Less than a hundred years ago, the television set was an almost-unheard-of curiosity. Today, it’s absurd for many of us to imagine life without one.

Thanks to both TV and its successor the Internet we have a lifeline to information on virtually any topic. We also have 24/7 access to entertainment of every kind under the sun. From games to live event coverage to so-called reality shows to streamed series, we’ve made it possible to go through life without ever being bored.

And therein lies our problem.

A lot of people today talk about the danger of too much screen time, but most of their concerns are about blue light, or their children’s developing brains. It’s much rarer that we give thought to how the time spent on TV or our phones affects our own personal growth – especially when it comes to our creative output or the ways we might spend our time otherwise.

Screen time has become inseparable from the rest of our lives, for both better and worse: as a lifestyle and a form of entertainment, it’s here to stay. But we need to understand what we are trading off when we unwind in front of a TV screen or a phone screen.

There’s no mathematical formula that gives us a magical number of ideal hours. TV itself is not some kind of noxious substance like radiation that builds up in our systems over time; it’s not a bad thing per se. Knowing how much TV (and screen time) is good or bad for you ultimately comes down to this question:

What kind of a person do you want to be?

If you don’t care where you’re going, as the Chesire Cat memorably told Alice in Wonderland, then it doesn’t matter which path you take – or in this case, how you spend your time.

On the other hand, if you have dreams and visions for your life then you probably need to take a closer look at how you spend your day, especially when it comes to screen time. ¹  As Annie Dillard puts it: “How we spend our days is of course how we spend our lives.”

TV Is Easy on Our Brains. Growth and Creativity Aren’t

Entropy is the natural state of the world.

Our rooms don’t get tidier over time; they get messier. Our muscles don’t get stronger, they get weaker. Our ability to speak Portuguese doesn’t get better, it gets sloppier. ²The only way to combat entropy is through constant proactive effort.

The same is true of our minds. 

Left to their natural states, our minds are not brilliant or creative. They don’t come up with wonderful ideas and solutions out of nowhere. It’s just the opposite: left to their own devices, our minds tend to wander and think all kinds of random thoughts. 

Being human, most of those thoughts are anxiety-inducing on some level. Some are downright unpleasant. The only way to counteract this is to discipline our minds over time by giving them something to do – but that’s hard for most of us living in a world that’s overflowing with anxiety-inducing news and stimuli.

This is where the genius of TV comes in. 

TV and other passive types of screen time solve the problem of entropy for us. They allow us to relax and escape our anxious thoughts without having to do hardly any work on our own. We don’t have to do the work of creating or structuring our thoughts or any kind of meaning; TV does it for us.

It’s the ultimate paradox: the need to relax versus the need to be truly happy. In the end, most of us will choose relaxation because it’s easier.

In the 1970s, two researchers ran an extensive study on the effects of TV viewing in the US. Their study included 100 individuals, from teenagers to the elderly. To create the most reliable metric possible, they used the Experience Sampling Method: this required their subjects to check in throughout their day and report how different activities – including TV viewing – made them feel. ³

Here is what they discovered:

While watching TV was one of the easiest and most relaxing things to do, it didn’t do much to help improve mood. That might sound like a contradiction at first: if the whole point of TV is to be relaxing and entertaining, wouldn’t it make you feel better?

Yes, but only on the most immediate, surface level. Like a mild sedative, TV will numb and distract you from real-life problems, but it does nothing to help you solve them. The minute you turn the power button off, you’re back to where you were before, except that now you’re a few minutes (or hours) older. 

On the other hand, the subjects of the experiment discovered that they felt much happier when they were working on a hobby or another type of activity that required them to use their minds. Even if the activity was harder, it was more enjoyable. 

Here’s the kicker:

Even though these types of activities were more fulfilling and enjoyable, because they were harder most people continued to choose TV-watching as the main way to fill their free time. It’s the ultimate paradox: the need to relax versus the need to be truly happy. In the end, most of us will choose relaxation because it’s easier.

If you want to be a more creative, productive person, you have to be comfortable combating entropy on your own – without the help of a screen.

You have to be okay with boredom. You have to put in the hours of practice to sharpen a skill, think more clearly, and bring something new into the world, even if it’s just your own point of view on a topic you care about.

Battling entropy is hard, especially in the beginning. That’s why most people never really get good at it. You have to decide now and today who you want to be and where you want to end up. If not, TV and your smartphone will have no problem helping you default on both of those things.

More TV Means Less Time With Other People

Robert J. Putnam is an award-winning political scientist. A little over 20 years ago, he set out to try to answer the question: Why are Americans becoming less and less engaged in their communities? 

Because it’s not a “hard science” topic, Putnam doubled down on his research to find the most data-driven answers possible. He scoured extensive datasets that went back multiple decades. He looked at historical records to see how Americans’ social and civic behavior changed over time.

Unsurprisingly, there was more than one answer to the question, from urban sprawl to longer working hours. One of the biggest, though, might sound kind of anticlimactic: watching television.

Simply put: Watching TV (or going online) consumes much of the time we might otherwise spend interacting with people. ⁴

If that means avoiding people or places you don’t like, that might be a good thing. However, if we’re talking about positive interactions – whether with friends, extended family, or people in the broader community – we risk missing out on serious lifelong benefits.

In his research, Putnam noted that “civic connections rival marriage and affluence as predictors of life happiness.” ⁵ In other words, spending time with people at church, a club, a volunteer organization, or another meaningful gathering, is practically just as good for us as having money or being in an intimate relationship. It gives us a sense of purpose and a connection to other people that helps us feel grounded, supported, and valuable. Meanwhile, “TV watching,” Putnam tells us, “comes at the expense of nearly every social activity outside the home, especially social gatherings and informal conversations.” ⁶

Does this mean that if we choose to stay home after a hard day of work with our TV or phone we’re stifling our personal growth? Maybe, maybe not. No one is so tireless and inhuman that they can spend their whole day pushing themselves to do stimulating, challenging things either alone or with other people. All of us need to recharge our batteries.

The question “Is watching TV bad for you” might be a bit of a red herring. It’s not that every second we spend with our eyeballs in front of a screen is a second wasted – what matters more is the big picture. Can you balance your need to “unplug” with the need to grow and become the person you truly want to be? 

The answer, of course, will be different for each one of us.

***

Read Next: Do You Need to Be a Morning Person? →

1. I’m not making the argument that all TV or screen time options are equal. Some shows and phone games are more educational than others; some are more uplifting. To debate each of these would take us beyond the bigger point here.
2. Unless perhaps you’re a native speaker of Portuguese. In which case, feel free to substitute a different language here.
3. Kubey, R., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Television and the Quality of Life. Routledge.
4. I should add, “in real life,” since Putnam’s most recent research concludes that virtual socializing doesn’t have the same effects as actual socializing
5. Putnam, R. D. (2001). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon & Schuster.
6. Bowling Alone, pg. 237