“TV viewing is an outgrowth of other characteristics of the home environment that lead to lower test scores,” Schmidt said.
Other research suggests these include less mother-and-baby interaction and less reading to children.
Unlike the Australians, the British government does not offer any guidance on how much TV toddlers should be allowed to watch. It has introduced an “Early Years Foundation Stage” for under-fives, which implies that television should be part of children’s learning. Carers, the guidance states, should help children become familiar with “everyday technology” and use it to support their learning. Only the French government has been brave enough to ban stations from showing programs targeted at under-threes. Last year it also insisted that overseas cable channels must incorporate a tobacco-style warning: “Watching television can slow the development of children under three, even when it involves channels aimed specifically at them.”
Aric Sigman, a UK psychologist and author of The Spoilt Generation, a broadside against permissive parenting, says while governments are happy to offer advice on sun block and portions of fruit and vegetables, they are less willing to provide guidelines about TV.
“Of course they don’t want to because it is a vote-loser,” he said. “It is society’s favorite pastime and it makes parents feel guilty. The convenience of us parents is seen as paramount as opposed to the well being of our children. When it comes to our childrens’ well being, our guilt as parents has to come second.”
Part of the problem, Sigman said, is we have a nostalgic view of our own experience of television when we were young.
“We say, ‘I watched Blue Peter and I’m OK,’” Sigman said. “But the editing speeds and the colors and the number of hours spent watching TV and the age at which TV watching starts are a whole different thing now. We can’t compare now with before.”
Rich agrees. Television is so different now that the “it didn’t harm me” argument is irrelevant, he said. Instead, frustratingly, he finds the debate around young children watching TV is played out as part of the culture wars in which the educated, ruling classes of academia and, when they dare, politicians, are perceived as self-righteously restricting the freedom of expression of ordinary people.
Rich instead hopes the debate could be examined more neutrally — and scientifically — as an issue of “health and development.” He accepts that TV is not like smoking: it is not simply bad for your health. He would like a return to a “respect” for TV and other electronic screens so they are treated like a trip to the theatre or a novel, as something to be consciously watched in moderation.
This may sound like another culture wars value judgment but, as he argues, it is not about good or bad TV but about the good and bad ways in which we consume it.
ADDITIONAL REPORTING BY TONI O’LOUGHLIN
RSS