Petition tries to get Fisher Price to stop selling baby seat with Apple iPad stand

Petition tries to get Fisher Price to stop selling baby seat with Apple iPad stand
How young is too young to use an Apple iPad? Fisher Price apparently believes that even babies should be using Apple's iOS powered tablet. Why else would it manufacture a baby seat that comes with a stand for the iPad? Priced at $80, the product's name is "Newborn-to-Toddler Apptivity Seat for iPad." But if the the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood has its way, the manufacturer will stop selling the product.

The organization has started a petition, calling the Apptivity Seat the worst screen product for babies. The CCFC notes that with a colorful screen and constant activity, the iPad can get a baby's full attention allowing the parents to leave it all alone with the tablet. If you want to add your name to the petition, all you need to do is to click the CCFC sourcelink below, fill in the blanks, and submit it. The petition is addressed to David Allmark, Executive Vice President of Fisher-Price, and requests that the company pull the seat. The CCFC stresses that it is wrong to leave a baby alone with an iPad, inches from his or her face. The screen is blocking the child from seeing his parents and the rest of the world. Part of the petition reads, "Babies need laps, not apps. Fisher-Price should focus on developing products that actually facilitate learning and development instead of encouraging parents to strap down babies -- even those too young to sit up -- inches from a screen."

In response, Fisher Price says that it is the target of a negative online campaign. There has been talk that Fisher Price is marketing the seat as an educational product, something that the manufacturer strongly denies. In addition, Fisher Price says that the seat does offer options to limit the viewing time of the tablet. As it turns out, the American Academy of Pediatrics agrees with the petition, saying that kids under 2 should not be using any electronic screens.

So far, the petition has 9916 signatures, just 84 short of the 10,000 goal. But even if the target numbers of signatures are reached, we wouldn't count on Fisher Price pulling the product anyway. By the way, parents buying the child seat get access to free apps for the iPad that are made specifically for the age group of those using the seat.




source: FisherPrice, LATimes, CCFC via CNET

FEATURED VIDEO

48 Comments

48. Sondae

Posts: 291; Member since: Jan 02, 2013

This type of idea promotes Parents to be lazy in raising there babies. Babies supposed to be interacting people, surroundings and play as there age not ipad. I wont be surprise if there will be a raise of obese kids and other causes of to much dependent to technology.

45. axllebeer

Posts: 272; Member since: Apr 05, 2011

Some parents should've never became parents in the 1st place. And yes, I am a parent of a 2 year old.

41. Fuego84

Posts: 357; Member since: May 13, 2012

It's so sad. In my opinion babies shouldn't be exposed to addicting eye damaging screens.

36. GoBears

Posts: 456; Member since: Apr 27, 2012

Seems like torture to me. No wonder some kids grow up and hate their parents.

47. o0Exia0o

Posts: 903; Member since: Feb 01, 2013

"Seems like torture to me. No wonder some kids grow up and hate their parents." Or shoot up schools. +1 to you sir

31. Paximos

Posts: 283; Member since: Jul 26, 2012

Fisher Price could careless how you'll raise your kids...it is all about $$$$$ and I would not be surprised if they were rewarded for this idea!!!

29. Lmao2013

Posts: 44; Member since: Dec 05, 2013

It's better than those talking teddy bears.

24. nexusdude

Posts: 151; Member since: Aug 22, 2013

Colors, moving objects and sounds are very important for a young child, but these things should NOT be recreated on a 2D surface. My little cousin is just learning to walk and if she's given a smartphone or a tablet she immediately STOPS moving just to watch the colorful animations. What if she sits like this for hours? Such products can cripple future generations. Remember Wall-E?

32. anirudhshirsat97

Posts: 408; Member since: May 24, 2011

you make a good point +1

22. JakeLee

Posts: 1021; Member since: Nov 02, 2013

Why don't they start a campaign against amoled then? LED = Light Emitting Diode Looking at light sources directly harms the eyes regardless of the person's age.

26. o0Exia0o

Posts: 903; Member since: Feb 01, 2013

THEN....THEN.....THEN....WHY DON'T WE ALL GO LIVE IN CAVES IF LIGHT IS SOO DAMAGING? SHOULDNT WE ALL BE BLIND ALL OF THE HOURS WE SPEND IN THE SUN? WHERE IS YOUR RESEARCH AT SO I CAN READ UP ON THIS AND LEARN ABOUT IT??

27. JakeLee

Posts: 1021; Member since: Nov 02, 2013

You don't have to live in caves to avoid looking at the sun directly.

28. o0Exia0o

Posts: 903; Member since: Feb 01, 2013

AH, so what you are basically saying is that it so OK to be in the sun light but do not look at device screens (which are dimmer than the sun) because that amount of light is harmful? Does this include all device screens or are you just trolling against a single manufacturer? Which is it?

30. JakeLee

Posts: 1021; Member since: Nov 02, 2013

Only amoleds where every pixel consists of up to three light emitting color diodes. LED backlight on LCD is a different story. Since the light has to pass through the TFT, it isn't considered to be a light emitter. It's not about luminance.

33. o0Exia0o

Posts: 903; Member since: Feb 01, 2013

And your source for this is what? Please name a source any soruce if you would. You comparing looking at an OLED screen to looking at the sun is like comparing apples to oranges. The reason that people are told not to stare directly at the sun is because of the sun's light output (which if stared at too long can cause permanente retina damage AKA BLINDNESS) Lets assume for a moment that your are right. There are hundreds of thousands of manufacturing companies producing hundreds of millions if not billions of products that are being used by people around the world that are harming thier user base by using OLEDs. Companies such as Sony, LG, Mitsubishi and (Yes the company your are trolling against) Samsung just to name a few. Why would they want to harm thier user base whom they make thier money off of? Does that make much sense to you? How 'bout you take off the old tinfoil hat there and quit trying to be a troll for Apple?

35. JakeLee

Posts: 1021; Member since: Nov 02, 2013

https://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/What-does-LCD-induced-eye-strain-and-baby-blindness-have-in-common Here's what I found in English. It's scientifically proven that blue lights are the most harmful one. And blue diodes in amoled have to emit roughly twice as intensive as the other ones for the proper color temperature.

38. Pancholo

Posts: 380; Member since: Feb 27, 2012

That blue link just gave us eye cancer! UGH! The thumb and reply button! What kind of conspiracy is this?!?! Darn you, JakeLee!

40. JakeLee

Posts: 1021; Member since: Nov 02, 2013

Are you kidding? The link works perfectly fine.

46. o0Exia0o

Posts: 903; Member since: Feb 01, 2013

LOL YES! ALL BLUE LIGHTS CAUSE CANCER! At least it does in his world. +1 to you sir.

42. o0Exia0o

Posts: 903; Member since: Feb 01, 2013

A FOURM?? A FOURM??? This is your big proof that OLED screens are harmful? A FOURM? Really? I ask you for proof. A scientific paper, a research study or something and your big proof is a forum? Are you really that much of a blind troll to just go grabbing at straws like this? DUDE REALLY GROW UP! GET A LIFE AND QUIT TROLLING!

43. JakeLee

Posts: 1021; Member since: Nov 02, 2013

I told you what I found in *English* That post is a decent one, and if you want, you can always read original studies the OP is refering. What's the problem?

21. tedkord

Posts: 17529; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Is it ironic that Fisher Price is the target of a campaign to get their product removed from the market because it incorporates a device from a company that is constantly trying to get products removed from the market.

19. tigermcm

Posts: 861; Member since: Sep 02, 2009

shut up and sit down somewhere, unfortunately they will win just like those who shut down your baby can read because a child shouldnt be in front of the tv long. so if this promotes leaving your child unattended wouldnt the regular toys that hang from it do the same?

17. pongkie

Posts: 663; Member since: Aug 20, 2011

if it stops the baby from crying why not

16. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

http://consumerist.com/2013/12/11/potty-with-ipad-stand-takes-home-worst-toy-of-the-year-award/ At least the baby seat didn't get the worst toy of the year award.

15. sckortyman

Posts: 23; Member since: Sep 19, 2013

I really really hope no parent uses this thing. However, they have the right to sell it and consumers will decide with their wallets if they feel the same way.

14. makio9

Posts: 48; Member since: Jul 23, 2012

Fisher price is the company doing the patent? Ummm..isn't it their product...that they made. i hate the business world mayne

13. cozze02

Posts: 135; Member since: Nov 25, 2012

Even thought its a crapy iPad, I would let my soon to be genius kid use it

10. Sauce unregistered

Wooowwwwwwwww hahaha. Pathetic petition lol.

8. Furbal unregistered

Or let parents raise their kids as they see fit....

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.
FCC OKs Cingular's purchase of AT&T Wireless