Which is what a large amount of people already do, who own a TV.
So the fact you own/don't own a TV is irrelevant. You've changed your behavior from 'watch whatever is on', to 'watch things I want to watch'.
Which is what a large amount of people already do, who own a TV.
So the fact you own/don't own a TV is irrelevant. You've changed your behavior from 'watch whatever is on', to 'watch things I want to watch'.
There's something you lose if you just go to on demand stuff. TV is an 'event', at a specific time. Kids go to the playground and talk about what they saw on TV last night. I think that's pretty useful socially to have shared experiences like that. I'd hate to be the kid that doesn't have anything to talk about because his parents don't have a TV.
Overall, I agree, though plenty of arguments can be made for and against this, especially where TV is concerned (given its brain-rotting tendencies). Personally, I grew up on mostly different shows than everyone else anyway, so I only shared experiences with an extremely small group of people, most of whom I'm sure I never met. Bill Nye, Nova, and generally PBS (no cable) were my shows of choice through all of elementary school. I also had the Animaniacs lineup near its beginning, but the vast majority of other kids my age (at my school) didn't get most of it.
Not bragging about my "mental might" here, my parents & older sister just did a good job loading me with things to learn before and during that age, so I had a real intellectual advantage at elementary school. They taught me most things 1-on-1 well before they came up in school. It's definitely put me in a different social circle, as I associate more with geeks than other stereotypes, but I'm happy here. For myself, I'll call not sharing a lot of the "normal" TV experience a positive thing.
In particular, now that I have a 18-month-old son, I find myself slowly putting plans into motion to ensure that he won't have to "put up with them", or, if you want real honesty, I don't have to put up with him getting barraged by ads.
(Just having a Netflix subscription is a good start now. They've got a range of stuff on Watch Instantly. I've got a couple of years before it really gets acute, too, and the situation may improve by then even more.)
Oh, training a kid to resist the commercials is part of a standard education now, but going up against industries with 60+ years experience in manipulating toddlers and young kids is something I'm going to try to avoid. Hopefully I can hold them back until it's more of a fair fight.
I don't necessarily agree with this statement. I do not believe people are as selective with what they watch if they own a TV (yes, I know, there are always exceptions). When you actively seek out the content when/where/how you want it, as well as probably paying for it in some cases, you are much more selective with what you watch and how much time you spend watching it.
If people own a TV, they are using the hundreds of channels they have to suck up time rather than providing them true entertainment. People who own TVs, in my opinion, are much more likely to channel surf and just find a boring show to fill up their time because they find nothing else to do. This gets even worse with the increasing use of DVRs.
It turns into not filling an interest/entertainment need but rather providing a diversion.
I'd say it's best to cure the problem (If you have one) than to proclaim that TV is bad.
The same sort of personality could waste time reading the dictionary or an encyclopedia. Not because they want to lookup something, just because they're bored. But that doesn't mean books are bad.