3 ms·

There’s a very solid argument for TV as stunting people’s development. There’s lack of reading, albeit not necessarily due to television (https://www.theatlant

There’s a very solid argument for TV as stunting people’s development. There’s lack of reading, albeit not necessarily due to television (https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/01/the-decline-of-the-american-book-lover/283222/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/01/the-dec...) There’s a direct link between television and obesity (http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/75/5/807 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/75/5/807) And more general health dangers (http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/newsplus/prolonged-television-viewing-linked-to-increased-health-risks/ http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/newsplus/prolonged-tel...) Etcetera

hydrox24 9y ago
One substantial benefit of Television was that everyone was simultaneously watching the same thing. This increased political homogeneity by providing a shared belief system, or at least some more common ground. Such homogeneity is correlated strongly with stability and prosperity on a nation-state level. This was particularly true from 1950 until 1970 or so, before cable television exploded (it remained true for longer in smaller nations without wide cable TV adoption). I think it matches up with a comparatively bi-partisan period in (mainstream) politics around the western world. Of course, there are disadvantages too, but homogeneity is looking increasingly valuable as legislatures around the Western world succumb to polarisation.
- pls2halp 9y ago
  But you can also argue that that polarisation is just a step away from homogeneity.
  - hydrox24 9y ago
    I'm arguing precisely this. Perhaps you misread my comment?
- dredmorbius 9y ago
  Via the medium of radio, that worked just dandy in 1930s Germany.
- jessaustin 9y ago
  Lots of current problems were created by that unexamined unanimity, so one would have to try much harder to successfully argue it was a "benefit".
  - hydrox24 9y ago
    What problems were created by the unexamined unanimity? I am not trying to argue there were no downsides, only that we should account for the benefits. The comments I responded to seemed to be ommitting the existence of some benefits. Whether the benefits outweigh the damage is a more complex question.
igravious 9y ago
Etcetera is not a reason.

hydrox24 9y ago

One substantial benefit of Television was that everyone was simultaneously watching the same thing. This increased political homogeneity by providing a shared belief system, or at least some more common ground. Such homogeneity is correlated strongly with stability and prosperity on a nation-state level. This was particularly true from 1950 until 1970 or so, before cable television exploded (it remained true for longer in smaller nations without wide cable TV adoption). I think it matches up with a comparatively bi-partisan period in (mainstream) politics around the western world. Of course, there are disadvantages too, but homogeneity is looking increasingly valuable as legislatures around the Western world succumb to polarisation.

pls2halp 9y ago
But you can also argue that that polarisation is just a step away from homogeneity.
- hydrox24 9y ago
  I'm arguing precisely this. Perhaps you misread my comment?
dredmorbius 9y ago
Via the medium of radio, that worked just dandy in 1930s Germany.
jessaustin 9y ago
Lots of current problems were created by that unexamined unanimity, so one would have to try much harder to successfully argue it was a "benefit".
- hydrox24 9y ago
  What problems were created by the unexamined unanimity? I am not trying to argue there were no downsides, only that we should account for the benefits. The comments I responded to seemed to be ommitting the existence of some benefits. Whether the benefits outweigh the damage is a more complex question.

igravious 9y ago

Etcetera is not a reason.