http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/42567494#42567494
I used YBCR and now LR and moving now to J. Geniuses and i had results and knew what i was getting into. I think it’s terrible now what they are doing to Dr. Titzer, but what do you think? I"m so curious about people’s views on the points they bring up in the msnbc spot
‘deceptive’
‘lying’
‘snake oil’
etc.
I think this is old and has been ongoing actually. I think its terrible and all those so called experts don’t have a clue. Those ‘experts’ dumb children down.
We all know here reading to your child, singing and talking to them does not teach a child to read. It teaches them to listen , yes, but not to read.
I was one of those people who thought YBCR was maybe a snake oil but its far from the truth. My 4yr old reads better than her sisters did at ages 5,6 ever did.
My daughter is also figuring out phonics pretty much on her own.
I think what this person is doing is snake oil and is keeping children from really truely reaching their full potential. And for people not say these babies aren’t reading is absurd.
Has anyone heard anything more on this at all?
P.S. I don’t regret getting YBCR at all. it was actually the best thing I had ever invested in.
I am quite curious as how singing can lead to reading if it is without visual aide? Speaking… perhaps, but not reading.
I see a number of reasons that many parents had failures:
They wanted a miracle with no input from them as a parent.The kind of parent that believes it is the government’s job and responsibility to teach their children any and everything.
They are not readers themselves. What will a child learn about reading if they never see mom or dad pick up a book themselves? Books become unnecessary chores that mom and dad don’t want or make time for.
They force reading on their child. “You WILL watch this video right now even though you are hungry, tired, and upset. You have NO CHOICE.” We all know that will never fly with a child and will actually cause damage.
It is not the product causing damage, it is the negative parenting styles full of “I don’t have to be THAT involved” “Do as I say, not as I do” and “You WILL do whatever whenever I tell you.”
The product says a baby CAN read, not that a baby WILL read.
I, too, would like to know if this has gone any further. I recently had someone that was a university “expert” step in on my conversation with another parent to discredit the program. I was outraged and disgusted considering I have a reading 2 year old and I was talking about babies reading in general (not any particular program).
“Experts” are overrated. All that means is you sat through some classes and took some tests, and maybe coughed up some research papers. As a natural “A” student, I know just how easy that really is. I am not impressed by a title.
On another note, I am not saying that anyone that didn’t have success with YBCR has failed or is a bad parent and must be in the criteria above. But rather that I believe those are some of the reasons that people going for a lawsuit would have failed.
I understand that children learn differently and one may need to learn their child’s style and how to teach their child to learn. I am a very angry pregnant woman, and a parent that really tries to help their child is a GREAT parent. You care. You are involved. And you won’t point the finger at someone else when it doesn’t work. That also makes you a good person with a good head.
Hmmm. Here is the original complaint, which is about marketing and the terminology used:
Let’s Stop Your Baby Can Read’s
Deceptive Advertising
On April 12, 2011, CCFC filed a Federal Trade Commission complaint against Your Baby Can Read!, a $200 video series that encourages parents to put infants as young as three months in front of screens. The complaint is part of our ongoing campaign to support parents’ efforts to raise healthy babies by stopping the false and deceptive marketing of “educational†baby videos.
The complaint, which was prepared by the Institute of Public Representation at Georgetown University, has already been featured in the Associated Press and on the Today Show. We are gratified that, once again, we are raising public awareness that there is no evidence that babies learn anything—let alone how to read—by watching videos. But we need your help to ensure that the FTC holds Your Baby Can Read accountable for deceiving parents.
Please take a moment to urge the FTC to stop Your Baby Can Read from luring babies to screens under false pretenses and to compensate parents who were deceived by its marketing.
Your Baby Can Read is advertised extensively on television and on the web. Like Baby Einstein, its marketing is designed to take advantage of parents’ natural inclinations to give children every possible advantage. Much of the marketing is targeted to parents of disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds for whom Your Baby Can Read’s hefty price tag represents a significant sacrifice. Your Baby Can Read pressures parents by urging them to seize a “short window of opportunity†for reading that begins in infancy despite that there is no evidence that any such “window†exists—or to support any of Your Baby Can Read’s pseudoscientific claims.
According to literacy experts who have examined Your Baby Can Read!, the program does not teach actual reading; at best, it’s memorization. Even though babies and toddlers may recognize written words, their brains aren’t developed enough to actually learn to read. Nor is there evidence that babies who watch the videos are better readers later on.
It is particularly egregious that Your Baby Can Read targets babies as young as three months. If parents follow the viewing instructions, their baby will have watched more than 200 hours of Your Baby Can Read by the age of nine months. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends no screen time for children under age two. Research has linked infant screen time to sleep disturbances and delayed language acquisition, as well as problems in later childhood such as poor school performance and childhood obesity.
That’s why—whether you’ve purchased Your Baby Can Read or not—the FTC needs to hear from you. And please urge your friends and family to weigh in as well.
http://www.commercialfreechildhood.org/actions/yourbabycanreademail.html
Does anyone know how YBCR is fighting this? The link in the previous post goes to a petition to the FTC asking them to act against YBCR. Would it be helpful to sign a petition to the FTC in SUPPORT of YBCR? Does anyone know how to set this up online? Or maybe this wouldn’t be helpful/necessary?
My DD started learning to read with YBCR. By the time she turned 2 years old she was reading new words she hadn’t seen before. I agree the infomercials could be less pushy, but I really do believe the product can work. It drives me crazy when the Harvard experts say it isn’t possible for toddlers to read because their brains haven’t developed enough.
only time for a short comment:
“delayed language acquisition” Opposite in my house! My son spoke early and has a HUGE vocabulary - thanks to YBCR, LR and to our desire to use adult words with him instead of “baby” words.
I’m also interested to hear if anyone finds a pro-YBCR petition.
I watch Matt Lauer and Jeff Rossen and think, “What uninformed, biased idiots.”
This is an incredibly bad program reheated (my review of the original program is here), with just the FTC complaint added.
Wish I had time to respond to the complaint publicly–maybe I’ll make time. I’ll be writing in support of YBCR to the FTC, in any case. I encourage you to do the same.
However this shakes out, I think you’re going to see big changes in how people understand early reading, and the teach of reading generally, over the next few years.
I honestly believe that works… personally have seen the great impact on my child. She use to watch this when she is back from preschool, she was around 23months old…she watches this programme in the afternoon and occassionally in the evening. I used to be very happy that atleast my child is learning something from the video rather than watching other unhealthy violent cartoons!
I strongly believe and support that YBCR actually helps kid to increase their vocabulary at a very tender age,expecially when both parents are working. In fact my daughter watches others cd as well like Action words from Bumblebee, GOGO conversations, Opposites from bumblebee
And the GOOD NEWS is she is able to use this words that she has learned from the cd’s!
Hmm. Here is the link to their petition and then there is something below where you can add additonal comments. Maybe if we wrote in the additional comments box that the information typed in that petition is nothing other than false and that this program actually does work then it would go straight to the FTC. Not sure.
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/621/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=6502
There is also a Facebook page called Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood. I went on there and stated my opinion. I would encourage you folks to do the same on that and let the people on there know , you know the ones who are falling for this garbage, that this program is indeed educational and atually works.
Wow, this aggravates me so much, because people already think I am crazy to be teaching my baby and now these idiots “prove” that YBCR is a “scam”! Okay so My mother was on the phone bragging to her sister about my daughter’s “incredible intelligence”. My aunt, her sister said that YBCR was undergoing a lawsuit that it is a scam. I said to my mother that it does not teach your baby to read. You do not watch those 5 DVDs and know how to read. It is a tool that you may use to help teach your child and give them a head start. I have had YBCR from time my daughter turned two months. If I didn’t put in work with her. Sit show her cards, sit with her while she watched the videos. Read to her, go out of my way to educate her she would most likely not be as smart as she is today. YBCR along with numerous programs including LR and LM ect. Have all helped me teach my daughter. She has a larger vocabulary then children who are older then her. I go to the store and find it odd that 3 year olds hardly talk or aren’t as vocal as my daughter. I take it for granted that my daughter is advanced I think all children are like this and then I see other children not doing what my daughter does. YBCR along with all the other programs I have used are short the most I will say is 30 minutes. How will 30 minutes of television a day turn your child into a television addict. Why are we trying to stop our children from becoming smarter then we are? Do we see the young people out here today. I live in NY and I see teenagers that do not know their zip code, kids 5 and 6 year olds that ask their parents what (in) means on a sign on the train. My mother wishes she has this for her children (me and my sister). I think the people questioning this product and the idea of early reading and early education need to pick up a book by Glenn Doman or see it for themselves. I really don’t understand why people wouldn’t want to educate their children early, why they wouldn’t believe it, we see how many kids can learn multiple languages as a baby but learn to read impossible!!! If it looks to good to be true it probably isn’t what the heck is that. So what all these children were just born smart. Well parents on here congratulations we all had something when we were pregnant that made our babies extraordinary. That is ridiculous! I get that the advertisements may be wrong in the sense that some people buy it expecting their babies to be able to pick up any book and read it before their first or second birthday with no other education other then YBCR. That is not the case YBCR is just a tool along with everything else we use, but it does work and it helps especially parents who are busy working or dealing with other kids and don’t have time to make their own flash cards and things. Sorry for the rant…but you have got to be kidding me.
Update:
I was reading the link
and it stated “In fact, there is no evidence babies learn anything—let alone how to read—by watching videos. And research links infant screen time to sleep disturbances and delayed language acquisition, as well as problems in later childhood such as poor school performance and childhood obesity. That’s why the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends no screen time for children under two.” My reply is my child sleeps for 12 hours at night usually and I can’t see how a 30 min program can make your child obese look at children and adolesents now who are addicted to video games I don’t think they were watching YBCR or doing early education because if they were they would be reading a book or doing something else probably educational at least my daughter seems to be all about educational things and I do not see her addicted to television or video games in the future…what happened to parenting? If you let your kids watch sesame street that is an hour long watch out you are contributuing to obesity and sleep problems in your children…tell all the babies who love elmo they can’t watch him anymore!
Yes I would strongly encourage everyone to write to the FTC to support YBCR.
Instead of following the CCFC’s petition link (which would end up supporting their petition), just write to the FTC directly here:
https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/
You can refer to the CCFC’s petition and express your views on it.
We can also leave a comment on CCFC’s Facebook page:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Campaign-for-a-Commercial-Free-Childhood/43207060421
I wish that Dr. Titzer would cite the research he referred to, as well his colleagues who agree with him to speak out and counter the arguments from the smear campaign.
I’ve posted my letter to the FTC on my blog, here: http://larrysanger.org/2011/04/574/
This could end up being one of the best things possible for early reading…public controversy leads to increased public attention, more information, and hence more credibility given to “our side.” Of course, saying that would be very naive…ten years ago. But today, the likes of Matt Lauer and the CCFC–paragons of establishment control of the conversation–are not the only voices out there. In the Internet world, our voices can actually be heard, and we can reach people directly. We can also greatly influence decision-makers, because (I’m think, anyway) the Internet makes it easier for people to reach them.
I look at this case as a sort of touchstone of a confrontation between the education, media, and academic establishments, on the one hand, and Your Baby Can Read, allied groups, and regular folks empowered by the Internet, on the other. Who will prove, ultimately, to have the power? :unsure:
This might be the last we’ll hear about it, though. The FTC might well conclude that there’s nothing to the case.
I commented on Facebook too, thanks for the link KL!
I think the attack on YBCR may spread to other educational products:
Are Little Pim, Your Baby Can Read or any other educational products used in your home? If so, and you live in the tri-state area and are willing to be interviewed in a taped spot, e-mail us and you might be featured in a future segment on TODAY.
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/36718102/ns/today-today_participate/
...and it stated "In fact, there is no evidence babies learn anything—let alone how to read—by watching videos.
Not so, according to PBS who claims young children can learn branding from TV as young as age 1 if I remember correctly. Which means if they can learn brands (like a big yellow M for McDonalds) then of course they should be able to learn the “branding” of the ABC’s from TV as well! That is just the beginning of course, but it’s ludicrous to state that TV cannot be an effective teaching tool for many, if not most, kids.
http://www.pbs.org/parents/childrenandmedia/article-faq.html#language
Of course, PBS has a vested interest, but it’s worth a read nonetheless.
The other thing…I find it so ironic that they are going after Titzer and NOT the non-educational TV shows, i suppose because no claims are being made but the whole thing is laughable. You want to campaign against something for a commercial free childhood? Let’s start with yo-gabba gabba. now THAT garbage will rot a mind.
If there was a LIKE button here TMT I would click it. :clown:
Yo Gaba Gaba I can’t stand. Yuck.
They might as well start going after programs like Dora the Explorer too as well as Seseme Street , Deigo , and all those nickelodeon educational shows too. If YBCR isn’t educational neither are these shows too.
Maybe Jeff Rossen should compare notes with his colleague Ann Curry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Vys9jvXwcU
Matt Lauer is in both of these videos, one featuring a toddler reading and the other calling YBCR “snake oil.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/30345516#30345516
Dr. Gentry just posted this on the Psychology Today blog!
Now this is getting very interesting - read the last paragraph:
I wonder who really is behind this latest complaint. I have no current association with the product called “Your Baby Can Read” although early this year I did provide an expert opinion on their behalf in an advertising complaint filed against them by one of their competitors. Here’s an interesting fact that I bumped up against as I prepared my report that outlined the authenticity of baby/toddler reading but contained no endorsement of any product. The competing company, LeapFrog, filed the advertising complaint against “Your Baby Can Read” claiming that baby reading was impossible. Yet LeapFrog founded by Mike Wood developed the company’s major product because he was having difficulty teaching his 3-year-old to read and use phonics! Due diligence made me wonder if the complaint was more about market share than about protecting babies.
HMMMMM…