cebert 2 days ago

Some people overestimate the impact that brief exposure to certain concepts has on children. For example, I watched shows like Captain Planet as a kid, which promoted causes like environmentalism. I wasn’t consciously aware of the viewpoints being presented, and they definitely didn’t turn me into an activist as a child. Young children are primarily drawn to entertainment and often don’t engage with complex ideas or deeper messages at that age.

I have to imagine that most children don’t even realize that same sex couples are in a relationship or a character is trans while watching shows.

  • al_borland 2 days ago

    As a child there were commercials showing birds and other animals tangled up in the plastic 6-pack rings. I still cut those up as a result of those commercials 40 years ago. Everyone I know from that era does the same… even people who generally laugh at the idea of environmentalism and throw recyclable cans with a deposit it the trash, because they can’t be bothered.

    I always think of Punky Brewster and get a little anxious any time I see someone get in a refrigerator. Even though I know modern refrigerators don’t have the issues of Punky’s, it still feels incredibly risky to get into a fridge thanks to that one episode of a TV show I saw one time 30+ years ago.

    You never really know what people will latch onto that will change behavior decades later.

    I watched Captain Planet as well. While I don’t know if it was directly responsible or not, I have a hard time throwing stuff away that still seems good. I always try to sell or donate it. I don’t want to be the one that adds massive amounts of stuff to the landfill. If I have more than one bag to throw away for the week, I feel a little embarrassed. I avoid retail therapy, in part, for a similar reason. Was it Captain Planet, was it the Reduce, Reuse, Recycle commercials? Maybe a little of both.

    • array_key_first 2 days ago

      IMO the main difference is that identity is more or less immutable. If it could be easily changed in childhood, nobody would be gay. We spent, like, the last 200 years trying our absolute hardest to make sure nobody is gay. We practically beat them over the head with it. We told people it's the worst thing ever and they deserve to die if they're gay.

      And people still came out gay.

  • UncleMeat 2 days ago

    This is going to get worse.

    States are introducing age-verification bills for porn where they include "gender ideology" or "people expressing identity incongruent with their biological sex" in the definition of porn. This was planned very explicitly in Project 2025. The right is pushing the same "trans visibility is turning kids trans" nonsense that they were pushing a 20 years ago with "gay visibility is turning kids gay."

    This isn't just going to be parents cancelling netflix subscriptions or even school boards removing specific books from libraries. This is going to be coordinated efforts to criminalize trans visibility.

  • mgh2 2 days ago

    Children are sponges when it comes to learning.

    The trick with propaganda is that it subconsciously affects your mind, to the point you won't realize until it is too late.

    It is no secret why most FAANG are in advertising: Meta, Google, Netflix (movies and shows are just another form).

    They are in the business of controlling your mind - doing this to children is immoral, especially when it comes to their health and identity.

    [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_truth_effect

    [2] https://archive.ph/JGuKR#selection-615.106-615.121

    [3] https://thatparkplace.com/my-panda-my-choice-propaganda-in-a...

    [4] https://medium.com/@trendguardian/free-will-a-rich-fairy-tal...

    • ofcourseyoudo 2 days ago

      What is the "false information" being pushed here? That transgender people exist?

      Anyone who has watched "Dead End" knows the only "propaganda" it is pushing is that trans kids exist and one particular one (Barney) feels more comfortable expressing what they feel is their most authentic identity.

      Also what is the comparative exposure of LGBTQ experience as seen in children's programming versus the amount of heterosexual experience they are shown?

    • wryoak 2 days ago

      If children are sponges when it comes to learning why do we wait until high school to let them learn eg calculus? And why censor anything from them? Seems like MORE exposure to ideas is better than less. The kids’ll sort out the truth for themselves when they inherit the earth.

    • general1465 2 days ago

      By this logic, I would need to be expert in cutting heads off Mexican cartel style, because when I was a teen I had a nasty habit of watching LiveLeak.

      • mgh2 2 days ago

        Not expertise, just distinction btwn truth and false. How can we be sure we are not a product of social media propaganda?

        • general1465 2 days ago

          Would you like a cupcake recipe?

      • 2OEH8eoCRo0 2 days ago

        It likely impacted what you think about Mexico.

BLKNSLVR 2 days ago

I think Elon would find that there are plenty of other kids TV shows that he would approve of on Netflix, so what's the ratio at which it becomes 'pushing an agenda'?

Elon has fallen into that classic trap of 'it exists, but I don't like it, so I must cancel it!' rather than what a normal thinking parent would do, and not allow your kid to watch that one show.

You know, parenting...

There are lots of shows I don't like on Netflix, I just scroll past instead of having a public tantrum.

But I'm not a ketamine addict either.

  • joules77 2 days ago

    He is an Attention addict. Just like Trump. They keep churning out shit everyday to get people to pay Attention to them. Why else buy Twitter/start truth social etc. So that their drug keeps flowing.

    Their biggest source of anxiety in life is enough people aren't paying attention to them. Anything else that captures more Attention is an automatic existential threat. Netflix captures a lot of Attention. Therefore its a threat.

    • baobun 2 days ago

      I'm told it's part of a deliberate strategy called "flooding the zone", via Bannon.

      • baxtr 2 days ago

        Couldn’t both be true at the same time? You’re an attention addict and use it deliberately.

        • southwindcg 2 days ago

          100%. It's weaponized attention whoring.

treetalker 2 days ago

Ah, Elon Musk: paragon of morality, grand chancellor, exemplar of clean living and philanthropy to children everywhere! Blessed are we to receive his immaculate pronouncements from on high.

jjgreen 2 days ago

The lady doth protest too much, methinks

  • delichon 2 days ago

    [flagged]

    • array_key_first 2 days ago

      Profound effect?

      Musk has, like, half a dozen kids and I doubt he can name all of them. None of them have a profound effect on his life, he made sure of that.

    • Zigurd 2 days ago

      I know people personally who have trans kids. It's trivially true that their kids had a profound effect on their lives. Just not a negative effect.

    • deeg 2 days ago

      Only because he has made it so. If he loved and accepted his daughter like most parents he wouldn't be railing like this.

  • BLKNSLVR 2 days ago

    I mean, his dad appears to possibly be a 'friend of Epstein' (colloquially, not literally), so there's likely some amount of suppressed something or other going on.

    It would be pitiable if he hadn't already burned through 1000x his allotted pity credits (even only in the last 6 months).