Words to live by

Tom Lee offers a simple solution for those who find themselves unctuously informing the rest of us that they do not own a television:

If you don't own a TV, go buy one. This way you'll never be tempted to unnecessarily mention

If you don't own a TV and are able to refrain from relating this fact, then, uh, carry on.

TO CLARIFY: You don't have to watch it, of course. That's your call. But by owning a television, most attempts to proudly explain your aversion to the medium will become so bogged down in qualifiers that they'll never escape your lips. This will be well worth the $19 investment.

ALSO: Obligatory Onion reference.

that you don't own a television, preventing everyone else from thinking you're a supercilious jackass.

Remember, these days, when you say "I don't own a television", you're not just misleading people into believing that you spend all of your spare time reading Proust in the original Sanskrit; you're also signalling that you don't have a Wii.  This is a major social liability.

Comments

If you announce that you don't own a TV or a computer, then I'll be impressed.

Posted by Bergamot | July 23, 2008 9:46 AM

Uh-huh. I think I'll pass anyway. Yes, I know, not having wii handicaps me with 'a major social liability'. It _is_ possible to watch all sorts of stuff, stay current on the news, and even watch movies on this thing we call a 'computer'.

Posted by ScentOfViolets | July 23, 2008 9:46 AM

Wii aggrevates my chronic nerve pain.

Posted by aaron | July 23, 2008 9:59 AM

If you announce that you don't own a TV or a computer, then I'll be impressed.

Have you imagined how much time you would have to be productive without being a slave to the boob tube nor up all night because someone on the Internet is wrong? ;)

Problem is, you'll end up like my brother. He gave up TV. Then he realized he was spending too much time online so he gave up Internet. Too much video games, gave up computer. Too much drinking... He finally realized that you just need to do something to relax. Moderation was fine, but going to an extreme (elimination) just lead to compensation in another area.

Posted by Demonspawn | July 23, 2008 10:03 AM

I don't own a television. Or a Wii. I don't go around bragging about this fact, but I don't generally find myself short of conversation topics because I can't discuss the season premier of Lost, and I've yet to see my social life negatively affected. Actually, quite the opposite - I spend more time going out and doing things with friends than I did when I was in college and played a lot of video games in my spare time. I also read books, am teaching myself to read and write Japanese, and play sports or work out three times a week to stay in shape, none of which would be possible if I watched a lot of TV. This doesn't make me a better person than someone who does spend their free time watching TV or playing Wii, but I do find it personally preferable. So, kindly spare the aggrieved snark, even if it is tongue-in-cheek.

Posted by Xeynon | July 23, 2008 10:11 AM

Along the same lines, why don't vegans buy a steak and stick it in the freezer. They don't have to eat it, but at least they won't annoy the rest of us with tedious explanations for why they'd never buy meat.

Posted by Fred | July 23, 2008 10:13 AM

I have no tv, no computer, and no printed books. I feel the quality of literature really took a nose-dive after that Guten-whatsit fellow ruined everything with his fancy-dancy new "mass media".

Note that I don't feel this in any way makes me a better person than you tv/internet/novel - obssessed bores but I do bring it up often with a slight air of condescension so maybe I do feel it makes me a better person and my disclaimer to the contrary is just part of the prententious dope schtick.

Posted by Bob | July 23, 2008 10:18 AM

First, any male that claims not to own a TV means that he doesn't watch Deadliest Catch, Dirty Jobs or the History Channel or Sports Center. At that point if he is under the age of 50, it probably means that he is gay or is gay and hasn't figured it out yet.

Beyond that no one, or few people, really are the philosophy professor from the Indigo Girls' song who "never did marry or see a B grade movie". Everyone has guilty pleasures. When someone claims not to have a TV or won't admit to having a guilty pleasure that just tells me that they are dreadfully insecure. It takes a certain amount of intellectual confidence to free admit you like B grade TV documentaries and follow at least one major sport. Following English Premier League doesn't count. Following only European Soccer is the sports fan equivalent of "I don't own a TV". Everyone needs idle pursuits. If you are unwilling to admit what yours are, you have serious self esteem issues.

Posted by John | July 23, 2008 10:19 AM

To quote the little old lady across the street, "I'd rather have a rattlesnake in the corner of my living room than a television"

Posted by sam | July 23, 2008 10:21 AM

"To quote the little old lady across the street, "I'd rather have a rattlesnake in the corner of my living room than a television"

Counseling or maybe some group sessions can help you feel more confident in yourself and get over that.

Posted by John | July 23, 2008 10:24 AM

John,

Don't forget Top Gear on BBC America, and of course, my all time favorite, Wings of the Luftwaffe.

Oh, and I'm gay...

Posted by jmo | July 23, 2008 10:31 AM

Maybe those without TVs could spend their free time trying to develop a sense of humor.

Posted by Peder | July 23, 2008 10:38 AM

"John,

Don't forget Top Gear on BBC America, and of course, my all time favorite, Wings of the Luftwaffe.

Oh, and I'm gay..."

Good for you and you sound like a lot better date than Sam would be.

Posted by John | July 23, 2008 10:40 AM

Top Gear, yes! Gay here too, and I'll take the "Deadliest Catch" over "Project Runway" any day.

We're now coping with too much video entertainment. Tivo, Netflix, Wii and two laptops in the living room. If we used them all to the fullest, we'd have no jobs or social life.

Posted by Chris Anderson | July 23, 2008 10:42 AM

I am straight and watch "What Not to Wear" religously with my wife. I watch it partially because I have a terrible crush on Stacy London but mostly because it is oddly compelling.

Posted by John | July 23, 2008 10:49 AM

least one major sport. Following English Premier League doesn't count. Following only European Soccer is the sports fan equivalent of "I don't own a TV".

Is 'major' restricted to pro, or does college ball count? I don't care for any of the pro league* but I do love vegging out on football saturdays. (And I prefer La Liga to the Premiership.)

*the Brewers appear to be at a high point of their 25-year cycle, so I'm a little interested. But that'll soon pass.

Posted by Matt B | July 23, 2008 10:51 AM

"Is 'major' restricted to pro, or does college ball count? I don't care for any of the pro league* but I do love vegging out on football saturdays. (And I prefer La Liga to the Premiership.)"

I am from Kansas where KU basketball is the major sport and the NBA is like the arena league. College sports absolutly count. Even getting married hasn't killed my college football and basketball addictions.

Posted by John | July 23, 2008 10:53 AM

"Is 'major' restricted to pro, or does college ball count? I don't care for any of the pro league* but I do love vegging out on football saturdays. (And I prefer La Liga to the Premiership.)"

I am from Kansas where KU basketball is the major sport and the NBA is like the arena league. College sports absolutly count. Even getting married hasn't killed my college football and basketball addictions.

Posted by John | July 23, 2008 10:55 AM

When I was completely unattached, and living in a 1 bedroom condo, I didn't own a t.v., because there were at least 25 saloons within a 10 minute walk from my abode, and in such a circumstance, I prefer watching sporting events while leaning on a bar. As my life grew more blissfully complicated, I acquired a T.V., a simple 19 incher. Now, I have a widescreen high-def monstrosity, and the thought of watching a ball game on anything else seems like a fantastic deprivation.

Posted by Will Allen | July 23, 2008 10:56 AM

See, the new supercilious phrasing is, "I don't get cable." You get the cachet of (possibly) owning a Wii or even Rock Band, while also leaving open the possibility that you spend all your time reading Proust.

Or maybe you just have a band in Rock Band called Proust and the Madeleines...

Posted by Emily H. | July 23, 2008 11:07 AM

Yes! I'm completely on board with threadjacking this into a 'Deadliest Catch' discussion.

Does anybody know what the latest word on Phil's health is? He was on the 'After the Catch' last week, and said the doctors basically told him he had two weeks to live.

Posted by Independent George | July 23, 2008 11:22 AM

"least one major sport. Following English Premier League doesn't count. Following only European Soccer is the sports fan equivalent of "I don't own a TV"."

I'm trying to work out what is the british equivalent of this. Probably following the Tour De France or Athletics (I think Americans call this Track).
Obvioudly following football is the be all and end all of most British sports fans.

Posted by Rajesh | July 23, 2008 11:24 AM

Wow, my TV situation is REALLY going to throw Megan McArdle for a loop:

1) I do own a TV, but

2) I very rarely watch it anymore, and

3) I'm actually serious about 2), because

4) the last time I watched it for TV programming was the Obama/Hillary debates before the Mar. 4 primary, and while

5) I did own a Wii,

6) I never used it on my new TV, and, even worse,

7) I sold my Wii as a result of getting bored with it (!) and how

8) I can get better excercise on Dance Dance Revolution on my PlayStation 2, which

9) I use my old TV for, because the new one can't upscale fast enough, meaning

10) my lack of TV watching is not to save money, since I bought the new one recently, and yet ... barely use it, except for DVDs and that Xbox 360 I haven't bought yet.

Yikes! Is there anyone to whom Megan's posts is LESS applicable?

Posted by Person | July 23, 2008 11:25 AM

What's a Wii?

Posted by Rex | July 23, 2008 11:32 AM

"Does anybody know what the latest word on Phil's health is? He was on the 'After the Catch' last week, and said the doctors basically told him he had two weeks to live."

I missed it to. I love Phil. You can't make these guys up. The people on those boats are so real and compelling. No TV writer could make them up. I once sat two seats over on a flight from Sig Hanson. Both me and the guy next to me recognized him (he had a gold watch with a map of Alaska on it so we knew it was him) and we were like 12 year old girls sitting near Milley Cirus. We talked to him for a bit and couldn't ask for a more down to earth nice guy.

Posted by John | July 23, 2008 11:41 AM

"Does anybody know what the latest word on Phil's health is? He was on the 'After the Catch' last week, and said the doctors basically told him he had two weeks to live."

I missed it to. I love Phil. You can't make these guys up. The people on those boats are so real and compelling. No TV writer could make them up. I once sat two seats over on a flight from Sig Hanson. Both me and the guy next to me recognized him (he had a gold watch with a map of Alaska on it so we knew it was him) and we were like 12 year old girls sitting near Milley Cirus. We talked to him for a bit and couldn't ask for a more down to earth nice guy.

Posted by John | July 23, 2008 11:43 AM

There is a whole category of conversation-enders of which "I don't own a TV" is just the most identifiable example.

My recent favorite was directed at me a few weeks ago. While discussing dating with a couple men, I noted that women, like most people, like a compliment now and then because it makes us feel good. To which one of the men responded, "I just think the women I date are beyond stuff like that at this point."

It's the seemingly-innocuous-reflexive-observation that is actually the obnoxious-statement-of-superiority meant to disguise the commenter's crippling insecurity.

Posted by Emily | July 23, 2008 11:45 AM

See, my problem with this is that Gandhi didn't own almost anything, was constantly mentioning it, and actually was a better person than anybody on this list. And was denounced during his lifetime for being a pompous condescending weenie.

Not that people who don't own TVs are all Gandhis. Or that there even is any moral content to not owning a TV. But something about the attitude of sneering at others for their renunciations bugs me. Or, for that matter, sneering at them for however they choose to present themselves by describing their consumer or lifestyle preferences. Megan does a lot of talking about how she owns a Wii and isn't ashamed of it. That guy Ogged from Unfogged used to talk a lot about how fast he can swim. I do a lot of talking about...various aspects of my lifestyle I choose not to mention because I'm afraid someone will make fun of them. We all have these little schticks we perform, and we're pretty goddamn easy to make fun of if anyone wants to do that.

Posted by brooksfoe | July 23, 2008 11:51 AM

brooksfoe:

I think one of the main things us TV-havers are complaining about is that when people inform us that they don't have TVs right after we've, say, mentioned how awesome So You Think You Can Dance was last night, they have a tendency to act as though this makes them Gandhi.

I agree that Gandhi was awesome and that my love of television (and the Wii) undoubtedly stands in the way of me being more Gandhi-like. But I know many people who brag about being tv-less, and none of them are conducting a peaceful revolution that will transform a nation.

People can talk about their interests/habits/lifestyles all they want -- it's the tendency to act as though they make you a more saintlike human that is obnoxious.

Posted by Emily | July 23, 2008 11:58 AM

Actually, while the "buy a steak" idea is clearly satire, the comparison between "people who constantly mention they don't own a TV" and "people who constantly mention they're vegans" is apt.

There's no explicit condemnation of the listener, but a definite implicit sense of superiority is usually present.

Posted by Geoff | July 23, 2008 12:03 PM

I own a TV, but I don’t have it hooked up to watch any shows. I don’t get cable. (sorry Emily). I just use it to watch Netflix DVDs. I don’t have a computer or internet at my home, either: I log on from work, mostly, like right now.

I do, however, have an Xbox 360 on which I’ve logged many a day. Call of Duty 4 and Mass Effect have swallowed up large amounts of my time lately.

[quote]any male that claims not to own a TV means that he doesn't watch Deadliest Catch, Dirty Jobs or the History Channel or Sports Center. At that point if he is under the age of 50, it probably means that he is gay or is gay and hasn't figured it out yet.[/quote]

I don’t watch any of the above (maybe History Channel once or twice), I’m 31, and I’m quite sure I’m straight.

I attribute a great deal of my indifference to American sports, however, to having not grown up in the United States. When World Cup soccer rolls around, I'll be glued to the TV at a friend's house.

Posted by Luke G. | July 23, 2008 12:30 PM

I don't have a TV, but I do download and watch shows on my computer. There are plenty of great shows on TV (I've gotten through many excellent sci-fi series on my computer), but this helps me avoid time-wasting "plop down and watch whatever is on" behavior. If I had a TV (and cable) there's a real danger that I'd spend most of the day watching Law & Order re-runs...

Posted by Erica | July 23, 2008 12:34 PM

Everyone has guilty pleasures. When someone claims not to have a TV or won't admit to having a guilty pleasure that just tells me that they are dreadfully insecure.

I never said I don't have guilty pleasures. I have a few Madonna songs alongside all the New Pornographers and Arcade Fire on my iPod, for God's sake - pleasures don't come guiltier than the occasional surreptitious listen to "Like A Prayer".

Nevertheless, for me personally, I find television a deleterious influence on my habits, and avoid it whenever possible. I follow sports but generally listen to games on the radio, go to a sports bar, or watch live feeds via internet (I live abroad so TV usually isn't an option anyway). TV shows that get critical acclaim (e.g. "The Wire") I will check out on DVD, where I can watch them without all the filler and endless injunctions to buy crap interspersed with the actual content. If I'm in a house that has a t.v., like my parents', I might watch PBS, the Discovery Channel, or something similar. I have no desire to own my own television, however, and don't see why it makes me pretentious or self-righteous to say that it's an accessory that I have in my life found both pernicious and ultimately less appealing than the alternatives, the same way some people feel about eating meat, or tofu for that matter. I don't go around beating people over the head with it (in fact I rarely even mention it - certainly I do so less frequently and voluntarily than Megan mentions her veganism).

Nevertheless, whenever I state my view of television, no matter how much I qualify or downplay it (and I tend to, as I don't like arguing about it), there are certain people who get defensive. I don't understand that. To paraphrase something Megan once said vis-a-vis her vegetarianism, I'm not judging you, I just have different preferences.

Posted by Xeynon | July 23, 2008 12:36 PM

I once sat two seats over on a flight from Sig Hanson. Both me and the guy next to me recognized him (he had a gold watch with a map of Alaska on it so we knew it was him) and we were like 12 year old girls sitting near Milley Cirus. We talked to him for a bit and couldn't ask for a more down to earth nice guy.

Sig always kind-of scared me. He and Keith. And Phil, come to think of it. Actually, pretty much all of the captains, which is part of why I love 'After the Catch' so much; it's nice to see them in an environment where they're not on the verge of a nervous breakdown.

That said, my favorite 'Deadliest Catch' moment was at the end of Jake's rookie season on the Northwestern, when they had him throwing the hook under 'Sig's Rules' (if he misses the line, he has to strip. In January. On the Bering Sea. Jeebus.). The entire time, you could just read his face gradually progress from 'Let's mess with the greenhorn!', to 'Crap, he's going to get pneumonia,' to 'Damn, I'm proud of him.'

Posted by Independent George | July 23, 2008 12:39 PM

I used to have just a TV with no antenna or cable (so, for DVDs) until we had kids. There was no moral or other pretentiousness; we were just too cheap to pay for cable, and the town had (at the time) exactly one broadcast channel. But we have one today; if you're home for hours with an infant/toddler, you need to do something to avoid going bonkers.

I think living without TV was better for me, in the main, and I'll probably return to that state when the kids are old enough.

Posted by Rob Lyman | July 23, 2008 12:41 PM

Now if we could only do something about Republicans who keep calling themselves libertarians or "independents"...

Posted by ed | July 23, 2008 12:45 PM

Actually, I now have a tv and am way into Battlestar Galactica.

I also use if for my Netflix: I'm halfway through the Wire and loved the Sopranos.

Stop bringing me up to support your pretenious little status plays, thanks.

-Gandhi

Posted by Gandhi | July 23, 2008 12:50 PM

This post created a really big crisis for me. I do own a TV, but when I first read this I wanted to get rid of it. After all, if I don't have a TV and I don't brag about it, I can be superior not only to people who have TVs, but also to people who don't have TVs and do brag about it. But then I realized, how will anyone recognize my superiority if I'm forbidden to mention its source? So then I thought, what I really need to do to communicate my status as a non-TV-owner-who-doesn't-talk-about-it is to concentrate on affecting the dress and attitude of a non-TV owner. That way, people will just assume I don't have a TV, and they will notice I'm not mentioning it either. And the best part is, I won't even really have to get rid of my TV! Any suggestions on how to look and act the part?

Posted by ben | July 23, 2008 12:52 PM

No TV and no beer make Homer something, something.

Posted by Homer Simpson | July 23, 2008 12:58 PM

I'm trying to work out what is the British equivalent of this.

"I only watch Test cricket."

Posted by Matt B | July 23, 2008 1:02 PM

... any male that claims not to own a TV means that he doesn't watch Deadliest Catch, Dirty Jobs or the History Channel or Sports Center. At that point if he is under the age of 50, it probably means that he is gay or is gay and hasn't figured it out yet.

I'm a gay guy, early forties, who loves Deadliest Catch. Is this Megan's new stealth demographic?

Posted by Deadliest Gay | July 23, 2008 1:07 PM

Day hikes, back country trips, target shooting, overnight horseback rides, travelling to other countries our beaches where my spouse and I spend hours walking around foreign streets taking it all in. Sounds like a borin life...

I'm missing out on so much by not having a TV. Now Wii is quite fun and I'll play it from time to time when available at a friends, same with guitar hero. But the downsides to owning a TV, for me, outweigh the benefits of the ability for constant so-called amusement.

I don't think I'm better than you because I don't have a TV. I think I AM better without a TV than I AM with a TV.

And I think you'd be better without a TV than you are with a TV. It's not a question of me vs. you judgement. It's a question of you vs. you and me vs me.

The people who implicitely interpret some kind of superiority/inferiority thing out of it -and- get offended by it, reveals more about them than me.

Posted by sam | July 23, 2008 1:28 PM

Wow, Sam, thanks for that. That was the perfect distillation of the attitude that we are railing against here. I'm almost tempted to think it was a parody but I'm sure you're for real.

Your argument in a nutshell: It's not that I think I'm better than you, it's that I'm dismayed that you are not trying to be the best "you" that you can be. After all, I've shown you the way that I am trying to be the best "me" that I can be and it doesn't involve television! Why are you not living your life to the fullest as I am!

Just as an fyi, doing the whole "more in sorrow than in anger" schtick doesn't mean you're not still an asshat.

Posted by Bob | July 23, 2008 1:53 PM

Day hikes, back country trips, target shooting, overnight horseback rides, travelling to other countries our beaches where my spouse and I spend hours walking around foreign streets taking it all in. Sounds like a borin life...

Exactly how are any of those things precluded by television ownership? I can't remember the last time I decided to fly to Singapore between 8-10 on a Tuesday night, or the last time I decided against hanging out with my friends to watch a Law & Order marathon.

I don't think I'm better than you because I don't have a TV. I think I AM better without a TV than I AM with a TV... And I think you'd be better without a TV than you are with a TV...

...The people who implicitly interpret some kind of superiority/inferiority thing out of it -and- get offended by it, reveals more about them than me.

You're right, I can't imagine how anyone could possibly read smug superiority into that statement.

Posted by Independent George | July 23, 2008 1:59 PM

I have no TV, the b/f had one and when he moved out leaving me with a two-income mortgage I could hardly afford to replace it, or the monthly fee for satellite. Living in a rural area where broadband is not available, my home entertainment center is a tabletop radio and a five-year-old cranky PC on a very slow dial-up connection. Whoo, boy!

But with much to do in real life, who misses the triviality of TV? Not me, about the only time I see TV is in the doctor's waiting room, and I find I really don't miss it. If the budget allowed, I would get a newer PC or iMac before spending anything to receive broadcast video.

I only mention that I have no TV when it is necessary to explain to persistent people why I can't comment on shows or people I have never seen, but that they can't seem to stop chattering about. I sure don't feel morally superior just because I pay my mortgage and don't have a lot of surplus affluence to own every toy and pay service that's out there. Other people may have different priorities and resources, though.

Posted by Rob | July 23, 2008 2:03 PM

Since so many of the tv-less have pontificated on the many virtues of not owning a tv, I thought I'd just weigh in on the many virtues of having a tv:

1) A lot of television shows are very good. Not all. Just like many books are terrible and most movies suck, TV is a hit and miss medium. But to deride the entire genre because of Two and Half Men is like saying you're going to stop reading because John Grisham exists.

2) Immediate cultural relevance. Listen, I watch plenty of shows on DVD after they air (The Wire and most HBO shows included, because HBO is too expensive for my budget). But there is a lot to be said for experiencing something when most other people do as well. Like a lot of Battlestar Galactica fans, one of the great things about the show is its implicit commentary on the current global political climate. I like experiencing and commenting on that aspect of the show as it airs, rather than trying to revive that conversation in 16 months when it might be less resonate.

3) Inexpensive exposure to things it would otherwise be hard for me to see. Not to dwell on Battlestar, but I should point out that I've never been that into science fiction. But the show is so well done that it's introduced by to the genre (including film and literature) in the best possible way. The show itself is written and produced by scifi fiends, so there are tons of references to influential works in the genre. None of which I would like have encountered if I hadn't decided to watch the show. And so I gained entry into a whole new cultural realm with very little overhead, since the show appears on basic cable and I own a pretty inexpensive television. You also have something like Planet Earth, which without television would either be a limited release documentary (all film documentaries are limited release, basically) or never made at all. TV makes Planet Earth possible. That's cool.

4) Unique storytelling. The biggest rap against tv is that it's low brow, least common denominator stuff, compared to film or stage or literature. But the serial format lends itself to such a unique way of unfolding a story, allowing characters and plots to develop over time. It's much easier to build a complex villain on a television show, because the audience has time to accept his shades of gray. Filmmakers have to define characters more quickly and usually with less nuance. Plus, a television show unfolds over months and years. So people have a chance to think about the story at a gracious pace. It all lends itself to more thought and reflection, which is why you find so many people who are willing to discuss a particular television show at great length and in an intellectual manner.

...Honestly, I could go on. Many of the tv-less have commented on how rich their lives are without tv, and that's fine. But so often, people who don't watch television act as though those of us who do are wasting our time. If you want to go hiking, I'm not going to sneer at it -- I recognize the inherent goodness in that activity, even if it's one a I don't often engage in. Television has an inherent goodness too, and you may not have been exposed to it based on the snippet of Judge Judy you caught in your doctor's waiting room. But enough with the attitude.

Posted by Emily | July 23, 2008 2:32 PM

Huzzah Emily!

Posted by Bob | July 23, 2008 2:50 PM

I can only echo what Rob Lyman said - didn't have a TV for years, not out of having something better to do but just because we were cheap.

Then, a friend moving out of town left one with a VHS player on our doorstep. So we got an antenna and played tapes.

Then, after 9/11 brought down the booster antenna on south WTC tower, we discovered that, like the rest of America, we were addicted to CNN, and our upstairs neighbor started dodging us, so we got cable.

Then I discovered that cable TV is actually pretty good.

Then we had a couple of kids, and now it's a precious window on a fantasy world of dinners without mac & cheese and applejuice and people who talk about things other than toilet training and dinosaurs.

Posted by Kathryn | July 23, 2008 3:12 PM

I have a TV, but no cable. I use it to watch DVDs; i haven't seen a episode of broadcast tv in my home since the series finale of Gilmore Girls (and despite being a fan of the show, I am not gay!) Not getting a converter box so after 2/19/09, I'll have no access to broadcast at all. I've given up on college and pro spectator sports as well.

I don't go out of my way to tell people I don't watch tv. If they mention a particular show or commercial, I just say I haven't seen it.

Much like I am a vegetarian and don't go around telling people I don't eat meat; this blog is the place I ever mention that I don't eat meat,

I certainly don't feel superior to anyone meat eater or nor, tv watcher, tv owner or not.

One thing I will mention is that after going quite a while without watching tv then visiting relatives, commercials are really inspiid, insulting and annoying. But you have no idea if you're exposed to them everyday.

No video game consoles, either.

Posted by James B. | July 23, 2008 3:14 PM

i watch youtube. does that count as tv?

Posted by mexican american | July 23, 2008 3:19 PM

Well I haven't owned a TV in the 7 years since my divorce, but I have noticed anytime someone asks me about a particular show, my response really is a conversation stopper.

I stopped watching TV because I found reading to be much more fun for me. Sci-fi novels, mysteries, legal thrillers. We have a Ukazoo bookstore neary where used books cost $1.98 apiece, and I read about 4 novels a week.

Reading just engages my brain in a story, in much more depth than TV ever did.

I will go to a bar to watch Maryland Terrapin basketball or the Ryder Cup, but that is about it.

Posted by Tax Lawyer | July 23, 2008 4:03 PM

I cancelled my satellite service and haven't regretted it. It is much more fun to watch television shows on DVD through Netflix. No commercials, you decide which shows you would like to watch, and you can watch whole seasons in a row without breaks. You don't even need a TV to watch DVDs, you can use your computer monitor. So if you're POSTING TO AN INTERNET FORUM about how you don't have a TV so you can't watch shows, get a grip. And if you're cheap, check out your library DVD collection.

Posted by Nathan Whitehead | July 23, 2008 4:13 PM

I will go to a bar to watch Maryland Terrapin basketball

Did you lose a bet? Seriously, why would you admit to such a foul, foul habit.

No should watch Terrapin Basketball.

Posted by Skullberg | July 23, 2008 5:11 PM

Just to offer another perspective, sometimes people project this attitude on you. I didn't have cable for a long time because I couldn't afford it, and I got terrible reception on the free channels. So I couldn't watch anything my friends at work were watching, and when they'd urge me to, I'd admit I didn't have cable. I spent scads of time online, and I said so, but people still acted as if not watching cable meant I was reading Proust. It made me uncomfortable.

Now I have cable, and no one seems to talk about TV anymore! I think they're all reading Proust.

Posted by sprite | July 23, 2008 6:05 PM

Just to offer another perspective, sometimes people project this attitude on you. I didn't have cable for a long time because I couldn't afford it, and I got terrible reception on the free channels. So I couldn't watch anything my friends at work were watching, and when they'd urge me to, I'd admit I didn't have cable. I spent scads of time online, and I said so, but people still acted as if not watching cable meant I was reading Proust. It made me uncomfortable.

Now I have cable, and no one seems to talk about TV anymore! I think they're all reading Proust.

Posted by sprite | July 23, 2008 6:05 PM

Since somebody insisted on broaching the topic as a jab at non-owners, here's the other take: a television is a latrine that flushes in the wrong direction. I do have one right now, but mainly as a monitor for the DVD player and my roommate's game consoles; it spends 90% of its existence in the standby state. These days, you can get satiated to the gills with news and entertainment media via DVD and Internet, and if one is planning to have Internet access anyway, both of those can be obtained more cheaply than a monthly cable bill, and handled with a computer and a large monitor -- the latter of which can be paid for with the money saved by not buying a television or cable subscription.

I also grew up without a television in the home. In lieu of that, we had these things called "books", and "toys", and "bicycles", and "backyard". Try 'em out sometime.

Posted by aMouseforallSeasons | July 23, 2008 6:09 PM

I also grew up without a television in the home. In lieu of that, we had these things called "books", and "toys", and "bicycles", and "backyard". Try 'em out sometime.

Well I grew up in a house with "books", "toys", "bicycles", "backyard", "television", "cable", "computers (Commodore 128 on)" and managed to not miss any of them. I think that was because these "adults" didn't let me devote all my time to any one of them - and taught me self control.

Surprisingly we managed to grow up healthy, go to good colleges and compete in athletics all the while - I can't imagine how totally awesome we would have been without the Smurfs!

Posted by Skullberg | July 23, 2008 6:25 PM

I'm reminded of "A Fish Called Wanda." Kevin Kline's character Otto constantly tries to make himself sound intelligent but just ends up revealing what a goon he is. As Wanda tells him:

"Aristotle was NOT Belgian. The central tenet of Buddhism is NOT 'every man for himself'. And the London Underground is NOT a political movement. Those are all mistakes. I looked them up."

Don't we all know people who think things like this? Who convince themselves they're more intelligent than everyone else because they aspire to have lofty thoughts and never quite get there?

I mention all this because I would INFINITELY rather have an intelligent conversation with someone about "Southpark" than talk to someone who thinks that Shakespeare's 18th sonnet is a love poem written to a woman. Or that Proust wrote in Sanksrit.

Posted by Seth | July 23, 2008 6:55 PM

I don't own a TV because my parents severely restricted my TV-watching when I was a kid and I just never developed an interest. This means I miss out on a certain amount of pop culture, but it's not like I'm suffering from some enormous surplus of free time I have to fill. I'm just annoyed that people assume this makes me some kind of snob.

Posted by Elliot Reed | July 23, 2008 8:27 PM

When I was growing up, if there was a good TV show you pretty much had to watch it. If you missed it, you'd never see it again except, maybe, years later in reruns. These days, everything good on TV (and there's actually a lot of good stuff on TV) ends up on DVD in fairly short order.

So I find myself never watching TV. I can just buy or rent the good stuff and watch it all at once when I'm in the mood for it.

Posted by Dan | July 23, 2008 8:33 PM

1) A lot of television shows are very good. Not all. Just like many books are terrible and most movies suck, TV is a hit and miss medium.

Absolutely true. But I can watch them on DVD, where I don't have to deal with commercials or promos for other not-as-good shows, or schedule my Thursday nights around being home at 8:30. As for bad movies and books, I avoid them as well - you won't see me reading L. Ron Hubbard anytime soon, or renting Travolta's adaptation of "Battlefield Earth" either.

2) Immediate cultural relevance. Listen, I watch plenty of shows on DVD after they air (The Wire and most HBO shows included, because HBO is too expensive for my budget). But there is a lot to be said for experiencing something when most other people do as well.

Perhaps. I don't really care all that much about being up on my pop culture, though. If I enjoy something, I'll consume it in due time on my own schedule. If not, then I won't. Externalities like being able to talk about it around the water cooler don't enter into it for me (though it's fine if they do for you).

3) Inexpensive exposure to things it would otherwise be hard for me to see.

Again, I think DVD's solve this problem equally well. I haven't seen BG, but PE is indeed a fine show, one I'll happily watch when there's a TV around. But there's no reason I have to watch it when it's broadcast.

4) Unique storytelling.

The best shows do make use of this aspect of the medium. And then there's any completely conventional episodic drama you care to name, any reality show you care to name, the aforementioned "Two and a Half Men", etc.

Posted by Xeynon | July 23, 2008 10:18 PM

Look, I'll grant there are supercilious twits out there, but I'm normally driven to mention my tv-lessness only in terms of "no, I haven't seen that show, and trying to make me remember seeing that show, or seeing that thing like that show, isn't going to work." Or, online, in counter to the "obviously no parent can live without television, and I defy anyone out there to honestly claim their kid doesn't watch 5 hours a day."

Though as we segment into littler viewing demographics, the assumption that of course everyone watches such-and-such show seems to be vanishing. (In Boston, at least, you can have such a common thread by referring to last week's Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me.)

I've read a lot more blog posts and essays from people railing against those who deign to not bother with television, than from those who don't bother the television.

Posted by Deborah | July 23, 2008 11:10 PM

The real threat from people who don't have TVs is that they do things like use Twitter.

Stuff white people like referenced in this post:

#28 Not having a TV
#9 Making you feel bad about not going outside
#19 Traveling
#39 Netflix
#80 The Idea of Soccer
#85 The Wire
#101 Being Offended
#125 Nintendo Wii
#149 Self Importance

&c. &c.

Posted by AT | July 24, 2008 12:24 AM

Oh dear, am I supposed to confess my TV-lessness here, too? Mostly, it's because I find the commercial breaks on US TV to be too frequent and annoying. I suspect that if the Tivo has existed when I first moved here, I'd have a TV now. As it is, I've lost the TV habit, and see no particular reason to get a TV any more than I see the need to get a croquet set, a deep fat fryer, or a pool table. It's just something I happen not to own.

Posted by Sam | July 24, 2008 1:04 AM

Bravo to the "stuff white people like" comment above! That really nailed everything I found ridiculous about this post.

But more than that, posts like these read like Megan has been reading through the 2006 archives of Ezra Klein, looking for his lighter posts as a guide to seem hip with the zeitgeist of modern America. (not that Ezra is particularly hip).

http://www.google.com/search?aq=f&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=Q5u&q=inurl%3Aezraklein+wii&btnG=Search

Posted by Greg | July 24, 2008 3:11 AM

FWIW, I haven't owned a television since 1988 (sold it when I moved overseas, never got one when I came back). For the past 10 years whenever this came up in conversation (fairly rarely I think), I would point out that I still watched movies (first on VHS via an adapter for my computer, then on DVD directly on the Mac). In the last five years I've been telling people that soon there will be no practical difference between owning a TV and owning a computer with high speed access. As it is, I religiously watch "Lost", "Reaper" and the occasional pilot, all of which I download in High-Def from iTunes. I could watch hundreds, maybe thousands, more shows if I wanted, either paid-for or free-with-commercials.

The big thing for me is lack of commercials. I don't listen to commercial radio either. I truly, truly hate the advertising based model of broadcasting. Idiotic ads, constant interruptions,heck if I wanted to watch ads, I'd watch the superbowl (which I do, every year, primarily to sit around with friends and judge the ads. Although last year there happened to be an excellent football game going on at the same time...) I really notice the difference with my kids. Without the constant barrage of advertising, they seem to be much less consumer oriented. They will soon be heading into their teen years so we'll see how long that lasts.

Posted by MarkedMan | July 24, 2008 10:30 AM

Shorter: I don't care that you watch television; why do you care that I don't?

Posted by Deborah | July 24, 2008 12:00 PM

This is one of those east coast meta elite things that makes no sense to a west coast prole like me. Why on earth would I brag about not having something? This seems to be a symptom of too many overachievers and not enough social hierarchies. It's like the cool local band that gets so popular that it becomes cool not to like them.

Posted by themightypuck | July 24, 2008 12:42 PM

Very interesting.
An hour ago a friend stopped by with his family to say good-bye.I asked them what they enjoyed most about their Cape May vacation.The ten year old said '"I enjoyed Cable."IMagine.In a garden spot he enjoyed Cable.
The father,a Director of a Wall Street firm,said " Me did too.I like to watch the Philly games which we cant do at home since we dont have Cable.The Mother is a medical Doctor.Is there an answer available.Duh

Posted by jack | July 24, 2008 8:36 PM

Rob,

My doctor doesn't have TV in his waiting room. Neither does my dentist.

See, Megan, this is how you transcend the I-don't-have-a-TV follies! :-)

Posted by Kirk Parker | July 24, 2008 8:46 PM

I think I can predict the sort of comments the guys at the nasty blog are going to make about this post, and it's the first time I've thought "wow, somebody's asking for it..." ;)

Posted by Joe Bingham | July 26, 2008 2:02 PM