When my children, ages 7 and 3, first started watching “Arthur” (aired twice daily on PBS), I would find a reason to be in the room: wiping the table, offering a snack, retrieving a small coat from its usual heap on the floor. But soon I abandoned all pretense and just flopped down on the couch next to them. The fact is, the adventures of Arthur the aardvark, his family and friends — assorted rabbits, apes, hippos, cats and the like — appealed to me. Wry and sweet, they are unassuming little dramas of life in the third grade, and a welcome respite from the cloying antics of Barney and the infantile prattle of the Teletubbies.
But as I watched the episodes, I began to understand another reason why I like the show: Arthur and his friends live in a place that is free of parental involvement, a world that has no relation to the world that my children — or any of their friends, as far as I can tell — must inhabit.
Here is an example: We see Arthur sitting in front of the television, watching a commercial for a new game. “I’ve got to have it!” he declares and runs up to his room, where he breaks open his piggy bank to get the necessary cash. Next he trots to the store, pays for the coveted toy and returns home. Nowhere in this interaction is there any discussion with parents about his purchase. Nor do they accompany him to make it. No, Arthur is free to react and to act in a refreshingly unfettered way, a way that has more in common with my own childhood — and that of other baby boomers — than anything my own children experience. It’s not that Arthur doesn’t have parents; he does, and they seem great. Mom is an accountant who likes computer games. Dad is a caterer who makes terrific desserts for the school bake sales. But although they love their children, they are not involved in the micro-managing of their lives.
Instead, they let Arthur go to and from school alone. Although we live two blocks from my son’s school, I wouldn’t dream of letting him do the same. If he were to go by himself, he would have to cross a busy four-lane avenue where the cars whizz by at a dizzying — and probably illegal — speed. None of the children, even in the fifth grade, go to school alone. Nor do they go unescorted to the park, or to each other’s homes, the way Arthur and his friends do. And never do I say to my son the magic words that so many of us remember: Go out and play. Playing, for my children, is a highly formalized, scheduled affair, with play dates arranged in advance and numerous telephone calls to confirm them. My son needs a Filofax — or at least a cheap knock-off — to keep up with his busy social life. It’s a life he enjoys and one that offers many pleasures and challenges. But spontaneity — the way Arthur and his pals meet for an impromptu kickball game or just ring each other’s doorbells without phoning first — is not among them.
This constant surveillance is wearying. When I take my son to the playground, where we have agreed — in advance, naturally — to meet several of his classmates, four other mothers are there with me, idly chatting as we watch our sons. An argument erupts: Someone has teased someone else; someone’s feelings are hurt. There are taunts and more taunts. Five mothers intervene, trying to resolve the conflict.
By contrast, Arthur and his friends get into fights, tease each other, form new alliances with other kids: all the complex and essential social interactions that turn them into civilized adults. If they have a fight, they just have to figure out what to do themselves. I envy them — and their parents. There is something liberating and healthy about letting kids work out stuff for themselves. I’m not talking about neglect, or about letting someone get hurt. When the hitting starts, I step in. But I do wish I didn’t need to put my two cents in every time my kid calls another kid stupid. Yet it’s hard not to say something if you and the other mother are standing right there and she happens to be staring daggers in your direction.
The kind of freedom I am nostalgic for is not possible today, certainly not in the city and probably not elsewhere either. My friends in the suburbs give similar reports; their kids are in organized activities, lessons and after-school programs. They are not allowed to just wander off for the day, to hang out, to invent their own amusement, to get bored, to figure out a life free from the constant watchful eyes of their parents and caretakers. So to get their daily fix of freedom, the kids have to watch “Arthur.” So do I.
Yona Zeldis McDonough is the editor of "The Barbie Chronicles: A Living Doll Turns Forty," forthcoming from Touchstone Books, and author of several children's books. She lives in Brooklyn with her family. More Yona Zeldis McDonough
The residents of “Sesame Street” have their share of challenges. You’ve got a guy who lives in a garbage can. A cookie-addicted binge eater. And an annoying little ginger who talks about himself in the third person. But on Sunday, the Street will get a Muppet with a different problem, one that nearly one in four American children will relate to — hunger.
In the one-hour prime-time special “Growing Hope Against Hunger,” viewers accustomed to Sesame Street’s usual adventures involving the letter K or the number 6 will learn a different kind of lesson from Lily, a young Muppet who talks about living in a home where a meal on the table’s not always a sure thing. Along with Brad Paisley and Kimberly Williams Paisley, Lily will help Elmo and his friends plan a food drive. They also visit a community garden to see how nutritious produce can be grown locally.
The harsh reality of childhood hunger may not be quite what one would expect from the place where the air is sweet, and it certainly isn’t an issue one would instantly associate with the special’s sponsor — Wal-Mart. You remember Wal-Mart: the company famed for its aggressive anti-union stance, the one that just last year wiped out its profit-sharing program while continuing to award bonuses to top executives? Maybe Lily’s family is hungry because her parents work for a corporation that could easily afford to pay its employees a better hourly wage, but doesn’t.
Yet the much reviled corporate behemoth has in recent years listened to the demands of its patrons in other regards — offering more eco-friendly products, reducing waste, and selling some healthier food. Sure, responsible acts make for good press for a company badly in need it, but they also help people. And you can loathe Wal-Mart’s corporate practices and still note that the company’s $1.5 million anti-hunger initiative is nothing to sneeze at — especially when you’re talking about cash-strapped PBS.
Despite its breezy tone, Sesame Street has never been a place where everything is A-OK all the time. The Muppets have helped kids work through the deaths of loved ones, the challenges of having a parent serving in the military and of living with HIV and AIDS. That in the midst of an ever-worsening economic crisis, the show would take on a painful and all-too-common subject shows its enduring innovativeness and a deep sensitivity to its audience.
Childhood is not all happy songs and manic monsters. The Department of Agriculture estimates that 17 million American children have “limited or uncertain” access to affordable food. In New York City alone, the number of homeless children in the public schools has skyrocketed 41 percent in the just the past few years. A couple of talking furballs and a country singer alone won’t change that. But they can help kids and families understand and empathize — and maybe to see that the school breakfasts and lunches some of their classmates are getting may be the only meals they receive that day. More significantly, they may just inspire families to take actions like participating in local food banks and gardens. Or even add themselves to the growing tide of Americans demanding that executive greed stop interfering with sustainable wages, so fewer real-life Lilys have to go to bed hungry.
Remember PBS’s “Reading Rainbow”? Chances are that you — or your children — watched it at some point during its more than 25 years on public broadcasting (it aired from 1983 to 2009, making it, according to NPR, the network’s “third longest-running children’s show” ever).
Burton wants participants to join him in performing the show’s opening song, which, if you don’t recall, goes like this:
While this might not be a “flash mob” in the traditional sense — if it stays as well-publicized among Burton’s 1,662,476 Twitter followers as it has been to this point, it could lack a certain element of surprise — there’s no doubt it will succeed in redirecting attention to the now-defunct show, and whatever new projects are up Burton’s sleeve.
Rap star Tupac Shakur is led from the Manhattan North police precinct after being arrested in an alleged sexual attack on Nov. 19, 1993. (AP Photo/Justin Sutcliffe) (Credit: Associated Press)
PBS officials say hackers have cracked the network’s website, posting a phony story claiming dead rapper Tupac Shakur was alive in New Zealand, and a group that claimed responsibility for the hacking complained about a recent “Frontline” investigative news program on WikiLeaks.
PBS confirmed Monday that the website had been hacked. The phony story had been taken down as of Monday morning. It had been posted on the site of the “PBS NewsHour” program, which is produced by WETA-TV in Arlington, Va.
Anne Bentley, PBS’ vice president of corporate communications, said in an email that erroneous information posted on the website has been corrected. The hackers also posted login information for two internal PBS sites: one that media use to access the PBS press room and an internal communications website for stations, she said. She said all affected parties were being notified.
David Fanning, executive producer of “Frontline,” said he was learning of the hacking early Monday, nearly a week after the program aired its “WikiSecrets” documentary about the leak of U.S. diplomatic cables to the WikiLeaks website. The documentary, produced by WGBH-TV in Boston, generated criticism and debate on the program’s website in recent days from those sympathetic to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and from those who thought the program was fair, Fanning said.
“Frontline” producers hear impassioned responses all the time, Fanning said. Having a group attack the PBS website over a news program was unusual but “probably not unexpected,” he said.
“From our point of view, we just see it as a disappointing and irresponsible act, especially since we have been very open to publishing criticism of the film … and the film included other points of view,” Fanning said. “This kind of action is irresponsible and chilling.”
A tweet from the “NewsHour” Twitter account said: “If you missed it: our site has been accessed by hackers. Thanks for staying with us.”
A group calling itself LulzSec and “The Lulz Boat” on Twitter claimed responsibility and posted links to other hacks, including a video apparently taunting the network. Taunting messages were also posted on the group’s Twitter page targeting the PBS program “Frontline.” One message said the group recently saw the “WikiSecrets” show and was “less than impressed.”
PBS ombudsman Michael Getler wrote about the “WikiSecrets” documentary in his weekly column Thursday, saying it had generated only a handful of complaints, though he had expected more mail from viewers.
“This may be a good thing for Frontline if it suggests that most viewers found the program to be in keeping with Frontline’s reputation for fair yet tough reporting,” Getler wrote.
Getler raised some questions about the reporting in the program but said he found the questioning by interviewer Martin Smith to be “tough but proper.”
Jim Lehrer says he’s retiring as a regular anchor of PBS’ “NewsHour” broadcast after 35 years.
After 52 years in journalism, Lehrer said Thursday that “there comes a time to step aside from the daily process, and that day has arrived.” His exit will take place the week of June 6.
Lehrer’s 77th birthday is next week. He said he will still appear many Fridays to moderate a weekly analysis feature with columnists Mark Shields and David Brooks.
The “NewsHour” has prepared for his retirement by setting up a two-person anchor team with rotating personalities. Lehrer has generally taken Mondays and Tuesdays off the past year.
Apparently Americans want to defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting because they think 5 percent of the federal budget goes to NPR and PBS. That was the median guess in a CNN poll released Friday. If that were true, Talking Points Memo noted, that would mean the CPB would receive $178 billion a year from the government. (And that’s not even counting what they get from Archer Daniels Midland and viewers like you.)
BBC, the largest broadcaster in the world, takes in $7.5 billion in income a year. If Americans were right, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting would have a bigger budget than every military on Earth besides our own. NPR would beat China in an arms race.
What would the Corporation for Public Broadcasting even do with that kind of money, besides continue to have a liberal bias and support the establishment of sharia law? We have some guesses:
“Wait Wait… Don’t Tell Me!” would be broadcast live from a moon base.
PBS would require a donation of at least $100,000,000 before sending you a DVD box set of a Fleetwood Mac reunion show.
$250,000,000 gets you a genuine Thai silk tote bag filled with precious stones. And one DVD documentary on the making of “The Red Green Show.”
“Frontline” would always be in IMAX 3-D.
Robert Siegel and Neil Conan voiced at all times by Kiefer Sutherland and Morgan Freeman.
Childrens Television Workshop would purchase the entirety of Brooklyn’s Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood in order to film Sesame Street live on location.
Click and Clack would be androids.
“Are You Being Served?” would be painstakingly digitally altered until funny.
Terry Gross would conclude interviews by deciding if the subject lives or dies.
Ken Burns documentaries would be produced with original footage obtained via time travel.
Every home, office and classroom in the nation would have a radio that can be turned down, but never completely off.
Juan Williams would be missing and presumed killed by an unmanned CPB drone.
“And part three of our show: What do you do when your mega-yacht’s death ray disintegrates your mother-in-law? It’s David Sedaris on the best Thanksgiving ever.”
Garrison Keillor could finally get that thing with his sinuses cleared up.