• Forum
  • Lounge
  • (opinion)Child Entertainment between the

 
(opinion)Child Entertainment between the UK and the US

Pages: 12
closed account (4w0o1hU5)
Considering this is a lounge in which all but c++ related converstation is welcome, along with my c++ enquiries I would propose what I have long believed without retort, I propose my plead:

Although the US has/is producing teen/adult entertainment in greater quality and abundance in comparison to the UK, regarding the Child demographic, the UK simply exceeds. Un-debatably, greater effort and creativity is put into the UK's children entertainment(atleast by the free and iconic BBC). And therefore, considering wide children tv usage among both countries, development is likely faster among the UK TV-consumer Child demographic. The very stereotypes already reflect this. The US will be associated with looney tunes, which propose little intellectual benefit for developing children. while the UK will be associated with, most commonly, "Peppa pig", A british animated Television program designed to teach more than to amuse. And selecting a random area, the alphabet, the US counterpart (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUvlnKMSVDQ) to british animated "alphablocks"(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nexzrZZ5kQI) have differences in creativity, engagement(critical), education and quality which is all too blatant! Perhaps the US school system is not the only element to blame.

To summarise, I State the US may exceed the uk in teen/adult entertainment however, the UK exceeds in entertainment for the developing.
The US will be associated with looney tunes
It's like saying US is associated with Charlie Chaplin. Adults here grew up on Sesame Street. Kids are growing up on YouTube.
the UK will be associated with, most commonly, "Peppa pig"
Peppa pig is extremely popular in the US right now. I had no idea it was an import.
Let’s see...

  • random, suggestive user name with 5 posts...
  • lounge topics / non-C++ stuff
  • inflammatory topic about a misrepresented non-issue

I think we know you.
closed account (4w0o1hU5)
Funny, you once complained about derailment of your own topic, and now you are doing so.
Last edited on
Adults here grew up on Sesame Street.

More than a few US adults grew up before Sesame Street was a thang.

@Duthomas, I was pondering the same thing, maybe we should keep giving this person rope.
entertainment for the developing

^^ I find that to be an oxymoron. Either it is educational (which can be fun, but its not 'entertaining') or its entertaining.

The roadrunner: entertaining.
S. Street: educational.

Which would most kids prefer to watch, given a choice? If the answer involves a coyote, its a good bet that entertainment and education should be kept distinct.

I hated the educational stuff. Most of it had no plot, no theme, and was ADHD ish -- just hop from topic to topic with no cohesion, and it felt like extended school hours. The fun stuff had a start, a finish, and some semblance of a plot/story and all (mostly). And today, shows and commercials are so disjointed its no wonder to me at all that many kids have attention issues.
Last edited on
closed account (4w0o1hU5)
Since you appear to have background regarding it, @jonnin , there is another question about cartoons for which I would like to hear your answer

Do you think too many cartoons have/are causing mistreatment of your family, mainly parents, to appear as "cool" behaviour?
Last edited on
I believe that anyone who commits a crime or harms another person due to a video game, tv show, or other entertainment has something wrong with them. The entertainment may TRIGGER an existing condition, but is not the CAUSE. My argument is that millions upon millions of kids play violent games or grew up watching rather violent cartoons, or shows where people hurt each other. A very small number of people exposed to these things are doing things they should not be. Smaller than you can even use in valid statistics. Millionths of 1% or lower kind of values.

If stupid things in entertainment were the cause of violence and crime, there would not be very many people left on earth.

If you want to go deeper into head shrinkery from someone who does not even believe in it, I would even argue that these forms of entertainment are a safe release for some people who might otherwise do harm, making them at worst even out on damage caused, but IMHO, more people are helped than hurt by it. I have nothing to back that up.
Last edited on
closed account (4w0o1hU5)
However you must take into account children may be so very easy to manipulate. Cartoons will likely not make then transgress the laws of the land, (drill music does that), but they may encourage unconvenient and untimely behaviour, by glorifying acts of mischief.
That gets into deeper problems. A child that is misbehaving due to TV has one of the following problems:
- mental problems triggered, but not caused by, what is seen
- lack of positive influences (parents, teachers, etc) that keep them grounded in reality
- too much screen time
- lack of exercise / release of energy (tied to too much screen time)
- lack of focused environment (too much screen time, exposed to rapid change of focus too much, rather than concentrate on one thing for a long period like reading a book)
and similar problems.

This is just an extrapolation of what everyone knows: too much of things usually causes problems. If you eat only candy, youll get sick after a while. If there are no adults around to stop this, you have a problem. Same with TV.

Boils down to, either the kid has some sort of problem, or the parents are not doing their job. Can't blame the TV or shows for either of those things. There isnt any 100% solution when a kid has a disorder. Bad parenting is 100% fixable. For that matter, parents can prevent watching these cartoons if they want, if they feel it isnt good for the child. Millions of us grew up watching this stuff, and the vast majority of us were just fine. The % of people that do not have mental problems but do have behavioral problems due to tv is almost nonexistent compared to all kids who watched those shows.
Last edited on
closed account (4w0o1hU5)
100% solution when a kid has a disorder
I suppose you could force a child with an eating disorder to go on hunger strike, theoretically. And unfathomably, a child with an anger disorder was no longer bludgeoning or mangling innocent peers after a brain surgery. Prior to the mere thought of a neurologist to have his brain scanned, people chose to let him be, and consider his condition unresolvable.



The % of people that do not have mental problems but do have behavioral problems due to tv is almost nonexistent compared to all kids who watched those shows.
I see, can you recall an instance of a "conscious choice" you made, to abstain from watching a show before?
I see, can you recall an instance of a "conscious choice" you made, to abstain from watching a show before?

I have not had access to TV shows in over 2 decades. I do not care for the material, I don't want my money going to the politically motivated cable company or politically motivated hollywood, and I have better things to do with my time. So, ... all the time? I do watch the occasional movie, usually if its free.

-- preventing a kid from eating will lower its weight. Its also immoral, obviously. Or you could *gasp* force them to stop eating candy bars and have them on a reduced carb reasonable portion diet until they get it under control. This does not resolve the disorder, it is a workaround. The kid probably still wants to munch every candy bar in sight, but is being blocked from it by adults that know that sugar is a sometimes treat (to tie back to the SS show). Food ads in kids shows may make this worse, but here again, the problem was not caused by TV or food ads, its just being aggravated by it.

Anger would be harder. Some people have things that can't be fixed with medication or surgery or therapy or anything else. There is no link proving that these problems were caused by anything environmental, though they can be made better or worse by environment. Here again, parents/caretaker would be there, providing the best environment possible (if that means no tv, then make it so) for the person.

Last edited on
closed account (4w0o1hU5)
I have not had access to TV shows in over 2 decades. I do not care for the material, I don't want my money going to the politically motivated cable company or politically motivated hollywood, and I have better things to do with my time. So, ... all the time? I do watch the occasional movie, usually if its free.
Very commendable, most commendable. This is praiseworthy of you.
No logic, no benefit, all you gain, is one gains is loss of time. And an inconveniently large minority have gained loss of chastity. (however I am to thank it a few times)

-- preventing a kid from eating will lower its weight. Its also immoral, obviously. Or you could *gasp* force them to stop eating candy bars and have them on a reduced carb reasonable portion diet until they get it under control. This does not resolve the disorder, it is a workaround...
This wasn't regarding TV, I merely said that as you said
Isn't any disorder which may be %100 resolved
which theoretically is not completely true.

The ORIGINAL title question has now been answered, to me, however. Your implications have made their insight. Not to be ignorant, US children cable media seems to have been made with duty, not delight. Perhaps it is now clear, why simple questions are not answered with lack of hesitation in concerning abundance across the US. Standard british child service really lacks food adverts, let alone junk food. Children love to learn from it (it isn't "added schooltime")!, and I can say as a witness of a child growing with it, it's assists mental developement, now recognises numbers (symbols (1,2,3,4...)) merely due to one show, https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/b08bzfnh/numberblocks





Last edited on
US cable media, like almost everything here, was made to produce money. Mostly by getting kids to watch ads for toys and junk food.

I think something translated poorly between what I was saying, and that we probably agree about the mental problems. Its a difficult subject.

We stick our kids in school for 8-10 hour days (10 if they enforce sports after, and many do). Adding another hour or two of sitting there listening to educational stuff is too much here, and after the shows, they would have another session of doing homework. There isnt time to BE a kid anymore in the US, from what I see.
closed account (4w0o1hU5)
Nobody cares about what(or who) shall be the most critical part of the future, it seems. How are children to become prodigies, when elders will show concern merely for seeing them reading a book, while other children are running around. They're failing their own future. With increased indoor times, there's more time to do what your obliged to do, and nobody has changed the world, by exacting their obligations.

It's tragic. But I guess they'll live to see themselves demand a drone at their service for food.
Last edited on
Geez, so anyone who disagrees with you, GolBer, and your silly premise, doesn't care about the future or children or anything.

Talk about an over-inflated sense of ego.
How are children to become prodigies
Why is it important to "become a prodigy"? If you've decided that that's how you want to spend your life then good for you. Nobody has to decide like you.

nobody has changed the world
Is it good to change the world? The world can change for the better or for the worse. It's difficult to tell which, since we don't have access to parallel universes.
Is it a bad thing not to change the world?

what your obliged to do [...] obligations
Psst. Let me tell you a secret: there are no obligations in life, other than those that you make for yourself.
You're probably under your 20s, so I think this is an important question. If you think you have obligations you should ask yourself, "am I doing what I'm doing because this is how I want to spend (as in, 'use up') my life, or because I've been told this is how I should spend it?"
Remember: regardless of how long, your time on Earth is finite. Whenever you do something you're not doing something else.
At one time I wanted to do what I could to change the world......

But no one gave me the source code.
How are children to become prodigies

When everyone is special, then no one is.

You might want to go watch the Pixar movie, "The Incredibles" and take more than a few notes.
closed account (4w0o1hU5)
Geez, so anyone who disagrees with you, GolBer, and your silly premise, doesn't care about the future or children or anything.
Not at all. Not everyone has to become productive. The consumers will always outnumber the producers.

It's not that they need to, @helios, but adult attitudes to aspiring ones, implied by a few ted talks, is inconvenient. I didn't say everyone needs to be a prodigy, but there's certainly less than decades ago.

Obligations, @helios, which if not exacted, will result in your ridding of your time, may result in your untimely demise, inflicted by who is 7x most likely to send you to death, than anybody else.


Talk about an over-inflated sense of ego.
How did I claim I am superior?

there are no obligations in life, other than those that you make for yourself.
Suppose a tsunami was to drown your city in 3 hours. You would consider saving your family via your vehicle as merely voluntary. Shan't you have some sense of duty?
Last edited on
Pages: 12