching good movies.

Well thst's not necessarily a bad thing if children are tired or want to relax!

Really hiddenhome? That surprises me. I'll see if I can root out that research, I'd like to read it.

Sorry that's in response to Hiddenhome.

Well I wonder what those scientists showed those children... I remember the first time my ds watched Maisy... I think his brain was making all the right connections ...

I forgot to say that I am totally snobbish of toddler educational programs, can't get overexcited by the fact that they might learn 1 spanish word thanks to Dora!!

I read in the guardian family section a couple of years ago about a study showing an increase in rates of ADD amongst children under 2 watching as little as 1 hour of tv a day. My partner has since found research showing adverse effects in up to 5 yr olds. Wouldn't judge people for letting their young children watch tv in the same way I don't judge other choices such as diet. Parents make compromises all the time. However, evidence does exist and I get a little tired of bring viewed as some extreme parent for not letting my 2 yr old watch any tv.

I have no link or proof, but I remember hearing something about it being linked to ADHD when watched too much when they are very young because the high speed flickering on the screen combined with developing brains can cause the developing brain to expect all stimulation as quickly as the flickering TV and there comes the ADHD issue.

No idea how much there is in this, just repeating something I remember reading.

That's interesting northernlass and Oggy.

I get really irritated by people who won't watch TV out of principle because "it is all rubbish". I watch TV to learn - documentaries, to be entertained - comedy, drama, films, crime detective drama and to find out what is going on in the world - news. I don't watch reality TV or soaps because they don't interest me.

I think people who rubbish TV have never seen anything really good and assume that there is nothing but soaps and reality rubbish.

Completely agree Cailin. When I watch my DCs watching TV there's absolutely no way that it takes very little brain power to watch. They're constantly learning, answering questions, joining in with songs / actions, etc.

They're active participants, not passive observers.

If I'm cooking in the kitchen, they'll run in to tell me about what one of the characters have done, a funny joke they've heard (explaining why it's a pun) or pick go straight to the craft shelves to make something they've seen.

As with everything in life it's all about moderation (except cake, of course).

I also think the official advice takes the view that people are too thick to work out what is moderate and reasonable and therefore recommends a blanket ban to avoid awkward "how much is too much" questions.

Incidentally, something I read about Jane Austen prompted to me write this thread. In her time novels were considered coarse and unsuitable and she was looked down up by polite society for being a novelist. Basically it was believed that novels, particularly ones written by women, were morally damaging and gave people fanciful notions. Of course nowadays we look back and shake our heads, and we would love to tell Jane Austen that her novels are revered as classics. I'm not saying that children's tv will ever be revered but sometimes the things I hear and read about tv have that same ring to them - the idea that tv is "chewing gum for the brain" - a sort of automatic reaction to something that is "coarse."

I think you're probably right there Oggy - it's like the "five a day" thing - apparently five was chosen as a high enough number that people would at least eat one or two pieces of fruit/veg a day.

A lot of it is snobbery imo. Especially adults who harp on that they don't watch tv. MIL is very much like that but will happily have radio 4 blaring at ear-splitting volume from every room in the house

Like most things in life, its ok in moderation!

It depends on their age, what they're watching and for how long.

Re under-2s and depending whose research you believe - three things optimise brain development: face-to-face interaction with parents or carers; learning to interact with or manipulate the physical world; and creative problem-solving play. Electronic screens do not provide any of this.

And the way we use TV and other electronic screens is changing so rapidly that no one knows how it will affect the developing brain (continues to develop until mid-20s)

However, findings like these are hugely unpopular because they unleash guilt by the bucketload, television is after all the nation's favourite past time and it would be a very brave government who made any recommendations based on this.

So, like anything else, it's personal choice.