Ok, so what's the difference between you and your iPod and children who only watch DVD's or commercial free kiddie channels?

I think maybe there's a difference that relates to imagination. Music invokes emotions and perhaps pictures in the minds of listeners that vary completely from one person to the next. The same, at least regarding pictures, really isn't true regarding TV. I remember when the Little House on the Prairie TV series came out and I was shocked, shocked, at how "wrong" they'd gotten Laura. It's kind of hard to imagine now, really, given that Melissa Sue Gilbert has thoroughly become Laura in my mind (probably b/c I went on to watch every episode). But at the time, I had an entirely different image of her and I (and my twin sisters a year younger) were just outraged at how totally different the actress seemed from what we had conjured from reading the books. This is small stuff, of course, but I suppose the larger issue is that it sort of demonstrates that the television does a little bit more of the "thinking" for you, so that for those kids who were first introduced to LH on the television, whatever brain cells and emotions and past experiences that went into their older siblings' or parents' evocation of Laura are simply not required for them.

No desire to pick on you. If you read my previous posts, you'll see that we're not "pure" in our house. It is smart, though, to stay on top of the latest research as well as pay attention to your inner common sense. I will tell you this: When I drag my kids (now older) from their computers (This is their drug of choice at the moment; the TV thing never became a habit), I notice there's always a bit more chaos and noise in the house. It's good to remember, though, that sometimes this arguing and working things out (Who should go first in a game, who's getting in whose space, etc.) can be beneficial in the long run--the sorting and negotiating and back-and-forth that seems kind of bothersome and negative is probably helpful in the development of critical thinking and social development. And it almost always bothers the parents far more than the kids. My kids attended self-contained gifted classrooms in the public schools, and those rooms were almost always louder and more child-directed than the others I noticed when I passed them by in the hallway. I think those teachers were trained or already knew to conduct their classrooms more like a lab atmosphere of discovery learning than passive learning.

Can't say enough, though, that there's some good stuff on TV, and a general sense of bonding can occur if a family watches a particular show together, talks about the characters and/or events, etc. I do like the idea of intentional viewing rather than just having it on as background. I think the background thing lends itself more to passivity, and even if your kids are motivated enough to get up and change activities, it still strikes me as, in the long run, encouraging mindlessness. Ours is off unless we are deliberately viewing it (as we did last night, btw, for the John Adams miniseries; our whole family planned our schedules to watch it together and just loved the first part--now we have an interesting historical figure and time to talk about together.)

Just one mom's view. Good luck with your girls--I'm sure they'll do fine whatever you decide.

Did you read Nicholas Kristof's column? I have followed this excellent reporter's stories for the past several years, and he is a consistent and insistent voice for the voiceless in the sex slave trade industry around the world. He has also been fair and independent in his assessment of the Bush presidency, giving it credit where it is due (which amounts almost exclusively to this front, unfortunately). Anyway, I was wondering if you'd read the full article. It forces a rethinking of the issue, even if you've been on the side of less government interference.

Is this non-you-tube link that I clicked on a live thing happening right now? I'm a technological baby who doesn't always understand this stuff. What am I looking at? Where are these people exactly? Are they in front of gov't offices or what?

I can't really argue with what you've said. You sound awfully balanced with good priorities, so I'm not sitting over here in Cleveland, Ohio, worried for your children :)

On the research thing--too true. And I don't even want to get started on the adhd thing. The study that supposedly linked TV to adhd (which is how the non-discerning media reported it) actually linked TV with a short attention span which is not the same thing as adhd. My middle son has adhd--forget the label, just know that he's impulsive and demonstrates disinhibition (he "indulges in the present" as I call it, with little thought for planning and intentional action) which with him often takes the form of too much reading or getting absorbed in something to the exclusion of everything else, which is clearly NOT a lack of attention the way the TV study meant--and to reiterate he hardly watched TV. Not sure you followed that convoluted sentence, but it was meant to support that what people cite as "research" can be dubious or miss the mark in some way.

My handle, lateagain, is simply reflective of the ridiculous way in which I live my life.

Have a nice day.