How does this type of education promote prevention, when the cause of the disease in the case of the new character is not identified, and the intended audience is not one that is suspect to becoming HIV positive? Poverty is a major factor in the AIDS epidemic in South Africa; will the children of the poor be watching Sesame Street? Do they even have TVs to watch it on?
I think that this is more of an attempt to remove the stigma of having AIDS.
I definitely advocate educating the young, but I think that achieving the goal of staving off the AIDS epidemic in South Africa would require a more difficult lesson, namely the causes of AIDS. Are they willing to teach children about unprotected sex and intravenous drug use? I doubt they are.
As such, I find this to be strange. They will add a character with AIDS, and can help create a positive image for those with the disease, but at the same time, they won’t reveal the cause of the disease. They are imparting a moral message upon the children of South Africa, but are not explaining why it is even an issue.
Will Sesame Street have this new character die on the show?
If Sesame Street is unwilling to discuss the causes of AIDS, will they be willing to discuss the eventual result?
Well, with all due respect, how do you know who the intended audience is? And who specifically has access to television? Granted, there are millions upon millions of people in SA who don’t have their own televisions, but perhaps they still have access to one - a community one, for example. I don’t know, either - you could be right, but it’s possible those who are most susceptible to the virus (whomever they are) can see the show.
Is it too much of a stretch to assume that the target audience is small children? After all, the American version targets children not yet old enough for school.
Now then, tell me how a bunch of children of pre-schooler age are at risk of becoming HIV positive. The major cause of the spread of AIDS in South Africa is unprotected sex. Are 3 and 4 year old children having sex in South Africa? Any 3-4 year old children in South Africa that are HIV positive were born HIV positive.
Well, you know, children have this odd habit of, over the years, becoming adults. Usually they become sexually active ones, to boot. I still lovingly remember many things I learned on Sesame Street, and it is never too early for children to learn proper habits for their health and well-being. If you’d read the article, you’d pick up on the fact that although sex will not be discussed on Sesame Street; they will answer questions like, “What do I do if I cut my finger? What do I do if you cut your finger?” Those are valid, relavent things for children to learn in a country where 1 in 9 people are HIV positive. Myths abound in S. Africa about how HIV/AIDS can be cured or avoided. Sesame Street helped me ignore myths about certain races and physical characteristics being “inferior.” It can do the same for kids regarding HIV.
How the HIV-positive people got HIV-positive is beside the point. The point of the Sesame Street character is to teach viewers how to live with HIV, either in themselves or in their friends & loved ones.
That’s what I meant. Don’t look for serious, adult issues to come up - should I wear protection? What about my favorite hypo? - but rather look for issues as to how the kids deal with other kids with diseases, whether that disease is HIV or something else. As said, there are many misconceptions about HIV and AIDS, and it only stands to reason that those in South Africa don’t get the full-court press of education that we in the States and elsewhere in the First World might get.
And yes, the intended audience IS children - children with parents who might be HIV+ now or in the future.
C is for Condom, that’s good enough for me
C is for Condom, that’s good enough for me
C is for Condom, that’s good enough for me
Oh, Condom Condom Condom Starts with C!!!
Well, I guess it’s too bad for those kids that they won’t be told that AIDS can be spread through sexual contact, considering that they have a habit of becoming sexually active adults.
That’s why I said in my first post in this thread that the addition of this new character was not so much a matter of preventing AIDS as it was a matter of removing the stigma. If it was about education for the purpose of fighting the epidemic the children would be learning about the causes of AIDS. As for myths about how it can be avoided, getting AIDS through unprotected sex is not a myth, but I guess that doesn’t matter, as the kids won’t be learning about that.
I’m not saying that the new character won’t do anything to help fight the epidemic. I just think that given the target audience and what will and won’t be discussed concerning the disease, that help is somewhat vague. It can be a step in the right direction, but I question how big a step it is.
Falwell, that is.
Though he said he agreed with the CWA woman 99.9 %, he did think it would help them be less ostracized.
I know, its a sign of the END…
FNRFR, I’m not sure about in the US but here in Australia most pre-schoolers will be taught not to pick up discarded syringes but to let an adult know about them. HIV is not the only or most likely disease that children could contract from a needlestick injury, and it really isn’t necessary to go into all the details of which diseases they might contract - you simply teach kids not to handle them.
HIV education is part of compulsory personal development classes here - these include sex education, drug education, STD education, contraceptive education.
Yes, African children will need more comprehensive HIV/AIDS education as they grow up, but it would be as pointless to deliver it in Africa at pre-school age as it would be elsewhere.
For now these children need to know that non-intimate contact with HIV positive people represents no risk, and they need to be taught how to deal with blood spills. The HIV positive muppet seems to address both of these needs.
Is anyone else majorly peeved at the news media (and the OP, for that matter) for never mentioning in the headline or the intro paragraph you get at most news sites that this is in South Africa? Every headline I’ve seen has been just like the OP. The locale is omitted for the purpose of “tricking” readers into thinking that this change will take place in America, thus arousing far more interest than if people knew from the start that it was in SA. I haven’t seen any TV news lately, but I bet that every local news station (especially our godawful, sensationalistic Channel 13) will be doing precommercial teasers with the same deceptive advertising.
“A day after show executives announced they would develop the as-yet-unnamed character for audiences in AIDS-ravaged South Africa, five members of the [U.S.] House committee on energy and commerce said the Muppet would be unwelcome on American TV.”
I agree with Opus1. It’s pretty misleading. As an educational tool for a community where many children and others are going to have HIV, I think a lot of good could come out of it.
However, in the States, if I had a kid, I would not want him/her to be exposed (seriously no pun intended) to an HIV positive muppet. I don’t want to explain to a 5 year old about sexually transmitted diseases of any kind, and I can’t imagine that that question wouldn’t come up in the mind of a child (but daddy, how did s/he get HIV? Am I gonna get it?).
