[dboreham]

Evidence in our house, yes. The TV delivery industry shot their feet off in this area because they have a pricing model where they want to charge per "screen" (we use Echostar, but I believe the other providers have similar pricing). They also insist (or did until yesterday) that the data gets to the screen by coax. My two kids have tv screens in their bedrooms but I was not interested in paying an extra fee to have the signal delivered to them, nor was I keen to crawl around under the floor pulling coax (they have perfectly fine GigE connections already). They could in theory watch TV on a screen in the family room but they'd need to fight someone else for control of the set top box (and get out of bed). The result is they spend all day watching YouTube and Snapchatting on their phones. The TVs are only used for Netflix.

[dinkumthinkum]

OK, but you know what they say about anecdotes, right? I'm sure there are many people on HN that have never watched a show in their entire life; there is an Onion article about "Area Man Constantly Telling People He doesn't Own a TV" [1]. Also, there is a group of people in America I understand called the Amish. That's fine but I'm not sure how to generalize from that .... My response is to this kind of often repeated idea that I think lacks a lot of merit or evidence in reality. For that view to be true, there better be a statistically insignificant number of kids that have ever seen any of these shows or any of their associated advertisments because they are too busy with Snapchat.

One thing I am aware of is that kids have a lot of free time and they do a lot of different things, is what I understand.

1. http://www.theonion.com/article/area-man-constantly-mentioni...