# Why do people have TV's?



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

It's been a year or so since i gave my telly away and i'm so happy with the decision, one of the best decisions i've made. 

In the evenings now we talk, play with the kids, listen to music, listen to podcasts or other online content, my wife makes jewellery and i often just lie in front of the fire or browse the net. In other words, i feel like we have a life, there's never boredam as there's far too much to do and the room looks better as there's not an ugly box demanding attention.

So my question, if it is a question, is why? why do people have tellys?


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Oct 31, 2010)

TV's what? Aerials, stands, screens, remote controls.

I understand the sentiment of not having a tv though. I gave mine away once and didn't have one until I took up with a partner who came with one. I still have the set, and watch it regularly for Channel 4 News. I watch other things sometimes, but I think the real disappointment of television, apart from the general brashness and loud vulgarity of its presentation style, is the lack of music. Radio is much better for music.


----------



## Callie (Oct 31, 2010)

You seem to have replaced TV with the internet. Is it really that much better?

Oh and people have Tvs for the same reasons you use the internet, its just a limited resource and offers less in the way of user customisation.

No?


----------



## dlx1 (Oct 31, 2010)

play xbox
play dvds

TV screen is bigger then computer screen


----------



## Santino (Oct 31, 2010)

For watching telly. Films, comedy, drama, Columbo, news, weather, CRICKET. I like telly.


----------



## Bungle73 (Oct 31, 2010)

TV can be good, but people need to be more selective of what they watch rather than sitting there for hours watching what ever happens to be on.


----------



## Santino (Oct 31, 2010)

Bungle73 said:


> TV is good, but people need to be more selective of what they watch rather than sitting there for hours watching what ever happens to be on.


 
Yeah, what a shower of cunts they are.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Oct 31, 2010)

Santino said:


> For watching telly. Films, comedy, drama, Columbo, news, weather, CRICKET. I like telly.


 
Columbo? You must have a very old set. Get a newer one. Is Columbo still being shown on TV.


----------



## Santino (Oct 31, 2010)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Columbo? You must have a very old set. Get a newer one. Is Columbo still being shown on TV.


 
Yes, most weekends on ITV and quite often on one of the detective-based satellite channels.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 31, 2010)

Have a screen but no aerial connected. Watch a few hours of iPlayer a week and DVDs, just don't like having a schedule and found myself watching the 'least shit' thing on because the telly was on. Have Internet and Radio for info, don't really need to have a telly.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 31, 2010)

Only last week they showed a shat vs columbo one where shat played a flamboyant TV detective. Shatners paunch was either corseted away or he was in shape.

As with any columbo the murderer gave himself away after relentless pestering by a man with a cigar stub and a crap haircut


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

I must admit Columbo is a good reason to have a telly, but as i've seen them all.....


----------



## mentalchik (Oct 31, 2010)

I have one because i like tele....

i also read a lot and use the internet......


why do people always sound a tad self righteous and patronsing when having this discussion ?


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

Sorry if i sound a bit self righteous. But a lot of people waste their lives watching endless hours of crap and so i think its fair enough to bring the subject up. People are free to live their lives how they like, but i think a lot of people don't know there's an alternative to x factor, eastenders etc.

Another very important point is that i have young children.


----------



## Reno (Oct 31, 2010)

When I chucked out my last telly I replaced it with a DLP projector. Since then I've barely watched any television, but I do watch a film or TV series on DVD or Blu-ray almost every night I'm home.


----------



## Santino (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Sorry if i sound a bit self righteous. But a lot of people waste their lives watching endless hours of crap and so i think its fair enough to bring the subject up. People are free to live their lives how they like, but i think a lot of people don't know there's an alternative to x factor, eastenders etc.
> 
> Another very important point is that i have young children.



Maybe you should spend some of your free time travelling door-to-door telling people about the tremendous mistake they are making.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Oct 31, 2010)

consoles films


----------



## kained&able (Oct 31, 2010)

I barely watch tele, news in the morning, football, f1. top gear and the gadget show  and thats about it really. Rest of the time i'm playing computer games, or watching dvd's.

Owning a tele doesn't mean you watch xfacor or eastenders automatically, some of us can make decisons about what we watch and can even pick up a guitar, a book or whatever if there is nothing good on. 

Don't see why you need to get rid of a the tv to make jewellery or play some tunes.

dave


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 31, 2010)

Santino said:


> Maybe you should spend some of your free time travelling door-to-door telling people about the tremendous mistake they are making.


 
Imagine a reith stamping on the face of light entertainments face-forever.

We are all BBC4 now.


----------



## trashpony (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Sorry if i sound a bit self righteous. But a lot of people waste their lives watching endless hours of crap and so i think its fair enough to bring the subject up. People are free to live their lives how they like, but i think a lot of people don't know there's an alternative to x factor, eastenders etc.
> 
> *Another very important point is that i have young children.*


 
Surely that is the main reason for having a telly?


----------



## Santino (Oct 31, 2010)

Everyone knows that children brought up in a house without a telly are the most well-adjusted and popular children at school.


----------



## mentalchik (Oct 31, 2010)

kained&able said:


> Owning a tele doesn't mean you watch xfacor or eastenders automatically, some of us can make decisons about what we watch and can even pick up a guitar, a book or whatever if there is nothing good on.



Well quite !


----------



## The Rural Juror (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> but i think a lot of people don't know there's an alternative to x factor, eastenders etc.
> .


 
sanctimonious, self-regarding toss.


----------



## mentalchik (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Sorry if i sound a bit self righteous. But a lot of people waste their lives watching endless hours of crap and so i think its fair enough to bring the subject up. People are free to live their lives how they like,* but i think a lot of people don't know there's an alternative to x factor, eastenders etc.
> *


 
or maybe they do but prefer tele.....

anyhoo that's a massive assumption and doing other stuff and tele aren't mutually exclusive ya know !

I've always liked watching a good deal of tv and also do a lot of other stuff, my kids likewise.........


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Oct 31, 2010)

mentalchik said:


> I have one because i like tele....
> 
> i also read a lot and use the internet......
> 
> ...


 
Exactly! 

I really like having a telly. And I also crochet, embroider, knit, make cards, do decoupage, perform in plays, read, talk, play on the internet etc... Having a telly doesn't stop me from doing other things. Plus there are times when sitting in front of the TV turning off my brain and watching whatever shit is on is exactly what my mind and body need to do!

I would miss it terribly if I didn't have one, but it does not rule my life and I am fully capable of having a rounded existence while still embracing having a telly thanks!


----------



## Thora (Oct 31, 2010)

Santino said:


> Everyone knows that children brought up in a house without a telly are the most well-adjusted and popular children at school.


 
Yeah but they probably go to Steiner school.

I have a TV so I don't have to interact with my family.


----------



## madzone (Oct 31, 2010)

I have a tv to watch brilliant things like The Witches which is on right now


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 31, 2010)

anti-semite


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Oct 31, 2010)

Sometimes I also talk to people about things I have seen on TV...radical!


----------



## mentalchik (Oct 31, 2010)

QueenOfGoths said:


> Sometimes I also talk to people about things I have seen on TV...radical!


 
how dreadful QoG......................


i would like to but i generally don't watch the same things as people at work.................(they regard me as a bit weird which is kinda nice)


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

Well i seem to have gotten a few backs up. I've had a telly, i know it's possible to turn it off if there's nothing on and that you can do other things as well and that you don't have to watch x factor, but.... let's face it, on the whole it's completely pointless, you spend a lot of time constantly flicking from channel to channel, endless annoying as fuck adverts, do i need to go on, surely my point doesn't need making.


----------



## Santino (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> surely my point doesn't need making.


 
And yet, and yet...


----------



## trashpony (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Well i seem to have gotten a few backs up. I've had a telly, i know it's possible to turn it off if there's nothing on and that you can do other things as well and that you don't have to watch x factor, but.... let's face it, on the whole it's completely pointless, you spend a lot of time constantly flicking from channel to channel, endless annoying as fuck adverts, do i need to go on, surely my point doesn't need making.


 
This is how I watch telly: read a review in the Guide and decide that something looks quite good, turn on the telly, watch the programme, turn it off again. Just because you used to have the thing on 24/7 when you had one doesn't mean everyone uses tv like that.


----------



## Reno (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Well i seem to have gotten a few backs up. I've had a telly, i know it's possible to turn it off if there's nothing on and that you can do other things as well and that you don't have to watch x factor, but.... let's face it, on the whole it's completely pointless, you spend a lot of time constantly flicking from channel to channel, endless annoying as fuck adverts, do i need to go on, surely my point doesn't need making.



I look in a TV guide if there is something interesting on and if there is, then I watch it. If it has adverts these days I tend to record something and then skip the ads. I never channel flick.


----------



## madzone (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Well i seem to have gotten a few backs up. I've had a telly, i know it's possible to turn it off if there's nothing on and that you can do other things as well and that you don't have to watch x factor, but.... let's face it, on the whole it's completely pointless, you spend a lot of time constantly flicking from channel to channel, endless annoying as fuck adverts, do i need to go on, surely my point doesn't need making.



Not if you have Sky


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Oct 31, 2010)

God, i can't fucking think why......................


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

One thing that has made my put this thread up was the response i often get when telling 'normal' people that i didn't watch that as i don't have a telly, they look at me as if i've admitted to having sex with crocodiles. So i now don't tell people.


----------



## mentalchik (Oct 31, 2010)

get over yourself,

listening to music, podcasts, browsing the net are as much forms of entertainment etc as is tv.........


----------



## Thora (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Well i seem to have gotten a few backs up. I've had a telly, i know it's possible to turn it off if there's nothing on and that you can do other things as well and that you don't have to watch x factor, but.... let's face it, on the whole it's completely pointless, you spend a lot of time constantly flicking from channel to channel, endless annoying as fuck adverts, do i need to go on, surely my point doesn't need making.


Whereas arguing about telly with a load of strangers on the internet is totally worthwhile


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Oct 31, 2010)

Too watch what they want to watch, maybe? Yes, that might be it....


----------



## mentalchik (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> One thing that has made my put this thread up was the response i often get when telling 'normal' people that i didn't watch that as i don't have a telly, they look at me as it i've admitted to having sex with crocodiles. So i now don't tell people.


 
maybe it's the self righteous tone........


----------



## Santino (Oct 31, 2010)

I put it on sometimes and just flick around for some background noise. Sometimes you stumble upon something you might not have otherwise watched.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Oct 31, 2010)

i'm not sure though, its a tough thing to think about...


----------



## Thora (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> One thing that has made my put this thread up was the response i often get when telling 'normal' people that i didn't watch that as i don't have a telly, they look at me as it i've admitted to having sex with crocodiles. So i now don't tell people.


 
Lol, I didn't have a tv for years, and whenever I mentioned it to people no-one was bothered.

All those sheeple just want you to conform


----------



## Santino (Oct 31, 2010)

The people I hate are the ones who just put Radio 4 on without specifically switching on to listen to a particular programme.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Oct 31, 2010)

You don't have to watch telly all the time just cos you have a TV. Fact I probably watch less telly now I have Sky than I did when there were only 4 channels in the UK.

More channels with crap shows spurred on by a shit celebrity obsessed culture shouldn't be a reason to ditch the box alltogether. There's plenty of good stuff on channels like Current TV, BBC4, Sky Arts, BBC2... just a case of being more selective in what you watch and when.


----------



## Reno (Oct 31, 2010)

Santino said:


> The people I hate are the ones who just put Radio 4 on without specifically switching on to listen to a particular programme.



That would be me. 

Mind I have it on pretty much all day. It's the only thing that get's me through the working day and when the archers and the rubbish plays are on I listen to podcasts.


----------



## Santino (Oct 31, 2010)

Reno said:


> That would be me.
> 
> Mind I have it on pretty much all day. It's the only thing that get's me through the working day and when the archers and the rubbish plays are on I listen to podcasts.


 
Is it because you don't know there are alternatives?


----------



## Reno (Oct 31, 2010)

Santino said:


> Is it because you don't know there are alternatives?


 
Like what ?


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Oct 31, 2010)

Santino said:


> The people I hate are the ones who just put Radio 4 on without specifically switching on to listen to a particular programme.


 
Feel free to hate me then Santino. I put on Radio 4 at random, safe in the knowledge, that provided it isn't Gardener's Question Time, The Archers, or sometimes a bad play, I will be able to listen to it and enjoy what is on.


----------



## Santino (Oct 31, 2010)

Reno said:


> Like what ?


 
Making your own linen, listening to birdsong, reading the Iliad in Attic Greek, that kind of thing.


----------



## Reno (Oct 31, 2010)

Santino said:


> Making your own linen, listening to birdsong, reading the Iliad in Attic Greek, that kind of thing.


----------



## Santino (Oct 31, 2010)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Feel free to hate me then Santino. I put on Radio 4 at random, safe in the knowledge, that provided it isn't Gardener's Question Time, The Archers, or sometimes a bad play, I will be able to listen to it and enjoy what is on.


 
Thank goodness you don't have young children then. Don't you realise you're wasting your life listening to all those documentaries and programmes featuring Ian McMillan?


----------



## Belushi (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Well i seem to have gotten a few backs up. I've had a telly, i know it's possible to turn it off if there's nothing on and that you can do other things as well and that you don't have to watch x factor, but.... let's face it, on the whole it's completely pointless, you spend a lot of time constantly flicking from channel to channel, endless annoying as fuck adverts, do i need to go on, surely my point doesn't need making.


 
I think its a good thing you've got rid of the tv as it sounds like you werent able to use it moderately.

I dont watch tv though either, its no big deal - I just spend too much time on the net nstead.


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

mentalchik said:


> maybe it's the self righteous tone........


Maybe here my tone is misunderstood, but in the outside world i'm not self righteous, ok, maybe i am a bit, but not as much as you think, maybe i am, i'm not sure, but i probably am a bit too self righteous, but surely that's just because i'm always right.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Oct 31, 2010)

Santino said:


> Making your own linen, listening to birdsong, reading the Iliad in Attic Greek, that kind of thing.


 
It is alright for you to say, but some of us don't have an attic so cannot read anything in it let alone Greek. My loom is being repaired at the moment and awaiting a spare part from China and the birds in the tree next to the streetlight never stop their racket day and night.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Maybe here my tone is misunderstood, but in the outside world i'm not self righteous, ok, maybe i am a bit, but not as much as you think, maybe i am, i'm not sure, but i probably am a bit too self righteous, but surely that's just because i'm always right.


 
lol

but....maybe..but..maybe..but maybe..........


----------



## andy2002 (Oct 31, 2010)

We all watch too much TV in my house but I think it's actually done my kids quite a bit of good. They're always asking about new words/concepts they've heard on TV and seeing films and stuff like Ben 10 has really fired their imaginations.


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

My kids watch more than enough telly when they go to other peoples houses and we hire videos to play on the laptop or youtube, so any more telly would be harmfull.


----------



## trashpony (Oct 31, 2010)

I absolutely hate people having the news on when my son is around - I really don't think he needs to see what 45 dead Iraqis look like. He listens to what they're saying on Radio 4 quite a lot - I am going to have to start listening to Radio 6 more I think


----------



## The Rural Juror (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Well i seem to have gotten a few backs up. I've had a telly, i know it's possible to turn it off if there's nothing on and that you can do other things as well and that you don't have to watch x factor, but.... let's face it, on the whole it's completely pointless, you spend a lot of time constantly flicking from channel to channel, endless annoying as fuck adverts, do i need to go on, surely my point doesn't need making.


 
generalise much?


----------



## Badgers (Oct 31, 2010)

I have one to keep a photo on top of. Don't plug it in though apart from the Queens Speech


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> It's been a year or so since i gave my telly away and i'm so happy with the decision, one of the best decisions i've made.
> 
> In the evenings now we talk, play with the kids, listen to music, listen to podcasts or other online content, my wife makes jewellery and i often just lie in front of the fire or browse the net. In other words, i feel like we have a life, there's never boredam as there's far too much to do and the room looks better as there's not an ugly box demanding attention.
> 
> So my question, if it is a question, is why? why do people have tellys?



some people manage to own a tv and still talk and play with their kids.  Some even have a hobby like your wife.  Nothing else you have listed is any more 'worthy' than watching telly.  Watching tv is just one entertainment/relaxation option people have in their lives.  Too much is bad for you the same as too much anything is bad for you. 

How is watching a documentary on whale migration less worthy than listening to Kylie on your mp3 player?


----------



## ChrisFilter (Oct 31, 2010)

Ah, a classic self-righteous thread of old 

I have a telly because I like watching telly, DVDs and playing computer games. How gauche.


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

The Rural Juror said:


> generalise much?


Isn't that what this site is for?


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Isn't that what this site is for?


 
Um, no.


----------



## madzone (Oct 31, 2010)

It's the lying in front of the fire browsing the net that confuses me. How is that superior to watching tv?


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Oct 31, 2010)

madzone said:


> It's the lying in front of the fire browsing the net that confuses me. How is that superior to watching tv?


 
because it just is, obviously.


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 31, 2010)

madzone said:


> It's the lying in front of the fire browsing the net that confuses me. How is that superior to watching tv?


 
I think you lay down different, healthier fat deposits than when you watch telly.


----------



## The Rural Juror (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Isn't that what this site is for?


 
you think?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> It's been a year or so since i gave my telly away and i'm so happy with the decision, one of the best decisions i've made.
> 
> In the evenings now we talk, play with the kids, listen to music, listen to podcasts or other online content, my wife makes jewellery and i often just lie in front of the fire or browse the net. In other words, i feel like we have a life, there's never boredam as there's far too much to do and the room looks better as there's not an ugly box demanding attention.
> 
> So my question, if it is a question, is why? why do people have tellys?



You knob


----------



## marty21 (Oct 31, 2010)

ChrisFilter said:


> Ah, a classic self-righteous thread of old
> 
> I have a telly because I like watching telly, DVDs and playing computer games. How gauche.


 
It's a classic thread - !


----------



## marty21 (Oct 31, 2010)

madzone said:


> It's the lying in front of the fire browsing the net that confuses me. How is that superior to watching tv?


 
better porn


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Oct 31, 2010)

madzone said:


> It's the lying in front of the fire browsing the net that confuses me. How is that superior to watching tv?


 
If you have got a fire to lie in front of then you don't need either a television or an internet connection. You can just look at the fire and see the pictures the flames make. We used to do that when I was a sprog. The armchairs were all circled around the fireplace, just out of range of the exploding bits of coal that sometimes happened.

 Later when dad was given a black and white with brown stained screen, television set by someone who owed him money, we moved the chairs to face east where the set was. Something was lost from my childhood then, that Bruce Forsyth never replaced.


----------



## andy2002 (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> My kids watch more than enough telly when they go to other peoples houses and we hire videos to play on the laptop or youtube, so any more telly would be harmfull.


 
How so?


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

Seems like there's a few self righteous people on the other side of this argument. But from the arguments put forward i'm in no way rushing out to buy one. It's a breath of fresh air to be without it, no matter how little it's used or how 'intelligently'. And i'm happier that i'm not subjecting my kids to it. And i do feel like i have more time to achieve more constructive and rewarding activities. So there...


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 31, 2010)

Hocus Eye. said:


> If you have got a fire to lie in front of then you don't need either at television or an internet connection. You can just look at the fire and see the pictures the flames make. We used to do that when I was a sprog. The armchairs were all circled around the fireplace, just out of range of the exploding bits of coal that sometimes happened. Later when dad was given a black and white with brown stained screen television, we moved the chairs to face east where the set was. Something was lost from my childhood then, that Bruce Forsyth never replaced.


 
Plus you can't make beans on toast with a telly.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Oct 31, 2010)

OHHHH I have a tv i should feel sooo bad.

Is that the aim of this thread then?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Seems like there's a few self righteous people on the other side of this argument. But from the arguments put forward i'm in no way rushing out to buy one. It's a breath of fresh air to be without it, no matter how little it's used or how 'intelligently'. And i'm happier that i'm not subjecting my kids to it. And i do feel like i have more time to acheice more constructive and rewarding activities. So there...


 
Go on then. 

You mean more time to loon don't you?


----------



## marty21 (Oct 31, 2010)

TrippyLondoner said:


> OHHHH I have a tv i should feel sooo bad.
> 
> Is that the aim of this thread then?


  you are a bad man , we are all bad men with remote controls watching the telly box - and bad women with remote controls watching the telly box - worse than nazis imo


----------



## madzone (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Seems like there's a few self righteous people on the other side of this argument. But from the arguments put forward i'm in no way rushing out to buy one. It's a breath of fresh air to be without it, no matter how little it's used or how 'intelligently'. And i'm happier that i'm not subjecting my kids to it. And i do feel like i have more time to achieve more constructive and rewarding activities. So there...


 
Perhaps you just need to learn how to multitask.


----------



## Belushi (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Seems like there's a few self righteous people on the other side of this argument. But from the arguments put forward i'm in no way rushing out to buy one. It's a breath of fresh air to be without it, no matter how little it's used or how 'intelligently'. And i'm happier that i'm not subjecting my kids to it. And i do feel like i have more time to achieve more constructive and rewarding activities. So there...


 
Yes its a good thing. How on earth did you get to the stage where tv dominated your life to such an extent anyway?


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Oct 31, 2010)

marty21 said:


> you are a bad man , we are all bad men with remote controls watching the telly box - and bad women with remote controls watching the telly box - worse than nazis imo


 
i can't take the power of having so much control with the remote


aarrrgghhh its killing me....


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

Hocus Eye. said:


> If you have got a fire to lie in front of then you don't need either a television or an internet connection. You can just look at the fire and see the pictures the flames make. We used to do that when I was a sprog. The armchairs were all circled around the fireplace, just out of range of the exploding bits of coal that sometimes happened.
> 
> Later when dad was given a black and white with brown stained screen, television set by someone who owed him money, we moved the chairs to face east where the set was. Something was lost from my childhood then, that Bruce Forsyth never replaced.


I spend hours looking at the flames, they never cease to amaze me.


----------



## kittyP (Oct 31, 2010)

I much prefer it with out a tv (not that we don't watch films and iplyer on the pc).
It does my head in when I am at my parents and they have ITV on with all the adverts.
You lots can do what you like though.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Oct 31, 2010)

kittyP said:


> You lots can do what you like though.


 
No we can't. 

Ill informed says otherwise.


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

There's always one....

I haven't said anyone can't watch telly.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> There's always one....
> 
> I haven't said anyone can't watch telly.


 
Bet you were on your high horse though eh?


----------



## machine cat (Oct 31, 2010)

We have a TV. It's not very good (only 4 channels)  and will become almost useless once the switch-over hits out area next year, but we still use it for watching dvds, and the missus for xfactor/strictly cunts dancing. Apart from that we read and do other things instead.

Having a TV doesn't mean you have to watch it all the time.


----------



## Santino (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> I spend hours looking at the flames, they never cease to amaze me.


 
Simple pleasures...


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

TrippyLondoner said:


> Bet you were on your high horse though eh?


of course, but it amazes me that more 'intelligent' people don't see it for what it is and get rid of them entirely. Less intelligent people obviously..... maybe i should stop writing.... i have to take the dog out anyway......


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> of course, but it amazes me that more 'intelligent' people don't see it for what it is and get rid of them entirely. Less intelligent people obviously..... maybe i should stop writing.... i have to take the dog out anyway......



 maybe maybe maybe.........


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> i have to take the dog out anyway......



Just put _Countryfile _on and let the dog enjoy that instead of a walk.


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Oct 31, 2010)

Can't talk/type anymore, tellys gone on


----------



## mentalchik (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> of course, but it amazes me that more 'intelligent' people don't see it for what it is and get rid of them entirely. Less intelligent people obviously..... maybe i should stop writing.... i have to take the dog out anyway......


 
ok i'll bite,

"see it for what it is" ???
what's that mean then ?


obviously i'm not intelligent enough to know


----------



## Santino (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> of course, but it amazes me that more 'intelligent' people don't see it for what it is and get rid of them entirely. Less intelligent people obviously..... maybe i should stop writing.... i have to take the dog out anyway......


 
All the clues to solve your conundrum are there, you just need to put them together.


----------



## mentalchik (Oct 31, 2010)

kittyP said:


> I much prefer it with out a tv (not that we don't watch films and iplyer on the pc).
> It does my head in when I am at my parents and they have ITV on with all the adverts.
> You lots can do what you like though.


 

If you don't like/want to watch TV fine, so what.......it's the self righteous "i'm so much better than you plebs"  type bollox that get's people pissed off......(see below)


ill-informed said:


> of course, but it amazes me that more 'intelligent' people don't see it for what it is and get rid of them entirely. Less intelligent people obviously..... maybe i should stop writing.... i have to take the dog out anyway......


----------



## rover07 (Oct 31, 2010)

Im enjoying the Onedin Line 4pm weekdays on Yesterday


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Oct 31, 2010)

mentalchik said:


> If you don't like/want to watch TV fine, so what.......it's the self righteous "i'm so much better than you plebs"  type bollox that get's people pissed off......(see below)


 
aye


----------



## rover07 (Oct 31, 2010)

And Harry Hill... FIGHT!


----------



## trashpony (Oct 31, 2010)

You still haven't answered the 'harm' question someone asked about the damage to your children of you owning a telly


----------



## madzone (Oct 31, 2010)

rover07 said:


> Im enjoying the Onedin Line 4pm weekdays on Yesterday




My dad was in that


----------



## Reno (Oct 31, 2010)

trashpony said:


> You still haven't answered the 'harm' question someone asked about the damage to your children of you owning a telly



Isn't there this theory that it's bad for children to relate too much to the telly during a period when they learn how to socialise with others ? I do think it's not a bad idea to limit TV time for children instead of just plonking them in front of it all day.


----------



## kittyP (Oct 31, 2010)

TrippyLondoner said:


> No we can't.
> 
> Ill informed says otherwise.


 
Ok, I have not read the whole thread but it seemed like he was saying what he had got from not watching tv rather than saying you guys should not watch it.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Oct 31, 2010)

kittyP said:


> Ok, I have not read the whole thread but it seemed like he was saying what he had got from not watching tv rather than saying you guys should not watch it.


 
He's being a twat and trying to get on his high horse, from what i've read, tbh. its obvious people get entertainment from tv or they wouldn't bloody get it.


----------



## trashpony (Oct 31, 2010)

Reno said:


> Isn't there this theory that it's bad for children to relate too much to the telly during a period when they learn how to socialise with others ? I do think it's not a bad idea to limit TV time for children instead of just plonking them in front of it all day.


 
I agree actually. I give the foal telly much like I watch it - turn it on, watch specific programme, turn off again (and generally only cbeebies because it has no ads). But there are times when it's a bloody godsend frankly


----------



## Athos (Oct 31, 2010)

I don't have a telly, for the simple reason that there's very little on that the Mrs and I want to/have time to watch.  But, we watch the odd thing on iplayer, and the kids watch something on the laptop most days.  But I don't understand why some people without tvs are so anti-telly, and so self-righteous about not having one.  If you like watching tv, it's just a bit of fun, innit?  I'd rather play dominoes with the wife, but I have the sense to realise that it doesn't make me more high-brow than the telly-watching masses!


----------



## kittyP (Oct 31, 2010)

mentalchik said:


> If you don't like/want to watch TV fine, so what.......it's the self righteous "i'm so much better than you plebs"  type bollox that get's people pissed off......(see below)


 
I don't really see the difference between saying i don't understand why you watch tv and saying I don't really understand why you like a certain song. 
I think it's ok to be bemused by someone elses likes and dislikes. 
If you accept that it can be condescending then I would have to accept that people on the other side get overly defensive too?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 31, 2010)

Do you like banksy ill-informed?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 31, 2010)

kittyP said:


> I don't really see the difference between saying i don't understand why you watch tv and saying I don't really understand why you like a certain song.
> I think it's ok to be bemused by someone elses likes and dislikes.
> If you accept that it can be condescending then I would have to accept that people on the other side get overly defensive too?


 
There's a difference disagreeing about liking the song and arguing that liking songs makes you a brainwashed moron. The first is fine, the second makes a you a snobby wanker. Get it?


----------



## Athos (Oct 31, 2010)

It's more like saying you don't like any songs.  And, in this case, worse: like saying anyone who likes songs is dopey.

ETA:  BA beat me to it!


----------



## kittyP (Oct 31, 2010)

TrippyLondoner said:


> He's being a twat and trying to get on his high horse, from what i've read, tbh. its obvious people get entertainment from tv or they wouldn't bloody get it.


 
Oh I agree! There is some great stuff out there.
Maybe you are all alot more disciplined than me. 
When I have a tv I find myself watching stuff that I really don't like but just zoning out.
I find it easier to keep the stuff over arms length, like a lot of other stuff on mylife


----------



## andy2002 (Oct 31, 2010)

Reno said:


> Isn't there this theory that it's bad for children to relate too much to the telly during a period when they learn how to socialise with others ? I do think it's not a bad idea to limit TV time for children instead of just plonking them in front of it all day.


 
You can say that about anything though - if your kids did nothing but read it would have the same detrimental effect on their social skills. Yes, reading is a less passive activity than watching TV but having observed my two kids it's clear that watching TV has really helped them evolve in certain areas. I doubt their interest in and engagement with words/language would be as advanced as it is and their imaginations would almost certainly be less developed. That said, only an idiot would stick them in front of the telly all day but I don't think anyone was suggesting that was a good idea anyway.


----------



## kittyP (Oct 31, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> There's a difference disagreeing about liking the song and arguing that liking songs makes you a brainwashed moron. The first is fine, the second makes a you a snobby wanker. Get it?


 I have to admit though there is some music out there that I think people are brain washed morons for liking and I think if you look in your hearts then you might agree in some circumstances.  
I do get what your saying but we all have a sense of superiority from time to time, what ever it may come from, arguing on the Internet or whatever  
He did say he used the pc for some visual viewing or did he not?


----------



## southside (Oct 31, 2010)

There is now way I could exist without a Tv of some form or other in my house.  I like watching things like films and music and watching the news and bellenders.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 31, 2010)

kittyP said:


> I have to admit though there is some music out there that I think people are brain washed morons for liking and I think if you look in your hearts then you might agree in some circumstances.
> I do get what your saying but we all have a sense of superiority from time to time, what ever it may come from, arguing on the Internet or whatever
> He did say he used the pc for some visual viewing or did he not?


 
That makes it worse! 

What was that chris morris thing about middle class heroin users.


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

Sorry for not replying to why i think a lot of telly is harmfull to children. I think it brainwashes them more than adults. The kids adverts i think should be banned. It stops them playing. It may harm their development. Teaches them to be lazy. Bad for their eyes. I could probably go on but surely that's enough.


----------



## kittyP (Oct 31, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> That makes it worse!
> 
> What was that chris morris thing about middle class heroin users.


 
So are you saying you have never had a sense (even small) of superiority about something you do or think?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 31, 2010)

kittyP said:


> So are you saying you have never had a sense (even small) of superiority about something you do or think?


 
I'm having one right now.

I'm not saying anything even approach that kittyp.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Sorry for not replying to why i think a lot of telly is harmfull to children. I think it brainwashes them more than adults. The kids adverts i think should be banned. It stops them playing. It may harm their development. Teaches them to be lazy. Bad for their eyes. I could probably go on but surely that's enough.


 
In what way is it "bad for their eyes"? Surely that's a canard?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Sorry for not replying to why i think a lot of telly is harmfull to children. I think it brainwashes them more than adults. The kids adverts i think should be banned. It stops them playing. It may harm their development. Teaches them to be lazy. Bad for their eyes. I could probably go on but surely that's enough.


 
You're an example of what we might become  without tv?


----------



## mentalchik (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Sorry for not replying to why i think a lot of telly is harmfull to children. I think it brainwashes them more than adults. The kids adverts i think should be banned. It stops them playing. It may harm their development. Teaches them to be lazy. Bad for their eyes. I could probably go on but surely that's enough.


 
well only speaking for myself and my kids i think that's a tad over melodramatic


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Oct 31, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> You're an example of what we might become  without tv?


 
God, i hate to think that.


----------



## Thora (Oct 31, 2010)

People have TVs because they're thick and don't care about their kids, obv.


----------



## kittyP (Oct 31, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> I'm having one right now.
> 
> I'm not saying anything even approach that kittyp.


 
Fair enough, just checking where we stand


----------



## kittyP (Oct 31, 2010)

Thora said:


> People have TVs because they're thick and don't care about their kids, obv.


 
What? I don't think he was saying that. Yes he was on a high horse but just because he likes not having a TV not that because he thought you were all bad parents.


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

Thanks for summing it up thora, oh hang on are you being ironic... 

I don't mind the suggestion that i'm being self righteous, but is the swearing at me necessary? Why don't you just calm down a bit.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Oct 31, 2010)

Sometimes when people are going on about the luxurious life that convicted criminals have in prison, they mention watching colour television (why the mention of colour who knows). The real reason for allowing television in prisons is to keep the prisoners quiet. Similarly with children. Parents like to keep the kids quiet without necessarily having to be involved themselves. Many years ago when television was controversial, a writer described television as 'the third parent'. I suppose it could be the second parent in a single-parent household. Perhaps television is the opium of the people who don't use opium itself, or variations thereof.

Anyway what's on the box now?


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> Do you like banksy ill-informed?


Yes.


----------



## Thora (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Sorry for not replying to why i think a lot of telly is harmfull to children. I think it brainwashes them more than adults. The kids adverts i think should be banned. It stops them playing. It may harm their development. Teaches them to be lazy. Bad for their eyes. I could probably go on but surely that's enough.


 


ill-informed said:


> And i'm happier that i'm not subjecting my kids to it.


 


ill-informed said:


> of course, but it amazes me that more 'intelligent' people don't see it for what it is and get rid of them entirely. Less intelligent people obviously..... maybe i should stop writing.... i have to take the dog out anyway......


 



kittyP said:


> What? I don't think he was saying that. Yes he was on a high horse but just because he likes not having a TV not that because he thought you were all bad parents.


 
Looks to me like that's exactly what he was saying.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Yes.


 
Adam Curtis?


----------



## discokermit (Oct 31, 2010)

telly is mostly shit.


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

Why don't you ask me directly if i think people who have tellys are bad parents. Because if you did i would say that all the parents that i know are struggling to do what's best and they sometimes let their kids do things that they probably know isn't best, but on the whole they are looking out for them and want them to develop properly. So, no.


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> Adam Curtis?


Sorry, don't know him.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 31, 2010)

discokermit said:


> telly is mostly shit.


 
Telly is fine. It's the people that watch it that want shooting.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Why don't you ask me directly if i think people who have tellys are bad parents. Because if you did i would say that all the parents that i know are struggling to do what's best and they sometimes let their kids do things that they probably know isn't best, but on the whole they are looking out for them and want them to develop properly. So, no.


 
That's a long odd way to say yes.


----------



## mentalchik (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Why don't you ask me directly if i think people who have tellys are bad parents. Because if you did i would say that all the parents that i know are struggling to do what's best and they sometimes let their kids do things that they probably know isn't best, but on the whole they are looking out for them and want them to develop properly. So, no.


 
So if i said i was quite happy for my kids to watch TV and i don't think there's that much harm involved what would you say ?

coz what you are saying is full of the implication that TV is the devils work...........


----------



## mentalchik (Oct 31, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> That's a long odd way to say yes.


----------



## Edie (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Why don't you ask me directly if i think people who have tellys are bad parents. Because if you did i would say that all the parents that i know are struggling to do what's best and they sometimes let their kids do things that they probably know isn't best, but on the whole they are looking out for them and want them to develop properly. So, no.


Let your kids have some chill out time you fuckin nazi.


----------



## trashpony (Oct 31, 2010)

I might let my son watch telly but I'm not po-faced. I know which parent I'd prefer


----------



## goldenecitrone (Oct 31, 2010)

I think there was some research in the US that claimed that children brought up without a telly in the house were more likely to get involved in drug-dealing and the porn industry in later life.


----------



## kittyP (Oct 31, 2010)

Ok I'm bowing out now. Chilli and horror movies (on the pc mind you ) are nearly reading for consuming.


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

Ok if you stick your kids in front of the telly all the time knowing that it's bad for them then i would say yes. However, watching some telly isn't the end of the world, but what that amount should be is what i'm saying, my opinion is a very low level especially for 5 and 2 year olds. You might think a higher level is ok, does that make you a bad parent, no.


----------



## andy2002 (Oct 31, 2010)

Hocus Eye. said:


> The real reason for allowing television in prisons is to keep the prisoners quiet. Similarly with children. Parents like to keep the kids quiet without necessarily having to be involved themselves. Many years ago when television was controversial, a writer described television as 'the third parent'. I suppose it could be the second parent in a single-parent household. Perhaps television is the opium of the people who don't use opium itself, or variations thereof.


 
TV may keep children quiet but they don't consume it passively. When my two have finished watching something they like, they're full of questions about it, asking if there's any further information about it they can get their hands on and even acting out bits of it. I try to keep an eye on the stuff they watch which adds another dimension to their enjoyment because you can then actually talk to them about it which they like.


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

goldenecitrone said:


> I think there was some research in the US that claimed that children brought up without a telly in the house were more likely to get involved in drug-dealing and the porn industry in later life.


Did that take into account poverty?


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Oct 31, 2010)

goldenecitrone said:


> I think there was some research in the US that claimed that children brought up without a telly in the house were more likely to get involved in drug-dealing and the porn industry in later life.



Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.


----------



## discokermit (Oct 31, 2010)

people stick their kids in front of the telly because they're lazy.


----------



## ebay sex moomin (Oct 31, 2010)

I can relate to what the O/P is saying. I didn't have a telly for a few years; in fact, I was quite resistant to having one in the house. I went out a lot more, got good on the guitar, read a lot and so on. It was a good time. It felt quite weird going round to my mates when the telly was on- I had an insight about it, something like 'the TV is like having a narcissistic know-it-all in the room that never stops talking, on any subject they feel like'. It just seemed so weird- this babbling loon in the room that everyone pays attention to. 

Nowadays, I watch quite a bit of telly, but mostly on catch-up. I'm quite choosy about what I watch- I like quizzes (Pointless, Only Connect), panel game shows and documentaries. Thoroughly enjoy them too 

So, I reckon if you don't want to have a telly, that's cool. If you enjoy watching a bit of telly, that's cool too. If you watch the Jeremy Kyle show you probably have issues, unless you're waiting for him to finally get lamped a good one. And stay away from adverts, they're mind-pollution.


----------



## waylon (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Ok if you stick your kids in front of the telly all the time knowing that it's bad for them then i would say yes. However, watching some telly isn't the end of the world, but what that amount should be is what i'm saying, my opinion is a very low level especially for 5 and 2 year olds. You might think a higher level is ok, does that make you a bad parent, no.



5 & 2 year olds, what about 1,3 & 4 year olds? Yer a bell, sugarplum, telly's bangin, I remember bondin with the old king n queen watchin Dallas & Dynasty n that.


----------



## spanglechick (Oct 31, 2010)

It's been a year or so since i stopped reading books and i'm so happy with the decision, one of the best decisions i've made. 

In the evenings now we talk, play with the kids, listen to music, listen to podcasts or other online content, my wife makes jewellery and i often just lie in front of the fire or browse the net. In other words, i feel like we have a life, there's never boredam as there's far too much to do and the room looks better as there's not shelves and shelves of dusty books cluttering the place up.

So my question, if it is a question, is why? why do people read book?  

I must admit Sherlock Holmes is a good reason to read books, but as i've read them all...

Sorry if i sound a bit self righteous. But a lot of people waste their lives reading crap for endless hours and so i think its fair enough to bring the subject up. People are free to live their lives how they like, but i think a lot of people don't know there's an alternative to Jilly Cooper, Dan Brown etc.



*Do you see what I did there...?*

Sorry, but completely denying yourself one conduit of culture and entertainment is just a bit weird.  I wouldn't stop going to the theatre just because We Will Rock You is a load of old pony.  I wouldn't avoid having a CD player of a radio because I don't like RnB.

It's misguided snobbery, is what it is.


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

Books don't rot brains though do they  Snobbery? This is my opinion, i'm suprised that i'm in the minority, but that's nothing new. I'm happy without a telly, so where does snobbery come into it. I think you miss my point.

@waylon...... erm.... yes ok.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Oct 31, 2010)

well said spanglechick


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Oct 31, 2010)

Televisions neither damage eyes nor rot brains. Personally, I ignore eveything the machine does except for Mad Men, but that doesn't mean I'm going to accuse it of random pathogenic effects.


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 31, 2010)

I dont have a telly, but thats not out of choice.


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 31, 2010)

spanglechick said:


> It's been a year or so since i stopped reading books and i'm so happy with the decision, one of the best decisions i've made.
> 
> In the evenings now we talk, play with the kids, listen to music, listen to podcasts or other online content, my wife makes jewellery and i often just lie in front of the fire or browse the net. In other words, i feel like we have a life, there's never boredam as there's far too much to do and the room looks better as there's not shelves and shelves of dusty books cluttering the place up.
> 
> ...


 
Post of the thread.


----------



## spanglechick (Oct 31, 2010)

I think there's as much lazy entertainment and lack of creative stimulation in the Da Vinci Code as in X Factor, tbh.  It's mindless - but i don't believe there's any evidence that it harms brain function or brings about dementia.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Oct 31, 2010)

Two reasons:

I love watching films
I love playing console games


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 31, 2010)

spanglechick said:


> I think there's as much lazy entertainment and lack of creative stimulation in the Da Vinci Code as in X Factor, tbh.  It's mindless - but i don't believe there's any evidence that it harms brain function or brings about dementia.


 
Yeah. Plenty of trash in the theatre too.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 31, 2010)

spanglechick said:


> I think there's as much lazy entertainment and lack of creative stimulation in the Da Vinci Code as in X Factor, tbh.  It's mindless - but i don't believe there's any evidence that it harms brain function or brings about dementia.


 
Ah, the snobs non-snobbery.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Books don't rot brains though do they  Snobbery? This is my opinion, i'm suprised that i'm in the minority, but that's nothing new. I'm happy without a telly, so where does snobbery come into it. I think you miss my point.
> 
> @waylon...... erm.... yes ok.


 
Books, now they are the really bad influence. I never did hold with all this book-learning. It gives folks ideas above their station. People what read books are always in a dream, miles away when they should be digging the soil or milking the cow or gathering wood for the fire.


----------



## waylon (Oct 31, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Books don't rot brains though do they  Snobbery? This is my opinion, i'm suprised that i'm in the minority, but that's nothing new. I'm happy without a telly, so where does snobbery come into it. I think you miss my point.
> 
> @waylon...... erm.... yes ok.



Does telly actually phsically rot brains though?Does it really? Don't think so.

And are you somehow attempting to belittle or otherwise disparage the fond memories I have of bonding with my mam n dad over a shared viewing experience of some soap or other? Why would you do that? That's really unpleasant of you.


----------



## kittyP (Oct 31, 2010)

Spangles, it was a very good point but I have to disagree. 
I dont think tv and books are comparible in this sense.
One of the main problems I had with tv is that if someone was watching something that I didn't like, I still got sucked in to sit down and watch it as they are such a focus in a room.
Also, I think the op admitted to watching some audio visual stuff, but by not owning a tv, finds it easier to pick and choose stuff on DVD and online. Which is kind of what we do with books.
We don't automatically read what the other people in the room are reading but it's really hard not to with telly. 
I hope this makes sense :s


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Oct 31, 2010)

Put more simply anyone that can't own something without it controlling them is an idiot.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 31, 2010)

Dickens would have had a telly.


----------



## Belushi (Oct 31, 2010)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Dickens would have had a telly.


 
Shakespeare would have been writing daytime soaps.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Oct 31, 2010)

Milton would present a gardening show with useful advice about decorative seraphs


----------



## Belushi (Oct 31, 2010)

Chaucer would have been on 15 to 1.


----------



## waylon (Oct 31, 2010)

Belushi said:


> Shakespeare would have been writing daytime soaps.



An wankin over em.


----------



## ill-informed (Oct 31, 2010)

@waylon.... erm.... yes ok.


----------



## D'wards (Oct 31, 2010)

If i was was ever on Room 101 i'd put people who condescendingly boast about not having a telly in there. I can say what i like about them, cos they won't be able to see it.

All those who give up telly wouldn't if they could not tell anyone about it.

Whats the point in giving it up entirely? i can see how people would have one but hardly ever turn it on, but if you haven't got one what do you do if we win the world cup, or another televised terrorist attack happens, or Radiohead are on Later, or BBC4 show a Classic Albums about Paranoid, or how do they watch Boardwalk Empire or Wonderland?

Not having a telly is just supercilious


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 31, 2010)

they can watch them online and then pretend to themselves that that doesn't count as watching telly.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 31, 2010)

The internet is clearly much more intellectual and educational than telly. Just look at Urban.


----------



## marty21 (Oct 31, 2010)

D'wards said:


> If i was was ever on Room 101 i'd put people who condescendingly boast about not having a telly in there. I can say what i like about them, cos they won't be able to see it.
> 
> All those who give up telly wouldn't if they could not tell anyone about it.
> 
> ...


 
they are missing 'The Only Way is Essex' as well


----------



## D'wards (Oct 31, 2010)

marty21 said:


> they are missing 'The Only Way is Essex' as well


 
And "Can Fat Teens Hunt?"


----------



## D'wards (Oct 31, 2010)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The internet is clearly much more intellectual and educational than telly. Just look at Urban.


 
I cannot tell if this is tongue in cheek or not


----------



## discokermit (Oct 31, 2010)

spanglechick said:


> It's been a year or so since i stopped reading books and i'm so happy with the decision, one of the best decisions i've made.
> 
> In the evenings now we talk, play with the kids, listen to music, listen to podcasts or other online content, my wife makes jewellery and i often just lie in front of the fire or browse the net. In other words, i feel like we have a life, there's never boredam as there's far too much to do and the room looks better as there's not shelves and shelves of dusty books cluttering the place up.
> 
> ...


 
sherlock holmes is fucking shit.


----------



## mentalchik (Nov 1, 2010)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The internet is clearly much more intellectual and educational than telly. Just look at Urban.


----------



## ill-informed (Nov 1, 2010)

D'wards said:


> If i was was ever on Room 101 i'd put people who condescendingly boast about not having a telly in there. I can say what i like about them, cos they won't be able to see it.
> 
> All those who give up telly wouldn't if they could not tell anyone about it.
> 
> ...


You are completelely wrong, i do not not have a telly so that i can feel superior or go round telling people, the idea is ridiculous. And what happens if we win the world cup or a terrorist attack, i could go down the pub to watch or listen to the radio etc, i don't think that's a good enough reason.

Some people can use tellys in a intelligent way and that's fair enough but i do believe that a lot of people waste their lives in front of them, so does that mean that i say they shouldn't? no. Does that mean i think they shouldn't? yes. Can you see the difference? Am i being self righteous, maybe but so what, am i not entitled to an opinion? And my kids will be better off without us having a telly to hypnotise them, they're doing just fine as it is. Do i think other people with tellys are bad parents? no. Do i think all parents could do better on a variety of issues, including myself? yes. Does that answer a few of your issues? I'm against telly. I think we'd all be better off if we could disinvent it, but hey, that's the way it is, but maybe we should take the time to listen to a different opinion without getting all defensive, just a thought.


----------



## trashpony (Nov 1, 2010)

You're a master of passive aggression, I'll give you that


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Nov 1, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> It's been a year or so since i gave my telly away and i'm so happy with the decision, one of the best decisions i've made.
> 
> So my question, if it is a question, is why? why do people have tellys?



Kind of narrow-minded of you, isn't it?

Does the whole world have to do what you do?


----------



## ill-informed (Nov 1, 2010)

trashpony said:


> You're a master of passive aggression, I'll give you that


 
Is that what i am?


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Nov 1, 2010)

It's the pseudo-intellectual crap about "idiot lanterns" and "hypnotism" that annoys me about No Telly types.  Another variant of this false, differentiating high-minded rubbish are those who do actually own a television set, but say it's a "small one."  But they won't admit to watching the latest blockbuster in High Definition or Blu-Rayed clarity.  It'll be some middle of the road documentary on BBC Four.  Some of my best memories as a kid are to be found in film night, usually a Saturday, with my mum, dad and brother, either watching a film on the telly, or renting a video.  Sometimes with a takeaway too.


----------



## ill-informed (Nov 1, 2010)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Kind of narrow-minded of you, isn't it?
> 
> Does the whole world have to do what you do?


 

Maybe.

No.


----------



## ill-informed (Nov 1, 2010)

I've also got fond memories of sitting on my dads lap to watch star trek. But my kids will have different fond memories.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Nov 1, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Maybe.
> 
> No.


 
We have two tvs and three computers [there's a lot of us]. We also go to films, talk, etc.

Where do we place?


----------



## kabbes (Nov 1, 2010)

Your kids will end up as adults that own giant televisions and mock you to their friends as the kind of parents that wouldn't have a TV.


----------



## ill-informed (Nov 1, 2010)

I'm not sure JC, what do you think.

@kabbes, they'll mock me for loads of things, but hopefully they'll be happy.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 1, 2010)

My brother-in-law's parents wouldn't have a TV in the house.  He now has a big fuck-off plasma, rolls his eyes at their attitude to telly and rues the fact that he lacks a common frame of reference when we talk about telly we watched as a kid.


----------



## ill-informed (Nov 1, 2010)

They'll probably eat nothing but raw meat, but does that mean i shouldn't bring them up vegetarian as well. No. They can do what they want as adults but while they're kids i'm in charge (and the wife), and we'll do what we think is in their best interest. Surely to do other than that would be wrong.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 1, 2010)

Yes, but don't kid yourself that you're creating some idealised environment that they'll forever thank you for.  Basically, you have a bee in your bonnet about something and are overreacting to the buzz.  And now you want to tell us about it.


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Nov 1, 2010)

What if they go to a friend's house for tea after school, and they watch telly?


----------



## kabbes (Nov 1, 2010)

The next door kid when I was a child wasn't allowed any sweets at all, ever.  At 11 they went to secondary school and had to walk there, passing the sweet shop en route.  They used to go in every day and almost buy the place, making sure they shoved it all in their gob long before they got home.


----------



## Santino (Nov 1, 2010)

trashpony said:


> You're a master of passive aggression, I'll give you that


 
You would say that.


----------



## trashpony (Nov 1, 2010)

It's not in a child's best interests to raise them vegetarian - that's entirely a moral decision.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 1, 2010)

at the moment we only watch telly when we eat dinner  a couple of movies a month too


----------



## ill-informed (Nov 1, 2010)

Captain Hurrah said:


> What if they go to a friend's house for tea after school, and they watch telly?


 
Yes. Also at their grandparents. They hire a video which is seen as a special treat. And we watch the odd cbeebies iplayer programme and sometimes cartoons on youtube, so saying the don't get any telly is wrong, i think they already get more than enough.


----------



## Santino (Nov 1, 2010)

Shakespeare wouldn't be writing for soaps, btw. He'd be doing something like The Wire or Mad Men or I, Claudius or something.


----------



## ill-informed (Nov 1, 2010)

trashpony said:


> It's not in a child's best interests to raise them vegetarian - that's entirely a moral decision.


i don't want to derail the thread but in my eyes (notice the mention of 'my') it is a moral, health and spiritual issue. Probably in the same way that you wouldn't give a child dog shit, i wouldn't give them meat. But anyway, back to the telly.....


----------



## ill-informed (Nov 1, 2010)

kabbes said:


> Yes, but don't kid yourself that you're creating some idealised environment that they'll forever thank you for.  Basically, you have a bee in your bonnet about something and are overreacting to the buzz.  And now you want to tell us about it.


 
hmmm.... parenting is often a series of compromises, but you have to do what's right, what you think is right and hope for the best, i realise kids rebel, but maybe you need to give them something to rebel against, but then hopefully as they get older they'll realise that i was doing what i thought was best.


----------



## tarannau (Nov 1, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Probably in the same way that you wouldn't give a child dog shit, i wouldn't give them meat.


 
Eh, what sort of penis-talking logic is this?

Are you trying to come across like an unbalanced numpty with weird ideas?


----------



## ill-informed (Nov 1, 2010)

tarannau said:


> Eh, what sort of penis-talking logic is this?
> 
> Are you trying to come across like an unbalanced numpty with weird ideas?


You want me to explain all my mad ideas then we'd be here all day. The threads about telly.


----------



## tarannau (Nov 1, 2010)

I'm building up more of a picture of you

Somehow I don't think your attitude to telly is the only problem here. Good luck with that judgementalism when they become teenagers


----------



## ymu (Nov 1, 2010)

There is some research that suggests that a lot of TV watching at a very young age can damage language development, with the suggestion being that with a lot of programmes, young children can't easily connect the words with the objects being talked about. If that's right, then Sesame Street would do much more good than harm, but the Teletubbies is probably a really shit idea for a kid's TV programme.

You can't use this sole factor to judge what harm is done to the kids with or without TV though. As kabbes has been pointing out, kids have social lives outside the home and common points of reference are important. It's tough being the 'strange kid'. Not something a parent should want to inflict on their child.

If it's on 24/7 and they're allowed to watch any old rubbish, then this probably isn't great parenting. But there are two BBC channels aimed at kids with no advertising and plenty of programmes that have been well designed to educate as well as entertain.

When I lived alone I used to have it on in the background a lot - I think it was probably on BBC News24 for several months once.  It's still on a lot now, but it's more interesting because my partner is a master flicker, so I never have to endure adverts and he finds some really good stuff that I'd never notice in the depths of a TV guide. 

I used to think that the proliferation of channels would reduce the quality of programming, but I think it's actually made the whole experience much better even if the inane crap has proliferated as expected. There are so many hours to fill, that you get a lot of documentaries and nostalgic repeats which would never have got an airing before, and lots of programmes are shown at least twice, so you're not so tied to a schedule. We get our internet on 3G and pay about £4 for an hour of streaming video, so catching-up online is not a great option for us.

So yeah, anyway, more sanctimonious ill-informed crap from the OP. IIRC he did a similar thread about his healthy diet recently. Oh, how wonderful he is and how much we should aspire to be exactly like him.


----------



## ill-informed (Nov 1, 2010)

ymu said:


> ........So yeah, anyway, more sanctimonious ill-informed crap from the OP. IIRC he did a similar thread about his healthy diet recently. Oh, how wonderful he is and how much we should aspire to be exactly like him.


 
hey don't call me ill informed, oh hang on a sec.... So anyway, the general consensus is that i should mind my own business. Maybe get a telly for the sake of the children and so that i fit in better. Maybe stop thinking my own thoughts and just find out what everyone else thinks and think that. Cheers.


----------



## tarannau (Nov 1, 2010)

Oh, stop being even more of a pompous prannet. Why not ask a genuine question and people may respond to you better. You only want to talk about tvs so you can try and achieve some form of moral superiority.

Myself? I'd prefer greater humility and perhaps some social skills.


----------



## Santino (Nov 1, 2010)

tarannau said:


> Myself? I'd prefer greater humility and perhaps some social skills.



We all want that for you, tarannau.


----------



## kyser_soze (Nov 1, 2010)

What the OP seems to be confusing is the hardware with the software. A TV in and of itself is simply a medium for playing software. It's not evil, it won't rot your brains, and I'd far sooner watch a movie or show on a decent size screen than huddled around a laptop.

We have a TV, it's big-ish (40") and generally gets used to watch shows that I've dled or stuff on iPLayer (and soon, 4OD as soon as it comes to the PS3); broadcast TV rarely gets watched, except for specific shows etc. but I don't go round judging people for watching shite like X-Factor and Strictly, mainly because I watch stuff that's _more_ shite.

What is it about TV that makes people that don't watch it feel superior to those who do? Also, someone who has said 'I surf the internet' as an alternative to watching telly should be careful of throwing around insults like 'Idiot lantern' (or whatever it was) since the internet is just as brain-rotting as network telly.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Nov 1, 2010)

kyser_soze said:


> What the OP seems to be confusing is the hardware with the software. A TV in and of itself is simply a medium for playing software. It's not evil, it won't rot your brains, and I'd far sooner watch a movie or show on a decent size screen than huddled around a laptop.
> 
> We have a TV, it's big-ish (40") and generally gets used to watch shows that I've dled or stuff on iPLayer (and soon, 4OD as soon as it comes to the PS3); broadcast TV rarely gets watched, except for specific shows etc. but I don't go round judging people for watching shite like X-Factor and Strictly, mainly because I watch stuff that's _more_ shite.
> 
> What is it about TV that makes people that don't watch it feel superior to those who do? Also, someone who has said 'I surf the internet' as an alternative to watching telly should be careful of throwing around insults like 'Idiot lantern' (or whatever it was) since the internet is just as brain-rotting as network telly.


 
This. Basically.


----------



## stupid dogbot (Nov 1, 2010)

It makes using the Playstation easier.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 1, 2010)

> You can't use this sole factor to judge what harm is done to the kids with or without TV though. As kabbes has been pointing out, kids have social lives outside the home and common points of reference are important. It's tough being the 'strange kid'. Not something a parent should want to inflict on their child.



exactly, besides, i have a thing against steiner schools and similar because its what my landlady keeps going on about as a good idea. 

are you gonna stop them listening to pop music and dressing in modern clothes as well ill_informed?


----------



## kyser_soze (Nov 1, 2010)

What don't you like about Steiner/Montesorri froggy?


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 1, 2010)

nothing, just a prejudice really. i actually went to a montessori school when i was very young for a little bit and barely remember it at all (from solid liberal middle class stock), steiner schools are a bit different though, in that they actually discourage you from doing tihngs like watching tv, listening to pop music, etc, according to a flatmate who went to one they were really free to do what they want in some ways but they had this idea of how education is which seemed to be just as restrictive as it was "liberal", it also seems a bit elitist as well and i don't like private schools however "nice" it is. though i admit i don't know all that much about it.

i also get a bit annoyed when you see all these articles from people in the paper about how they wont buy a kid a tv because it's "damaging" etc, it just seemsl ike a form of snobbery and also an attempt to protect kids from the world even though they would never see it like that, and there's nothing like watching tv with your family after school tbh. i dont agree that it doesn't make you closer as a family, if you all gather round to watch something it can be great.


----------



## Thora (Nov 1, 2010)

Nothing at all wrong with Montessori - in fact a lot of her ideas are now incorporated into mainstream education.  Steiner is a bit nutty spiritual bollocks.


----------



## ymu (Nov 1, 2010)

frogwoman said:


> i also get a bit annoyed when you see all these articles from people in the paper about how they wont buy a kid a tv because it's "damaging" etc, it just seemsl ike a form of snobbery and also an attempt to protect kids from the world even though they would never see it like that, and there's nothing like watching tv with your family after school tbh. i dont agree that it doesn't make you closer as a family, if you all gather round to watch something it can be great.


Yep. We always had a couple of programmes on Saturday and Sunday evenings, and the odd one or two mid-week, that were family 'events'. Not that we didn't communicate any other time, but they are some of my fondest memories, and I probably can't accurately recall a single scene that we watched together. It was the amusing ongoing debates about whether it was reasonable for our parents to force us to watch the Money Programme before the Wonder Years came on, and Dad's pearls of wisdom when he was commenting on something, and the atmospheric stuff that I remember.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 1, 2010)

Thora said:


> Nothing at all wrong with Montessori - in fact a lot of her ideas are now incorporated into mainstream education.  Steiner is a bit nutty spiritual bollocks.


 
yep


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 1, 2010)

ymu said:


> Yep. We always had a couple of programmes on Saturday and Sunday evenings, and the odd one or two mid-week, that were family 'events'. Not that we didn't communicate any other time, but they are some of my fondest memories, and I probably can't accurately recall a single scene that we watched together. It was the amusing ongoing debates about whether it was reasonable for our parents to force us to watch the Money Programme before the Wonder Years came on, and Dad's pearls of wisdom when he was commenting on something, and the atmospheric stuff that I remember.


 
most of the time your chatting and commenting on the programme and not even watching it tbh.


----------



## Thora (Nov 1, 2010)

Have you ever seen Steiner school children's artwork?  Little bit spooky...


----------



## felixthecat (Nov 1, 2010)

Thora said:


> Nothing at all wrong with Montessori - in fact a lot of her ideas are now incorporated into mainstream education.  Steiner is a bit nutty spiritual bollocks.


 
You summed it up quite neatly there!^


----------



## Corax (Nov 1, 2010)

I have a TV so I can watch things ironically and sneer at the people that are watching it non-ironically.


----------



## ill-informed (Nov 1, 2010)

tarannau said:


> Oh, stop being even more of a pompous prannet. Why not ask a genuine question and people may respond to you better. You only want to talk about tvs so you can try and achieve some form of moral superiority.
> 
> Myself? I'd prefer greater humility and perhaps some social skills.


 
Ok, after i posted it i thought it was a bit childish, but i was getting a bit frustated at the constant accusation that i was just being morally superior. Now maybe that's true to a certain extent, but so what. As i've said, i'm much happier not having a telly around, and i can't understand why it's not a more common thing. My last telly was great and if you'd asked me then i would have spoken just like anyone else, ie. i don't watch it much, i just watch x, y, z, i love such and such, great invention, good for bonding etc etc. However it's been over a year now and i seriously am so much happier, i wouldn't say morally superior, happier, it feels more peaceful, so that's it really. 

Now as to the question as to whether i am harming my kids, i believe i am doing the best for them, if they have to get a bit of flack at school then so be it, they're very well liked kids so i would think that any flack would be minimal and kids have to learn to deal with bullies and pack bullying, and besides as i've said repeatedly they do already see some telly. So should i get a telly for their sake so that they can fit in better even though 'I' believe that it would be harmful to them? no.

And about the bonding issue, everyone has their own happy memories of being a kid and my kids are very happy and well adjusted and they will have loads of fond memories of doing things as a family.


----------



## ill-informed (Nov 1, 2010)

frogwoman said:


> exactly, besides, i have a thing against steiner schools and similar because its what my landlady keeps going on about as a good idea.
> 
> are you gonna stop them listening to pop music and dressing in modern clothes as well ill_informed?


 
Did you want me to answer that?


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 1, 2010)

Thora said:


> Have you ever seen Steiner school children's artwork?  Little bit spooky...


 
No?? I dont know anything about them tbh other than my landlady thinks theyre amazing despite not also knowng anything about them really 

do i want to?


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 1, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> Did you want me to answer that?


 
i dont really care. sorry, i'm in a really fucking grumpy mood this week.


----------



## Thora (Nov 1, 2010)

frogwoman said:


> No?? I dont know anything about them tbh other than my landlady thinks theyre amazing despite not also knowng anything about them really
> 
> do i want to?


 
They just don't really go in for giving children free rein in art classes - all the children are taught to do the same picture, or use the same colour, so everyone produces an identical picture of a rainbow.  Rows of paintings exactly the same.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 1, 2010)

Thora said:


> They just don't really go in for giving children free rein in art classes - all the children are taught to do the same picture, or use the same colour, so everyone produces an identical picture of a rainbow.  Rows of paintings exactly the same.


----------



## ChrisFilter (Nov 3, 2010)

I bought another telly off eBay last night. Now there's a big one in the lounge, a little one in the bedroom and a big one in the spare room (Xbox den).

Digusting


----------



## stupid dogbot (Nov 3, 2010)

ChrisFilter said:


> I bought another telly off eBay last night. Now there's a big one in the lounge, a little one in the bedroom and a big one in the spare room (Xbox den).
> 
> Digusting


 
Worse than Hitler.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 3, 2010)

ChrisFilter said:


> I bought another telly off eBay last night. Now there's a big one in the lounge, a little one in the bedroom and a big one in the spare room (Xbox den).
> 
> Digusting


 
you ought to be shot.


----------



## kyser_soze (Nov 3, 2010)

Something should be done


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 3, 2010)

The worst ones are the ones on benefits who have tellys.


----------



## fractionMan (Nov 3, 2010)

I bought a telly a few weeks ago after not having one for a year.

For the most part it's shite, but there's a few things worth watching.  It does stop me spending so much time on the web after working all day in front of a computer, which is a Good Thing.

Luckily there's a built in DVD player and CBeebies.


----------



## kyser_soze (Nov 3, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> The worst ones are the ones on benefits who have tellys.


 
They shall be judged by Jeremy Kyle for their sins.


----------



## stupid dogbot (Nov 3, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> The worst ones are the ones on benefits who have tellys.


 
Especially flat-screen ones. Those are expensive.

How _dare_ they spend the handouts they get from our hard-earned taxes on _luxury_ electronic goods?

Wow, this right-wing wibbling's actually really easy. And it requires no thought. No wonder so many people resort to it instead of actually having a considered view of their own!


----------



## kabbes (Nov 3, 2010)

Since you can only buy flat screen tellys these days, there should be a special council person that comes round and bends them if the owner is on benefits.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 3, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> The worst ones are the ones on benefits who have tellys.


 
especially big tellies. the bigger, the telly, the worse it is. until if you have a home cimema system in your home, then you're worse than hitler and have probably killed more people.


----------



## mentalchik (Nov 3, 2010)

ChrisFilter said:


> I bought another telly off eBay last night. Now there's a big one in the lounge, a little one in the bedroom and a big one in the spare room (Xbox den).
> 
> Digusting


----------



## Idaho (Nov 3, 2010)

People do get very judgemental about TVs. I suppose it's a very easy and identifiable activity. 

I am a bit of a snob when it comes to TV. I don't often just veg out in front of the TV (although I confess a weakness for real life police/customs/immigration type programmes).


----------



## fractionMan (Nov 3, 2010)

I only managed 7 pages this time last year 

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/threads/303822-Do-you-have-a-tv


----------



## Oswaldtwistle (Nov 8, 2010)

*"Why do people have TV's? "*

To watch TV programmes on of course!


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Nov 8, 2010)

stupid dogbot said:


> Especially flat-screen ones. Those are expensive.
> 
> How _dare_ they spend the handouts they get from our hard-earned taxes on _luxury_ electronic goods?
> 
> Wow, this right-wing wibbling's actually really easy. And it requires no thought. No wonder so many people resort to it instead of actually having a considered view of their own!


----------



## kained&able (Nov 8, 2010)

you all laught but beacuse society pressurised me into buying a new tele in the summer my credit card is in debit by £750 still.

I'm a victim of this bourgeoisie nonsense and don't appreciate the jokes 

Won't someone think of my credit rating.


dave


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Nov 8, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> One thing that has made my put this thread up was the response i often get when telling 'normal' people that i didn't watch that as i don't have a telly, they look at me as if i've admitted to having sex with crocodiles. So i now don't tell people.


 
Now sex with crocodiles would make for some interesting tv viewing!  Puts a whole new spin on Crocodile Hunter.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Nov 8, 2010)

QueenOfGoths said:


> Exactly!
> 
> I really like having a telly. And I also crochet, embroider, knit, make cards, do decoupage, perform in plays, read, talk, play on the internet etc... Having a telly doesn't stop me from doing other things. Plus there are times when sitting in front of the TV turning off my brain and watching whatever shit is on is exactly what my mind and body need to do!
> 
> I would miss it terribly if I didn't have one, but it does not rule my life and I am fully capable of having a rounded existence while still embracing having a telly thanks!


 
QoG when I read your posts I wish I still lived in London, because I think we could be great mates.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 9, 2010)

DotCommunist said:


> Imagine a reith stamping on the face of light entertainments face-forever.
> 
> We are all BBC4 now.


----------



## rutabowa (Nov 9, 2010)

i have a tv for x factor, come dine with me, friends, and late night horror films such as grizzly rage (which i would never have seen without a tv)


----------



## Fruitloop (Nov 9, 2010)

I need something to plug my xbox into.


----------



## Spion (Nov 9, 2010)

Idaho said:


> I am a bit of a snob when it comes to TV. I don't often just veg out in front of the TV *(although I confess a weakness for real life police/customs/immigration type programmes)*.


*laughs out loud*


----------



## kyser_soze (Nov 9, 2010)

rutabowa said:


> i have a tv for x factor, come dine with me, friends, and late night horror films such as grizzly rage (which i would never have seen without a tv)


 
I've never seen Grizzly Rage, nor heard of it, but I now have a burning desire to watch it.


----------



## Quartz (Nov 9, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> It's been a year or so since i gave my telly away and i'm so happy with the decision, one of the best decisions i've made.



I did without a TV for a decade after it was stolen. I didn't miss it. Then in 2005 I went and bought myself a 42" plasma, mainly to watch videos. On TV, I watch the news, Top Gear, F1, Spooks, Dr Who, Question Time sometimes, and a few other programs.


----------



## K-R-M (Nov 9, 2010)

I didn't care about having a telly when I was a bit younger. Lived in one place on my own when the TV licence inspector knocked on my door, I let him in and showed him the arial cable with no TV attached and he said fine, I'll be back in 18 months. So I got a little portable thing off one of the neighbours. 
Different now, have a posh Sony one and been texting my mate about Eastenders as it happens


----------



## Crispy (Nov 9, 2010)

Have a tv but only watch what i want when i want on it. Not snobby about TV, just don't want to submit to the whims of the schedulers.


----------



## Crispy (Nov 9, 2010)

Actually, i so am snobby about tv.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 10, 2010)

Such a huge over-reaction to Ill-Informed's thread from some parties! Says lots does that. *eyes room beadily*

I'm currently renegotiating my relationship with the goggle-box idiot-lantern magic-eye jumbotron sitting in the corner, looking like some guilty puppy, but a puppy made of metal and with buttons for eyes. 

I admit I have allowed this thing to spew shit onto the rug that is my life. I did not control the beast, I allowed to control me. Such willpower shown by the Urbanites on this thread with their appointment viewing and variety of interests and macrame! Lucky blighters, like the ones who can have one glass of wine and leave it at that. I envy you all!

I was addicted to TV, allowing it to subdue me like a narcotic, aimlessly channel surfing for anything with some remote speck of interest, or at least the possiblity of me feigning it. Property shows, shows with loud ladies on, shows about old people selling old things, cooking, eating and shitting in all it's glory - anything was fair game really. Discernment becomes redundant once you have the "post-modern excuse" down pat.

Of course, this addiction was the by-product of depression - but now, in the heightened emotional state of recovery, I have begun to take note of the feelings that watching TV gives me, and judge honestly what the impact of this viewing is, on my psyche and my relationship with the world.

I've found that news is quite hurtful, and often distressing. Soaps, based as they are on conflict and histrionics, can leave me anxious. Feeling anger at wasting one's time on endless and meaningless consumer shows can be lessened by controlling their intake - designed as they are, to be the visual equivalent of a cheap but tasty cheeseburger, and ultimately just as unsatisfying.

But there are things to watch which are inspiring. Magnificent things. I watch David Attenbrough, and documentaries with natural views. Coast is a fave. I watch good comedy that makes me laugh, and things which are instructional, from which I can learn a new technique. And that's about it, I've pushed the puppy into the corner, and it's staying there until I want to play with it. It's better that way, for me. I would consider getting rid if it, as turning it off has lead to many wondrous things occuring, which might not had I remained glued. 

The average UK adult watches something like 28 hours of TV a week - I would say 28 hours of anything per week is a bit excessive (unless it's sleep, in which case for fuck's sake sleep more.) I do come from a working class culture where telly is the free babysitter - it went on first thing in the morning, and stayed on until the dot went. Having a silent telly in a wooden case was very middle-class, usually came with a piano and a pony and antimaccassars. So I never learned this discernment thing, and have badly misused telly for on and off for many years, probably. 

I do admire everyone's perspicacity with the telly, but I do understand that a life without it could be so sweet, if it represents a bad habit for you, even an addiction or an unhealthy fixation, and I think we need more honesty about how what we watch can effect us emotionally, in a world where we have never watched more TV, showing us things we've never seen before, and perhaps weren't meant to see.


----------



## rutabowa (Nov 10, 2010)

kyser_soze said:


> I've never seen Grizzly Rage, nor heard of it, but I now have a burning desire to watch it.


 
it is quite a film... it was my introduction to the works of modern z movie director David DeCoteau, look him up on the internet he has a massive filmography.


----------



## Santino (Nov 10, 2010)

Wookey said:


> Such a huge over-reaction to Ill-Informed's thread from some parties! Says lots does that. *eyes room beadily*
> 
> I'm currently renegotiating my relationship with the goggle-box idiot-lantern magic-eye jumbotron sitting in the corner, looking like some guilty puppy, but a puppy made of metal and with buttons for eyes.
> 
> ...


 
It's like someone who's 'in control' of they're drinking sneering at someone enjoying a few pints.

Actually, I have no idea if it's like that, I couldn't be arsed to read most of it.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 10, 2010)

Santino said:


> It's like someone who's 'in control' of they're drinking sneering at someone enjoying a few pints.
> 
> Actually, I have no idea if it's like that, I couldn't be arsed to read most of it.



Do you have a poor concentration span? Telly can do that to you, I've heard.


----------



## kyser_soze (Nov 11, 2010)

rutabowa said:


> it is quite a film... it was my introduction to the works of modern z movie director David DeCoteau, look him up on the internet he has a massive filmography.


 
That's some film CV - softcore porn to schlock horror! I might have to investigate


----------



## Scaggs (Nov 12, 2010)

I’m finding telly more depressing recently. There’s very little on now that I can watch for more than a few minutes without getting mad and switching off. The incessant incidental music on every show and the formula where they have to preview everything coming up in the same programme drives me nuts. 

I even avoid the news and documentaries now because they seem to think that anyone who’s watching has learning difficulties. I even find myself getting pissed off while watching CBeebies with the little-un’s. Do toddlers  really need exercise propaganda and cooking programms?

I wouldn’t get rid of it though because I download the odd bit of escapist shite and watch it through the PS3. I’d also have to pretend I still have one,  just so I don’t get accused of being a snob.


----------



## twentythreedom (Nov 12, 2010)

Santino said:


> CRICKET. I like telly.



who'd wanna be without sky when the ashes are nearly here??? fuck that, telly rules


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Nov 12, 2010)

twentythreedom said:


> who'd wanna be without sky when the ashes are nearly here??? fuck that, telly rules


 
fuck yeah


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Nov 12, 2010)

Wookey said:


> Such a huge over-reaction to Ill-Informed's thread from some parties! Says lots does that. *eyes room beadily*
> 
> I'm currently renegotiating my relationship with the goggle-box idiot-lantern magic-eye jumbotron sitting in the corner, looking like some guilty puppy, but a puppy made of metal and with buttons for eyes.
> 
> ...


 
Why does every post of yours lately seem like some kinda documentary?


----------



## Santino (Nov 12, 2010)

twentythreedom said:


> who'd wanna be without sky when the ashes are nearly here??? fuck that, telly rules


 
Some people say they prefer the radio coverage, but the telly is like radio with pictures. And also better.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 12, 2010)

Turns out I have telly to watch Misfits.  Bloody brilliant, that programme is.

Radio IS, on the whole, better for cricket because you can potter whilst listening to it.  Cricket and pottering go together like, erm, like one old-man activity with another one.


----------



## Scaggs (Nov 12, 2010)

Life is too short for cricket.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 12, 2010)

Cricket is too short for life


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 12, 2010)

damn it, I'll have to watch Misfits on megavideo- 4oD is a cancerous growth on the internet.


----------



## Santino (Nov 12, 2010)

kabbes said:


> Turns out I have telly to watch Misfits.  Bloody brilliant, that programme is.
> 
> Radio IS, on the whole, better for cricket because you can potter whilst listening to it.  Cricket and pottering go together like, erm, like one old-man activity with another one.


 
You can potter with the telly on too. Or you can sit on the sofa with the crossword, glancing up to watch each ball and then glancing down again when it's padded away for no runs.


----------



## kyser_soze (Nov 12, 2010)

kabbes said:


> Turns out I have telly to watch Misfits.  Bloody brilliant, that programme is.
> 
> Radio IS, on the whole, better for cricket because you can potter whilst listening to it.  Cricket and pottering go together like, erm, like one old-man activity with another one.


 
Sitting in a comfy chair and smoking a pipe.


----------



## trevhagl (Nov 12, 2010)

ill-informed said:


> It's been a year or so since i gave my telly away and i'm so happy with the decision, one of the best decisions i've made.
> 
> In the evenings now we talk, play with the kids, listen to music, listen to podcasts or other online content, my wife makes jewellery and i often just lie in front of the fire or browse the net. In other words, i feel like we have a life, there's never boredam as there's far too much to do and the room looks better as there's not an ugly box demanding attention.
> 
> So my question, if it is a question, is why? why do people have tellys?


 
fair point and indeed if i lived by myself there would be a time when i woulda thought long and hard about it but i now have that much stuff to watch i am glad i have one, though a lot is on DVD ie Sons of Anarchy


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 12, 2010)

just catching up with this thread, but it looks promising as the op looks to be in the running for the most conceited post of the year.


----------



## marty21 (Nov 12, 2010)

Orang Utan said:


> just catching up with this thread, but it looks promising as the op looks to be in the running for the most conceited post of the year.


 
there's still time for you to nail that prize


----------



## kyser_soze (Nov 12, 2010)

trevhagl said:


> fair point and indeed if i lived by myself there would be a time when i woulda thought long and hard about it but i now have that much stuff to watch i am glad i have one, though a lot is on DVD ie Sons of Anarchy


 
See, this is what I mean about the mixup between hardware and software. ill-informed's OP assumes that the only thing anyone watches is broadcast telly, whereas like yourself, most of the stuff I watch are specific shows that engage me in a good story. It's all a bit baby with bathwater, ditching a decent sized screen to watch stuff on a postage stamp.




			
				wookey said:
			
		

> Soaps, based as they are on conflict and histrionics, can leave me anxious.



You need therapy. Soaps leave you anxious? I bet you'd shout out a 'bad guy' character in the street, like the idiot who spat at the guy who played Nick Cotton.


----------



## London_Calling (Nov 12, 2010)

I'm not reading all of this but I've played this issue every way in the recent past and a couple of things stood out for me;

It's easy to be evangelical about stopping TV in the same way it is when you stop smoking - it's the relief or release as much as anything. However, what you might think of as ‘enthusiasm’ isn’t received often that way.

Having/watching TV is obviously ingrained from early childhood and serves a personal emotional agenda beyond that of mere entertainment medium. It's a comfort on some levels for example, a reminder of family life on another as well as touching on other more subtle emotions. There's a lot of shit to work through, imo.

We all know from our own experiences and from looking at the very significant fall in TV viewing that there is a lot more out there now. What's quite interesting is that the stuff I value - for example, the HBO type drama serial (usually via DVD's) - is dependent on the TV business model remaining successful.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Nov 12, 2010)

Santino said:


> Some people say they prefer the radio coverage, but the telly is like radio with pictures. And also better.


 
Can listen to it on the radio channels that are on my tv if i wanted to then.  But i always prefer tv coverage!


----------



## Wookey (Nov 12, 2010)

kyser_soze said:


> You need therapy. Soaps leave you anxious? I bet you'd shout out a 'bad guy' character in the street, like the idiot who spat at the guy who played Nick Cotton.


 
I'm in therapy, Kyser - and part of that therapy involves not watching television. Watching TV excessively is bad for your health - more than 10 hours a week and your risk of diabetes and obesity rises significantly. Excessive calorie consumption and lack of exercise are costing the country a fortune in health care, and TV is directly related to this.

Add to the physical side-effects the mental ones, as I've described. Not everyone is as mentally robust as you; some people are perhaps more sensitive to visual representations of violence, murder, death, disease and natural disaster. My own analysis of my emotional state when watching TV is that I can experience low-level anxiety when (good) actors depict violence, crying or shouting arguments. Even though I know it's isn't real! As with children who it is claimed have seen 40,000 depictions of violent murders on TV by the time they're about 12, it's very difficult to prove a direct link between input and emotional output - I'm only explaining what I feel in my head, but I'm glad it's given you a laugh and the opportunity to point. 

Most people on this thread seem to be saying that they are careful and selective TV viewers. Not everyone is. Posters say they don't let TV stop them doing other things. Not everyone is like that. Posters say they are selective. Well, I'm a graduate professional who has seen more Jeremy Kyle than I care to remember. There are many experiences out there, including the OPs, and they're all just as valid as yours.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 12, 2010)

I haven't posted for many months, so perhaps I have a lot to say?


----------



## Wookey (Nov 12, 2010)

Santino said:


> Some people say they prefer the radio coverage, but the telly is like radio with pictures. And also better.


 
On what basis is it better? With radio, you are using the higher functioning parts of the brain to construct the imagery you aren't being spoonfed. Conversely, when watching TV your higher brain functions shut down, and you start using the limbic brain structures, which don't distinguish between reality and make-believe, (which is the job of the neo-cortex) they treat all input as equal - and kick-start your fight or flight response oftentimes innappropriately.

TV also switches brain use to the right hemisphere, unlike radio, and yet it's the left hemisphere which runs our judgement, analysis and critical facilities towards whatever input goes in.

Hours and hours of doing this is suspected to seriously influence brain development and function. This switching to the right side also causes the release of endorphins,beta-endorphins and enkephalins into the system, and these are opiate-like substances that can cause dependence on the pleasurable experience being gone through - much as happens with orgasms. A drop in these substances can trigger anxiety, and presage depression and addiction.

So TV isn't better than radio from a health point of view, and many exclusive radio listeners would argue they are no less informed or entertained than you, and potentially a lot more in charge of their endocrine systems, anxiety levels and mental acuity.


----------



## Santino (Nov 12, 2010)

It's better because you can see the cricket happening.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 12, 2010)

Santino said:


> It's better because you can see the cricket happening.


 i know a lot of people who prefer it on the radio


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Nov 12, 2010)

Santino said:


> It's better because you can see the cricket happening.


 
Yep.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Nov 12, 2010)

You seem to imply that it is one or the other though Wookey.

I quite often have the TV on but don't 'watch' it, merely glance over at Sky News occasionally to see if any important news is breaking. I don't engage any more with it unless I choose to. If I see a 'BREAKING NEWS - TERROR ATTACK' or something then I turn on the sound and switch away from what ever else I'm doing. It's just an option, its completely different to sitting and engaging with a screenplay or something, but it's inherently better than the radio or the internet because it has pictures, and multi network feeds. Something that neither radio or the internet can provide in a quick and easy way like a major news broadcaster can.

As others have said above - same applies to cricket. You check up on the pictures occasionally, while listening to music/working, or even... ...listening to it on the radio.

As Kyser says, its just a screen a the end of the day - how you engage with it is your choice. But these days its not uncommon to be consuming three hours of media in any one hour of the day, if you get me.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 12, 2010)

skyscraper101 said:


> You seem to imply that it is one or the other though Wookey.
> 
> I quite often have the TV on but don't 'watch' it, merely glance over at Sky News occasionally to see if any important news is breaking. I don't engage any more with it unless I choose to. If I see a 'BREAKING NEWS - TERROR ATTACK' or something then I turn on the sound and switch away from what ever else I'm doing. It's just an option, its completely different to sitting and engaging with a screenplay or something, but it's inherently better than the radio or the internet because it has pictures, and multi network feeds. Something that neither radio or the internet can provide in a quick and easy way like a major news broadcaster can.
> 
> ...


 
Most people consume more than three hours a day - and some groups (youth, students) consume even more.

The AVERAGE viewing hours is 28 per week! In the US (more channels, more TVs) it's even higher.

I'm glad you use it sparingly, and with control. But I would argue most people aren't that discerning - and TV can be a physically and emotionally addictive agent, leading to sedentary lifestyles and fat waists - and we haven't even started on advertising and the effects of that!

I never understood cricket from watching it on TV, never got it at all. I only really understood why it was a popular sport when I went to see a match at Old Trafford - sitting with my mates, having a bite to eat and a laugh, listening to the um-pah-pah and cooing at Freddy Flintoff. And look! There's even a cricket match going on, let's watch a bit of that too! I totally understood the human aspect of this spectator sport, the communal aspect, the celebratory aspect of being with 6000 other goons...

Compared to that, your TV coverage is a watered-down imitation of reality, good for keeping up to date with the scores, but it's not like WATCHING a cricket match, is it?

Instead of comparing TV with the internet, or the radio, let's compare it with real life, with smells and voices and walking around and breathing the air of it. Living on our feet and interacting with other humans is a vital part of our emotional health, and I think many people rely on the TV for that part of their life, and it's not a high-fibre cereal.


----------



## Santino (Nov 12, 2010)

Wookey said:


> Most people consume more than three hours a day - and some groups (youth, students) consume even more.
> 
> The AVERAGE viewing hours is 28 per week! In the US (more channels, more TVs) it's even higher.
> 
> ...


 
You can actually see the cricket better on TV than at the ground.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 12, 2010)

bollocks


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 12, 2010)

Bring back the past.


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Nov 12, 2010)

If I didn't have a TV then I wouldn't be watching the episode of "Law & Order" currently on FiveUSA which has a character in it called "Dr. Shipman" which made me giggle in a guilty way. Therefore telly is good. FACT.


----------



## Santino (Nov 12, 2010)

QueenOfGoths said:


> If I didn't have a TV then I wouldn't be watching the episode of "Law & Order" currently on FiveUSA which has a character in it called "Dr. Shipman" which made me giggle in a guilty way. Therefore telly is good. FACT.


 
There's an episode of Law & Order: Criminal Intent which is just a rip-off of the Harold Shipman case: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0629523/


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 12, 2010)

As far as I can see we have decided that TV is OK except if you are fat and/or a prole with kids. Completely ignores those of us sat awake at night, skinny and single and swearing at BBC news 24 of a 5 am.


----------



## MysteryGuest (Nov 12, 2010)

Anybody else read this?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Arguments-E...2742/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1289576871&sr=8-1


Good book.  iirc.  (It was 1992 when I read it though.)  I still watch telly though, here and there (as does Jerry Mander).


----------



## Santino (Nov 12, 2010)

MysteryGuest said:


> Anybody else read this?
> 
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Arguments-E...2742/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1289576871&sr=8-1
> 
> ...


 
No, I'm waiting for the film.


----------



## fen_boy (Nov 12, 2010)

Wookey said:


> TV also switches brain use to the right hemisphere, unlike radio, and yet it's the left hemisphere which runs our judgement, analysis and critical facilities towards whatever input goes in.
> 
> Hours and hours of doing this is suspected to seriously influence brain development and function. This switching to the right side also causes the release of endorphins,beta-endorphins and enkephalins into the system, and these are opiate-like substances that can cause dependence on the pleasurable experience being gone through - much as happens with orgasms. A drop in these substances can trigger anxiety, and presage depression and addiction.
> 
> So TV isn't better than radio from a health point of view, and many exclusive radio listeners would argue they are no less informed or entertained than you, and potentially a lot more in charge of their endocrine systems, anxiety levels and mental acuity.



Any links for all that?


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Nov 12, 2010)

Santino said:


> There's an episode of Law & Order: Criminal Intent which is just a rip-off of the Harold Shipman case: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0629523/


 
Do you know I think I have seen that one! I must watch too much TV


----------



## Santino (Nov 12, 2010)

QueenOfGoths said:


> Do you know I think I have seen that one! I must watch too much TV


 
There's also one with a Stephen Hawking-y physicist and an Anna Nicole Smith-y model.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 12, 2010)

Santino said:


> No, I'm waiting for the film.


 i'm waiting for the 60 second infotainment blipvert


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Nov 12, 2010)

QueenOfGoths said:


> Do you know I think I have seen that one! I must watch too much TV


 
Damn you to hell, TV watcher.


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Nov 12, 2010)

Santino said:


> There's also one with a Stephen Hawking-y physicist and an Anna Nicole Smith-y model.


 
Yeah - isn't the Anna Nicole Smith character played by some once well known but now slightly faded actress and her husband/boyfriend by David Cross!  I know my L&O and and am unabashed about it


----------



## Santino (Nov 12, 2010)

QueenOfGoths said:


> Yeah - isn't the Anna Nicole Smith character played by some once well known but now slightly faded actress and her husband/boyfriend by David Cross!  I know my L&O and and am unabashed about it


 
IMDB says: yes.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 12, 2010)

Santino said:


> IMDB says: yes.


who? i'm curious now


----------



## Santino (Nov 12, 2010)

Orang Utan said:


> who? i'm curious now



Kristy Swanson.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Nov 12, 2010)

Wookey said:


> Most people consume more than three hours a day - and some groups (youth, students) consume even more.
> 
> The AVERAGE viewing hours is 28 per week! In the US (more channels, more TVs) it's even higher.
> 
> I'm glad you use it sparingly, and with control. But I would argue most people aren't that discerning - and TV can be a physically and emotionally addictive agent, leading to sedentary lifestyles and fat waists - and we haven't even started on advertising and the effects of that!



I think you misunderstand me. I'm saying I often consumer three hours of *media* per hour. That would be listening to the radio, while surfing the net, and glancing up at the telly which is also on.

Often I'm doing none of these things. Sometimes I'm just doing one of them. I don't see a problem with it. I do what I want.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Nov 12, 2010)

skyscraper101 said:


> . I don't see a problem with it. I do what I want.


 
Exactly.


----------



## kyser_soze (Nov 12, 2010)

> more than 10 hours a week and your risk of diabetes and obesity rises significantly



I would imagine that if you spend more than 10 hours a week on the internet or reading books and don't do anything else, and eat loads of shit, your chances of diabetes and obesity rise too. I know there is some research which says telly is especially bad for this (something about switching brainwave patterns into a somnolent mode, which triggers changes in your metabolism, which slows down which you don't get with 'interactive' ents like books, but I've never seen a corrolary study done on cinema so have it in the 'possibly true, possibly bollocks' category of 'studies have shown' new articles )


----------



## Wookey (Nov 12, 2010)

fen_boy said:


> Any links for all that?


 
I'd start with Krugman's 1969 experiments in brain hemisphere reactions to TV watching, and work forward from there into endocrinology, which came later obviously.

http://old.disinfo.com/archive/pages/article/id1149/pg1/

http://dieoff.org/page24.htm

And here's a review of The Tube, which features the old man's work: http://www.turnoffyourtv.com/reviews/tubemovie.html

Some of the info is just what I've learned from my efforts at endocrine control, which can be influenced by diet, external and internal stimulii and of course, TV.


----------



## fogbat (Nov 12, 2010)

Wookey said:


> On what basis is it better? With radio, you are using the higher functioning parts of the brain to construct the imagery you aren't being spoonfed. Conversely, when watching TV your higher brain functions shut down, and you start using the limbic brain structures, which don't distinguish between reality and make-believe, (which is the job of the neo-cortex) they treat all input as equal - and kick-start your fight or flight response oftentimes innappropriately.
> 
> TV also switches brain use to the right hemisphere, unlike radio, and yet it's the left hemisphere which runs our judgement, analysis and critical facilities towards whatever input goes in.
> 
> ...


 
There are a lot of science-y words in this post, so I'm afraid Wookey is correct.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Nov 12, 2010)

hardly ever watch as prefer reading but i understand why people watch it and it has no indication of peoples intelligence or any of that shizzle.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 12, 2010)

skyscraper101 said:


> I think you misunderstand me. I'm saying I often consumer three hours of *media* per hour. That would be listening to the radio, while surfing the net, and glancing up at the telly which is also on.
> 
> Often I'm doing none of these things. Sometimes I'm just doing one of them. I don't see a problem with it. I do what I want.



If you don't see a problem with it, then there probably isn't a problem with it, I hope I didn't suggest there was in your case.

But other people have vastly different experiences, don't they? Studies show that TV watching is a stronger indicator of childhood obesity than even diet or excercise, it's a more pronounces precursor to fat kids. Who grow into fat adults with the same bad habits. The link is proven, we don't need to debate it - we watch more TV now than we did last year, and we have a higher incidence of childhood obesity this year than we did last year. The two are intertwined, and that's partly the passivity of TV come into play, and partly the mindless consumption of calories whilst watching TV, which many kids do.

Me telling you that TV is problematic for some people is like an alcoholic trying to tell a man who enjoys the odd pint of ale on a Sunday that alcohol is a poison. The man without the drink problem can't see that booze is a poison, it isn't a problem for him. But that doesn't stop booze being a poison, it still is. Just not poisonous to that man, at that time.

So you don't face any issues with TV, which is fab. There but for the grace of something something, innit!


----------



## Wookey (Nov 12, 2010)

fogbat said:


> There are a lot of science-y words in this post, so I'm afraid Wookey is correct.


 
You are the rightest you have ever been. You can expect it all to go downhill, from here on in.


----------



## Santino (Nov 12, 2010)

cum hoc ergo propter hoc


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 12, 2010)

Santino said:


> cum hoc ergo propter hoc


 
Cum high, cum properly.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 12, 2010)

Santino said:


> cum hoc ergo propter hoc


 
No, causitively evaluated science stuff, actually!



> Drs. R.M. Viner and T.J. Cole from the University College London evaluated the effects of early childhood television watching on adult obesity by assessing data from 8,158 participants of the 1970 Birth Cohort. Height, weight, and frequency of television watching were assessed at ages 5, 10, and 30 years. At age 5, approximately 40% of the participants exceeded the AAP's guidelines, although the average number of hours watched was 1 ½ hours. The researchers found that each additional hour of weekend TV watching by five-year-old children over the AAP's suggested two hours may increase the risk of obesity in 30 year olds by 7%.



Science Daily


----------



## Santino (Nov 12, 2010)

Wookey said:


> No, causitively evaluated science stuff, actually!
> 
> 
> 
> Science Daily



There's nothing in that abstract that says TELEVISION causes anything. It's hardly a devastating revelation that overweight people tend to sit around more. Did the studies take into account how much time people sat around reading, or listening to radio, or on the internet, or in the pub?


----------



## Wookey (Nov 12, 2010)

Santino said:


> There's nothing in that abstract that says TELEVISION causes anything. It's hardly a devastating revelation that overweight people tend to sit around more. Did the studies take into account how much time people sat around reading, or listening to radio, or on the internet, or in the pub?


 
Of course television doesn't cause anything in and of itself, just like an undrunk pint of lager doesn't. But excessive television viewing, which most people are guilty of, is directly causally related to obesity. To the point where health agencies around the world recommend TV viewing limits for kids, which are far beneath the average daily viewing time enjoyed by most kids (In the US, 1.5 hours recommended as opposed 4 hours daily average).


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 12, 2010)

Wookey said:


> Of course television doesn't cause anything in and of itself, just like an undrunk pint of lager doesn't. But excessive television viewing, which most people are guilty of, is directly causally related to obesity.


 
More so than eating too much?


----------



## Santino (Nov 12, 2010)

Wookey said:


> Of course television doesn't cause anything in and of itself, just like an undrunk pint of lager doesn't. But excessive television viewing, which most people are guilty of, is directly causally related to obesity. To the point where health agencies around the world recommend TV viewing limits for kids, which are far beneath the average daily viewing time enjoyed by most kids (In the US, 1.5 hours recommended as opposed 4 hours daily average).


 
There was nothing in your quote that demonstrated a direct causal relationship. I fail to see how such a cause could be established without a huge study that monitored enough behaviour to eliminate other factors such as just general sitting around.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Nov 12, 2010)

fogbat said:


> There are a lot of science-y words in this post, so I'm afraid Wookey is correct.



I don't know about 'correct' as such but you have to credit him for a triumphant reclaiming of his previously unchallenged position as the most pompously self-righteous poster on the boards.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 12, 2010)

The two are intertwined; the more TV you watch, the more empty snack foods you are likely to consume. So a sedentary lifestyle with innappropriate calorie levels leads to obesity. TV is the most common form of sendentary relaxation. It can contribute to people being fat.


----------



## Santino (Nov 12, 2010)

If TV is the most common sedentary activity, it is going to be associated with obesity. I hope no one got a research grant to work that out.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 12, 2010)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> I don't know about 'correct' as such but you have to credit him for a triumphant reclaiming of his previously unchallenged position as the most pompously self-righteous poster on the boards.


 
Thankyou MGO, I tell you there is far too much pussy-footing around going on here lately, if I can reintroduce a decent sense of pomposity and self-rightousness then I've done my bit.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 12, 2010)

Santino said:


> There was nothing in your quote that demonstrated a direct causal relationship. I fail to see how such a cause could be established without a huge study that monitored enough behaviour to eliminate other factors such as just general sitting around.


 
Presumably the longitudinal study I referred to had control measures, I haven't read the paper.


----------



## Santino (Nov 12, 2010)

You know what they say about 'presume'. It makes a pres out of ume.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 12, 2010)

Wookey said:


> The two are intertwined; the more TV you watch, the more empty snack foods you are likely to consume. So a sedentary lifestyle with innappropriate calorie levels leads to obesity. TV is the most common form of sendentary relaxation. It can contribute to people being fat.


 
What about the tv watching in India, where they most likely are eating rice and a veg curry?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 12, 2010)

Wookey said:


> On what basis is it better? With radio, you are using the higher functioning parts of the brain to construct the imagery you aren't being spoonfed. Conversely, when watching TV your higher brain functions shut down, and you start using the limbic brain structures, which don't distinguish between reality and make-believe, (which is the job of the neo-cortex) they treat all input as equal - and kick-start your fight or flight response oftentimes innappropriately.
> 
> TV also switches brain use to the right hemisphere, unlike radio, and yet it's the left hemisphere which runs our judgement, analysis and critical facilities towards whatever input goes in.
> 
> ...


 
Good effort. Utter, utter bollocks, but very well constructed bollocks. Well done.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 12, 2010)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Good effort. Utter, utter bollocks, but very well constructed bollocks. Well done.


 
Thankyou, thankyou. I do try with my bollocks, unlike some around here.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 13, 2010)

Wookey said:


> Thankyou, thankyou. I do try with my bollocks, unlike some around here.


 
Hook, line and sinker. 

You fat couch potato cunt.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 13, 2010)

goldenecitrone said:


> What about the tv watching in India, where they most likely are eating rice and a veg curry?


 
Obesity is at epidemic levels in India, and they have 555 TV channels to choose from in a recently liberalised multi-billion pound TV industry.

It's a complete case in point for a hand-in-hand connection.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 13, 2010)

Wookey said:


> Obesity is at epidemic levels in India, and they have 555 TV channels to choose from in a recently liberalised multi-billion pound TV industry.
> 
> It's a complete case in point for a hand-in-hand connection.


 
Once bitten, twice shy wooks. Twice shy.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 13, 2010)

goldenecitrone said:


> Once bitten, twice shy wooks. Twice shy.



Oh, I stand by every word I've said, it's all true. But it is, at the same time, in the great scheme of things, a load of bollocks, because I know it's true, and thus this thread serves me little intellectual purpose other than to study how intransigent other people can be when dearly-held behaviours are challenged.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 13, 2010)

Wookey said:


> Oh, I stand by every word I've said, it's all true. But it is, at the same time, in the great scheme of things, a load of bollocks, because I know it's true, and thus this thread serves me little intellectual purpose other than to study how intransigent other people can be when dearly-held behaviours are challenged.


 
Then you would also know that tv is the symptom, but not the cause.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 13, 2010)

goldenecitrone said:


> Then you would also know that tv is the symptom, but not the cause.


 
A symptom of what?


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 13, 2010)

Wookey said:


> A symptom of what?


 
Inactivity. Leisure culture, not having to actually do much to sustain life.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 13, 2010)

goldenecitrone said:


> Inactivity. Leisure culture, not having to actually do much to sustain life.


 
So TV is a symptom of a sedentary life, and not a cause of a sedentary life?

You're saying TV watching, which is shown to be excessive in the average person and addictive to many, has a _neutral_ effect on sedentariness? That it cannot cause someone to be sedentary?


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 13, 2010)

Wookey said:


> So TV is a symptom of a sedentary life, and not a cause of a sedentary life?
> 
> You're saying TV watching, which is shown to be excessive in the average person and addictive to many, has a _neutral_ effect on sedentariness? That it cannot cause someone to be sedentary?


 
Yes, you got it, in a nutshell. We have excess time to use when we're not working our arses off to keep a roof over our heads and keep a meal on the table. People use that time in different ways. Some like running on a treadmill, watching the BBC news channel, trying desparately to keep the ageing process at bay. Others like to buy 20 cans, a dozen burgers and settle down to the X factor. Different strokes for different folks.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 13, 2010)

goldenecitrone said:


> Yes, you got it, in a nutshell. We have excess time to use when we're not working our arses off to keep a roof over our heads and keep a meal on the table. People use that time in different ways. Some like running on a treadmill, watching the BBC news channel, trying desparately to keep the ageing process at bay. Others like to buy 20 cans, a dozen burgers and settle down to the X factor. Different strokes for different folks.



Look at this description of a study of small towns which suddenly had TV introduced. It's a fairly unique experiment really, but seems rigorous and the closest we could get to a measurable situation. They definitely conclude that TV causes negative impacts on people's social lives and sports participation.

http://world.std.com/~jlr/comment/tv_impact.htm



> To sum up: the introduction of television made kids more aggressive, harmed the acquistion of reading skills, decreased creativity scores, and cut participation in non-TV leisure activities. These conclusions are not novel and are not peculiar. The effects of TV are obviously great and are obviously far-reaching. What all the effort, all the rigor, all the detailed analysis of this study shows, is that the effects are negative.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 13, 2010)

You might as well show me a study of how the wheel changed human society for the worse. I'm sure it would have been made if such research had existed then.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Nov 13, 2010)

Wookey, you need a tv man. Since when is arguing for hours through the day with a bunch of people online you don't even know better for your health than watching tv?


----------



## Wookey (Nov 13, 2010)

goldenecitrone said:


> You might as well show me a study of how the wheel changed human society for the worse. I'm sure it would have been made if such research had existed then.


 
Well, it's a lovely little study which was able to see what would happen to a community when one variable changed, in this case the introduction of TV. It was longitudinal and cross-sectional and had control communities nearby for comparison. It's methods probably teach us a lot about methodology, it's a cracker. And what's more, it entirely proves my point that TV causes negative social impact, and specifically a more sedentary lifestyle. Do you know of a study which refutes this, or proves no causal connection between TV and getting fat?


----------



## Wookey (Nov 13, 2010)

TrippyLondoner said:


> Wookey, you need a tv man. Since when is arguing for hours through the day with a bunch of people online you don't even know better for your health than watching tv?


 
I'm using my higher brain functions! My neo-cortex is buzzing! I'm negotiating complex threads of information, processing and externalising all at the same time. If I want to veg out, I watch telly. If I want to get wound up, I come here.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Nov 13, 2010)

Wookey said:


> I'm using my higher brain functions! My neo-cortex is buzzing! I'm negotiating complex threads of information, processing and externalising all at the same time. If I want to veg out, I watch telly. If I want to get wound up, I come here.


 
'higher brain functions' lol, good one.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 13, 2010)

Wookey said:


> Well, it's a lovely little study which was able to see what would happen to a community when one variable changed, in this case the introduction of TV. It was longitudinal and cross-sectional and had control communities nearby for comparison. It's methods probably teach us a lot about methodology, it's a cracker. And what's more, it entirely proves my point that TV causes negative social impact, and specifically a more sedentary lifestyle. Do you know of a study which refutes this, or proves no causal connection between TV and getting fat?


 
Auschwitz TV.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 13, 2010)

TrippyLondoner said:


> 'higher brain functions' lol, good one.


 


You're undermining my authority at a crucial juncture!


----------



## Wookey (Nov 13, 2010)

goldenecitrone said:


> Auschwitz TV.


 
I see.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Nov 13, 2010)

Wookey said:


> You're undermining my authority at a crucial juncture!



You're concerned with authority on a internet forum? 

GET A TV MAN.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 13, 2010)

Wookey said:


> I see.


 
Sorry, think it was Sobibor Plus.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 13, 2010)

By the way, is this racist?


----------



## Wookey (Nov 13, 2010)

22 seconds of unreclaimable life.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 13, 2010)

What about this?


----------



## Wookey (Nov 13, 2010)

This is just retribution and it isn't pretty.


----------



## Backatcha Bandit (Nov 13, 2010)

This one's for you, Wookey:



Thanks for the thoughtful, informative posts.


----------



## Backatcha Bandit (Nov 13, 2010)

I've never had one of my own.

If I visit someone and there's one on 'in the background', I find it so obtrusive that I can't ignore it.  It's like the hypno-toad. 

I usually politely explain that they (the TV owner) has precisely zero chance of competing with it for my attention, as they are not spending several thousand pounds a minute trying to attract my gaze.  If it's news or some other hysterical propaganda, I'll just switch the fucker off, damn your eyes.

I watch a lot of documentaries and the odd bit of comedy on the computer, but the difference there is that I can watch what I want when I want.  That's the key difference - It's _pull_ media, as opposed to _push_.  No ads, no schedule.  If someone comes round or the phone rings, I can pause it, so it doesn't compete for attention.





As for the accusations of 'self-righteousness'...  a Wendell Berry quote seems appropriate:




			
				Wendell said:
			
		

> ..others accuse me of self-righteousness, by which they seem to have meant that they think they are righter than I think I am.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 13, 2010)

many people are watching telly in the way you describe now, me included. i rarely watch any scheduled telly anymore. i don't like just sticking it on for no reason. never watch it in the daytime and usually watch DVDs, catch up, or saved programmes in the evening. schedules are on the way out. eventually, the only scheduled telly will be live 'event tv' and sports.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 13, 2010)

Backatcha Bandit said:


> This one's for you, Wookey:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the thoughtful, informative posts.




I really enjoyed that. lol


----------



## Backatcha Bandit (Nov 13, 2010)

I can't believe it took nearly 350 posts before it came up, TBH.


----------



## Agent Sparrow (Nov 13, 2010)

Actually, re: obesity I do seem to remember there was a spike in the UK average weight, round about the time that remote controls became common place. There's another one that was thought to coincide with the addition of a second phone (so a two floor house would have one on each floor) became more common. I mean, it's just correlative speculation, but still an interesting idea. 

Personally I can't be smug at not having a tuned in TV because I'm sure my time spent on the net is hardly more productive. If anything it's easier to get sucked into wasting HOURS doing nothing productive at all.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 13, 2010)

Agent Sparrow said:


> Personally I can't be smug at not having a tuned in TV because I'm sure my time spent on the net is hardly more productive. If anything it's easier to get sucked into wasting HOURS doing nothing productive at all.


so so true!


----------



## kyser_soze (Nov 15, 2010)

Backatcha Bandit said:


> I've never had one of my own.
> 
> If I visit someone and there's one on 'in the background', I find it so obtrusive that I can't ignore it.  It's like the hypno-toad.
> 
> ...


 
Someone who watches X-Factor on ITV player on their PC is behaving in _exactly_ the same way you are - treating it as a pull medium, choosing to watch what they want, when they want. Yet I doubt when you posted this you were thinking about X-Factor or Strictly...


----------

