| Page 2 of 3 < > |
Diaper Demographic
Andrea McKeon has warmed to the idea of letting her daughter watch TV. "She's very alert. It hasn't affected her activity level," she said.
(By Linda Davidson -- The Washington Post)
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
Some critics of baby media complain that educational claims are false and misleading. "They are hard-wiring dependence on media before babies get a chance to grow and develop," said Susan Linn, co-founder of the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, a Boston-based advocacy group. The campaign has petitioned the Federal Trade Commission to treat claims made by Baby Einstein and Brainy Baby as deceptive advertising.
Baby media marketers contend they're catering to an existing need and their products are another tool for parents to use to interact with their children.
"We're not putting babies in front of television. We're giving them a cleaner, safer alternative," said BabyFirstTV co-founder Sharon Rechter. The channel, which costs $10 a month, offers slow-paced, five-minute shows with no advertising. Parents are reminded regularly in subtitles and short messages to take the time to point out shapes, colors and objects.
Demand for shows for infants and toddlers isn't limited to the United States. In Israel, BabyTV's first market, the premium channel "sold as well as Playboy," spokeswoman Maya Talit said. BabyTV is now carried in Latin America, Asia, the Middle East, Canada and Europe.
The appeal, it seems, is universal: "It's guilt-free electronic baby sitting," said Michael Rich, a Harvard pediatrics professor and director of the Center on Media and Child Health. In reality, he said, most parents do not interact with their children while watching television.
He and other researchers cite several recent studies that suggest the tube may not be an effective teacher, such as one 2004 experiment that found that infants and toddlers can imitate a task such as removing a mitten after one live demonstration, but need to watch the same demonstration six times on video before they get it.
Watching a screen is "much more difficult for babies than we think," said Rachel Barr, a Georgetown University psychologist and study co-author.
A 2004 analysis by Christakis concluded the more time 1 1/2- and 3 1/2-year-olds spent watching television, the more likely they were to have attention problems at age 7.
"There's no question babies are engaged in the screen . . . but that should not be confused with either the child liking it or the child deriving benefit from it," he said.
Programmers, however, counter that existing studies, including Christakis's 2004 analysis, don't look at content.
Take "Sesame Street." Research has shown regular viewers aged 2 and older learned words more quickly than children who watched less. But one study has also indicated that watching the show may slow language acquisition in those younger than 2.
"Content does matter. Television is not monolithic, and there's no evidence the box is inherently evil," said Rosemarie Truglio, vice president of education and research for Sesame Workshop.
