Someone shared that counterpoint with me. I'm a bit confused by it, it seems aimed towards people who would throw money at "Reading Rainbow" without reading or even watching the video, expecting it to come back on the air or be free for everyone forever. They're doing it to take their lonesome little iPad app and expand it to other ecosystems, and to think they're doing more is naive.
However, their bigger argument I find to be flawed. They say that teaching focus is now on getting kids to learn how to read, and that's not what Reading Rainbow does; thus, we don't need Reading Rainbow. But I think that's why we [do need it - kids can learn sentence structure and how to spell most basic words in school, but to get them to read after that is a real challenge. I've known too many people who proudly proclaim, "I don't read for fun." These are the same people that make the stupidest mistakes every day in our increasingly text-based world, because if it's good enough for second grade, it's good enough for Facebook.
In short, school can teach kids how to read, but unless they have a parent who's passing on a true enthusiasm (as I did), they need programs like Reading Rainbow, in any incarnation, to make them want to read.
Boter, formerly of TF.N as Boter and DarthArjuna. I like making movies and playing games, in one order or another.