4 ms·

> I think this ship sailed like eighty years ago... Seriously just about every successful kids show from my youth - with the possible partial exception of Sesam

> I think this ship sailed like eighty years ago... Seriously just about every successful kids show from my youth - with the possible partial exception of Sesame Street - were thinly disguised toy advertisements. I grew up on Arthur, Mr Rogers, and Sesame Street. It’s certainly possible to have quality noncommercial children’s programming.

falcolas 7y ago
That's easily less than two hours per week of content (more if you have a kid today and can take advantage of backlogs). Sure, it's possible, but not in the quantities consumed by children.
- jethro_tell 7y ago
  Perhaps the problem is the quantity? I'm not sure what world we're thinking we should just give our kids a phone and let them watch youtube as long as they want? I don't think that negates the garbage content and algos from youtube, and we avoid youtube with our kids, but if kids are running out of quality content, send them outside and lock the door.
  - falcolas 7y ago
    > I'm not sure what world we're thinking we should just give our kids a phone and let them watch youtube as long as they want? What we're thinking is "I need an hour free from entertaining my child, this entertains them." It's quite simple, it's the modern equivalent of "go outside and play" for a generation where kids going outside for hours of loosely supervised play is frowned upon by society.
    - jethro_tell 7y ago
      I'd disagree that it's a modern equivalent for the child. Maybe the same thing for you. There are plenty of times I need a break. It only takes an extra minute to redirect to something that takes effort for the child. Remember when your mom said, 'if you're board, you can clean your room' then you found something to do? Try that instead of handing them a phone. It's funny that people are worried about letting kids play around their neighbors outside but letting any random person have access to them from YouTube is preferred? I can at least vet my neighbors. I don't give a fuck what people think. There's no laws against it. I send my kids outside and tell them to come home for dinner. I live in a major metro in the US. They visit friends, neighbor dogs, bring home flowers from neighbor's gardens. It's hard to believe that you can trust a kid on the internet if you can't trust them outside by themselves. And let's be honest, the chances are actually higher that you're a threat to your kid than some random person trolling the neighborhood. Where did common sense and doing what's clearly best for your kid go? edit: if you give your kid one hour per day to take a break, you need to come up with 7 hours of viable content a week. That should be pretty easy to do without going through youtube. There's stuff out there that is reasonable and we haven't even dipped into minecraft.
    - SomeOldThrow 7y ago
      > It's quite simple, it's the modern equivalent of "go outside and play” I feel bad for the kid.
sdenton4 7y ago
It absolutely is... but clutching pearls about toy advertisements at this point in history doesn't really add to the conversation.
- SomeOldThrow 7y ago
  There are few problems in childrens TV you can't attribute to advertising. It's absolutely relevant.
- graphememes 7y ago
  Have you ever stopped and thought, hm, maybe I'm perpetuating it? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SD0apYFz5gg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SD0apYFz5gg
- bokchoi 7y ago
  That seems rather defeatist, doesn't it? Also, please don't dismiss someone else's perspective as "clutching pearls" -- that's not really fair.
naravara 7y ago
>I grew up on Arthur, Mr Rogers, and Sesame Street. It’s certainly possible to have quality noncommercial children’s programming. All of those were products of PBS. So it seems like if we want it to be possible it needs to be primarily funded by donors, grants, and public spending.

falcolas 7y ago

That's easily less than two hours per week of content (more if you have a kid today and can take advantage of backlogs). Sure, it's possible, but not in the quantities consumed by children.

jethro_tell 7y ago
Perhaps the problem is the quantity? I'm not sure what world we're thinking we should just give our kids a phone and let them watch youtube as long as they want? I don't think that negates the garbage content and algos from youtube, and we avoid youtube with our kids, but if kids are running out of quality content, send them outside and lock the door.
- falcolas 7y ago
  > I'm not sure what world we're thinking we should just give our kids a phone and let them watch youtube as long as they want? What we're thinking is "I need an hour free from entertaining my child, this entertains them." It's quite simple, it's the modern equivalent of "go outside and play" for a generation where kids going outside for hours of loosely supervised play is frowned upon by society.
  - jethro_tell 7y ago
    I'd disagree that it's a modern equivalent for the child. Maybe the same thing for you. There are plenty of times I need a break. It only takes an extra minute to redirect to something that takes effort for the child. Remember when your mom said, 'if you're board, you can clean your room' then you found something to do? Try that instead of handing them a phone. It's funny that people are worried about letting kids play around their neighbors outside but letting any random person have access to them from YouTube is preferred? I can at least vet my neighbors. I don't give a fuck what people think. There's no laws against it. I send my kids outside and tell them to come home for dinner. I live in a major metro in the US. They visit friends, neighbor dogs, bring home flowers from neighbor's gardens. It's hard to believe that you can trust a kid on the internet if you can't trust them outside by themselves. And let's be honest, the chances are actually higher that you're a threat to your kid than some random person trolling the neighborhood. Where did common sense and doing what's clearly best for your kid go? edit: if you give your kid one hour per day to take a break, you need to come up with 7 hours of viable content a week. That should be pretty easy to do without going through youtube. There's stuff out there that is reasonable and we haven't even dipped into minecraft.
  - SomeOldThrow 7y ago
    > It's quite simple, it's the modern equivalent of "go outside and play” I feel bad for the kid.

sdenton4 7y ago

It absolutely is... but clutching pearls about toy advertisements at this point in history doesn't really add to the conversation.

SomeOldThrow 7y ago
There are few problems in childrens TV you can't attribute to advertising. It's absolutely relevant.
graphememes 7y ago
Have you ever stopped and thought, hm, maybe I'm perpetuating it? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SD0apYFz5gg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SD0apYFz5gg
bokchoi 7y ago
That seems rather defeatist, doesn't it? Also, please don't dismiss someone else's perspective as "clutching pearls" -- that's not really fair.

naravara 7y ago

>I grew up on Arthur, Mr Rogers, and Sesame Street. It’s certainly possible to have quality noncommercial children’s programming. All of those were products of PBS. So it seems like if we want it to be possible it needs to be primarily funded by donors, grants, and public spending.