How long do you think someone needs to review toys on YouTube before they are professionals at it? Do you think every TV presenter gets years of training before they are given a show?

There are tons of smart, qualified people doing science and math videos that are as engaging as anything on the History channel, it's not all "hold my beer" videos and cats.

I feel it's less weird after reading the above comments.

Am I allowed to think this derail is weird?

There are fair points made, but some of the weight is off, particularly that being assigned to the reaction of thinking it is weird. Yeah, olds don’t get what the kids like. That is what I am saying. It’s as much a judgement on me as them. When my grandkids are watching footage of other people watching footage of people opening toys, that will be weird to my kids. And it will still be weird.

My wife thinks it is weird I get in arguments with other nits online. She is right, even as there are plenty of people who do it with me.

And here is the issue with the just like tv or sports analogy. I don’t think you have really watched some of the videos I am talking about. There are some where hot wheels are raced on high end tracks with photo finishes and replays and brackets. Sure. That I can see. But this channel has over 6 million subscribers:



I have nothing against the guy who made it, good for him, but to say this is similar to the Mickey Mouse club in either effort or production or final product is ridic. To say it is like the nfl is laughable. You can say it’s just a continuation of parents thinking the Beatles are just noise, but you gotta try really hard to defend watching this **** for hours as not weird. And the choice is not just play with toys or watch people open toys, it is watch nearly anything imaginable from movies to live action to sports, to playing video game, to playing with toys...but they choose this.

It's gambling but without the expense. If you can get the same dopamine hit from seeing a rare pokemon card being opened as you would hitting your flush on the turn you're probably far better off.

The hydraulic press YouTube guy is legit.

It's not just kids doing the watching or the producing.

Never thought it was kids producing, and you are probably right about the viewers, but I have only been exposed to kids watching it.

The gambling thing is apt. I am obviously addicted to my phone in the exact way a gambler is addicted to a slot machine. Refresh, refresh, refresh.

But it is still ****ing weird and it’s hard to see the value in it regardless of how compelling it may be. I am pretty comfortable with putting the iPad on top of the fridge before letting my kids watch hands open eggs for any length of time.

I am yet again convinced of its weirdness.

I don't think it's weird that kids want to watch it all. It's very sad if parents use it as a babysitter though.

I'm friends with a bunch of people with young kids and taking away the iPad is viewed as the #1 punishment.

My kids aren't allowed to use a device anymore. After about a week they stopped asking for it. Rather see them use their imagination as opposed to being lost in a phone or IPad.

My Dad didn't have a TV when I was a kid. Weekends with him sucked, especially because I missed the second part of every 2-part Batman cliffhanger. Goddammit how did Batman and Joker escape the giant clam?

BUT - I learned to use my imagination more and am very glad he did that. I should thank him.

I watched a lot when I was a kid. My wife grew up third world so she did not. We restrict tv to a pretty high degree, only on weekends and small amounts. I’m not sure how it is working out though, tbh. My kids are both obsessed with wanting to watch tv. They ask constantly even though we almost never give in, they will stop and look at tv in public anytime they see one, and they will never turn down a chance to watch it. At one point they campaigned to go to a specific gym because the daycare there has a tv on. They admitted it when I realized it after a week or so. They are 3 and 6. I wonder if we are making them more interested because we are restricting it, and I don’t really know where the line of diminishing returns is.

So long as they don't spend their entire childhood parked in front of the TV I don't think you can go too far wrong either way. Having shared culture references with their peers isn't without value, either.

This has turned into a pretty interesting topic imo even though it is not on thread. Is it worthy of being pruned by a mod and continued?

As a side note, I apologize for my (standard) initial defensive reaction.

https://medium.com/@jamesbridle/some...t-c39c471271d2

I see both sides of this debate.

I'm mostly with the people saying "yeah people like weird things, no ****, news at 11." I like watching other people play video games and I'm an adult.

On the other hand, as noted by the above article, there is something specifically weird about children's YouTube that is more than just differing preferences.

Of course parents should not use YouTube or TV as a babysitter, and should monitor and control young kids' screen time. When I let my kids watch YouTube, I don't mind them watching those kinds of videos because they enjoy them and there's nothing wrong with them. In fact, it's closer to actual kids' play when they open toys and look at them, and is probably healthier than watching kids' cartoons.

I think it's actually "stranger" that you find those videos strange, particularly that one. Disney/Pixar's Cars is a massively successful franchise that has spawned 3 movies, spin-off cartoons, tons of toys and merchandise, and even entire theme park lands dedicated to them.

Of course there's interest in Cars toys. Kids are curious what is inside those eggs. They want to see the toys inside. When kids pass those 25-cent toy machines (now often 50-cent or even $1, grumble grumble) in grocery stores, they often want to get some and open those too, even if they don't particularly play with that tiny cheap toy much afterwards. If they could have 10-20 toy eggs that they get to open themselves, then they'd probably enjoy that even more. Most kids don't get to do that. But they're still interested in watching people do that. What's strange about that?

For example, do you find this video strange?



30 million views to watch some car that's not yours drive down the road, WTF?!?! And it's not even racing another car or doing anything particularly interesting, it's just watching someone else who you can't even see make someone else's car move in a not necessarily interesting fashion.

Lots of people are interested in watching it. And lots of kids are interested in watching Cars toys being opened.

Re: medium article, the first half of the article is not very interesting or noteworthy imo and there's nothing wrong with most of the videos in it.

However, the second half is something else, and not what we are talking about itt, at least so far that I know of. I agree that the stuff in the second half of that article is probably bad. The reasons would be due to "wrongness" created by full automation with little to no human supervision, violent, scary, and sexual content aimed at children, etc. I don't let my kids watch those types of videos.

That is a good argument for parental involvement and monitoring of the content that kids watch. But it has nothing to do with videos about opening toys or watching other people do pretend play with dolls or toys or that kind of thing. Which is decidedly not weird, but perfectly normal and something that should be expected imo.

I see where you are going with it and still see a distinction. I watch videos of people working out with weights. I watch people playing poker. Both of those are instructional, and both are also not universal interests. That said I would not watch a novice work out, or a granny penny ante game, or live feeds of test drives at the Toyota dealership.

I’m not going to belabor it much more, but there are plenty of egg surprise videos that are not car themed. The channel linked has “play dough” eggs where they have covered already opened eggs with playdough and re-open them with random things inside and, it is hours upon hours of slow paced content. Yes kids clearly like it, hence the success, hence I am the one who is wrong but I still don’t see it. When we were kids there was something like these channels we were exposed to—toy comecials during our tv shows, and all I ever wanted was for them to be over to get back to the program.

On the subject of modern kids’ cartoons, conversely, the quality and value of many choices has gone way, way up from when I was a kid. Shows like Blaze and the Monster machines, Wally kazaam, and others teach letters, numbers, math and even some physics. The egg opening vids may not be damaging but it is not nearly the most value they can get sitting in front of a screen.

I think you're thinking of different age ranges than I am. The toy egg opening videos are generally for younger children than Blaze, Wally, etc. I have young children as well, and I'm quite familiar with everything you've referenced.

For younger children, slower paced is actually better and healthier for you. At least from research and studies that I've read previously. Fast paced, jump cuts, different segments, etc is worse for the young mind because it's not natural and not how the real world or IRL pretend play is. There was debatable information on whether all that too early could even lead towards ADD or be linked or stuff like that. I don't remember all the details, and this is not my field of study, but I remember it being non-controversial that slower paced, more real life simulated stuff was better than fast paced action cartoon stuff. From whatever I read at the time, perhaps there's more updated research nowadays, I'm not sure.

So for example, Blues Clues with its IRL human talking to you at a normal pace, asking you questions, having you follow along like normal interaction with an adult would be, was better for kids than even Sesame Street, which jumped around relatively quickly from segment to segment with random animations and different characters (talking about the latter part of the show, not the first portion that was a longer more drawn out acting scene between the same characters). Mister Rogers was better than cartoons. Etc.

That's what I mean by "healthier" for young kids. When they're older and capable of learning from something like Blaze, they've generally outgrown toy egg videos anyway (most but not all).

The point you made about toy commercials also shows this. At older ages, kids react how you're talking about, they want the commercials to be over. At younger ages, they watch the commercials and often enjoy them almost or just as much, and also cannot distinguish between the commercials and programming. That's part of why advertising is so successful on kids and potentially dangerous for them. At younger ages, kids are just figuring out what is "real" and what is not, what is pretend and what is not, etc. Those are the ages where toy eggs are perhaps more appropriate than alternative videos/shows. (Although neither is "good" compared to other actual educational IRL instruction, or sports, or pretend play or whatever. But that is not what we are talking about.)

Your reaction to these videos seems to be from the perspective of an adult mind and how you personally view them, and not thinking about why young kids might like them. And I might agree more with your reaction if adults were intently watching these videos for hours on end, I might also find that strange. But they generally don't. For kids, as long as you accept that kids like toys, even small little toy eggs, even if they're not Cars-related, but simply random toy-related (btw Play-Doh is massively popular both on its own to physically play with and in videos), then watching these videos does not seem strange, but seems perfectly understandable.

Pokemon cards aren't cheap in the long run man. At least with poker there is a potential ROI

I don’t think we are really on too different of wavelengths here. Some of the extrapolation of my position ie valuing quick cut shows vs slower paced for “health” doesn’t apply to my POV, and I also may not agree about the all of the small points of fact like it only being toddlers watching these videos. I have seen kids much older watching content like this. The first time I became aware of it was when I saw two kids who were stuck while their parent was working in the family restaurant sitting at table watching someone (an adult) play with play dough for the entire time I was there. They had to be in the 8 year old range.

I guess I can see why they would like it, and I certainly can’t argue that they don’t. I can concede it is not the most damaging thing they could be doing with an iPad or idle time. I don’t think it will be the downfall of society. That said, I see it much closer to a pattern of light and sound that puts them in a trance than other forms of visual and audio entertainment. It may well have more value and less downside than Dora the explorer, or bubble guppies, but it still gives me the creeps.

Did you ever find out?

Mods, please move this thread back into one I don't read so I can regain my blissful ignorance.