We interrupt our humorous discussion of books to consider the alternative. TV.
I don’t mean to get political, but I’d like to join the discussion that began the night before last about slashing public funding for Public Television.
At issue was whether or not it was worth borrowing from the Chinese to pay for it. Not that anyone is blaming the Corporation for Public Broadcasting for the national debt, but when you’re balancing a budget, I believe the point was that every one eight-thousandth of a percent counts.
And it’s not that Public Broadcasting is totally dependent on the government. We, the people, provide only about 15% of PBS’s budget through our taxpayer dollars. But if you had to part with 15% of your annual budget, say, through paying that much in taxes (or even less) you might likewise feel that every 15% counts.
Regardless of your political bias toward one or the other of these views, I would like to share some perspective from my political bias. That is, from the interest of my own children.
PBS Kids is the only network TV I let my kids watch. We do it on Wednesday mornings, when my daughter is home from preschool.
Other than Friday and Saturday movie nights, that’s practically the only time we turn on our TV. (Sorry if that seems weird.)
What’s so special about PBS? Well, the educational aspect is nice, but that’s not the most important thing. And the escape from addictive violent imagery is a bonus, but not our prime consideration either. And I do appreciate that they don’t sexualize everything for all ages, but again that’s not the draw.
What’s special about PBS is the absence of commercials. The rock ‘em, sock ‘em, buy-buy-buy brainwashing that consumes a full quarter of the viewing experience on broadcast TV and a third on cable. I used to write commercials for kids’ TV, so I know exactly how much psychological research is exploited to transform young innocents into rabid consumers. “Still persuadable” is what they call the younger demographics. In other words, gullible. Suckers. Prey.
We need a safe haven from that. PBS is that safe haven.
I know parents who need to hold one kid spellbound while scooting another off to school while changing the diaper of a third. Sometimes the TV is the only affordable assistance.
In an old friend’s neighborhood, a kid who wants to live long enough to finish high school and maybe, just maybe, be the first kid on the block to escape the cognitive debilitation of poverty and violence, and attend college, TV offers not only companionship during those lonely years, but also a supportive voice. And a window to a world where positive life opportunities do exist.
Commercial TV does not offer that voice. Commercial TV doesn’t want to wait for that kid to develop into a well educated, well paid consumer. Commercial TV wants that kid’s money now. Or certainly no later than the end of this fiscal quarter. Commercial TV wants to instill in that kid the same short-term, immediate-gratification thinking that it has.
Kids are our future workforce as well as our future market. They are the people who will be paying our Social Security when we are older. And the ones who will be caring for us in our dotage.
Like it or not, TV will be a strong influence on the kind of people they become.
Still, we’re talking about a value judgment, and some might not consider giving our kids a chance to escape blind consumerism to be worth going into debt to China. So look at it a different way.
We already spend more than 25 times as much on Chinese-made toys for kids under 12 alone than we do on funding public broadcasting. Sheltering them from incessant advertising — funding PBS Kids — could result in fewer US dollars in Chinese hands.
And having smarter, safer kids who can grow up and compete with the Chinese — and everyone else — in the global marketplace would be a pleasant bonus.
So, a few more federal bucks for Big Bird? That’s not debt.
That’s investment.
Yes and Amen!! As a fan of “West Wing” I remember a discussion about how much of the national budget is spent on the arts – all of them – and the comparison that the U.S. arts budget is equivalent to that of Sweden. Wherever the money comes from, PBS, NPR, the NEA and NEH are providing an education many children will find nowhere else. Especially since so many schools drop music, art and drama courses when they want to save money. Sigh. I’m with Big Bird on this one!!
I’m of two minds about this subject. Yes, cutting funding to PBS in order to balance the U.S. budget is ridiculuous. That’s like using ping-pong balls to attack an aircraft carrier.
On the other hand, I’ve reached the conclusion that ALL television is BAD. Television, by its very nature, is passive and hypnotic. Your own post mentions “need to hold one kid spellbound”. You don’t DO anything while you’re watching TV. You just take in whatever your optic and auditory nerves feed you, without assessment or questioning. That can’t be healthy.
When I got divorced two years ago, my ex got custody of the TV. Some friends gave me an old “pre-digital” TV for my apartment. I didn’t have the money or the time to get the “converter” box, and I didn’t want to spend $70 a month or more on cable or satellite. So the TV just sat there in my living room.
And I discovered something. I had more TIME–to read, to exercise, to clean my apartment beyond stuffing my dirty clothes under my bed. I even found time to go back to school. I think more clearly. I make better choices when I buy things, because I’m not constantly bombarded with commercials. A few months ago, I took that old TV to a recycling center. I don’t miss it.
Many years ago, a psychologist told me, “Television does not exist to provide us with news and entertainment. Television exists to provide a marketplace for advertisers.” No commercials means no TV programs. Even PBS is not immune. On the local PBS station, in between programs, are the little announcements of “support of members like you and…(fill in the name of a local business that shelled out $1000 or so).” Call it whatever you like–if you mention the name of a business, it’s still a commercial.
I know, I know, I’m a hypocrite. I watch Notre Dame football games on the big-screen TVs down at the local pub. But I still think the best thing we can do for our kids is to SHUT THE DAMN THING OFF–once and for all.
Pingback: Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » Question of the day
PBS and NPR are so much more than Sesame Street. I think that “public” media produces many fine programs but, when it shows a political bias, that bias is almost always tilted against Republicans, Catholics, conservatives, etc. and almost never in the other direction. I don’t want my tax dollars to go toward programs that routinely insult and offend me.
Here in Chicago, our PBS station plays kid stuff from 6AM to 6PM. The hour before that is nonpartisan gardening, the hour after that is Newshour. I used to love Newshour back when I had time to watch news, because it didn’t tell you what the newsmakers in Washington thought — it let them speak for themselves! After that, it’s antiques and stuff with English accents. But most of the day it’s great.
I won’t argue that NPR is as centrist, but I’ve been cheesed off at them ever since they cut out jazz in the evening. The only other jazz station in town has a weak signal. Imagine a city the size of Chicago, with only one jazz station and only one country station! But that’s a different rant.
All I ask is that you don’t conflate NPR with their more sensible TV counterpart.
Thanks for your reply. I hardly ever watch PBS nowadays because I am more interested in programs on other channels but, when I think about PBS issues programs, I think about Bill Moyers, an avowed liberal. There is no counterbalance. Where is the new William F. Buckley?
I believe that PBS went through a housecleaning of sorts during the George W. Bush administrations, but my understanding is that eventually the Old Guard regained control.
I am a fiscal and social conservative. I am tired of the liberal elites talking down to me and undercutting my values. They know they are biased, but don’t care and refuse to be fair. Well, if that’s their attitude, then can get along without public tax dollars.
I think you’ll enjoy it here at CaptainDad.com, then, for two reasons. One, we are decidedly a Family Values environment. And, two, we keep it as nonpartisan as possible.
We leave the politics to the pundits and focus on what binds us all together. By which I mean a two-year-old with a roll of toilet paper.
This is a late reply, but I felt the need. First of all, most of the cable tv programming geared to the under 5 crowd is largely commercial free (we watch NickJr, DisneyJr, Qubo in addition to PBS kids). My son (3 1/2yo) loves movies and loves tv and I have come around to realize that it is not hypnotic and passive. He is constantly being exposed to things that he wouldn’t otherwise have been exposed to and is broadening his awareness and his vocabulary. He LOVES Octonauts and was thrilled to visit the Aquarium and asked whether he would see some of the animals featured on Octonauts “Creature Reports”. Yes, I can bring him to the Aquarium, but I can’t possibly give him all of the context that he gets from paying attention to these shows. We read books too, but I have found that not all tv is bad tv!
Thanks for your opinion and I love the picture. PBS started the year my son was born and that was the only television allowed for him to watch. Even in the 70′s we parents had concern for the quality of the the “boob” tube as my father called it. I am happy to report my grandchildren also love PBS and the oldest one (16) gives his dad reports off Frontline, Nova etc. He also watches the Big Bang Theory and plays his share of video games. Inducted in the National Honor Society today PBS has served our family very well. Big Bird showed up on Saturday night live. I hope he lives a long time!!! Thanks for your website!!