What do you think?
Rate this book


352 pages, Paperback
First published August 1, 2012
I am not in any way a specialist in the field of digital media or neuroscience but I do conduct a scientific research. That's why my doubts about Spitzer's credibility increase for example when in a fragment where he argues that all tv programs specifically dedicated to young children negatively influence their language learning he cites a paper which showed this harmful influence for "Teletubbies". Yet, in the same paper other tv programs were shown to have positive influence on language learning. Also, the researchers cited a different paper which presented a positive influence of "Teletubbies" on expressive language production of children. So why doesn't Spitzer discuss any of these results? Because they don't fit into his interpretation?
I'm not going to write down all my concerns about some of Spitzer's conclusions. Generally, I agree with him that media consumption by the young should be monitored and that no digital media can replace real people interactions, teachers or parents. What I do not agree with is his demonization of digital media and oversimplifying view in black and white. He doesn't even discuss any positive sides of digital media. The overreacting tone of his writing is also off putting. Not to mention the last two chapters in which Spitzer stands as the lone voice in the wilderness against blind society attacking him for saying the truth about the damages digital media bring.
I also agree with the views expressed in review by Jade.