If you want to really go back in the TV history books, you’ll find that this whole debacle was started with programs such as Sesame Street, 
Mister Rogers, Captain Kangaroo and 3-2-1 Contact. Hundreds of programs could be added to the list, but it was TV programs like these that started America on the trend of educating their children through one of the most convenient teachers in the house, the television. What has evolved from this are more educational TV Shows that incorporated more interaction like Blue’s Clues where children are asked questions, engaged with music and activities that include other children and the child viewer themselves. By 1997 a new child education system was born, Baby Einstein. The new development of the Baby Einstein DVD baby education package grew to a million dollar business quickly and was soon gobbled up by the Walt Disney Corporation. In the last couple years heavy scrutiny has come out against educational claims made by all these programs and systems.
On May 5th, 2008 a new study was released which you can read here in the May issue of the Archives of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine a JAMA publication, concerning TV viewing and verbal interactions among low-income parents and infants. It seems the study was partly developed due to the, “dramatic increase in television programming directed toward young infants” said the author of the study. The direct argument of the proliferation of educational media material for young children, more specifically for this study, 2 years and younger is th
ere is no data to support this material is educational. The exact statement the authors make in argument of the growth of young children educational media is, “This has occurred despite recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics that children younger than 2 years should not watch any television. Much of this programming is marketed toward parents as ‘educational,’ despite limited data to support this assertion.”
This study tackles issues that haven’t been looked at specifically in the past. There were many different types of analysis in the past concerning educational media like Baby Einstein, which we will cover later. This study however found an important link between infants receiving less verbal and physical interaction when viewing any type of TV program. There is a catch here, however, as there always seems to be with anything! If the parent, or mother in most cases, viewed the educational TV programs with the child, termed as coviewing, they interacted with the infants 62.7 percent of the time. Mother-infant interactions were only reported 23.7 percent of the time during all TV viewing but during child-oriented media when mom was around it hit 42.8 percent of interaction time.
So with all the stats and figures it can almost make you wonder if there was a conclusion. The bottom line finds that if an infant is exposed to TV, they have very limited amounts of mother-infant interactions that report at one fourth of all TV viewing the infant is exposed to. While the figures show that mom’s interacted with infants more when viewing educational children’s content they didn’t spend more time coviewing, which in turn didn’t lead to any increased interaction. The final conclusion this study has decided upon is that they don’t really support educational media produced for infants two years and under unless there is someone interacting and coviewing the content with them.
With this most recent study being released it’s almost a Déjà vu moment when looking back at the heated battle that happened between the 
University of Washington and the Walt Disney Company. The major claim by a study done at the University of Washing was, “Baby DVDs, videos may hinder, not help, infants’ language development.” The complete press release and coverage to the in depth story can be found on the University of Washington’s article archives here.
The biggest and most damaging claim made by the University of Washington study were the exact figures on how it could be damaging vocabulary development of infants. “Rather than helping babies, the over-use of such productions actually may slow down infants eight to 16 months of age when it comes to acquiring vocabulary”, stated the study. The study went on further to actually pick an exact number of how many words infants were losing in their vocabulary for every hour they watched an educational DVD and video. The study made this claim, 
“The scientists found that for every hour per day spent watching baby DVDs and videos, infants understood an average of six to eight fewer words than infants who did not watch them. Baby DVDs and videos had no positive or negative effect on the vocabularies on toddlers 17 to 24 months of age.” All of these findings were in an effort to explore the potential damage that new found data of young infant TV adoption rates were growing, stating that by 3 months of age 40 percent of infants were regularly watching TV and by age 2 it was 90 percent.
The release of the studies made The Walt Disney Company a very unhappy player in the baby educational arena. It was in 2000 that The Walt Disney Company made a purchase of the Baby Einstein franchise for an undisclosed amount. Since the Baby Einstein franchise had grown to $10 million in revenue by 2000 you can imagine what Disney forked over for it’s new prized possession. When the studies hammered the entire market segment of baby DVD 
education, Disney fired back with a letter from the CEO which you can read here. To add the heap of bickering, the President of the University of Washington replied with his own letter back to the CEO of Disney rejecting the complaints which you can read here.
So for all you future parents out there, think twice before you decide to educate your offspring in hopes of bringing them to the ranks of Einstein. Let’s just be honest here though, how many parents have only education on their mind when they sit their infant in front of Sesame Street, Arthur, Blue’s Clues and Baby Einstein DVD’s? If you’re a good parent, you are lying every step of of the way saying it’s all about education when we all know that everyone wants a cheap babysitter from time to time. For the cost of a nice flat-screen, monthly cable fee and a $20 DVD you can have a perpetual baby sitter that also gives that parent the feel good feeling that they are not only keeping the baby quiet, they’re educating them to boot. Leave us a comment and let us all know what you think.
I think the fault lies not with the DVDs, which may or may not double as some sort of intellectual stimulant, but with the parents that think parking their kids in front of TVs all on their own will magically make them smarter.
It’s the equivalent of locking an infant into a room with a pile of books and expecting any form of literacy to emerge. Sadly, you as a parent still have a responsibility, whether you like it or not. Enjoy your child.
What about dads?
I have three children (16, 14, and 1), the oldest two watched Barney and Timmy the Tooth at least every day until the age of 4 or so. Both of them are now in advanced placement classes and my oldest will be in “college” high school starting next year. So to put it bluntly, I believe these studies are a load of crap.
I stand guilty as charged. However, in my defense, I must say that if it weren’t for Blues Clues in the afternoon, I would never have had my desperately needed naps.
[…] read more | digg story ?? @ 00:27:13(+0000) [filed under Digg […]
Little kids shouldn’t watch tv -duh.
It’s good to remind people that tv/videos/dvds aren’t good for kids. They aren’t educational, they aren’t fabulous, they are lame. I can’t believe that people still think tv is “good” for kids. I am not saying it’s the worst thing on earth, it is way better than beating your kids for example, but it’s one more thing that parents and caregivers do for convenience that isn’t good for kids. Like hauling babies around in infant car seats outside of the car a lot, or ditching them for hours in a constantly vibrating chair that plays music, or feeding them formula. none of these are evil acts, but they aren’t GOOD for kids. What is good for babies and young kids is human interaction, eye contact, talking, holding, laughing and decent food.
and it’s not just moms making the kids dumber. It’s dads, grandparents, nannies, babysitters, caregivers, our stupid culture.
My son is going to be 1 this week and he has yet to watch TV. My wife and I (my wife more so) play and talk to him and read to him. I can’t say if this has done anything in the form of helping him become advanced, but it sure is nice not having to worry about him getting upset when it’s time to turn off the TV like so many other children I have seen do.
My wife and i started playing the entire Baby Einstein Collection DVDs for our daughter for about 30-60 minutes a day (an average of 1 or 2 DVDs) at about 6 months of age. She turned 15 months yesterday and now knows almost 200 words (we tested and counted), and recognizes images and sounds in the real world as a result. I contribute part of this sucess to the DVDs, but only in combination with “going along for the ride” in watching, interacting, questioning, etc. with my little one. She gets much joy wathcing Baby Einstein and completely flips out during her favorite scenes. It is a tool, not a solution. The study dismisses them but only with the understanding that the children are basically placed in front of the TV and ignored. The culprit in such cases are the parents, not the TV or the shows.
I used to know a woman that sat her kid down to watch the same stupid Disney cartoons over and over, while she got stoned with her husband.
That’s pretty damn sad. She thought she was a good parent because she didn’t beat her child and fed her. It takes a hell of a lot more than that to be a good parent.
There’s also the sad fact so many mothers work now so they are busy fixing dinner or cleaning after they come home from work so they don’t have time to sit down with their child. This is after they’ve been away from their child all day.
It’s so great to be a working mother . . . thanks a lot Gloria Steinem for screwing us all over. alternativeconservative.com/2008/04/25/discrimination-against-women
I realize that this isn’t scientific, but I have two children under the age of four and I can tell you my personal experience with them matches these studies. I do not shun television at all, but I can tell you that my wife and I spend a lot of one on one time with our children and both of them have a large vocabulary. This is despite the fact that they both watch some television. I think this has less to do with television being bad for children, but rather that some parents view television as a substitute for parenting. My observation is that children with active and involved parent’s do well regardless of how much television they watch. It just so happens that children with uninvolved parents tend to watch a lot more television than others.
Look I’m an honor student whose just about to graduate from high school. I have enough academic scholarships to get a full ride to any college in the state and when i was an infant i watched ninja turtles, power rangers, and well you get the point. TV is a great tool for teaching its just not the answer to your child’s academic development. At that young of an age I think parents should be more focused on their child’s happiness and development as a person. Once again I’m a graduating senior with little child exposure, so everything I just said is purely opinion.
Below is an interesting article about this same subject. This study is claiming that certain programs are okay for kids to watch (Barney, Sesame Street).
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-11-05-children-tv_N.htm
It’s the type of DVD (animals, phonics, potty training, nursery rhymes, dancing/movement) and a parent’s involvement, or even an older sibling. In other words, the right type of DVD coupled with time limits and personal interaction that can make DVD viewing “okay”. You must balance that with far more time spent playing with toys (with parents, siblings), outside time (with same), art, and music. I’m not an advocate for NEVER letting the TV allow you to get your dishes done, take that delayed shower, make that phone call, put stamps on your bills, or close your eyes for 15 minutes - I think that’s fine. Just balance it parents, it’s up to you to make all activities educational.
I’m all for the old school DVD’s by the way. Electric Company is a favorite for my 13 year old and 18 month old alike - and the 18 m/o is now making phonic sounds with letter recognition. You have to watch WITH them and make the sounds too - it’s fun!
I am glad that there is a study on this issue I have been saying this for some time.
[…] the BusinessShrink.biz: The bottom line finds that if an infant is exposed to TV, they have very limited amounts of […]
I LOVE how “MOMS” and not “PARENTS” are mentioned in the headline subliminally indicating fathers have no responsibility in caring for their own children
@marie c
The reason “MOMS” are mentioned is because the study only covered, sampled and surveyed moms. Apparently, they were the only ones at home when the study surveyed the thousands of participants. If fathers were found at home, it’s certain the outcome would be the same.
@17 - Did you even read the study?
Participants: Low socioeconomic status mothers of 6-month-old infants.
Maybe you’ll actually read the study next time before you climb up on that high horse.
[…] Source [Business Shrink] Filed Under Uncategorized […]
As I read this, I found discrepencies. The study was only conducted with “low economic” families. Why didn’t the study include the factors of the average or above average family? The study could be consistent if it included individual attention and study time with the parents combined with the tv watching. All factors must be considered and they were not. They didn’t include the fathers and were bias with only including the mothers, which were the only ones targeted. This information needs more validity and research before it can be considered. It also needs to include the types of children researched in detail. I consider this article rubbish.
It is ashame that we need to find reasons or diversions from the main issues at hand. We all know that TV in no way can be proven good or bad, but we can easily state that time leaving your child alone watching a blinking light that changes on average every .5 sceonds intetionally to maintain ones attention can be harmful. If given the proper frequencies can induce seizures. Hmmm, peoples productivity can also be measured by the frequency rate o flourescent bulbs. Hmmm, maybe watching the grass grow could be a little safer, MORE interseting for a child and MORE educational. It can spawn creativity from the child’s own mind, not Disney’s, and can create a world where parents begin to parent again and interact and become the teachers of their own children. I am a father, a DAD, and I would rather stimulate my child’s mind with what surrounds them because it is tangible, can be touched, heard, seen and smelt. WOW….is that a crazy idea….probably. What did we every do before TV and cell phones and DVD’s……
I watch my grand babies 2 days a week. Their ages are 4, 2, and 4 mos. They each watch or have watched the Baby Einstein videos and were absolutely mesmerized by them (most of the time next to me or on my lap). However, they are about as interesting to them as colorful rattles and hanging toys. I don’t know about anyone else, but I don’t have to worry about too much “video brainwashing”…their short attention spans stop that for me. BTW.. their vocabularies are way advanced…all due to parental (and Grand parental) interaction. I’m not worried about it.
Although I do believe many parents do abuse these videos,I think this study is flawed. The research was with low income parents, sadly that is not an accurate representation of the general public. To be more accurate this study should have covered multiple economic groups, not just one. The moral is parents who spend time with their children and use these videos will be fine.
I totally argee with all of the people that are saying that “educational” tv/dvds/etc, are only a tool in which to help. They only help if the parent(s) are involved in the process. I have babysat a lot and someday will be a parent. I have found in personal experience, reading studies and talking to people, that children with parents/guardians that arent involved tend to have more porblems. This includes behavioral, educational, and otherwise. I grew up with my sister and a single mom. I think that using the “working mom” excuse is stupid. My mom came home every night after work and sat down at the table with us for dinner, she always discussed our days with us and sat on the couch with us so we could take turns reading a night time story. There is no good excuse for ignoring your children, if you dont have time for them, dont have them.
Who 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…
[…] Want to make your kid stupid? Make him watch TV. […]
thank you, guy
There isn’t anything of value left on TV today except the History and Discovery Channel. My kids rarely turn it on, but certain parents are to blame wholeheartedly for allowing this. For some, it is similar to shoving a pacifier in their mouths to keep them quiet and out of their hair. Then they wonder why kids are getting lazier and more overweight in the process. I have forever refused to partake in this kind of behavior with my children, and today it shows both mentally and physically. They are truly a delight!
I wish people would understand how science works and stop telling the story of how they let their kid watch tv and……..x happened. Some kids can be sat in front of a TV hours a day and still be a genius. Some kids can have their parents play and talk to them all day and they may still be learning disabled. The point is that if you use TV as a babysitter, odds are, you are limiting your child’s vocabulary development. So those parent’s on here telling their anecdotal story of 1-3 kids is great, but WORTHLESS. Also, maybe you got your kid in a gifted program, but what if you would have interacted with them instead? Science says that the odds would be they would have even better vocabulary.
That is fantastic!
I don’t think there is anything wrong with watching a little TV. When my second child was born it was all I could do to get dinner on the table. I don’t expect the TV to make her a Genius. Its just nice to not listen to a screaming baby when you cant give them your undivided attention. Parents just need to be responsible.
[…] GO TO FULL STORY […]