Freeband TV News

Children’s TV watching reaches new records – not necessarily good news

Robin Hague

Television might have to act, before being forced to

Cheer or lament. Children are watching more and more television, even two year olds. While this may be cause for celebration among the manufacturers of salty, sugary foods and the advertising industry, it should be cause for concern for the rest of us, especially within television itself.

For those in the television business, children’s viewing is not an issue that can be swept under the carpet, as controversial problems resulting from children’s TV watching make the industry vulnerable to vote-grabbing political interference.

Nielsen reports American children aged between 2 and 11 “are watching more and more television than they have in years.” Eight years in fact. Nielsen’s findings show kids aged 2-5 now spend more than 32 hours a week on average in front of a TV screen.

The older segment, aged 6-11, spend a little less time, about 28 hours per week. Nielsen believes this is due in part to the fact they are likely to be attending school for longer hours. We hope.

The breakdown shows 2 to 5 year olds watching just under 25 hours of live TV per week, an hour and a half of recorded TV, more than five hours in front of DVDs or videos and just over an hour on games consoles. A two year old on a games console? It gives new meaning to the word Wii.

Older children, the 6 to 11 year olds, watch just over 22 hours of live TV, an hour of recorded television, about three hours of DVDs or videos and nearly two and a half hours in front of games.

This is clearly not the fault of the television industry. No-one is forcing kids to watch TV, they reasons they do are manifold. For example, many factors are at play in modern parenting, ranging from employment and financial pressures, through to long sought improvements in the lives of women.

Nonetheless, a two-year old’s television watching will have occurred with the consent or encouragement of an adult, parent, guardian or otherwise.

There is significant concern over the effects any television watching has on children. In his book ‘Remotely Controlled,’ psychologist Dr Aric Sigman warns too much television viewing can result in stunted brain development in children, higher risks of ADHD, slowdowns in the body’s metabolic rate and permanent damage to children’s educational progress.

Television can be a leading cause of stress, anxiety and depression among children.

For example, in the wake of the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington, a study in the New England Journal of Medicine described how children who viewed extended television coverage of the attacks demonstrated an increase in substantial stress symptoms. 35 percent of children had one or more substantial stress symptoms and no amount of discussion with their parents affected the degree of stress they experienced.

‘The Formal Pace of Sesame Street Over 26 Years’ is a report that found the high editing rate of commercial children’s’ television programmes corrupts a child’s attention skills because “they demand constant attentional shifts by their viewers.” Incidentally, scenes from Sesame Street tended to last 70 percent longer than commercial children’s TV scenes, perhaps explaining the attraction of Bert, Ernie, Big Bird and Elmo to psychotropic drug users.

An essay from two academics at Harvard Medical School states “television viewing is exactly the opposite of what toddlers need for their development.” The essay, ‘Say No To Teletubbies,’ says young children’s television viewing should be postponed as long as possible.”

Advertising to children has been another major concern, with commercials for sweets and snacks blamed for increases in childhood obesity and other early onset health problems.

This has been addressed in the UK for example by controls on food advertising to children. McDonalds has successfully worked with this, responding with commercials extolling the virtues of ‘five a day’ fruit and vegetable portions, available in its restaurants.

There are sensible ways for children to watch television, their viewing rationed and controlled by their parents. In the UK, ‘Viewtrition: A Parent’s Guide to Quality TV for Kids’ was developed with the support of Freeview to help parents make the best choices for their children’s TV consumption.

However, there is no consensus as to how much television a child of any particular age should watch. Dr Sigman maintains it’s the very act of viewing that is harmful, affecting children’s dopamine levels and behaviours.

The American Academy of Paediatrics recommends a complete ban on TV for children younger than two.

Such a ban can only be enforced by parents. However, the debate around children’s television makes the television industry as a whole liable to become the victim of hysteria and ill-conceived legislation.

Issues surrounding children and their care are hot buttons for politicians. No-one can successfully argue against policy or legislation that is claimed to be aimed at protecting children, no matter how poorly it is thought out and framed.

In fact, the only argument that can be had is around the rigour of the legislation, resulting in increasingly fevered law-making. European television is particularly vulnerable to this kind of misguided approach, with the EU able to set various levels of binding legislation, some of it extremely welcome, other parts contrary to the long-held customs and liberties of individual European communities.

Faced with this possibility, it may be healthy for the television industry to take a pro-active role in rigorously examining the children’s TV market.

We have seen how Freeview in the UK has already taken a lead in this, sponsoring the Viewtrition study and report. Television should contemplate establishing an industry-wide forum on children’s TV and sponsor further study and recommendations.

This must be done sincerely; it would be all too easy for television to be accused of publishing an emollient, self-serving defence of its offering to children. Far better is to reach out to those recognised specialists in the field of children’s behaviour and psychology, fund new work by them and live with the results.

Better to take the lumps now, rather than waiting for a struggling party or individual politician to take up arms against the industry, using a populist appeal on behalf of those fat, square-eyed, attention-deficit, high blood-pressure blobs in the living room we used to call kids.

Latest Press Releases