As I type this, I'm enjoying my air conditioned home, while outside, it's heating up for another record blasting heck of a hot Texas day. We are under a heat index warning for goodness sakes. What does this have to do with global warming? I'm not sure. I'm no climatologist, and even if I were, I'd just be debating with other climate geniuses about the causes and consequences of global warming, or an impending ice age, whatever the case may be. Still, it's up to us as inhabitants of the earth to listen to the statistics spewing out of both sides of the debate and thoughtfully come to a reasonable conclusion on what to do about said global warming issue. But it seems, some people don't think SpongeBob should weigh in on the debate.
The Internet is heating up over a segment on Fox & Friends in which Steve Doocy and Gretchen Carlson claimed that Nickelodeon is pushing a global warming agenda, citing a SpongeBob episode and a book that was handed out at a government sponsored event. You can read about the accusation that SpongeBob is spreading global warming misinformation on MediaMatters.org if you want to get the details.
I'm also very wary of children's programs or other products geared toward children that attempt to push an agenda. However, here are some points to consider regarding the SpongeBob issue:
- It's SpongeBob. SpongeBob is one of the longest running, most popular cartoons to air on TV. He gets into all kinds of crazy adventures and involved in various causes. The cartoon often contains jokes about current issues, which is one reason why it's as popular among older kids and adults as it is with younger kids. If Mr. Krabs says, "Thanks to global warming, the temperature will soon go through the roof, and we'll have an endless summer." That's a joke.
- It's not just SpongeBob. The environment is a huge issue to kids these days. Earth Day is highly recognized and celebrated, and many (too many to mention) kids' programs and other kids' media formats run specials highlighting issues surrounding the environment and even global warming specifically. If SpongeBob is the title character in a book that promotes attempting to prevent global warming, he is certainly, by far, not the first.
- Better Safe Than Sorry. Is it really that bad that SpongeBob and other animated characters are bringing up issues related to global warming and the environment? Even if the people who reject the idea of man made global warming are absolutely right, what harm comes from teaching kids to respect the environment, and to study and appreciate the effects our actions have on the world around us? We are all stewards over many different things during the course of our lives, and the earth and the environment is a stewardship we all share and must take seriously. I don't mean we need to shove the issues down anyone's throats, but teaching kids to be to be responsible, respectful stewards over those things they are entrusted with is a good, positive thing. Always.
- This is a fabulous learning opportunity. Just as teaching kids the truth about advertising and the messages behind it helps them become critical thinkers, so does pointing out subtle messages in TV programming. Kids are bombarded with messages from innumerable sources every day of their lives, and most of them just soak it all in and try to make sense of it on a subconscious level where who knows what is going on. This is our chance as parents to say to our kids, "Hey, look at how these shows have subtle messages that may lead you to believe one way or another. Think about those messages. What do you believe about them? Do some research. Come to your own conclusions." Even if I agree with whatever agenda comes out in a TV program or movie, I will often point out the message to my kids and say, "Did you know that some people don't agree with that?" I love for them to know that there are two sides to almost every story, and I want them to recognize when they are being fed a line and do the research to figure things out for themselves.
These issues present us with an opportunity to teach our kids to be thinkers and problem solvers. These political debates are an opportunity for us to teach our kids to be better than we are. Attacking SpongeBob, and especially real human beings for that matter, is no way to discuss the issues at hand. We can be respectful and try to understand the point of view of both sides without compromising our own beliefs. We may even learn something from it. Poor SpongeBob is caught in the political crossfire of a debate that is only an extension of a bitter political climate that has gotten way out of hand. SpongeBob is not the problem here.
Follow Kids TV & Movies - Twitter | Facebook
(Photo credit: Nickelodeon )
Hello.
Science: people doing stuff has increased the levels of carbon and that carbon increase will warm our climate on earth.
Silly People: Oh Science, Schmience.
So what if Sponge Bob says it’s so.
We ought to check with Sponge Billy to see what he thinks.
JOHN LONGENECKER
Over the years I’ve been quite concerned with the indoctrination of children whether it be religious, or neo-liberal socialism motifs. If SpongeBob is a trusted avatar and cartoon character, then it will cause an imprintation on the children’s brain. Humans are partly made of carbon, Arthur C Clarke called them “carbon based bi-peds” in fact, so it’s impossible to walk on the sand without leaving a carbon footprint.
AGW theory and it’s evangelical followers have really done a number on science, hijacked the domain, science will have a tough time moving forward regaining that trust. Indoctrination of children is simply inexcusable at this point. But we shouldn’t be surprised in this as many of the creative class of folks do lean far-left on the political spectrum and they have a whole nice little agenda to go along with it.
For quite a while it became so politically incorrect to challenge Global Warming theory that many climate scientists lost their funding, jobs, and were sidelined, along with politicians, business leaders, and such. We need to consider the implications of cartoon characters promoting smoking as much as we do promoting AGW. I believe this issue is serious and I am happy you brought it up.
Better safe than sorry? Are you saying that an agenda that has the potential to ravage economies, redistribute the wealth, create a climate of fear etc. is ok even if totally fabricated? Just asking?
Silentappraiser,
We can easily teach children to be responsible and environmentally conscious without ravaging any economies, redistributing wealth, or creating a climate of fear. Fanaticism may cause issues such as these, sure, but teach kids about that too.
That’s in fact my point, talk to your kids about the issues so that they are aware of ALL SIDES, all implications, and possible unintended consequences. I absolutely teach my kids to do their best to be green, because I think it’s the right thing to do no matter what the outcome of the global warming debate. However, we aren’t extreme about the issue and we make sure to discuss all sides of the issue.
We had a great discussion about this when the movie Arctic Tale came out and advised kids, “If your mom and dad buy a hybrid car, it’ll be easier for polar bears to get around.” Let me tell you, we had quite a discussion over that! Overall, we liked the movie, but that is the type of indoctrination I can and did get worked up about.
Lance,
I totally agree with your point about indoctrinating kids. As in my example above, I try to watch for that and address it with my kids, and I would be among the first to stand up against if I saw it happening. But, I just don’t think SpongeBob goes that far, and I think the bigger issue in our current political arena is solving our problems wisely, cooperatively and respectfully.
We can teach our kids to see both sides, because honestly, I think it’s rare that one side is totally right and the other totally wrong. Usually, well-intentioned people on both sides of complex issues have valid reasons for thinking the way they do.
If a show leans opposite your own political leanings, that’s a great chance to show your kids how people incorporate their agendas into things and teach them to be mentally strong enough to see it for what it is and judge it accordingly.
If a show inappropriately promotes an agenda, then we have civil ways we can deal with that. We can make our voices heard, but attacking SpongeBob or whoever and using inflammatory language, as is the case with the SpongeBob saga, only serves to shut down open communication and pit people against each other.
Also, it says a lot to our kids when we just turn off a show and say you know what? That’s just not something our family agrees with.
There is no “debate” on global warming. You either accept proven science, or deny it.
The fact that our atmosphere acts like a greenhouse has been in textbooks for decades…
Apparently, most conservative bloggers never read those chapters.
I hope Spongebob continues educating children on accepted science. Science that, by the way, will determine the economy and standard of living for the coming generation.
You’re right better pay my carbon tax to Al Gore and Rothschild now to save the planet! Spongebob told me so! Nevermind climategate! Nevermind polarbeargate!
Timothy McVeigh opposed gun control.
Timothy McVeigh blew up a building in Oklahoma.
Therefore sane people should support Gun Control.
If you agree with the above logic, congratulations. You too have the mental capabilities and keen mind necessary to deny global warming.
There is no debate, there is no controversy. Climate change is caused by human activity.
There is no “both sides” in this debate… unless it is in the same vein as the Evolution vs so-called “Intelligent Design” debate. One side has ALL the science, while the other side is a bunch of disingenuous bunk.
Consider this – there is NO scientific body… NONE with a dissenting view on climate change.
There is a few with noncommittal positions, and the vast bulk left all support the view that we are heating up the earth.
First, I would like to say that it really amazes me how everyone has really gotten so amped up about Spongebob. It’s just Spongebob-he is a cartoon who on a daily basis does something completely ridiculous. I don’t let my kids watch it because there is so much nonsense in it. If my kids are going to watch tv, it’s going to be something educational or wholesome.
Second, some of the comments are only to discuss whether global warming “is” or “is not” man made. What we are trying to discuss is not the validity of global warming. It is about children’s shows, and how they sometimes have issues we may not agree with. So, let’s all try to stick to the subject here.
I love that this has been brought up because it is something I have discussed with my kids as well. No matter the show you watch, there will occasionally be something in it that needs to be discussed on a deeper level with your children. Discussing both sides of an issue helps your children develop thoughts for themselves so they don’t blindly follow whatever is said. Even if it’s not a debatable issue, some things will be said or done that your child might have questions about. That’s why it’s important to be interactive with your child when watching tv. It is not just a babysitter, but a learning tool.
Spongebob isn’t the first show ever to say or do something people don’t agree with, and it won’t be the last. But, if you are involved with what your kids watch it won’t be blown out of control, it will be another learning opportunity.
Just one more example of agenda driven media/entertainment where the Innocuous appearance has the greatest ability to shape and control behavior. It exemplifies Social determinism at it’s finest, and as long as we debate the trivial red herrings, the real issue and true agenda of social engineering through “education” to manipulate and control thought,belief, and action remains free from discovery; thereby, persisting with little to no resistance. Herein lies the battlefront for freedom; for who is truly free when their thoughts, beliefs, and actions…all of their choices, are predicted, predetermined, predicated upon political power. The conflict is between individual freedom and socialization. The question is: who will think for you? The answer is already written when the soldiers are our innocent, naive, trusting children who will whole-heartedly accept and internalize whatever SpongeBob tells them.
Again science is not a democracy… Hello people!? Science simply describes what is. The vast majority of scientists are wholly in agreement on the causes of climate change. If you happen not to agree with the scientific community on this, your opinion simply doesn’t count. Period.
Based on the numerous comments – there is a debate like it or not. I think the main point of this post is being missed! There is a teaching opportunity here. Kids need to be aware that everything they see, hear, or read is not “the gospel truth”. There are two sides to almost everything and letting them know that not everyone thinks the same gives parents the opportunity to teach their children how to think critically, research out a topic they don’t understand, and then come to a conclusion instead of taking anything at face value because if you don’t think they way I do you are clueless.
No, no, no. I’m all for better safe than sorry.
This is why we need to keep our women at home.
We wouldn’t want them going out and getting all raped and what not. Better safe. Yeah.
Scienceisnotademocracy…
Science is also not a theocracy either.
And now that your church is under attack, you’re out to hunt the heretics.
We don’t buy your junk science even if it’s to just be on the “safe side”.
Again… if you are not a scientist and cannot perform the experiments or interpret the data, your opinion on the subject doesn’t matter. Its that simple. There is no “church of global warming” as such, but a large body of research and data collected over decades that a community of the adequate, i.e. those who “know how to read” are in agreement upon. The current debate about whether global warming is man made or not happens largely outside the scientific community, in the a sphere that is emotionally charged and politically motivated. Sorry, but the jury is in agreement and already in on this. Emotions and politics have no bearing on the veracity of scientific data.