Living Car Free - Now TV free.

Dont't dump your frustrations of life onto the tube. I find that computer ownership or access can get out of control just like overwatching television. Moderation and balance is the key.

Yeah, no kidding.

I've been tv free since about 2000. Not so much 'cause I felt the need to get rid of it, as much as I've never owned my *own*, and when I got my own place instead of living with roommates I was too cheap to buy one or pay for cable. That's money better spent on cycling gear.

My life didn't take on the miraculous transformation that I hear about from some former tv-owners. I waste just as much, if not more, time surfing the web (I have cable internet, but no cable tv ;)), than I ever did watching tv.

Maybe I should dump the broadband too. Might not be much more productive, but at the very least I'd be forced to get outta the house and go somewhere with *people*, e.g., the locally-owned coffee shop w/ free WiFi, in order to get my internet fix. ;)

-Trevor

blow up your teevee
throw away your paper
move to the country
build yourself a home
plant a little garden
eat a lot of peaches
try to find jesus
on your own

sorry, couldn't help myself. not watching tv means more time for john prine.

it seems like i've had tv-periods in the way that some of the people on this thread have had tv-free periods. grew up in a country where it didn't exist till the late 70's and we left soon after that. my first few months in canada, living in family's home, i was glued to it for a while, and then there have been the patches of time where we've lived with someone else who did have it for a short while. but personally, nah. i've never had it or wanted it except in the times when baseball is on. the 1999 world series (was it?) where the yankees beat atlanta in four. . . that's about the only time i ever look back on a tv patch and feel thankful that it was in our lives then. but i admit the world series gives me some difficult moments every year. i become kind of a lost soul wandering the earth, pressing my face to the glass of restaurants that have a tv. . .

it's probably still not mainstream, but i think it's definitely becoming more common than it used to be because the internet in general is kind of pulling people away from it. i do know that the difference between me and other people has got a lot less; i often forget for up to a month that i have this difference from everyone else. back in the day, when my son was in preschool and daycare, i don't think a day ever went by when each of us didn't have to explain this fact at least once. now tv itself is just less of an issue and less of a topic, i find. yee-hah.

Nobody says it better than Frank Zappa:

I am gross and perverted
I'm obsessed 'n deranged
I have existed for years
But very little has changed
I am the tool of the Government
And industry too
For I am destined to rule
And regulate you
I may be vile and pernicious
But you can't look away
I make you think I'm delicious
With the stuff that I say
I am the best you can get
Have you guessed me yet?
I am the slime oozin' out
From your TV set
You will obey me while I lead you
And eat the garbage that I feed you
Until the day that we don't need you
Don't go for help...no one will heed you
Your mind is totally controlled
It has been stuffed into my mold
And you will do as you are told
Until the rights to you are sold
That's right, folks.. Don't touch that dial
Well, I am the slime from your video
Oozin' along on your livingroom floor
I am the slime from your video
Can't stop the slime, people, lookit me go


Good riding,
desmobob

While getting my hair cut last week, the woman doing the cutting asked me if I had watched a certain show on television the night before. I told her I haven't had television for ten years. Her response:
"No television?!? You're boring!"

I guess I never realized how exciting it was to sit on my a** on the couch and stare at a box.... :rolleyes:


Good riding,
desmbob

I'm car-free and I've been TV-free for about 3.5 months now. I don't miss the TV shows since I wan't all that much into them, but I do miss watching sports which I think is the least sleezest aspects of TV. I think I'm going to break down and get a TV so I can watch the world series. I hope that my red sox will still be in it. the yanks are only a half game back as I write this.

Don't buy a TV. Call some friends and go to a local hang-out and watch it there. One of the offending aspects of TV is its detrimental effect on community.

I have now officially been tv free for 2 weeks and six days :D . I enjoy life so much more without it. I'll never go back.

OK. I'll play devil's advocate here:

I can understand the urge to moderate TV viewing habits, and, as I work in related media, I do try to make my TV viewing a matter of selective viewing and not "grazing" or having the idiot box on for comfort. But the more vehement anti-TV types here remind me of 19th century cranks decrying novels as claptrap and unworthy of consideration. Like it or not, television is an important part of the way we communicate with each other as a society. Television informs all other visual media. Televison is a key to understanding the way the world communicates today. To cut yourself off from it deliberately is to cut yourself off from a major stream of discourse and to distance yourself from your fellow man. Now, certainly, I advocate both caution and moderation in your viewing habits, and certainly, all television should be viewed with a skeptical eye and with a critical understanding of the ever-changing semiotics of the medium. But it is worth watching, if only to understand what you're resisting. Plus, I loves me some hockey.

OK. I'll play devil's advocate here:

I can understand the urge to moderate TV viewing habits, and, as I work in related media, I do try to make my TV viewing a matter of selective viewing and not "grazing" or having the idiot box on for comfort. But the more vehement anti-TV types here remind me of 19th century cranks decrying novels as claptrap and unworthy of consideration. Like it or not, television is an important part of the way we communicate with each other as a society. Television informs all other visual media. Televison is a key to understanding the way the world communicates today. To cut yourself off from it deliberately is to cut yourself off from a major stream of discourse and to distance yourself from your fellow man. Now, certainly, I advocate both caution and moderation in your viewing habits, and certainly, all television should be viewed with a skeptical eye and with a critical understanding of the ever-changing semiotics of the medium. But it is worth watching, if only to understand what you're resisting. Plus, I loves me some hockey.


What do you make of post #31:


I don't watch TV, either.

I heard yesterday there's a giant flood along the gulf coast, due to a hurricane. I find that not watching TV means that I don't keep up with current events. Yeah, I could get a newspaper or listen to the radio, or whatever, but I don't really find it that interesting. I mean, it's not worth it to go out of my way just to check and see if anything horriffic happened in some place that I've never been to.

Some people would probably think I'm an idiot because I don't know which celebritry recently divorced which other celebrity, or because I don't know how president Bush is reacting to this hurricane/flooding thing.

But why does it matter? In all honesty - the hurricane has no bearing on my life at all. Had I not seen an article on a website yesterday that mentioned it, I would have never known it existed. Why should I go out of my way to try and keep up with tons of news that will never affect me?


Makes FatA** and Vegas Vic look like concerned world citizens if you ask me...

What do you make of post #31:




Makes FatA** and Vegas Vic look like concerned world citizens if you ask me...
I find the deliberate myopia of post #31 far more troubling than the wrongheadedness of the posters you mention. JMO...YMMV.

OK. I'll play devil's advocate here:

I can understand the urge to moderate TV viewing habits, and, as I work in related media, I do try to make my TV viewing a matter of selective viewing and not "grazing" or having the idiot box on for comfort. But the more vehement anti-TV types here remind me of 19th century cranks decrying novels as claptrap and unworthy of consideration. Like it or not, television is an important part of the way we communicate with each other as a society. Television informs all other visual media. Televison is a key to understanding the way the world communicates today. To cut yourself off from it deliberately is to cut yourself off from a major stream of discourse and to distance yourself from your fellow man. Now, certainly, I advocate both caution and moderation in your viewing habits, and certainly, all television should be viewed with a skeptical eye and with a critical understanding of the ever-changing semiotics of the medium. But it is worth watching, if only to understand what you're resisting. Plus, I loves me some hockey.I agree and yet I don't. I DO own a TV, since I do not think it is an inherently evil device, as well as a VCR and a Playstation 2, and I have super-basic cable to facilitate a decent internet connection. I watch "Lost" religiously and enjoy a few other shows, like "Battlestar Galactica," and like to rent DVDs of shows like "Six Feet Under" and "Deadwood" when they come out. While I agree with most of your observations about the medium of television, I think it has been left in the dust by the internet as far as what is really useful to people, like the ability to access information and communicate.
As far as being "a major stream of discourse and to distance yourself from your fellow man.",I couldn't disagree more. I think television is purely monologue, not dialogue, and I think television itself is part of what isolates people from each other. Sure, learning about a new, popular brand of shoe might make you feel one with your fellow man, but at the end of the program you'll still have never had a conversation with your next door neighbor. You dig?
Anyway, 95% of it is crap, but I'm not totally opposed to watching it, i just don't consider it a very enriching thing to do for 6 hours a day, or whatever the average is. I'm sure we can agree on that.

Our family has been TV free for a couple of years now. The biggest change has been a remarkable reduction in the kids' "I wanna's." This does not mean we don't enjoy a few good shows, we just wait until they come out on DVD and watch them on a laptop. This practice emphasizes the art of the show's storytelling AND makes the viewing deliberate. The family makes a plan and executes the plan together and the viewing becomes special rather than ordinary -- fun, instead of a time filler.

For news, we get a daily paper and listen to radio broadcasts during breakfast and while making dinner. The practices encourage discussion of current events and the paper encourages the boys to read and be aware of what's happening in their own city.

When we sold the surround sound and big TV, there was much whining for a week. The boys' friends thought we were lunatics. Not anymore tho, the boys' friends come over and play video games, long drawn-out games of Risk and D&D, and generally have a lot of fun -- all without television broadcasting.

For me, the most offensive aspect of commercial television was the commercials. I realize it's important to sell stuff, but I husband and I didn't think anyone in our family needed to hear about how some product would fix a perceived shortcoming day in day out. I mean, there's got to be something wrong with you, your looks, your life, whatever, or you wouldn't need this fantastic product right? The other thing that bugged me was how passive the boys went when watching. Instead of thinking up some creative new mess to make, there they sat, a glaze over their eyes, only to get up and complain about being bored when the show was over.

All in all, it's been one of the best choices we've made as parents.

I'm with you sydney.

Commercials can be really bad... There are ppl studdying child psychology out there to make them want so many things. "how much can we make them nag the parents".

Even for the adults, how many car commercials out there show the image of the perfect family in a perfect suburban house, and try to make you feel the dependability of a car.

As far as actual programming, I don't see ever 5% of the shows out there who would make you connect with your fellow man. Go for a walk, talk to someone, you'll go 10 times farther.

News can be had from the internet, and world awareness can be much better attained if you go read a few books than if you watch what mediatic corporations want you to know.

When you have been without TV for several years, only then can you get a sense of how truly strange TV is. A few weeks ago, I read an article on how some beer company was concerned with trying to broaden their appeal to younger drinkers while not alienating their existing older drinkers. My first thought was, "Well, if they haven't changed the recipe, their existing drinkers should have nothing to complain about." But the article didn't talk in the least about the recipe or about the taste. It was only concerned with advertising. As someone who hasn't had a TV in many years, I find it utterly bizarre that some commerical should be more important than my own taste buds in determining whether or not I like a drink.

tv sucks.

Not completely.

I love the history/discovery/TLC/Food(I'm fond of cooking) etc.
And Nova, National Geo on PBS are favorites as well.

Basically, it's like most technology - you gotta separate the wheat from the chaff

Not completely.

I love the history/discovery/TLC/Food(I'm fond of cooking) etc.
And Nova, National Geo on PBS are favorites as well.

Basically, it's like most technology - you gotta separate the wheat from the chaff
Uh, hmm, I'm not a TV person. I saw the History channel once over at a friend's house, it was as stupid as a sitcom. The show used tricks and outright lies. It was about underwater acheaology. They showed the same footage at three different points in the show claiming it was from a Roman wreck, a wreck from the 1800s and a wreck from the 1900s. In different parts of the world. They justified an interpretation of the roman wreck saying they were quoteing Plutarch. I looked it up- they fabricated the whole Plutarch angle. What is the point in watching it? I saw the discovery channel once - same thing the show about aircraft was a rah-rah for the airforce and our policy in Iraq. It was a year or so after the first Gulf War. If you think you are well informed by these shows you are mistaken. Back to bikes. I'm visiting my parents right now and they've got the tube on continuously to CNN. I walked through the room today and there was Sen. McCain and something about stripping pork from some transportation bill. The interviewer listed three pork barrel projects in his home state. All were improvements to pedestrian and/or bike access. Not a single car oriented example. The false message was loud and clear- money spent on pedestrian and bike access is a waste. Who really knows the tranportation bill in Arizona? How many viewers fact checked CNN on this one? How many just accepted the message? It is no wonder that my parents don't understand the car free thing.

Well I guess you're just a special person... perhaps one of the intellectual elites, amid us plebeian rubes.

It's funny though, that you haven't mastered the paragraph.

television is an important part of the way we communicate with each other as a society.

well, yeah, but there are a lot of important parts of the ways we [fill in the blank] as a society that had dissenters even in their day and are now considered a bit unevolved. hitting children is an important part of the way we pass on our values as a society. hanging the poor used to be an important part of the way we discouraged petty theft as a society. driving cars everywhere is an important part of the way we . . . you get the point, probably. all of it assuming that by 'we' you mean western society. point being that just because something IS, means nothing at all about whether it SHOULD be.


major stream of discourse

i'm sorry. i thought about it for a couple of days and i still couldn't come up with a single tv-inspired conversation i could remember hearing that would qualify for the name 'discourse'. not even being snarky, but i don't think i could even call 85% of them 'discussions'. they were just gossip and repetition.


and to distance yourself from your fellow man.

snicker. and you say that like it's a bad thing. more seriously, sure it creates a gap; there weren't very many of those conversations i could have joined in with even if i'd wanted to. but to be entirely honest, i get the impression that tv CREATES as much distance as it supposedly bridges, and i'm talking about between people to whom it's a common factor. in my observation it seems to generate a kind of social-interaction junk food: the conversations i've heard over the past 20-plus years were almost unrelievedly extremely shallow, and didn't appear to be saying what even the people involved in them seemed to be groping to say. for the record, i've also noticed that not watching tv hasn't marginalised my kid nearly as much as i once thought it would. the only slightly odd thing that MIGHT be related to it is the fact that he doesn't seem to handle ambient noise or irrelevancy very well. i suppose there's a case to be made that he never developed the aural or visual processing neurology to deal with the high levels of incoming, unrelated stimulation that other kids grow.

post-mortems on televised baseball games exempt from all the above.

OK. I'll play devil's advocate here:

I can understand the urge to moderate TV viewing habits, and, as I work in related media, I do try to make my TV viewing a matter of selective viewing and not "grazing" or having the idiot box on for comfort. But the more vehement anti-TV types here remind me of 19th century cranks decrying novels as claptrap and unworthy of consideration. Like it or not, television is an important part of the way we communicate with each other as a society. Television informs all other visual media. Televison is a key to understanding the way the world communicates today. To cut yourself off from it deliberately is to cut yourself off from a major stream of discourse and to distance yourself from your fellow man. Now, certainly, I advocate both caution and moderation in your viewing habits, and certainly, all television should be viewed with a skeptical eye and with a critical understanding of the ever-changing semiotics of the medium. But it is worth watching, if only to understand what you're resisting.

Erm, just how many times do you have to watch it to understand that it sucks? Do you advocate that we check in every day just to make sure? "Yup, still sucks today." "Yeppers, still mindless garbage." "Yessir, still bland and insultingly dumbed-down." "Mm-hmm, still looks like one endless commercial for a consumerist 'lifestyle' that holds no appeal for me." "Yeah, still mindnumbingly dull." (Etc.)

Uh, hmm, I'm not a TV person. I saw the History channel once over at a friend's house, it was as stupid as a sitcom. The show used tricks and outright lies. It was about underwater acheaology. They showed the same footage at three different points in the show claiming it was from a Roman wreck, a wreck from the 1800s and a wreck from the 1900s. In different parts of the world. They justified an interpretation of the roman wreck saying they were quoteing Plutarch. I looked it up- they fabricated the whole Plutarch angle. What is the point in watching it? I saw the discovery channel once - same thing the show about aircraft was a rah-rah for the airforce and our policy in Iraq. It was a year or so after the first Gulf War. If you think you are well informed by these shows you are mistaken. Back to bikes. I'm visiting my parents right now and they've got the tube on continuously to CNN. I walked through the room today and there was Sen. McCain and something about stripping pork from some transportation bill. The interviewer listed three pork barrel projects in his home state. All were improvements to pedestrian and/or bike access. Not a single car oriented example. The false message was loud and clear- money spent on pedestrian and bike access is a waste. Who really knows the tranportation bill in Arizona? How many viewers fact checked CNN on this one? How many just accepted the message? It is no wonder that my parents don't understand the car free thing.

Wow, you're a tough sell.

Did you ever see "book notes" with Brian Lamb?

Posts 68 and 69 do much to confirm my impression of rabid anti-tv folks as cranks and misanthropes. Luddites are cute and all, but they're also all dead.

Posts 68 and 69 do much to confirm my impression of rabid anti-tv folks as cranks and misanthropes. Luddites are cute and all, but they're also all dead.


Post 66 is abviously a tinfoil hat type nutjob,

Posts 68 and 69 do much to confirm my impression of rabid anti-tv folks as cranks and misanthropes. Luddites are cute and all, but they're also all dead.

As are the people they opposed. Tell you what: when I'm dead I'll start watching lots of TV again, since the overwhelming majority of it is geared toward flatliners anyway. Deal?

So do you guys listen to music or the radio, or are your houses quiet like tombs?

As are the people they opposed. Tell you what: when I'm dead I'll start watching lots of TV again, since the overwhelming majority of it is geared toward flatliners anyway. Deal?
This post does very little to discourage the impressions your earlier post helped establish.

So do you guys listen to music or the radio, or are your houses quiet like tombs?

Radio in the morning and evening during dinner making for daily news, hubby on his guitar, sons with drums and viola practice, eldest son with music collection, cats mewing for attention or door service, family laughter, bickering, negotation, conversation, telephone calls to family and friends, whistling, humming, singing while about tasks, drop-in visitors, sound of washing, footsteps, the neighborhood .... nope, no silent tomb here.

This post does very little to discourage the impressions your earlier post helped establish.

Damn. And my heart was really set on discouraging those impressions.

How exactly does one discourage an impression, anyway? Make fun of its poetry? Tell it that it's not college material? Fail to act excited when it wins a trophy? Is this one of those things that I would know if I spent more time connecting with the world by sitting all alone in front of the tube? The suspense is totally killing me!

Damn. And my heart was really set on discouraging those impressions.

How exactly does one discourage an impression, anyway? Make fun of its poetry? Tell it that it's not college material? Fail to act excited when it wins a trophy? Is this one of those things that I would know if I spent more time connecting with the world by sitting all alone in front of the tube? The suspense is totally killing me!

Posting in a tone that's not hostile, condescending and borderline misanthropic would be a start. Work on that for a while & then we'll get into the finer points.

singing while about tasks, sound of washing, .



Hmmm....you sound like a good little worker..LOL

Just teasing.
I have played with the idea of getting satellite radio to replace my TV

Posting in a tone that's not hostile, condescending and borderline misanthropic would be a start. Work on that for a while & then we'll get into the finer points.

but i find a great deal of mainstream tv to be all three of those things, which more or less sums up why i'm not at all inclined to engage with it, no matter how 'major' it might be as a phenomenon. i found your post somewhat condescending, actually. i'm not sure why you felt it necessary to tell people like me how to handle television, or why it behooves us to do so.

you made a devil's advocate post, which kind of implies (to me) openness to a debate. you got replies to that post. it really shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone taking that role if the replies convey a certain level of disagreement. your own reaction leaves me wondering why you bothered, unless you were either a) just looking for a pointless argument or b) convinced that somehow you had something to say which was so profound and startling it would cause the thread's participants to see a sudden light which had never shone upon us before.

You guys are missing out on some good shows.

Posting in a tone that's not hostile, condescending and borderline misanthropic would be a start. Work on that for a while & then we'll get into the finer points.

There are certain situations wherein it's really hard not to condescend. I'm allergic to hard work, so that's the end of that, I'm afraid.

By the way, I own a television and watch it occasionally. I like "Curb Your Enthusiasm." That Larry David really is a hoot. So, why did I let you go on thinking that I was a rabid anti-TV type? I guess it just amuses me to see how worked up some folks get when you take a swipe at one of their gods.

Most of what's on really is crap, though. All in all, I'd rather ride my bike.

you made a devil's advocate post, which kind of implies (to me) openness to a debate. you got replies to that post.


yes, replies which demonstrated a condescension and hostility that was, frankly, startling, and confirmed my first general impression of anti-tv types as misanthropic cranks. the full text of your reply furthered that impression, btw.

So, why did I let you go on thinking that I was a rabid anti-TV type? I guess it just amuses me to see how worked up some folks get when you take a swipe at one of their gods.


Sorry if you got the impression I was a tv-worshipper, you god-smashing rebel, you. But I'm always glad to supply amusement for my intellectual betters, like an ant beneath an eight-year-old's magnifying glass. Gotta go, though... USA Network is in hour six of their bi-monthly Golden Girls marathon!

LOL @ this whole thread.

I haven't had a television in years. Mostly, I don't miss it a bit.Mostly I didn't like what I saw, some of it I did, but it got to the point where the good stuff wasn't worth the bother of sifting it out from the rest.

Sometimes, though, I find that I _am_ missing some cultural reference. For instance, people tend to compare things that happen in their lives to Seinfeld episodes. They'll say to me, "this is just like that Seinfeld episode where Elaine...yadda yadda..." And then I have to say that I've never seen Seinfeld and don't have a television. Perhaps I am missing out on things. Maybe. I don't know. But I do know that I can't have everything. I have 24 hours in the day and every hour of those spent in front of the television is one of those hours I'm not doing something else. What I would gain in exposure to current cultural phenomena, I would certainly lose in things that I value- like conversation with the DH, time spent reading, going out to places, volunteering with the Girl Scouts.

The funny thing is, there's always someone at work or in my circle of acquaintance who's more than willing to share what's going on in the world of celebrity, etc. I'm not entirely out of the loop. I know that Brittany had her baby and Renee's getting divorced. It's actually really rather hard to divorce one's self from popular culture while working a "normal" job and living among people. When something important is going on, like hurricanes or Supreme Court nomimations, Yahoo has plenty of news articles that I can read and keep up.

You would probably find my house quiet. I don't have the radio on except for saturday night's Prairie Home Companion if we happen to be home. I'm even experimenting with not playing my cds for background noise. What you might hear at my house is my bird screaming for attention, my dog barking. You'll definitely hear city traffic in the background, but I like that because it reminds me that I'm surrounded by other people. You might heat me singing, badly, but with enthusiasm. You might hear me practicising my ukelele, again badly, because I just started taking lessons.

What I did tonight instead of watching television: cooked two meals- one for tonight, one for tomorrow night, washed all of the dishes with the help of DH, brought in laundry from the line in the yard, finished reading a book in the Master and Commander series ("The Surgeon's Mate", tomorrow I start "The Ionian Mission"), knit about five inches in the sleeve to a new sweater, went out for coffee using my bike to get there, took my dog for a walk, talked on the phone with a dear friend, sang the Pirate King song from the Pirates of Penzance, and just now settled in for a little quality time with my bird and the computer. All in just one evening. I suppose I could have watched three or four television shows in that same time, but I'm happier this way.

You guys are missing out on some good shows.

My girlfriend makes that point sometimes.

I don't respond, since I've already told her of my opinion as to what happens at the end of a year of watching "good shows" vs. not watching.

(and there sure do seem to be a lot of good shows- hey, by some people's standards I could watch 30 hours a week of them.)

For all you TV snobs...why on earth would you own a computer or an internet connection?
Just more time wasting information gathering and communication at your disposal.
Pitch it.

Are there any TV free people here who watch videos on the computer?

Fxjohn: To answer your question, Internet has many good sites, and it allows you to keep up with the news. We can always chose what topic we want to view, and it is much more interactive.

TV is loaded with bad programs and even though you can change channels, you can rarely view the information you want (or anything even interesting) when you are there devoting time to it. Sometimes I actually turn the TV and I'll find something interesting while flipping channel and I'll listen to it. That's rare though, and I certainly won't leave tv on, flipping channel for a long time to hope for something good. Better have a conversation with my gf then to occupy my mind with this.

Kdos: There's a couple shows i've downloaded in the past, but now when I want to see a show I usually wait for the dvds and rent them.

Are there any TV free people here who watch videos on the computer?

Me. As I compose this I am watching Simple Plan's "I'd Do Anything." Next is Good Charlotte's "Anthem." After that some Green Day. Maybe then Relient K's newest. As a family we watch A&E, BBC, and other DVD's that we borrow from the library.

I've never had a TV because I always found other things I'd rather spend the money on. The computer I justified because it has more uses. My 18 year old daughter takes online classes and my wife does accounting work for her clients.

There are no bad things, only bad uses of things.

I wish I could be laptop free. :(

This thing is like a ball and chain. :(

I have been TV free for over six years now. I don't miss much. I do have internet, newspapers, magazines, radio. It's ironic, because I make my living as a cinematographer/videographer, and work a lot for network television programming. I also see what happens behind the scenes and I am not impressed.

I am in the process of becoming car-free. In the last year my car caught fire and was stolen twice and I live in a mid-sized midwest city (Kansas City). I spent thousands of dollars on that beater car last year and I drove it probably a few thousand miles. I'm sure it cost me at least a dollar a mile or more.

My only difficulties with being car-free are transporting gear, hills (believe it or not, we have some pretty good hills here), and distance (urban sprawl is bad here). I'm leaning towards purchasing a folding bike (Birdy) with an electronic engine (BionX) to assist with the hills and distance. I have not come up with a viable solution for cargo yet.

do i? nope. not never. it's ridiculous. i do have a television however. a very old 13" magnovox. arial off, plug unplugged. it's used for veiwing vintage movies and how to videos.

yes, replies which demonstrated a condescension and hostility that was, frankly, startling, and confirmed my first general impression of anti-tv types as misanthropic cranks. the full text of your reply furthered that impression, btw.

It is easy to call anyone who holds a view contrary to popular belief a crank. This is because a person essentially does not have to put forth an argument, and merely relies on preconceived notions. Atheists were, and to many degrees still are, considered cranks.

I see a flaw in the general analysis of television's impact as a source of information. At least in America, most of the news is rather sensationalist than informative. Television as an entertainment source is not even a consideration, since many different societies have different forms of entertainment. So all that is left is the notion that television somehow provides something of cultural substance.

The truth of the matter is that a person can generally be better informed by the radio or reading a newspaper.

Further, the analogy of television to books is, in my view, a false one. Television is essentially a passive medium, whereas reading generally requires a modicum of concentration, and ergo is active.

Everyone you said about television is not about it being an informative medium, but rather its power as an inculcator of culture. So really you are calling people cranks who disagree with certain aspects of culture. And honestly, that is a tricky subject.

Television as a medium in western society has a few huge negatives that I think any of its benefits do not redeem.

1. It essentially does not provide anything new. That is to say, anything of substance I can obtain from television I can obtain from mediums that have few of television's negatives.

2. It is a the most powerful vehicle for cultural indoctrination, and unfortunately it usually presents the most insidious aspects of modern culture. (I.e., television is a huge influence in how people form opinions about gender and happiness.)

3. It is one of the greatest promoters of complacency and sedation known to humankind. I will not go so far as to say that television causes people to be sedate, but it truly is myopic to ignore the ease with which television can induce it. For instance, if a person is feeling lazy, but has no television, the alternatives are to take a nap or do something productive or enjoyable. With a television, just flip a switch. Of course, this example does not pertain to people who DO enjoy television.

Frankly, I have never once heard an sound argument for television's importance. Besides feeding women with messages that they need beauty products to hide their inherent ugliness (not television specific), and men with the idea they need to feel attracted to every female they meet, what cultural edification does television provide? It has its moments. Watching humankind set foot on the moon in real time...that is pretty nice.

But it would be quite absurd of me to lamblast anyone on these forums because they have never seen Top Model Sverige or Floor Filler (the latter a show following Swedish dancers). Yet that is exactly what people do when they call "antiTV" folk cranks. I met an Italian woman recently who had never seen Star Wars. Guess what, I can assure you she lived a perfectly healthy life, and could discuss a wide range of topics.

I sold my TV a long time ago and used the money to buy a piece of rock climbing gear for a trip to Devils Tower (a Black Diamond #3.5 Camalot for you rock climbing types out there). I really liked not having one and didn't miss it at all. But now, due to being really poor and living in a very expensive city, I can't escape its evil blue glow since I live in a studio with a friend who owns and likes television. I try to get her to watch PBS stuff like Frontline, but she really likes all those damned shows about dead people like CSI and Law and Order. Blech. One thing that I do, which seems almost as rare as not owning a TV, is mute the commercials. Once you get used to doing that, whenever you're around a TV where the commercials aren't muted, you realize how loud and obnoxious they really are.