TV Programs as Smartness Boosters

It never occurred to me that dramas and reality programs could also function to make viewers smarter. I used to think of news programs as the only programs on TV capable of doing so, due to the fact that news programs would impose cognitive demands on viewers by acquainting them with the up-to-date events and in turn engaging them in the analysis and reflection of these events as they relate to their lives. Therefore, Johnson’s (2005) article indeed comes as a pleasant surprise for me. As he asserts, dramas such as 24, ER, The West Wing, actually place greater cognitive demands on the viewers by putting forth narratives which are characterized by subtlety and discretion (p.8). As such, in stark contrast to the commonly held value that they are a bad influence, these programs could actually contribute to the development of mental functioning and the enhancement of cognitive capacity. This is nothing short of great news for people like me who turn on TV as if it were a second nature as soon as I hit home.

However, while I welcome Johnson’s proposition with open arms in terms of dramas and reality programs boosting viewers’ smartness, a major concern has come to present itself as I read this article. That is, the potential negative impact on viewers might override the cognitive benefits these programs have to offer. Although dramas like 24 do entail better integration of the information and a higher-level reasoning skill to make sense of and connect their multiple narrative threads and in so doing set viewers in motion for some brain exercises, the fact that they are, more often than not, violence-, crime-, and obscene-language-packed somehow makes them less than ideal candidates for serving as informational programs for viewers. As a rule, we construct our value systems and develop our linguistic repertoires by virtue of interacting with and learning from people, books, and media that we come into contact with in our social milieus. Hence, there is a chance that viewers of the aforementioned programs, while expanding their cognitive capacity through watching them, may at the same time foster the idea that violence and threats are acceptable solutions to conflicts, and incorporate offensive language such as excessive cursing and swearing into their everyday conversations. The example popping up in my head as to how easily language might catch on through media pertains to the flick Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. I remember when the movie came to an end, I noticed a number of people left the theater crooning Willy Wonka, the theme song played over and over again in the movie. In other words, a merely two-hour trip in the theater resulted in a new unit being added to the viewers’ linguistic repertoires and being produced in the oral form right away. The trailer of this movie accompanied by the theme song is as follows.



*This video clip comes from YouTube.

In light of this example, I could not help but wonder what impact the hours after hours of exposure to the violence and offensive language would exert on the viewers, not the least teenaged ones. In a line, though the growing complexity of dramas and reality programs involving multiple-threading, flashing arrows, and social networks would no doubt act to stimulate viewers’ cognitive development, the negative impact sugarcoated by the excitement of watching them such as the idea of violence-as-a-solution and offensive language deserves more careful attention.

As far as I am concerned, none of the dramas or reality shows named in Johnson’s (2005) article is my cup of tea. For one thing, they tax too much of cognitive resources in watching. For the most part, I turn to TV programs for some entertainment which by my definition means something I could kick back and enjoy without focused attention. Having to concentrate a great deal and feeling exhausted after watching certainly falls outside that definition. For another, they stand far from being adequate language learning materials. One of my motives for watching English-speaking dramas/sitcoms pertains to the benefits of getting more exposure to authentic use of English through understanding the narrative threads embedded in the show. Yet, for such dramas as ER, the fast-speed talking fraught with a plethora of medical jargons make it practically the off-limit to me as a language learner, since I would spend most of an episode feeling confused and overwhelmed both by the language and by the plots. Vis-à-vis these dramas featuring twist-and-turning threads and fast-speed talking, sitcoms like Friends, with their friendly plots scattered with surprises and with their everyday English mixed with useful idioms, emerge as the most educational form of entertainment for me. For example, I picked up some idiomatic expressions such as leaving someone high and dry and kicking up someone’s heels from Friends. Plus, they also play a crucial role in my process of cultural acquisition. For instance, I learnt about the 4 things needed for a wedding from Monica’s wedding in Friends, that is, something old, something new, something borrow, and something blue. Most important of all, I could always count on them for a good laugh. Therefore, as an English learner, I benefit more from the sitcoms that not only leave me in stitches but offer great vocabulary as well as cultural lessons than the Sleeper-Curve dramas.