DadTalk

Virtual Worlds for Kids to Flood the Market

Shhhh. I need your help keeping a secret from my children. Don’t tell them about Webkinz or Club Penguin. Ever.

I’m especially talking to you, gift-givers. I will be checking all, cuddly, stuffed animals for  “Webkinz” tags. If I find one, be prepared to cough up a gift receipt pronto.

To be honest, I didn’t even know what Webkinz was until about two weeks ago. But at a recent holiday party, a boy about Seth’s age was dragging one around by the ear. The 4-year-old freaked whenever he lost sight of the toy.

The boy’s dad explained the concept to me: You get the doll, go online and activate an account. From there, you can feed and take care of your Beagle, Alley Cat or Brown Arabian. Personally, I’d go for the Bull Frog, since cats and dogs dominate the market. Besides, it would be a lot cooler to feed it insects than stinky dog food.

So you are probably wondering, what’s wrong with these virtual worlds? Harmless fun, right?

Overheard

Seth is on the local TV news! Well, sort of. You can barely see him spinning like a top near the end of the report. I had a hard time getting that screen grab above.

TV Is Still Getting Worse? Sorry, We Didn’t Notice

Has TV vulgarity taken a turn for the worse? Sorry, we didn’t notice since ours is off again.

When we considered moving this summer, we plugged in the free cable and kept the channel firmly fixed on HGTV. My family especially loved Design Star, by the way.

But now that school is back in season, I’ve disconnected the infernal thing. Here’s why:

McDonald’s Wrappers Makes Food Taste Better; Obesity Marches on

Carrots wrapped in McDonald’s packaging tasted better to the children surveyed than did carrots in a plain wrapper. (No such ads exist because McDonald’s doesn’t sell carrots).
– Los Angeles Times on new study

Think about that for a minute. Researchers package carrots and hamburgers in plain white wrappers and an identical item in McDonald’s wrappers. Children as young as 3 say the McDonald’s-wrapped food tastes better.

The more TVs in a child’s home, the more likely McDonald’s-wrapped food wins the taste test, according to a study from researchers at Stanford University and Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital. The same holds true for fries, chicken nuggets and milk.

Interestingly, my kids who have probably never seen a McDonald’s TV ad, don’t like the food. In fact, the only thing they like about McDonald’s are the toys.

The study reinforces the idea that kids, who ranged from 3 to 5 years old in this study, consider commercials as authoritative as CNN. (What that says about adults is another matter.) Psychologists say that even 8-year-olds have trouble recognizing an ad’s persuasive influence.

Well, that may explain why the fight against obesity is failing, reports The Associated Press via USA Today. Not a single state saw a drop in the obesity rate, while it climbed in 31.

From the article:

Health officials say the latest state rankings provide evidence that the nation has a public health crisis on its hands.

Unfortunately, we’re treating it like a mere inconvenience instead of the emergency that it is,” said Dr. James Marks, senior vice president at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, a philanthropy devoted to improving health care.

Which states are faring the worst?

1. Mississippi
2. Alabama
3. West Virginia
4. Louisiana
5. Kentucky
6. Tennessee
7. Arkansas
8. Indiana, South Carolina (tie)
9. Texas

Colorado continues to be the fittest state.

Notice a trend here? The losers are poor Southern states.

While it may seem counterintuitive, junk food is less expensive than fruits and vegetables. And poor neighborhoods are less likely to have grocery stores stocking fruits and vegetables on their shelves. Fast food chains are often a primary source of food.

Which brings us back to the McDonald’s story. One suggestion to fight the obesity problem is to have fast-food chains advertise healthier fare.

“The only way you’re gonna get a big successful commercial campaign is from a big company. What if Ronald McDonald introduced kids to broccoli. . . . “Joanne Cantor, director of the Center for Communication Research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, tells the Times.

Here’s my suggestion short of taking TV sets away from children’s homes: Create a national advertising campaign, complete with cool characters that kids will identify with. Then adorn apples, oranges, bananas and asparagus – preferably organic – with stickers that illustrate our new mascots. If executed well, suddenly broccoli will taste better.

Yeah, I know chances for success here are slim to none, but hey, a concerned dad can dream.

My Family Is Being Terrorized by HGTV

I made the mistake recently of hooking up cable TV in our bedroom. My wife and I essentially have been living free of that monstrosity for almost nine years.

After being given a second TV as a gift, I figured I would put it in our bedroom so that my wife and I could occasionally watch something relaxing at night. It seemed “reasonable.” (For some reason, the cable works in that room, but not our living room.)

Almost by magic, the remote was permanently affixed to HGTV. After all, the commercials are rarely about food or pharmaceuticals. And I suppose it’s better than FOX News.

When I mentioned this to another parent, she said, “Oh yeah, we always keep the TV on HGTV. That way, if my kids walk into the room, I don’t have to worry about them watching a Lucky Charms commercial. Or a violent cartoon. Or …” By the way, did I mention they’re house hunting?

Sadly, there is a HUGE downside to watching this network. While Lael could care less, Seth is mesmerized by the handsome men and women tearing out walls and creating an “open, airy space.” Seth, who wants to be an architect and a truck driver and an engineer and a doctor and an astronaut and a train engineer and a musician and a construction worker when he grows up, probably knows more about curb appeal than half of Chicago’s homeowners.

Great view of Lake Michigan notwithstanding, Anne’s obsession with the show might have something to do with being crammed like sardines into our 750-square-feet apartment. That and the fact that the kids have trashed everything we own simply because there is no place to hide our stuff. Oh, and I think Anne is tired of drinking wine out of mason jars instead of our wine glasses, which are still in California storage.

Because we think housing prices are not done collapsing, we figure our best plan of action is to rent a house even though I will really, really miss the great view. It might not be enough to dispose of the post-ownership blues, but at least the family would have room to breathe.

So yesterday we yet again loaded the kids into the minivan and resumed exploring the communities in Evanston, the first suburb north of Chicago. The benefits of Evanston are obvious to us. A large number of Seth’s classmates live in the diverse community. It’s not too far from work because of train access. And there’s a lot to do.

The problem has to do with the housing stock. Homes are either so big that they are rarely rented out – except by students near Northwestern University – or we’re stuck in another expensive apartment building … without the view.

But we really need more space. The kids have nowhere to play when they’re stuck indoors. Our current building lacks a pool and play area. The elevators are always having a problem. Plus, we would like to stop paying for storage in California, money we could use instead for rent.

Watching HGTV exacerbates the situation: here are all these happy Americans buying and remodeling beautiful houses. Where are they getting all this money?

HGTV is something of a false utopia, though. After all, we haven’t seen many shows – zero to be exact – talking about surviving foreclosure or folks struggling with housing payments they can’t afford.

There haven’t been any shows about how new home prices near where we USED TO LIVE have been slashed by nearly 50 percent. That’s right, new homes in Rancho Cucamonga that used to go for $1.2 million are now being offered for $695,000.

To piss us off even more, despite what is happening in Rancho, banks are stingily holding onto properties. They fear flooding the market and refuse to let prices fall naturally as they should. If you look at this chart on bank-owned properties, the first question to ask yourself: Why haven’t home prices fallen more?

And yet, HGTV’s hosts continue to chirp happily about how wonderful it is to buy a 1-½ bath, 3-bedroom house in Alexandria, Virginia, for $750,000 house. Did I mention that in one bedroom, the dad could reach both walls by holding his hands out?

So I curse HGTV every time Anne watches it. Then I sit down and watch it too.

You Mean Sleep Woes Persist After Kids Leave Family Bed?

The first time I remember watching the Dick Van Dyke Show, I was confounded by Laura and Rob Petrie’s separate twin beds. My mom and dad shared a bed, so why would they want to sleep separately, I wondered.

Of course, I didn’t know about the strict rules on television bedrooms back then. Dick Van Dyke was on during family hour, after all.

Culture took care of the rest, embarrassing all couples who admitted to having separate beds. But the same generation – the Baby Boomers – who made fun of the lifestyle now seem to be bringing it back, reports The New York Times. (Boy, they’re really milking that sleep thing at the Times.)

The National Associated of Home Builders are predicting that up to 60 percent of custom homes will have dual master bedrooms by 2105 – though home sellers and buyers are loathe to admit it. Why?

“It was more than snoring,” light sleeper Lana Pepper tells the Times. “He (her husband) cannot have his feet tucked into any of the covers; I have to have them tucked in. So I took all the linens and split them with scissors. Then I finished the edge so that half of the sheet would tuck under and the other half he could kick out.”

Um, split the linens? And wait a minute, I kick my feet out of the linens too – after all, I wear a size 12 shoe. A tucked-in bed makes it impossible to sleep on my back. And though my wife likes her corners tucked in, I don’t think she wants me to sleep in a different room. Right hon? Right?

I mean, Anne and I dream of kicking a certain little girl out of our bed so we can get BACK together, not further apart. I sure hate to find out that a few years after enjoying a warm spouse next to me instead of a foot in my face and a head in Anne’s ribcage, we will be wanting to head off to our own bed chambers. Talk about nightmares.

Our Son Teaches Us ‘An Inconvenient Truth’

As everyone on this site knows, I’m not a big fan of TV, but I’ve wanted to see An Inconvenient Truth since it came out. I took the financial plunge – hiring babysitters, etc. – to take my wife to the movie months after it came out, but we still couldn’t get in. Instead we had to watch a less than satisfying Superman 1,236,423. (Huh, I just realized I never got around to posting about that date.)

So when a friend lent me a copy the other day, my wife and I decided to watch it with the kids. After all, it’s “educational TV,” right? We were all in a good mood since it was on the same day as our park outing.

Lael was understandably fussy throughout the movie, but 4-year-old Seth was deeply into it. He fought to stay awake, because it was waaaay past his bedtime.

Aside: My wife kept saying during and after the movie, “Why couldn’t Gore have been like that during his campaign!” I think the entire world wonders that.

Okay, now to the punch line: Seth has been asking to see the movie again and again. I keep putting the boy off, but my wife relented on a rainy Wednesday. Here’s an edited e-mail exchange we had:

Anne: You want to watch some TV (meaning a video)?
Seth: I want to watch the really long one. (Rummages through the bin). Where’s the really long one?
Anne: You mean the trains and airplanes one?
Seth: No, the one with the kid and her ice cream melts.
Anne: (thinking): You mean, the one about global warming?
Seth: Yeah! That one!
Anne: Noooo ... you can’t even watch that on TV. It’s for the computer.
Anne: It’s Daddy’s. (lists other reasons why he can’t watch it ...)
Seth: I want the long one! I want to watch it on the compooder!

So your son is now watching “An Inconvenient Truth” on the computer.

Sigh.
Love you. xoxo

My response:
I’m okay with that, though I suppose he’ll be the world’s most rabid environmentalist. At least it’s not a big commercial.

I wonder why he liked it so much? Maybe all the cool pictures?

Anne:
Yes, of course. When I asked him what he liked about it, he insisted it was the ice cream cone melting and “some other things” that he felt were for kids. He’s completely absorbed by it. How much is sinking in, I’ve no idea. xoxo

And a bit later from Anne:
I think it says something that Al Gore is able to keep a 4-year-old’s attention. The explanations are clear and the graphics are great.

Move over Thomas the “Cheeky” Engine and Bob “Yes! We! Can!” The Builder. Al Gore, you have a rabid, 4-year-old fan.

Television May Trigger Autism, Experts Find

As anyone who reads this site will tell you, I am not fond of television, especially when it comes to young children. TV watching interferes with normal development, encourages behavioral problems such as hyperactivity (pdf) and contributes to bad eating habits.

So with great interest I’ve been reading this study: Does Television Cause Autism? (pdf) The authors strongly argue the answer is yes. While other bloggers and writers have already posted on this, I didn’t feel comfortable until I read the actual paper.

Here’s how the Cornell study worked, severely oversimplified:

Part I

• Children develop autism, a complex disease that effects behavior before they are 3 years old.
• Kids are more likely to watch TV when it rains.
• Researchers compared county-by-county precipitation levels in California, Washington and Oregon to rates of autism.

Results: The more it rained, the more likely a child developed the condition, which is “A psychiatric disorder of childhood characterized by marked deficits in communication and social interaction, preoccupation with fantasy, language impairment, and abnormal behavior, such as repetitive acts and excessive attachment to certain objects. It is usually associated with intellectual impairment,” according to the American Heritage Dictionary.

Part II

• During a certain period of time, cable TV was increasingly entering American homes.
• Researchers compared data in California and Pennsylvania to see if autism rates increased along with installation of cable.

Results: Autism rates increased by 17 percent from 1972 to 1989.

Like I said, this is an extreme oversimplification of a study that used statistical equations like this one: AUTk = β1 + β2PRCPk +β3logPOPk + β4INCk + β5REGk + β6HISPk + β7BLKk + β8INDk + εk I’m not being snarky here. I’m just pointing out that this study used numerous variables with complex equations that I’m not equipped to evaluate. (I sure hopethese researchers have all their statistical ducks in a row.)

But the results are essentially this: 38 percent of all autism cases may be triggered by watching TV. In the world of statistical research, that is a stupendously large number.

The implications, if the study holds up to scrutiny, are mind-blowing – autism, one of the most devastating and fastest growing mental illnesses of modern times, is caused by watching TV.

But as I hinted at the beginning of this post, I have some reservations about this study. The authors of this report agree more research is needed because this study is evidence of a correlation rather than direct cause and effect.

That’s good, because I am uncomfortable how the study relies on many assumptions and “adjustments” for various statistical anomalies. But my biggest concern surrounds environmental causes.

The researchers claim that the autism link revealed by the rise of cable TV serves as evidence that the disease trigger is not environmental. I don’t see how they can conclude that, when you consider that watching TV is an indoor event whether because of rain or because there are more shows on.

The longer children stay indoors, the more they are exposed to household bug sprays, various cleaners, cell phones and my bugaboo, fire retardants. It could well be that fire retardants, which are known to effect the nervous system, also grew in usage during the same timeframe the experts studied. It is possible that TV and toxins work in tandem to cause autism. A more bulletproof study is needed to determine what is happening to America’s kids.

Presuming the study if fundamentally sound, one thing is clear: something inside the homes of Americans is triggering autism. The study’s authors point to the Amish, where autism barely exists. The Amish watch little or no TV and have maintained a mostly organic lifestyle, eschewing modern food and chemicals. That certainly makes it harder to blame genes for autism.

So what can a parent do? It seems more prudent than ever to keep that TV off until a child turns 3. Why even take the risk? And keep it off even as your kids age. It should be used only on occasion as an educational tool, never a baby sitter. And get those kids out of the house as often as possible. The reasonably fresh air – unless you live next to a cattle ranch or a smokestack or a freeway – may also lower your child’s risk of developing autism.

Previous Posts on Television
Kaiser Study Reveals How TV Is Used as Parenting Tool

Hey Baby, Do I Have a TV Network for You

Even Family Movies Aren’t Entirely Safe for Toddlers

Television Can Undermine Even the Best Parents

Study Links Television, Kids to the Bully Pulpit

Here’s More Evidence TV Ads Bad for Kids

TV Commercialism Harms Children, Like It or Not

Satire Men Need Men: Studies Prove It

A common meme I’ve heard during my life goes something like this: “Women are more social than men.”

Maybe that’s true, but I grew up in Chicago, where men are your good buddy and your male relationships determine what sports you watch, who you drink with, and who you eventually marry. As an introverted youngster, I was never comfortable with the culture and fled as fast as possible.

And because my dad died when I was young, I had few male relationships to serve as an example. Like a boy raised by wolves, I preferred social contact with women rather than men.

Even to this day, I only have a few close male friends. My closest – after my brother – just visited from Los Angeles on Thursday. The rest I've never seen, save one person, because they’re all BLOGGERS.

It turns out that males are not only social animals, their health depends on having male companions, reports the Los Angeles Times. Male social isolation is growing around the world, worry the experts, and it is making us sick with depression, high blood pressure, clogged arteries and infections.

How can that be? My kids have brought more diseases home in one week than I experienced during my 25 years or so of bachelorhood.

But the experts are firm: when guys don’t have male friends, we’re more likely to eat poorly, get sick and die unless we are married or live with our mums. After all, there is no one to nag us to wash our hands after we flush or force us to eat our broccoli. (I like broccoli, but then as I’ve said, I’m weird.)

I noticed the researchers left out another health-impacting possibility: having male friends generally means more physical activity: playing soccer, fishing or walking to the bar for a drink.

So how can men save themselves from themselves? Presuming you are unable to find a spouse or a willing mom, the experts offer limp suggestions such as volunteering or making friends for life. Humph, they didn’t even mention blogging.

Here are some of my own suggestions for single men. Sure, none of these ideas would have ever worked for me, but they’re better than the lame, ineffective ones offered by the experts:

• If you are really, really tall, go to any pick-up basketball courts. You will have friends for life.
• Take up golfing, get the best tee times and invite desperate addicts to go with you.
• Buy a couple cases of beer, sit out on your front porch and offer one to every guy who walks by.
• If you are opposed to drinking, hand out free trinkets to your favorite teams. (Be careful: you don’t want to offer a Yankees lid to a Red Sox fan.)
• Buy the biggest fricking TV you can refinance your house for and become sports central for all your male friends at work and in your apartment building.
• Tell dirty jokes at a bar.
• Grill burgers or steaks – depending on you budget – and just wait. Men will smell the smoke and find their way to you.
• Start a blog on how your dating life sucks. Other men will find you via Google in 0.2 milliseconds. (Keep in mind, these friends will remain anonymous with pseudonyms such as Big Al, Tough Guy and Nails.)
• Go biking – must dress in requisite clothing – through Lincoln Park (or some equivalent area in your town.) The more expensive the bike, the more male bikers you will meet.
• Punch a construction worker. (You will have friends for life after a lengthy hospital stay.)
• Go kayaking in Lake Michigan (or some equivalent area in your town) during rough weather and meet some very nice rescue crews. If you live in a mountainous region, go hiking and then get stuck in some visible spot where you will have to be rescued by helicopter. If you forget to bring water, all the better for a longer hospital stay.
• Rob a bank and let the police catch you. You will have more male friends than you can count.

Trip to See ‘Cars’ With Son a Joyride

I finally took Seth to his first-ever big-screen movie, Cars. There are few choices nowadays that I feel comfortable taking my kids to see. Curious George would have been okay, but time didn’t permit.

Cars made sense for other reasons: Seth, like many boys, is fascinated by vehicles of any sort. And I had brought home a promotional Cars board game months ago that he just loved.

Seth loved the movie, but seeing the movie had a few repercussions. Seth was grumpy the rest of the day. I suspect the large screen, high-octane action movie overwhelmed his senses.

He’s been more insistent on wanting to watch TV, which he rarely does. At one point he even said, “I love TV, daddy.”

“I know,” I said, “that’s why we limit how much you watch.”

I suppose Seth is a bit too young to understand my sardonic sense of humor, but then he knows I’m so firm on the issue that he’ll give up after six or seven hours of nagging.

The outing also allowed me to focus on Seth, who has been jealous of his sister in recent weeks, for a few hours. We spent even more time together on Sunday at the pool. Sure, mom and sister were there, but Seth got to spend the bulk of the time playing with me.

It’s enough to make a dad feel pretty happy.