Watching Jersey Shore makes you dumber.

[Agloco]

The OP is really flawed though. It acts as if there's no place in society for mindless stupid entertainment. I promise you that if you never partake in something mindless simply for entertainment value you will burn out before you reach any sort of intelligence pinnacle.

Says the man who is capable of discerning said show from reality.

The vast minority are capable of appreciating it for what it is Manny. Unfortunately, most will see it as an example of what's acceptable or how to behave. It certainly doesn't send the right message about motivation.

Your mistake is putting yourself in the same pot as other young Americans who watch this junk. This study applies no more to you or Funt as it does to someone who doesn't even watch it.

[z0sa]

While I am not a big TV guy at all and hold the same opinion that most Americans watch way too much TV for their own good, I must disagree with your statement. I can't see how watching a few sports games and channels like Animal Planet or Discovery make you dumber. There are programs out there where you learn a lot about animals, clearly not making you dumber, quite the opposite.

I noted in my second post (in an edit, admittedly) that a few exceptions do exist, I myself am a HUGE fan of discovery/AP/history HD, there is a lot of great knowledge there

BUT

even then, the director/editors are pressed to make it as "watered down" and interesting for the casual viewer as possible. You're spending your time inefficiently from a learning standpoint, combining a bunch of reading with some video about whatever they are covering is usually much better for your actual knowledge about any certain topic

[ALVAREZ6]

Also, one of the biggest faults with the study as I can see from that article is the lack of perception. People perceive different subject matter differently. In the case of Jersey Shore, a person may watch it and feel envy for the party atmosphere and lack of responsibility they display while another person may watch it and laugh at the utter ridiculousness of the situation. If they want to say that what you watch has an affect on how you think then perception of that material must be important as well and it seems as though they have tried to shoe horn the authors perception in place of the subjects.

That seems rather flawed to me. Thats not say the study doesn't have merit, its just an important factor to consider when making your conclusions.

Right on, absolutely flawed there is no denying it, but it makes sense that they left such details out because it's just an online article from MSNBC trying to get views on a very popular subject (Jersey Shore = make you dumb).

[ALVAREZ6]

I noted in my second post (in an edit, admittedly) that a few exceptions do exist, I myself am a HUGE fan of discovery/AP/history HD, there is a lot of great knowledge there

BUT

even then, the director/editors are pressed to make it as "watered down" and interesting for the casual viewer as possible. You're spending your time inefficiently from a learning standpoint, since mixed education (ie both reading and video about whatever they are covering) is usually much better

I agree with all of that, definitely watered down, but just because it's not the best/most efficient option doesn't mean it's not making you smarter, or even dumber, clearly.

[MannyIsGod]

i assume you are asking why watching TV makes you dumber, because you could be doing something constructive with that time (basically anything that involves active problem-solving) instead of sitting on your ass staring at a screen while being mentally hand-held throughout (Jersey Shore). it is a fantasy scenario that the director and editors create to keep your interested, and not a reflection or indicator of real life situations, so it's not good from an experience or learning standpoint, basically the only arguments one could make

How would this differ from reading? When reading you're not actively solving any problems you're just taking in information.

BTW I didn't mention movies per se for a reason, they technically count as TV at home but a well-made movie is generally much more intellectually involving for the viewer than ANY tv show, which is made with leading into commercials and ads in mind, and keeping you hooked with any BS tactic they can pull as long as possible to watch more commercials and ads.

I don't see how a well made movie is any different from a well made TV show at all. The story development in many TV shows is far superior to the best 2 hour movie out there and it really isn't even close. This is a very interesting POV. Are you sure that you're more intellectually active watching a movie than watching TV?

I'm not saying TV isn't entertaining, but that's the problem, it's all bang and no buck at the end of the day when one's vegetated in front of the screen for hours

there are some exceptions, specifically in small child's TV, but once you get to 9-10 year old cartoons, it's all bull

What about at the end of the day when one's been vegetated at a job or at school for hours? How many productive hours does a human have in a day before you start losing efficiency? Should a person spend every waking hour doing something intellectually stimulating?

[AmericanPsycho]

How anyone finds Jersey Shore hilarious makes no sense and that these same posters ciricritique movies with such passion is hilarious.

[MannyIsGod]

Says the man who is capable of discerning said show from reality.

The vast minority are capable of appreciating it for what it is Manny. Unfortunately, most will see it as an example of what's acceptable or how to behave. It certainly doesn't send the right message about motivation.

Your mistake is putting yourself in the same pot as other young Americans who watch this junk. This study applies no more to you or Funt as it does to someone who doesn't even watch it.

Sure, but that doesn't necessarily speak to intelligence more than it does to social normals and morality. I'm not so sure they go hand in hand.

[MannyIsGod]

How anyone finds Jersey Shore hilarious makes no sense and that these same posters ciricritique movies with such passion is hilarious.

I guess some of you spend all your time drinking the best wine and eating the finest cheese while wearing the finest threads.


On the other hand, I can enjoy the some dude cooked on the corner of a street and enjoying a really great cut of meat cooked perfectly. I don't see why that's so hard to understand.

[z0sa]

How would this differ from reading? When reading you're not actively solving any problems you're just taking in information.

I disagree completely, just reading a simple description requires a type of problem solving in formulating the way you perceive the described world

I don't see how a well made movie is any different from a well made TV show at all. The story development in many TV shows is far superior to the best 2 hour movie out there and it really isn't even close. This is a very interesting POV. Are you sure that you're more intellectually active watching a movie than watching TV?

I think so, and precisely because the entire plot is "jammed" into a much smaller segment, you have to be constantly and actively be following the course of things at a speed that is not required in most TV shows, even serial ones. Many, many people "catch up" on serial shows despite missing multiple episodes; how much of a movie can you miss before you're seriously losing entertainment value from missing a pivotal scene?

What about at the end of the day when one's been vegetated at a job or at school for hours?

School usually isn't vegetative unless you lack sleep or have a seriously terrible teacher who refuses to let a good student speak out, ask questions, etc

Work can be lame and mind numbing but work isn't done for entertainment last I checked

How many productive hours does a human have in a day before you start losing efficiency? Should a person spend every waking hour doing something intellectually stimulating?

Depends on each person specifically, one assumes

I think the latter question is also a matter of personal preference and really depends on your personality type. I'd have to assume that type b personalities watch the most TV, for example.

[CuckingFunt]

HA! j/k. I am all for mindless entertainment on occasion, once in a while. A steady diet of it though... that should worry anyone.

I think the steady diet part is an important qualifier not taken into consideration in the OP's experiment.

Lord knows I love a guilty pleasure show (or ten), but they probably make up a pretty small percentage of all that I watch/read/listen to.

[CuckingFunt]

Not surprising, to be honest anyone who watches more than an hour or two max of TV a day (mostly everyone, in fact, the average in the USA was 2 hours a day a few years back, probably up more now) is pretty much wasting their time and getting dumber, or at least, not getting smarter for a few cheap laughs or thrills, and sometimes not even that

Impossible to generalize.

I'm a big TV watcher, have always been, and as a latchkey kid developed a habit of using the TV as background noise (when I was little, the voices made me feel less scared/lonely in an empty house until mom got home) that has not yet gone away. I listen to music often, and am outside and active a fair amount, but I'd say the TV is on the majority of the time that I'm at home and don't have company. So, way more than an hour or two a day, but I would certainly consider myself to be reasonably intelligent.

I think more important that how much TV one watches, or even what shows are watched, is how one watches TV. I see a lot of TV, a lot, but there are only a few shows every week that actually get my full attention. Most of my TV "watching" is in fact glancing; checking out the screen every now and then while I'm also engaged in any number of other activities. Additionally, when I do watch TV, I don't do so in zombie mode. Whether naturally or through academic habit, I'm generally a pretty active audience. I tend to engage fully in the things I watch/read/listen to, whether it's Treme or Jersey Shore, rather than sit like a bump on the couch and passively consume the TV's images.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

I guess some of you spend all your time drinking the best wine and eating the finest cheese while wearing the finest threads.

Don't hate.

[MannyIsGod]

[CuckingFunt]

Ruby cufflinks.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

I'd recommend a 2008 Frei Bros. Cabernet and a plate of young Reggiano with your JS viewing. Honey with the parm is optional, but go organic if you decide to indulge.

Finish off with a slightly chilled Prosecco. Add a wedge of strawberry if you're having trouble sealing the deal.

I learned all of these things from watching TV.

[CuckingFunt]

I'd recommend a 2008 Frei Bros. Cabernet and a plate of young Reggiano with your JS viewing. Honey with the parm is optional, but go organic if you decide to indulge.

Finish off with a slightly chilled Prosecco. Add a wedge of strawberry if you're having trouble sealing the deal.

I learned all of these things from watching TV.

Reggiano? A little on the nose, don't you think?

I'd go with French breakfast radishes cleaned and halved, topped with European style cultured butter and a sprinkle of sea salt.

[MannyIsGod]

ruby cufflinks.

loooooooool

[703 Spurz]

You don't ever watch movies? You never read books? What makes you interested in those? Its not like half of Jersey Shore isn't staged.

You're saying the idea of Jersey Shore is the same as me watching The Big Lebowski? Both scripted ideas that are meant to entertain?

It's not even close to being the same thing.

[MannyIsGod]

I hate cheese, BTW. Especially Parm. It ing stinks. Prosecco and the Cab I can do though.

I prefer to watch Jersey Shore with a full cup of RON RON JUICE though.

[703 Spurz]

i assume you are asking why watching TV makes you dumber, because you could be doing something constructive with that time (basically anything that involves active problem-solving) instead of sitting on your ass staring at a screen while being mentally hand-held throughout (Jersey Shore). it is a fantasy scenario that the director and editors create to keep your interested, and not a reflection or indicator of real life situations, so it's not good from an experience or learning standpoint, basically the only arguments one could make

BTW I didn't mention movies per se for a reason, they technically count as TV at home but a well-made movie is generally much more intellectually involving for the viewer than ANY tv show, which is made with leading into commercials and ads in mind, and keeping you hooked with any BS tactic they can pull as long as possible to watch more commercials and ads.

I'm not saying TV isn't entertaining, but that's the problem, it's all bang and no buck at the end of the day when one's vegetated in front of the screen for hours

there are some exceptions, especially in small children's TV, but once you get to 9-10 year old cartoons, it's all bull even there.

Being at work 8 hours a day is enough 'problem-solving' for me. Going home, exercising a few times a week, then watching tv for a few hours is pretty much how my weekdays go.

Am I a ing idiot b/c I watch TV every night? Absolutely not. You think I want to go home after working all day to work on crossword puzzles or some other intellectual ? No way in bud

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

Reggiano? A little on the nose, don't you think?

Consider the audience.

[CuckingFunt]

I hate cheese, BTW.

Does not compute.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

I hate cheese, BTW. Especially Parm. It ing stinks. Prosecco and the Cab I can do though.

What? You're a ing communist.

[ALVAREZ6]

I hate cheese, BTW.

Hating cheese is far more stupid than consistently watching Jersey Shore.

[MannyIsGod]

I knew this was the reaction that was going to come. You guys should see the weird ing looks I get when I tell people I don't like cheese. Sometimes people act like I just kicked their dog.

I do like Mozzarella but I hate just about every other cheese I've tried. I mean some of that stinks so bad.