|
CounterPunch
November
14, 2002
Why Newsweek
is Bad for Kids
by RUSSELL MOKHIBER
and ROBERT WEISSMAN
Did you see the cover story of Newsweek magazine
last week?
The cover story is titled, "Why
TV is Good for Kids."
What are we to expect from Newsweek next
week?
Why Soda Pop is Good for Kids.
Why Sedentary Living is Good for Kids.
 Why Obesity is Good for Kids.
Some things are good for kids.
Reading is good for kids.
Love and caring is good for kids.
Teaching is good for kids.
Running, playing basketball and baseball
and tennis and swimming are good for kids.
But don't try and insult us by telling
us that sitting in front of a TV is good for kids.
Why, against all common sense, is Newsweek
going to try and convince us that television is good for kids?
Well, one reason might be: Newsweek is
owned by the Washington Post Company, which owns a sprawling
cable company and six broadcast stations around the country.
Of course, nowhere in the article does
Newsweek tell us this.
And how does Newsweek try and convince
us that TV is good for kids?
They trot out an expert, Daniel Anderson,
a professor of psychology at the University of Massachusetts,
who claims that TV is good for kids.
But what Newsweek doesn't tell us is
Anderson is a paid consultant to a variety of television networks
and advertising interests.
His clients include: NBC, CBS, Universal
Pictures, Sony, General Mills, the Leo Burnett ad agency, Nickelodeon
and the National Association of Broadcasters.
The article says that TV is a good thing
because kids learn from television and parents are "looking
for TV to help them do a better job of raising kids."
But Frank Vespe, executive director of
the TV TurnOff Network (<www.tvturnoff.org>), points out
that the article misses a crucial issue: the average American
school child spends more time in front of the television each
year -- about 1,023 hours -- than in the classroom -- about 900
hours.
"This amount of television -- more
than twice what anyone thinks is a healthy amount -- has negative
consequences for health, education, and family time," Vespe
said.
This amount of television watching actually
hurts children.
Vespe points to studies documenting how
kids gain weight from watching TV, and that TV reinforces sex
roles and stereotyping.
Voracious TV-watching kids turn into
voracious TV-watching adults. The average American watches four
hours a day, 1460 hours a year, about two full months, 24 hours
a day, every year.
Newsweek did run a one-page counterpoint
("No It's Not") to its "TV Is Good for Kids"
eight pager.
The "No It's Not" counterarticle
is written by a mom who points out that the American Academy
of Pediatrics recommends no television for children younger than
two and a maximum of two hours a day of "screen time"
-- TV, computers or videogames -- for older kids.
We rang up the author of the "Why
TV Is Good for Kids" article, Daniel McGinn.
McGinn immediately points out that at
the end of his article, he did write that the expert, Anderson,
advised on a handful of television shows during their conception.
"People who help create television
shows get paid to do so," McGinn tells us.
Well, yes, but Anderson gets paid to
do much more.
According to his own bio, Anderson has
been paid by NBC and by General Mills to consult "on television
viewing behavior."
And he's been paid by the Leo Burnett
ad agency to consult on "children's cognitive processing
of television."
That's a touch more than helping to "create
television shows."
We asked Newsweek's McGinn why he didn't
inform his readers that Newsweek is owned by the Washington Post
which owns a cable company and six broadcast news outlets.
"Newsweek is owned by the Washington
Post," he says. "I'm not sure what the Washington Post
owns today."
You mean you don't know that the Washington
Post Company owns television outlets?
It's right on the company's web site:
WDIV in Detroit, KPRC in Houston, WPLG in Miami, WKMP in Orlando,
KSAT in San Antonio and WJXT in Jacksonville.
The Post also owns Cable ONE, the owner
and operator of cable television systems serving subscribers
across the country.
Earlier, McGinn left a message on our
machine saying he was willing to talk with us "at whatever
length."
At this point, though, McGinn decides
the conversation has gone on long enough.
"Who do you write for?" he
asks. We tell him.
"Have a great day, bud." And
he hangs up.
Russell Mokhiber
is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Corporate Crime Reporter.
Robert Weissman is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based
Multinational
Monitor, and co-director of Essential Action. They are
co-authors of Corporate
Predators: The Hunt for MegaProfits and the Attack on Democracy
(Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1999.)
Yesterday's
Features
Jeffrey St. Clair
The Totem
Thieves
Patrick Cockburn
America's
Saddam Obsession
Anthony Gancarski
Defending
MOM
Rick Giombetti
Wellstone
Assasinated?
The Onus is on the Conspiracy Theorists
Linda Heard
Horseman
Without a Horse
Debate Rages Over an Egyptian TV Series
Ben Roberts
Is It Possible to Underestimate Bush's Intelligence?
New
Print Edition of CounterPunch Available Exclusively
to Subscribers:
- The Shafts of Death: Bush, Coal Mines, and Death
in the Tunnels;
- Speak Memory!: Carter and the Draft;
- Daniel Pipes' World: Smearing Pro-Arab Academics;
- Ashcroft's Gays: the War on Free Speech;
- Saddam's Amnesty: Could It Happen Here?
- Criminalizing Dissent: a history and preview;
- Iraq 1987: When the Going Was Good;
- Egypt in Turmoil: an Anthropologist's Account;
- Green and Grounded: Profiled at the Gate.
Remember, the CounterPunch website is
supported exclusively by subscribers to our newsletter. Our worldwide
web audience is soaring , with about seven million hits a month
now. This is inspiring, but the work involved also compels us
to remind you more urgently than ever to subscribe and/or make
a (tax deductible) donation if you can afford it. If you find our site useful please: Subscribe
Now!
Or Call Toll Free 1 800 840 3683
home / subscribe
/ about us
/ books
/ archives
/ search
/ links
/
|