Children nowadays spend a great deal of time watching television.However, television can not replace the book as a learning tool,which is why children are less well-educated today. To what extent do you agree with this statement?

Young people today invest much of their time in observing content on the television's screen, the reason why they are not so learned today, yet the reading of books remains more important than the former as a conduit of education. I totally disagree with

this

statement because so much can be learnt from television and hard copy books are now outdated given technological advancement. These are discussed below.

First

and foremost, it is unfair to disown televised content because there is a lot of children can learn out of it. It could be science, geography or politics to name just a few subjects but TV programs are certainly educational. My daughter,

for example

, learnt how to speak English with the assistance of cartoons

such

as Pepper Pig at the tender age of two and a half years.

Secondly

, a book is now relatively outdated. Who in

this

day and age still holds a hard copy of the best selling piece? Many have followed the wave of technological improvements to use the TV set for learning purposes. Even the so-called classic texts can now be found in certain televised educational material.

This

shows that books are not invincible, they are very replaceable.

For instance

, Mpho's Search, one of the compulsory readers for early secondary learners, is broadcast at 3 pm daily on SABC 2, South Africa's broadcasting network. In conclusion,

therefore

, television has so much to offer in the education sector, with its programs able to school children.

Furthermore

, some live picture broadcasts are dedicated to texts that were formerly read as hard copies. I argue based on these two points that it is absolutely not true that kids nowadays are not well-educated and that the TV cannot act as a replacement for physical texts.