These guys clearly weren't around for the introduction of television. If ever there was a technology tailor-made to hijack our minds with, it was TV. It wasn't the end of the world.
There’s lack of reading, albeit not necessarily due to television (https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/01/the-dec...)
There’s a direct link between television and obesity (http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/75/5/807)
And more general health dangers (http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/newsplus/prolonged-tel...)
Etcetera
This was particularly true from 1950 until 1970 or so, before cable television exploded (it remained true for longer in smaller nations without wide cable TV adoption). I think it matches up with a comparatively bi-partisan period in (mainstream) politics around the western world.
Of course, there are disadvantages too, but homogeneity is looking increasingly valuable as legislatures around the Western world succumb to polarisation.
I am not trying to argue there were no downsides, only that we should account for the benefits. The comments I responded to seemed to be ommitting the existence of some benefits. Whether the benefits outweigh the damage is a more complex question.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Arguments_for_the_Elimi...