They're so Yummy and Tender

Mmmmm. Free-range kids. Salon.com: Stop worrying about your children!

Basically, being exposed to all of the worst-case scenarios on TV has coupled with our poor ability to assess risk of unlikely events, results in parents being way too overprotective. I see kids getting driven to and from things I would have walked/biked to (and had I asked to be “chauffeured” I would have gotten a scowl that would have disfigured me for life), and parents wait with/for their kids at the bus stop. Perhaps there’s a socializing aspect to that, but if it’s for safety it’s probably unwarranted.

Everything that we do has a product that we can buy that’s supposed to make our kids safer, as if they’re born without the requisite accoutrements. Then there is something we can do as parents to be more careful, to be more protective. The assumption behind all of that is that if you are a good parent, you should be protecting your child from 100 percent of anything that could possibly go wrong, and if not, you will be blamed and Larry King will shake his finger at you.

I also like the point about how kids used to become “adults” at around age 12 or so, rather than being sheltered from life, and how constant supervision is smothering.

The fun of childhood is not holding your mom’s hand. The fun of childhood is when you don’t have to hold your mom’s hand, when you’ve done something that you can feel proud of. To take all those possibilities away from our kids seems like saying: “I’m giving you the greatest gift of all, I’m giving you safety. Oh, and by the way I’m taking away your childhood and any sense of self-confidence or pride. I hope you don’t mind.”

Is it Illegitimate Journalism?

The Daily Show as Legitimate Journalism

Jon Stewart makes no pretense that he’s all about the entertainment, but I think the article is right — he does ask the tough questions when the time comes and shows good insight into issues.

The venerable Sunday morning news shows, oftentimes featuring some of the most reputable people in journalism, largely go through a formulaic process, repeated weekly with their guests. The crack team of researchers will provide a number of quotes made by said interviewee appearing to contradict each other that the guest will then evade and stonewall against by jumping through any number of grammatical, contextual, semantic, and logical hoops. While The Daily Show has a more varied roster of guests from week to week, the Sunday morning talk shows routinely have decision makers and opinion leaders on to explain themselves. Put it this way; who would you rather have interview David Addington, Alberto Gonzalez, Donald Rumsfeld, or Dick Cheney? I would feel much more confident that an interview with Stewart would reveal more of a subject than an interview with any of the Sunday morning hosts. If British talk show host David Frost can cement the legacy of a disgraced U.S. president, then certainly Jon Stewart would be able to shed light on some of our more pressing national issues.

I’m guessing that some of the people mentioned would rather only be interviewed by someone who was tossing slow pitches over the fat part of the plate