You can not think for yourselves when reading? When surfing the internet (like this website) or posting on forums? You can not think for yourself when listening to music? Even television can be very intellectually stimulating. It all depends on what programs you watch. What exactly are you doing where you think for yourselves? Meditating, cut off from reality? Good luck there.

The analysis of television is extremely misleading in Mercola's response to it. First off, soda. You do not need to drink soda while you watch television, I do not, I drink water. You also do not have to lie still. In fact, sitting on a couch hurts my back, so I often watch television standing or squatting (with weightshifting every minute at least).

Many forms of exercise can be done while watching television, such as calisthenics, a treadmill, an exercise bike, gazelle, etc light weightlifting, and stretching. That people do not is not the fault of television, but of people's inactivity. Inactivity cannot be linked to television like that. Most people don't do these forms of exercise anyway because they find them boring, so doing them while watching television can encourage them.

What this is, rather, is a bias towards activities that cannot be done while watching television, such as playing team sports, or things that require a large amount of space. These are wonderful activities and do have their space, but they are not the only form of exercise that has value. In fact, the most measurable and progress safe forms of exercise can be done with an extremely limited amount of space, while watching television.

There are unique benefits to those that require your full concentration, but they are not necessary for good health or wellbeing. Some people are just unable to multitask, and they want to take it out on those who do, or use spacious attention-robbing sports as a method for making themselves superior to those who exercise without competition, simply for wellbeing and not attention.

MIND CONTROLLING MEDIUMS? Dear me. No. What leads to mind control is not media, but rather parents who are lazy and stupid and pass these qualities on to their children, who cannot think freely. Before television, people would just become mind controlled sheep in some other way. At least with television, what they are being exposed to is widely known, and can be easily criticized, and negative thoughts can be overcome. This could not happen when their media exposure was in quiet, such as churches today, which instill far more mind-controlling than any television program (save televangelism).

Many associations are posted that are simply not explained reasonably.

*Yes, television CAN change your children's views. So can any possible human experience that could ever happen, every second of the  day. Could luck finding something that doesn't change someone's views. Are changing views threatening?

*Food choices can be altered, yes, but they can be altered positively just as much as negatively. Many commercials and programs are on about healthy eating. In fact, such media was what made me stop eating McDonalds. What made me start was being taken there as a child by my parent, not from seeing commercials.

*Materialism cannot be rooted in television. Prior to television, there was radio. Prior to that, magazine. Prior to that, seeing things in a shop window. Prior to that, seeing your friend had something, and coveting it. You cannot blame the greed and envy of man on Television. It sucks trying to do that. Again, throwing every possible blame in the direction of something you dislike. Furthermore, materialism is a personal choice and not necessarily a negative thing as long as you recognize the value of immaterial things. In fact, you can justify many immaterial things materially, if you contemplate it deeply enough. Listen to "material girl". Beautiful song.

*Television will not make your children go into more debt as adults. Honestly, children have free will, I know because I (like all of you) used to be one. What makes people go into debt is not being taught the value of money and how to use it responsbily. Television is not at fault, but rather, parents who are lazy and will not parent their children, and instead expect the TV to do it for them. It's not the TV's fault anymore than it's a forest's fault if a parent abandon's their kids in one. Except some programs on TV actually DO teach morals about proper spending and the value of money and how it sucks to blow it.

*Humans have always been agressive. Again, lack of parenting, and lack of proper rolemodels for the value in being gentle. Much of violent programming is accompanied by peaceful moral programming. Just because Jimmy takes steroids and beats up his mother and girlfriend on South Park doesn't mean kids are going to do that, it's actually expressing morals, but done in a comedic fashion because the morals are so damn common sense and have been expressed to death, and people are making fun of that, and the stupidity of anyone who would actually do those things. This would probably help children steer to the correct path more than superiority-complex moral lecturing from hypocritic parrot parents. Kids want to be better than their parents now because of this.

*TV does not lead to smoking. TV is watched indoors, smoking is done outdoors. Generally. There are many anti-smoking commercials on Television. This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Dear me.

*How can your child get seriously injured when he's watching TV indoors all the time? Do you mean that his obesity (which as I explained, is caused by Doritos, not South Park) will make him fall and break his leg? Or that, from watching all the violent rap videos on MTV, he's going to start a gang war?

All these conclusions are postulated by puritans and I'd like to see any valid evidence showing a causatory relationship. If there are any, they're likely just coincidental correlations which people make up unscientific social conclusions from.