This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

THE FUTURE IS RUINED FOREVER! (Where have all the good shows gone?)

edited September 2009 in Everything Else
So first Jim Henson dies (effectively taking with him the muppets and fraggle rock), then Mr. Rogers, and now Reading Rainbow is getting the axe.

For us in the United states, we grew up on these shows. Shows like Mr. Rogers Neighborhood and Reading Rainbow were a keystone in our television programming as kids.
And what's worse is one the reasons behind it being canceled. Reading Rainbow helped kids love reading, operating on the assumption that they already knew how. But new research shows that teaching kids HOW to read is the new front line in literacy.

Really? Seriously? I remember when I was a kid, I gobbled up books. We would go food shopping and I would grab a book from the book section and finish it before we hit the checkout. I attribute my reading speed to shows like Reading Rainbow for encouraging kids like me to read more.

What will future generations be like without shows like R.R. and Mr. Rogers?
«1

Comments

  • Crazy ADD narutards who have to buy 'em all.
  • Crazy ADD narutards who have to buy 'em all.
    Oh ho ho, I see what you did there. Cleverly placed there my friend. Seriously though, kids really don't have any good television anymore.
  • edited September 2009
    Seriously though, kids really don't have any good television anymore.
    I suspect that this is what every successive generation has been saying (replace "television" with "books" or "scrolls" or "cave wall paintings") since the dawn of man, and yet every generation moves forward a bit, eventually making the previous one look like a bunch of retarded rednecks. I'm not worried.
    Post edited by Funfetus on
  • I suspect that this is what every successive generation has been saying (replace "television" with "books" or "scrolls" or "cave wall paintings") since the dawn of man, and yet every generation moves forward a bit, eventually making the previous one look like a bunch of retarded rednecks. I'm not worried.
    The generation moves forward on the backs of the smart. The average kid is still going to be dumber than the previous generation. These days kids watch stuff like bratz, pokemon, or whathaveyou for shallow cartoon. In my youth I watched TV that dealt with death, murder, politics, dictatorship, apartheid, stealing, friendship, love, exploration, to name a few things. And that was just one show.
  • The average kid is still going to be dumber than the previous generation.
    The jury's out on exactly why, but IQ scores consistently go up with each generation.
  • On the whole, the world is improving. People live longer, women are no longer treated as objects in most places, slavery has been abolished and people are persecuted much less often for expressing their thoughts.
  • Download old episodes and make your kids watch them.
  • The jury's out on exactly why, butIQ scores consistently go upwith each generation.
    But But, I heard the old days were always better then the current days.

    Why Reading Rainbow died.

    'Grant says the funding crunch is partially to blame, but the decision to end Reading Rainbow can also be traced to a shift in the philosophy of educational television programming. The change started with the Department of Education under the Bush administration, he explains, which wanted to see a much heavier focus on the basic tools of reading — like phonics and spelling."
  • edited September 2009
    Seriously though, kids really don't have any good television anymore.
    I'm sorry, but I have to beg to differ. there are entire channels now devoted to children's programming and while some of their programming is purely for entertainment value, a lot of it focuses on specific education themes from reading, language,interactive skills, art, culture, history, math, science, moral issues, "how things work", etc. PBS alone has an extremely long list of children's programs.
    Obviously if you focus on only the crap series, then it will look like there is no quality, but that would be like judging 80's children's television shows only He-Man, She-Ra, Thunder Cats, Jem, My Little Pony, etc.
    As Scott pointed out, most of the shows you loved as a kid are available on DVD if you genuinely can't find any programming you approve of for children.
    Honestly, I think the bigger issue of children's television is the amount of time children are allowed to watch television. TV, video games, and computer games seem like the default activities in many households. While each has its place and its usefulness, they should be only a few of multitude of activities a child partakes in while at home.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • edited September 2009
    'Grant says the funding crunch is partially to blame, but the decision to end Reading Rainbow can also be traced to a shift in the philosophy of educational television programming. The change started with the Department of Education under the Bush administration, he explains, which wanted to see a much heavier focus on the basic tools of reading — like phonics and spelling."
    Kids are watching TV at a younger age, maybe it's not such a bad idea to be teaching them how to read rather than what to read. Books are not hard to find, there are millions.
    Post edited by George Patches on
  • The average kid is still going to be dumber than the previous generation.
    The jury's out on exactly why, butIQ scores consistently go upwith each generation.
    The Atari 2600 had one button. The PS3 has 241.6 buttons. Each generation is living in an increasingly complex world, with more and varied information to absorb. We are getting smarter; we are becoming better problem-solvers. With such a flood of information at our fingertips and unprecedented free time to delve into said information, it was inevitable that Reading Rainbow would disappear.
  • Plus, can't parents just READ with their kids any of the books Reading Rainbow would cover? Most of them were well known, award winning books or new books by authors that previously won awards. As much as I love the theme song and seeing "Jordy" without his visor, it certainly isn't the only way to introduce children to books.
  • I bow to your superior trekitude.
  • Just wait till someday we have reality TV kids' shows.

    Duck-duck-goose Survivor.
  • edited September 2009
    Just wait till someday we have reality TV kids' shows.
    We've had those, mostly in the form of game shows.
    They also, within recent years, had that one show about kids running their own little society. I never saw it, but it was all over the news.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • They also, within recent years, had that one show about kids running their own little society. I never saw it, but it was all over the news.
    Kid Nation
  • Ma'm, it's G-e-o-r-d-i, thank you.
    Now I want to see a Geordie Geordi.
  • We'll be fine as long as Sesame Street doesn't completely die off. There's still stuff there.

    How bad would all of us say that Nick Jr. or that Disney-in-the-morning stuff programming is?
  • We'll be fine as long as Sesame Street doesn't completely die off. There's still stuff there.
    According to Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point, research has shown that Blue's Clues is more effective at teaching children than Sesame Street.
  • I like Blue. I think animated dogs should have a much larger role in educating our young people.
  • I think sexy nurses should have a much larger role in educating our young people.
  • image
    Hellllloooooooooo Nurse!
  • image
    Sexier than Kate Mulgrew. She is not attractive in any way.
  • edited September 2009
    So, you find a dude more attractive than Kate Mulgrew?

    You take the dude. Me and Kate, we got business.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • edited September 2009
    So, you find a dude more attractive than Kate Mulgrew?
    Yes. I have some deep man-love for Picard. He's that awesome.
    Post edited by Jason on
  • edited September 2009
    While the actress is very nice looking, but Captain Janeway was a bit bland. I wanted to love her so very badly, but she was just a beige wall. Also, why choose a female captain as an attractive "nurse" when you have Nurse Christine Chapel and other female medical staff?

    Also, Captain Picard is a fantastic.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • edited September 2009
    Also, why choose a female captain as an attractive "nurse" when you have Nurse Christine Chapel and other female medical staff?
    Eh, I've just always been much more attracted to Janeway than Chapel. Furthermore, the nurse is not required to be a medical nurse. They're just required to be a "sexy nurse" to help educate our nation's youth. I would very much like to be educated by Kate Mulgrew.
    While the actress is very nice looking, but Captain Janeway was a bit bland.
    Personal preference, I suppose. For myself, whenever I look at Janeway, I do that Chuck Avery wolf thing where my eyes bug out of my head, my heart bursts through my chest, etc, etc.

    But, okay, if you don't like Kate Mulgrew, then

    image

    HeeLLLLLLLOOOOOO Nurse!

    Even better:

    image

    HeeLLLLLLLOOOOOO Nurse!

    Other nurse possibilities:

    image
    image
    image
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • Thus ends the objectification of women portion of our show.... ^_~
  • Thus ends the objectification of women portion of our show.... ^_~
    Ummm . . . I was the one hoping to be objectified.
Sign In or Register to comment.