>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 19:04:04 -0400 (EDT) >From: Robert Weissman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Subject: [corp-focus] Look Before You Leap >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >X-Mailman-Version: 1.1 >Precedence: bulk >List-Id: Sharp-edged commentary on corporate power ><corp-focus.lists.essential.org> >X-BeenThere: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Status: > >Look Before You Leap >By Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman > >A friend of ours -- you might call him techno-challenged man -- recently >met the guy who invented the E-book. That's the little hand-held computer >that carries hundreds of books and that let's you read them on an easy >reading screen. > >The inventor told our friend that in five years, his invention will carry >one million books -- all easily accessible, all searchable, all without >paper. > >"Even I was sold," said challenged man. > >"You won't even have to leave the house," we said. > >"Reading has always been a solitary endeavor," he said. > >"Yes, but at least you had to get out of the house, say hello to the >librarian, or the bookseller," we replied. "What happens to them?" > >Now, don't get all excited, techies. Yes, we are writing this on a >computer. Yes, we are sending this over the Internet. > >But beware! A backlash is brewing against computer mania. We have leaped >before we looked. And some are now predicting a crash landing. > >Last month, the Alliance for Childhood (www.allianceforchildhood.net) a >group of more than 75 educators, child-development and health authorities >called for a time-out from the overwhelming pressure on educators and >parents to computerize childhood. > >They released a report, "Fool's Gold: A Critical Look at Computers in >Childhood." The group, which includes Harvard professor of psychiatry >Alvin Poussaint, child and adolescent psychiatrist Marilyn Benoit, and >Mary Pipher, author of Reviving Ophelia, issued a statement calling for a >moratorium on the further introduction of computers in early childhood and >elementary education -- except for special cases of students with certain >disabilities. > >We've always felt a little queasy when politicians like Al Gore and George >Bush promised to put a computer in every classroom. But we didn't know >why. Now we do. > >The signers of the call for a moratorium said that a time-out is necessary >to "create a climate for a broad national discussion about the serious >developmental risks" posed by computers in childhood. > >They noted that research does not support the current and proposed >expenditures of billions of dollars on technology in primary schools, as >the Clinton-Gore administration now advocates. > >Research shows that far better than sticking kids in front of computers is >putting them with caring adults, engaging them in creative play, outdoor >experiences with nature, the arts, and hands-on learning of all kinds. > >There they sit in front of their glaring screens, playing video games, >sipping on sugar and water (Coke or Pepsi?) and eating junk food. Is it >any wonder that this generation of children is the most sedentary in >U.S. history? > >The Alliance is so concerned about the problem, that they called on the >Surgeon General of the United States to prepare a comprehensive report on >the physical, emotional, and other developmental hazards that computers >pose to children. > >They warned of social isolation, obesity, eyestrain, and repetitive stress >injuries. Margit Bleeker, a neurologist, said that repetitive stress >injuries among the young "is probably a time bomb waiting to go off." > >The Alliance estimates that public elementary schools would have to spend >about $8 billion per year to meet the technology goals promoted by >Clinton/Gore. Those schools spent more than $4 billion in the 1999-2000 >school year on computers and all of the costs related to them. > >"That money could be better spent on proven educational interventions for >children at risk of school failure, including smaller classes and smaller >schools, higher salaries to attract and retain good teachers, and early >attention to nutrition, high-quality child care and health care, and safe >housing," said Joan Almon, a former kindergarten teacher and the U.S. >coordinator of the Alliance for Childhood. > >To make way in their budgets for the computer onslaught, many schools are >choosing to cut back on field trips in nature, music, the arts, library >books, and time for play or recess. > >But it is exactly these programs that most benefit at-risk children. > >"It is within the context of human relationships, play and interactions >with nature that we socialize our children," said Dr. Benoit of Howard >University Hospital in Washington, D.C. "Premature relegation of learning >to computer interaction will rob them of both that civilizing influence >and of their innate creativity." > >Bailus Walker, Jr., a former president of the American Public Health >Association, said that the money spent on computers could be better spent >removing lead paint from housing in poor neighborhoods. When it comes to >our children's readiness to learn, "being unleaded is a lot more urgent >than being online," Walker said. > >Edward Miller, a co-author of the report and former editor of the Harvard >Education Letter, said that children of wealth and privilege are enjoying >advantages of smaller class size, individual and personal attention from >caring adults and hands on experience with arts, science, and nature. > >"These experiences come with proven benefits," Miller said. "To spend >precious resources on unproven computer technology when we know that >millions of young children lack these bare essentials is educational >malpractice." > >Walk into any public library these days and chances are that you will be >confronted by a phalanx of computers. Children are immediately drawn to >them, as we were drawn to television when we were kids. > >It is clear to us now that television has done more damage than good to >our society. Unless we act now, computers may do the same to our children. > > >Russell Mokhiber is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Corporate Crime >Reporter. Robert Weissman is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based >Multinational Monitor. They are co-authors of Corporate Predators: The >Hunt for MegaProfits and the Attack on Democracy (Monroe, Maine: Common >Courage Press, 1999). > >(c) Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Focus on the Corporation is a weekly column written by Russell Mokhiber >and Robert Weissman. Please feel free to forward the column to friends or >repost the column on other lists. If you would like to post the column on >a web site or publish it in print format, we ask that you first contact us >([EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]). > >Focus on the Corporation is distributed to individuals on the listserve >[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe to corp-focus, send an e-mail >message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text: subscribe > >Focus on the Corporation columns are posted at ><http://www.corporatepredators.org>. > >Postings on corp-focus are limited to the columns. If you would like to >comment on the columns, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
