Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site SCIRTP.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!mcnc!rti-sel!SCIRTP!ned From: ned@SCIRTP.UUCP (Ned Robie) Newsgroups: net.kids,net.tv Subject: Re: kids without TV Message-ID: <303@SCIRTP.UUCP> Date: Mon, 12-Aug-85 20:32:54 EDT Article-I.D.: SCIRTP.303 Posted: Mon Aug 12 20:32:54 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 18-Aug-85 20:46:14 EDT References: <545@tekigm.UUCP> <5713@cbscc.UUCP> Organization: SCI Systems, Research Triangle Park, NC Lines: 72 Xref: linus net.kids:1536 net.tv:2931 > > I am courious if there are other families > > without the one-eyed monster and how well is it going for them. > > What activities were done in place of this national pasttime? > > How do the kids survive amoung friends if they don't know what is > > currently the big sho'? > > > > Robert Dexter When I was very young (8 or 9 years old) I had a friend down the street whose father would not allow a TV in the house. My friend spent most of his time watching TV at our house and another friend's house. I remember he would come over to play and all he wanted to do was watch TV. It was a drag because we (friends with TVs) usually wanted to go outside. > I'm impatient in front of the TV > (especially the dumb commercials you get bombarded with so frequently). > > I definitely think that the small percentage of > good programming on TV does not justify owning one. (When you do, its > harder to limit your watching to the good stuff.) > There's more than a small percentage. Rent a TV and get cable for a while. SKIP THE COMMERCIAL NETWORK CHANNELS and go directly to PBS, CNN, C-SPAN, Arts and Entertainment (A&E), National Geographic Explorer on Nickelodeon (this program is GREAT!), the Health and Medicine channel, sports (ESPN and USA, etc.). Cable TV provides a variety of very educational, entertaining, and generally worthwhile programming -- just give it a chance. PBS alone is worth the investment. > I definitely think that the small percentage of > good programming on TV does not justify owning one. (When you do, its > harder to limit your watching to the good stuff.) > The aforementioned programming IS worth it. As for limiting one's watching to good stuff... well, if you don't like what you or your kids are watching, change channels or turn the TV off. Also, most cable companies offer channel controls that allow you to lock-out channels that you don't want to receive. > Encourage > your kids to read more than watch TV and they'll have some things they're > "up on" that the other kids aren't. I think reading generally provides > more exercise for the imagination than TV, hence developing it more. I agree, but no TV at all?? > Kids can learn early on that what the crowd does isn't always the greatest > thing and being up on the latest show is no big deal. It can be a big deal if most of your friends are always talking about something you know nothing about. > will probably get some TV at a friend's house, anyway; hopefully much > less than if you owned one yourself.) > > When it does happen > make arragements to watch at a friend's house or borrow a portable. > > Paul Dubuc cbscc!pmd Do you think your neighbors appreciate this? I wouldn't, knowing you don't have a TV. Like it or not, TV is a very important and pervasive communications medium. It's important that children are exposed to it, understand it, and learn how to use it responsibly and constructively. I feel that just removing it from the house is a mistake. -- Ned Robie