Look up a book entitled "Four Agruments for the Elimination of Television" it is a fascinating read. The author basically says the same things fond in this study and he wrote it in the '70's....
a full set of Encyclopedia Britannica's, stacks of National Geographics and a load of Reader's Digest Classic Collection books that countered the deleterious effects of Gilligan, Hanna-Barbera and the true horror known as soap operas. The books enabled me to analyze what the flickering tube presented, making the dross far more entertaining than it's face value. I knew there was no way a Professor could actually keep a radio running for years with 1960's technology on such limited resources, the Six Million Dollar Man would have snapped his natural bones and cartilage throwing a tree and President Johnson exhibited the tics and quavers of an inveterate liar (you couldn't pick that up without transmitted sight and sound).
Television combined with an education able to withstand it's negative effects is a good and useful technology. Paul Jesup's observation about science fiction inspiring generations of scientists is absolutely true because those kids read, dreamed and experimented beyond passivity.
Now that the choices aren't limited by the domination of three primary networks and technological developments that enable us to watch what we want when we want to (with far better information about content), any modern-day "victims" of television mortification should be as obvious as a crack junkie with the shakes. Today the old concept of the "electronic babysitter" practically defines low grade child abuse. Allowing kids (and adults!) to similarly overwhelm themselves with videogames, internet chat or any other isolated pursuit is the same problem in a different guise.
Pull the plug of the electronic drug. Like me right now...later!