small screen News Digest of Australian Council on Children and the Media (incorporating Young Media Australia) ISSN: 0817-8224 No. 257 September 2009 A Brain for life - the 21st century mind friendship, the perpetrators that posted In Sydney and Adelaide in September and Asked if she thought that children were the tampered picture on the web self early October, eminent UK neuroscien- disadvantaged if they are exposed to less confess with no prompting and every- tist Baroness Susan Greenfield presented stimulation from screens, - she said that thing is all OK in less than one day challenging addresses for those concerned technology should not dictate what society The following issues need to be consid- about the developing brain, and especially and parents want for their children They ered; in childhood. need real relationships with real people. • The program only gives one very mild Says Greenfield, “The human brain is What we really need for our children is to example of cyber bullying , continuously adapting and responding to deliver a sense of identity, of fulfilment, • It does not show children the extent the environment, - neuroplasticity- . It is and of being useful to society. And so we of the effects cyber bullying can have the personalisation of the physical brain should encourage children to be creative- on an individual (the animation only that we can now regard as the individual to have their own ideas, find what they shows a mild upset of the victim and “mind”. Given the exquisite sensitivity of are good at, enjoy, and can use. Children the problem appears to go away in a the individual brain/ mind to individual should be proud to be different. very short time) experiences, we need to explore the impact • It has an unrealistic view of problem of the new environment of the 21st century Cybersafety for the very young - Is solving in the real world – self-confes- on the kinds of people we may become”. ‘Hector’s World’ the answer? sion of perpetrators, time factor of 1 In our technological society, it is becom- day and a quick and happy ending ing essential for children to interact with • It doesn’t actually explore options computers and the internet to meet the of how to deal with cyber bullying. demands of school and communication. It only suggests that you speak to a Consequently children are interacting trusted adult. with the internet at a younger age. With • It doesn’t provide information of how internet access being widely available through to report or the rights of the victim. computer and mobile technologies, it is becom- • It does not address consequences for ing more difficult for parents and carers to the victim or the perpetrator monitor children’s internet use. Therefore, it In relation to the whole site, my view is that is critical that we educate children about cyber it is not developmentally appropriate for safety. However, to effectively educate children, the suggested age range. Two to six we need to create programs that are age appro- year old children would not under- priate, stimulating and capture their interest. stand the concepts presented in these We asked Lesley-Anne Willoughby to review animations without adult interven- hectors World. Lesley has B.Early Childhood tion, some of the characters such as Education (Hons) (earned for a study of cyber- the angler fish may be frightening for safety in children of junior primary age), and is continued on P2 a lecturer in early childhood development. In regard to the young mind and screen Adelaide seminar culture, Greenfield suggested 7 impacts The ACMA cyber safety program that we need to address. These are : ‘Hectors World’ (designed for 2-10 year Bratz, Britney & Bralettes: olds) addresses issues such as ‘keeping • short attention span personal information safe’ and ‘cyber bul- The sexualisation of childhood • a strongly sensory environment lying’, and these programs do provide • a loss of metaphor and meaning (from some important safety information and in- Steve Biddulph, author & psychologist being constantly in a literal and visual struction for young children to help them Julie Gale, convenor Kids Free 2B Kids world) keep safe. However there are some areas of Elizabeth Handsley, Vice President ACCM • process vs content (if you rescue the concern in relation to age appropriateness, princess do you care about her?) the messages it portrays and the structure Chair: Matthew Abraham ABC Radio • reduced empathy (from loss of face to of being a series. face interaction and reaction) 7 for 7.30pm Monday 23 November 2009 • a loss of personal identity (with con- Using the ‘Cyber bullying’ series as an Immanuel College stant need for reassurance that you are exemplar, the story is as follows 32 Morphett Road, Novar Gardens SA important) • increased risk-taking A picture of ‘Ming’ is tampered with and Tickets $27.50 posted on the internet, Ming gets upset [email protected] Greenfield added, “we need to discuss and withdraws from her group, Ming Ph 08 8376 2111 whether we want this sort of world, and if, then speaks to her mother who takes her Book early - seating limited not’ what we are going to do about it”. to her friends and her friends show her A Brain for life - 21st century mind Editorial: TV for under 2s Ad-free school buses in the USA ‘Hector’s World’ Video games and teenage health Mobile phone genie small screen September 2009 p2 EDITORIAL TV for under 2s (http://www.rch.org.au/ emplibrary/ccch/PB_16_template_ final_web.pdf) no. 257 September 2009 Back in 1999, the American Academy of Pediatrics, recommended that parents avoid TV for their This recommendation has now been under two year old children. small screen included in the soon to be released Editor: Barbara Biggins OAM “Get up and grow”guidelines Barbara Biggins At that time some thought that advice draconian; Compiler: Caroline Donald which are part of the Federal OAM others thought it sensible to avoid passive Hon CEO Editorial Board: Barbara Biggins, government’s anti-obesity drive. Jane Roberts, Judy Bundy, interaction at a time when the brain is developing Elizabeth Handsley. rapidly. And in recent weeks we have had neuroscientist Baroness Susan Greenfield warning of the likely small screen is published at the Ten years on, the debate has been revived. beginning of each month and negative impacts on the development of early reports on the events of the Two months ago a policy paper jointly issued by brain connections, of time with screens for the previous month 11 issues per the Centre for Community Child Health at the very young. year (Dec/Jan double issue) Royal Melbourne Children’s Hospital and the Published by Again- some say “How dare you tell parents what Murdoch Children’s Research Institute said that Australian Council on to do? We need TV to keep us sane. “ TV needs to be regarded “unequivocally as a Children and the Media health and wellbeing issue for young children”. (ACCM) Surely the issue is that this is important The paper said that media was an important issue PO Box 447 information for parents to have- along with advice Glenelg 5045 as it affected child development (including brain about getting babies immunised, not putting South Australia development) and the ways in which children them on their stomachs to sleep, the importance [email protected] see and understand the world (including social of good nutrition. Most parents want the best www.youngmedia.org.au norms and values) and their place in it.”The for their children, and value useful and reliable Tel: +61 8 8376 2111 centres recommended serious consideration of information. Why should this new information be Fax: +61 8 8376 2122 the AAP’s recommendation re TV for under 2s. seen and treated any differently? Helpline: 1800 700 357 ACCM is a national, non-profit continued from P1 community organisation. Its mission is to promote a younger children and in particular the healthier on average, while using the telephone quality media environment for ‘keeping personal information safe’ story and watching television did not appear to corre- Australian children. requires a child to sit and watch a series of five late to worsened or improved health scores. No part of this publication animations that follow on from one another to may be reproduced without view all concepts of how to keep personal infor- The leader of the research team, Melissa Wake permission of the Editor. mation safe. from Melbourne’s Royal Children’s Hospital and Contributions are welcome. the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, said This program is clearly more suitable for chil- the results indicated that “unsupervised, violent dren aged 7 years + when children are better video games cannot be seen as a good thing”. cognitively developed to think critically and ACCM’s services are Professor Wake said TV watching tended to be supported by grants participate in perspective taking. However the lack of stimulating interaction (watching more social than playing video games. “A lot of from the animations only) may diminish the interest for the content can also be educational or entertain- South Australian children. The program will gain greater inter- ing, making people laugh - there’s a lot of good Government est from children if it offers interactivity such things about TV,” she said. In contrast, video as games or monitored experiences similar to game use is a more solitary activity and, for teen- ‘Cyberquoll’ and needs to consider how to bet- agers, a more violent activity. ter accommodate children aged under 6 years. Australian national guidelines recommend that ACCM’s Web Page and Lesley Willoughby young people spend no more than two hours a Broadband access day using electronic media for entertainment, are supported by its http://www.hectorsworld.com/island/index.