Few modes of entertainment are guaranteed to be staples throughout one’s life. As kids grow up they ditch their dolls and action figures for video games. Then they leave their video games for bar hopping. One constant entertainment throughout all these different fads is television. You never grow out of it, and there is something on it for everyone. With television being such a big part of many people’s lives it has become a hot button topic among parents. Many say that television is bad for their kids, that it rots their brain, and that it is a complete waste of time. Others say it is beneficial towards them, that it introduces them to new things, and enlightens them. After much research I have come to the conclusion that it is not that television is good for children, or bad for children; it simply effects them. And the determining factor over whether that effect is one of negative or positive proportions, is the parents. Parents have the ability to make children’s television watching a constructive experience. Kids will often cite their parents or teachers as their role models, but I would argue that one of the biggest influences in a child’s life is the screen that they spend hours upon hours in front of. Television is not good or bad for young children; the way children watch television determines if it is good or bad for them.

How can TV be a role model in a young kid’s life? How can TV have the same impressionable affects that a mother to child might have? “Childhood is a time of important developmental advances that establish children’s sense of identity,” (Eccles 31). So maybe the physical television in itself is not a role model, but the people depicted on it certainly are. Kids will look up to characters like Spiderman or Cinderella, because they see them as role models. People who save the day, or wear the prettiest dress, are exactly who kids want to model themselves after.  The reason they believe that the Spiderman’s and the princesses are the epitome of beings is because that is the impression television puts on them. Parents have the ability to do one of two things: They can watch these shows on TV with their kids and explain how they are not realistic and teach them lessons based on the characters and situations. If the parents do not have time to sit down and watch TV with their children than they should restrict the programming that they watch to strictly educational material. While almost all television has some educational value, the educational programming that kids can watch unsupervised should only be non-fiction television appropriate for their age group.

The TedTalk, “How TV Affects the Brains of Young Children,” argues that TV has a major effect on young kids, but not the way they view things. It actually affects their brain and how they think. Dimitri Christakis, the speaker and the director of the Center for Child Health, Behavior and Development at Seattle Children’s Hospital, says that certain television shows or movies stimulate a child’s brain in a way that makes it much harder for them to focus. The fast moving objects and quick talking pus the brain in a temporary ADD like state. He uses the Powderpuff Girls Movie as an example. Content-wise, it has all the makings of a G rated film, but it retains a PG solely due to the fact that the images move very quickly and can have a negative effect on a young viewer.  He then pulls up a clip of an old Mr. Rodgers episode. “Educational programs like, Mr. Rodgers, pose no increased risk for attentional problems,” (Christakis 11:06). The reason television shows like that are okay for a child is because not only do they have education value, but they move at a slower pace, and are easier for a young child to comprehend. Christakis then shows a chart on the screen that shows that shows like Mr. Rodgers have 0% of an effect on kid’s attentiveness, while shows like the Powderpuff Girls have a 60% effect on kid’s attentiveness, and finally violent shows have a 110% effect on kid’s attentiveness. The chart comes from an in-house study at the Seattle Children’s Hospital, and he and his assistants sampled 100 children to obtain these results. These statistics show that it is not television that is effecting young kids, it is the certain programs they may watch. 

Author Dafna Lemish has a very similar view as Christakis to television in children’s lives. “As beginning-viewers, babies and toddlers seem to attend more closely to programs that are designed for them, including: peppy music, sound effects, animation, lively pacing that is not overwhelming, humor, as well as female and children’s voices,” (Lemish 45-46). She goes on to say that as children grow older they move on to new types of shows. There are shows suitable for all age groups. Kids can move from Teletubbies, to Sesame Street, to live-action kids shows all while maintaining healthy viewing habits. Not every researcher is on board with Lemish’s ideas. Many say that no amount of TV is healthy. Cynthia Dalton from kishealth.org believes all forms of media are harmful to kids. “Children who consistently spend more than 4 hours per day watching TV are more likely to be overweight,” (Ben-Joseph 1). I disagree with what Cynthia is saying here.  What goes wrong in the viewing process is that children do not stick to the progressive viewing patterns. “They gradually experiment with the entire range of television genres, including those specifically not intended for them – such as violent movies and pornographic material,” (Lemish 47). More often than not, the average mature teenager or young adult can handle violent television and censored sex scenes, but a child cannot. Lemish created a study in which she had several young children, and the same amount of teenagers, watch a show created for teens. She then quizzed the kids on things they came across in the show, with a harder version of the questions being used for the older children. The older teens were able to learn from the show and take away so much more than the young children, because they were just not ready for it. It creates an unrealistic image for them and they start to prepare themselves for these unrealistic situations in the real world. In a less harmful personal example I can recall watching Scooby Doo at a young age. According to Lemish Scooby Doo is a show that shouldn’t be watched until around ages 8-10. I’m guessing I started watching it at around 4. There were so many episodes where the gang got in trouble with quicksand that I would spend hours thinking and preparing myself on what I would do not if, but when, I encountered quicksand. Of course never in my life have I come across quicksand and I am still not sure if it even exists. While this example may just pertain to me, Lemish is arguing that if I had started watching Scooby Doo at a more appropriate age then I would have realized quicksand is not an everyday problem and is strictly on the show to entertain me. She would say that young kids are not ready to handle and understand these complex situations that some TV shows put kids in. Both Lemish and Christakis want reader and viewers to understand that television is not a bad thing for young kids, in fact it can be very good for them, but if it is watched the wrong way it can certainly be harmful.

Many authors choose not to look at the negative effects of television, because they realize that if they let their kids watch TV a certain way there will be no negative effects. Yuki Hayashi is a big believer that letting young children watch TV is only beneficial towards you and them. “Although prior research had connected TV viewing to cognitive delay, in those studies a lack of controlling for socio-demographic and environmental factors may have skewed results,” (Hayashi 1). What the author is saying is that studies that say television is harmful to children is did not take into account that the children studied came from lower income homes, with less educated parents. The cognitive delay was not coming from TV, but it was coming from the environment the child was raised in. Yuki cites a pediatrician named Dr. Dennis Leduc, who studies children’s learning, “parents watch age-appropriate programs along with their child and take the opportunity to talk about what they see,” (Hayashi 1). The doctor is saying that parents have the ability to make television not only a source of entertainment, but a bonding and learning experience with their child.  This again shows that television is not a negative source of entertainment for children, it is how they watch television that determines whether it is a positive or a negative one. Not everyone would agree with Hayashi though. Amanda Gardner, a children’s health expert and columnist for CNN Health, says that anything more than small spurts of television can have damaging effects on kids. “Each additional hour of TV that toddlers watch per week translates into poorer classroom behavior, lower math scores, less physical activity, and more snacking at age 10, according to a new study in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine,” (Gardner 1). Despite this authors like Hayashi or Samir Vermani, children’s doctor and author of “TV Can Improve Kids’ Behavior,” argue that if those children had someone monitoring their television usage none of those things would occur.

While many researchers have found that television can be a positive experience for young children, some authors still believe that no matter what, television will harm them. To view television as harmful without any proof happens quite often, and from all of my research I have found that it occurs more with men. It is possible that that stems from some fathers having the traditional view of their kids spending all their time outside playing sports. They might think why spend time watching TV when my son or daughter and I can go have a catch. I’m not arguing that television is necessarily better than playing sports, what I am arguing is that it holds just as many benefits. When playing sports, you get exercise, you learn team work, and you may even learn a skill that will put you through college for free. But when you are watching television you gain knowledge, culture, and things that will eventually be more useful later in life. Parents should have more of an open mind when they tell their kids to go play outside instead of watching TV. Maybe instead they should change the channel to The Travel Channel or Animal Planet. Once again, I am not saying to push your kids out of sports and onto the couch, but the pressure being put on young kinds in sports is tremendous. “The trend to younger and younger commitments is a big concern today in youth sports,” (Wallace 1). Parents will stop at nothing to get their kids a college scholarship and many times it leads to the child resenting them and or quitting the sport all together. “Parents believe they need to give their kid an edge, he said, but the irony is they may be hurting their child's athletic future more than helping,” (O’Sullivan 1). Instead of the parent always pushing their kids to practice, play on three different teams, and getting involved with the coaches, they should be okay with their kids taking a few hours to unwind and watch TV. Because after all, if kids spend no time in front of the TV they may end up lacking a lot of common knowledge that is necessary in a world after sports. Things like what’s going on in the world, politics, and basic common knowledge are things lots of people learn from watching TV. Many people would say that a sense of humor is a very important character trait to have if you want to make friends and land jobs. Television sitcoms do a big part in helping people learn a sense of humor and it also gives them something in common with others. My point is that parents need to understand that if they do not let their children watch TV they will be far behind most people in lack of world knowledge and sociability. They should be focusing more on what TV can do to enhance their child, than what it can do to hurt them.

Authors like Mullins or Amanda Gardner say that children have much better things to do than watch TV. Getting off the couch for exercise or sports is not the only reason parents do not want their kids watching television. Everyone has heard the phrase “TV rots the brain.” Well some parents take that saying to a new level. Author Seth Mullins explicitly stated he does not let his children watch TV. He says that television is a separate reality, and that it is too different from kid’s typical environments. “Television programs confront them with images and sounds that bear no relationship to that environment,” (Mullins 1). To counter Mullins’ argument that television programs bear no relationship to the real world, I will use beloved 1990s classic sitcom Full House. Every episode of Full House tackled an issue like parental death, cheating on a test, and lying to your parents. At the end of every single episode a lesson was learned by one of the characters, and a lesson was taught to the audience. “There are, no doubt, many television programs available – especially if one has cable – that are educational in nature,” (Mullins 1). Mullin’s does acknowledge that TV has educational benefits but says that it should only start being watched when kids reach their teens. The reason he believes this is because he does not think kids will be able to understand this information. The problem with his argument there is that if he believes children will not be able to understand and that is why they should not watch; then why would he not watch with them? If the author, who has two children of his own, would sit down with them and watch TV, then whenever one of his kids had a question or something came on the screen that they did not get, he could explain it to them. Parents tend to use the “TV will root your brain” cliché as a scapegoat for not spending a little bit of time with their children.

Most authors see the positives and negatives of TV while a few tend to only see the negatives. That leaves the third and final type of author/parent; one who fully embraces that TV is a huge part of the world we live in and takes full advantage of that. I have already talked about the about the authors that understand that TV is a part of life, like Christakis and Nathanson, and that watching it the right way is in-fact fine for children. That being said, a lot of parents and authors see all the benefits outside of the educational ones that television holds. In this paper I am arguing that television can be as beneficial as you make it for yourself and authors like Ian Kennedy, children’s life and growth expert, and Samir Vermani know that it is very possible to take full advantages of what TV has to offer. I’ve talked a lot about the educational values of television but there are so many other benefits that TV brings to kids. Television has a way of bringing families together after a long day apart. “Whether it becomes a bonding moment with young kids watching “Sesame Street” or endless discussions about the plot intricacies of “Lost” with your teens, television can be a catalyst for family interaction,” (Kennedy 1). Another huge advantage for kids watching TV is language learning. It is becoming very advantageous for people to know the English language and if parents from foreign countries got their kids to watch English television they could be bilingual before middle school. Finally, a main reason why TV is largely beneficial to kids is the fact that it helps with social interaction. “Researchers found that television has a social benefit for kids who have difficulty connecting with others,” (Kennedy 1). When you are a kid it can sometimes be hard to make friends but television makes it easier to bond with others when you are looking for something in common. So many friendships begin with common interests such as reading and sport; television is just another way for kids to branch out and make new relationships. A personal example of this would be the friendship I have made with my high school math teacher all because we both love the MTV reality show The Challenge. Television not only has tremendous educational value, but it also has lots of other real world values as well. Whether it is helping a family or new friends bond, or it is helping someone learn new language, television can certainly be a positive experience for kids.

Television is not good or bad for children; the way they watch TV determines whether it is good or bad. That being said, there are so many ways to make television watching a positive experience for kids. IF parents take the time to watch television with their children they have the ability to make TV a learning experience. Television can also be used to help learn a new language or bond a family together. Finally, television can help a kid make friends by learning social skills and giving he or she something in common with others. As long as parents limit the amount of hours their children watch, and keep them from watching anything that is too inappropriate or violent, TV will be nothing but a positive influence on kids as they grow. Many authors are on onboard with my argument that TV is not a negative influence on kids, and in fact when watched correctly can be quite a positive impact. And while there are still some out there that keep the old fashioned views of television being “no good,” it is a very small bunch. That small part of society needs to realize that TV is not going anywhere, and that it is better to embrace it for its benefits, than avoid it completely.
