Re: DSM: Re: Re: Re: Television

From: Warren McMillan (warren@bmts.com)
Date: Fri Dec 07 2001 - 11:41:40 EST


Wow! Mike Sadofsky is certainly not benign.;-)

I made the point that TV is not benign in response to Evelyn's assertion
that "TV has no agenda...". On the points that you raise, however...
Mike writes:
> "I always felt and continue to feel that the role of parents and adults
> in contact with children is to help them understand ...".
...and:
>"If kids understand this...".
My response is, adults and parents don't so kids don't.

Warren

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Sadofsky <sadofsky@mediaone.net>
To: <discuss-sudbury-model@sudval.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: DSM: Re: Re: Re: Television

> WOW!
> I try to stay away from adding to these threads, but sometimes I am
> driven to add my perspective.
>
> Warren writes below:
> >TV is not benign. Every image and every word is carefully
> >crafted or filtered by anonymous agents in order to condition your needs,
> >wants, opinions, preferences and attitudes to match their own political
or
> >commercial agendas.
>
> Is your goal to raise children in a "benign" environment?
> So TV isn't benign.
> Newspapers aren't benign.
> Magazines aren't benign.
> Books, whether fiction or non-fiction aren't benign.
> Grocery stores and convenience stores aren't benign.
> Farming, ranching, dining, and practicing medicine aren't benign.
> Statements by politicians and government agencies aren't benign.
> Advocacy agencies aren't benign.
> Games aren't benign.
> Parents aren't benign.
> People aren't benign.
>
> I always felt and continue to feel that the role of parents and adults
> in contact with children is to help them understand that much of what
> we experience has been shaped to meet some set of goals. If kids
> understand this and seek to create a perspective for interpretation
> that recognizes the biases and objectives that others hold, then we've
> accomplished a great deal.
>
> Mike Sadofsky
>
>
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:49:12 -0500, you wrote:
>
> >If you have a problem with traditional schooling, surely one of the
reasons
> >is that its mandate is to 'shape' or condition children according to an
> >agenda predetermined by some anonymous bureaucrats in a department of
> >education somewhere. You reject traditional schooling in response and
remove
> >your child from this harmful conditioning and send him/her to a place
that
> >is free of this kind of manipulation ie. a SV school. Yet, you allow
your
> >child to be influenced by the equally manipulative environment of the
> >television. TV is not benign. Every image and every word is carefully
> >crafted or filtered by anonymous agents in order to condition your needs,
> >wants, opinions, preferences and attitudes to match their own political
or
> >commercial agendas.
> >If you would send you children to a SVschool, surely one of the reasons
is
> >so that they can come to know themselves; to find out who they are and
what
> >is their purpose. You reject traditional schooling because it distracts
> >them from this quest with its overloaded timetable and forced learning.
> >Television is the master of distraction. It can literally keep your
> >children from themselves for hours at a time, day after day. As a
> >distraction, television easily outperforms schooling.
> >If you would send you children to a SVschool, surely one of the reasons
is
> >so that they are free to pursue their own interests. You reject
traditional
> >schooling because of its mandated curriculum. Television has its own
> >curriculum; its own mass messages that we all get, and get continuously
> >again and again in multiple contexts. We eventually internalize these
> >messages and they come to shape us in subtle ways no school curriculum
> >designer could ever dream of. What is the TV curriculum? Seeking
pleasure
> >is the meaning of life; accumulation is the way to happiness; respect and
> >courtesy are uncool; information is knowledge; violence works.
> >While we worry about schooling and make sacrifices to ensure our children
> >are safe from its detrimental affects, the real monster sits smug in our
own
> >livingrooms working its magic on our unsuspecting kids.
> >Television is, pound for pound, far more toxic for children than
schooling.
> >
> >Warren
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: <Evfocus@aol.com>
> >To: <discuss-sudbury-model@sudval.org>
> >Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 6:04 PM
> >Subject: Re: DSM: Re: Re: Re: Television
> >
> >
> >> There is a huge difference between college and TV. College is
interested
> >in
> >> giving people what they "should want" just like schools. TV has no
agenda
> >> about what people should want. They spend millions finding out what
people
> >> really want.
> >> In a way they are similiar to Sudbury in that way, there is no value
> >> judgement placed on what people want. It doesn't matter whether they
want
> >> mud wrestling or politcal discussion they give them whatever they want
to
> >> watch.
> >> I actually make a point of trying not to be to judgmental about my
> >daughters
> >> TV watching because I think all I end up doing is communicating that
their
> >> judgement is flawed.
> >> If schools had to hold interest the way television does, they would be
> >much
> >> better places. Right now we have a vicious cycle. Schools say to kids
"We
> >> don't care what you think or feel this education is good for you"
> >> Television listens to what they want, and that includes antischool,
> >> antiauthority programming which may be caused by a society that refuses
to
> >> respect their wishes.
> >> Imagine if schools had to get the Neilson ratings shows do?
> >> Evelyn Hardesty
> >> DVS Parent
> >>
> >> ===========
> >>
> >> If you wish to be removed from this mailing list, please send an email
TO
> >> majordomo@sudval.org (do NOT reply to the mailing list) with the
following
> >> phrase in the BODY (not the subject) of the message, replacing
> >> "email@host.dom" with the email address that you subscribed under:
> >>
> >> unsubscribe discuss-sudbury-model email@host.dom
> >>
> >> If you are interested in the subject, but the volume of mail sent is
too
> >much,
> >> you may wish to consider unsubscribing from this list and subscribing
to
> >> "dsm-digest"
> >>
> >> This mailing list is archived at http://www.sudval.org/~sdg/archives
> >>
> >
> >
> >===========
> >
> >If you wish to be removed from this mailing list, please send an email TO
> >majordomo@sudval.org (do NOT reply to the mailing list) with the
following
> >phrase in the BODY (not the subject) of the message, replacing
> >"email@host.dom" with the email address that you subscribed under:
> >
> >unsubscribe discuss-sudbury-model email@host.dom
> >
> >If you are interested in the subject, but the volume of mail sent is too
much,
> >you may wish to consider unsubscribing from this list and subscribing to
> >"dsm-digest"
> >
> >This mailing list is archived at http://www.sudval.org/~sdg/archives
>
>
> ===========
>
> If you wish to be removed from this mailing list, please send an email TO
> majordomo@sudval.org (do NOT reply to the mailing list) with the following
> phrase in the BODY (not the subject) of the message, replacing
> "email@host.dom" with the email address that you subscribed under:
>
> unsubscribe discuss-sudbury-model email@host.dom
>
> If you are interested in the subject, but the volume of mail sent is too
much,
> you may wish to consider unsubscribing from this list and subscribing to
> "dsm-digest"
>
> This mailing list is archived at http://www.sudval.org/~sdg/archives
>

===========

If you wish to be removed from this mailing list, please send an email TO
majordomo@sudval.org (do NOT reply to the mailing list) with the following
phrase in the BODY (not the subject) of the message, replacing
"email@host.dom" with the email address that you subscribed under:

unsubscribe discuss-sudbury-model email@host.dom

If you are interested in the subject, but the volume of mail sent is too much,
you may wish to consider unsubscribing from this list and subscribing to
"dsm-digest"

This mailing list is archived at http://www.sudval.org/~sdg/archives



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Mar 27 2002 - 19:39:48 EST