That's awesome! I hate that they advertise as educational.

I couldn't get the link for the refund to work though. I copy and pasted and it took me to the website but it said this page does not exist. I wonder if they've moved the page so as to get less demands for refunds.

here, I found it.

http://www.babyeinstein.com/parentsguide/promise.aspx

I understand that screen time isn't good for babies and that Baby Einstein was the start of a huge push to get babies in front of the television as early as possible. I am glad that as a result of the complaint, they stopped advertising it as educational. However, I do not recall any Baby Eintein commercial, ad, promo, etc, that didn't give me the impression that the videos were to be used with a lot of interaction and teaching on the parents' part rather than babies being plopped down in front of it to learn on their own.

I also have huge issues with the Disney corporation defining childhood. But I have to say, IMO, needing a refund because the company told you it was educational is going over board. I personally will not be returning any of the movies I purchased years ago because I feel like I did get my money's worth out of them. Not only as one in many tools for interacting with and teaching my children, but to distract a clingy baby that would never let me put him down so I could, say, go to the bathroom. I also used them to help S, who was special needs, gain the communication skill and re-learn verbal interaction. But I never had the illusion that putting my kids in front of a BE movie would make them geniuses.

I can see maybe if you truly believed that these movies would make your child smarter, wouldn't have sat your kid in front of some other inane kids' show to pee or shower or whatnot, and honestly felt that the advertising never gave you a clue that the videos are meant to be used with interaction from an adult, feeling like you deserve a refund. But even so, I don't really agree with the idea that we should make decisions for our children based on the advice of marketing companies. There are plenty of products that are out there for babies and kids that are unecessary and/or downright detrimental. I think that this kind of refund sets the precedent that we should be able to put or trust in marketing to be truthful about what we can expect of their products without ever questioning what we are being told.

As far as I know most, maybe all experts recommend no TV time for children under 2 at all, with the parent or otherwise. Marketing these things as educational is false advertising, period. I think it's fair to expect a refund. I don't think it sets any standard re: mindlessly accepting marketing, I think it enforces basic standards about advertising.

I know people who are convinced they are educational, that you should plop your baby in front of them and they will learn things. Not only that you can; that you should. That's concerning.

I watched one of these things once. It was flash, flash, flash, several jolts per second. I couldn't believe it, I could hardly follow it. No wonder they say it's "stimulating" for a baby!

Disclaimer: I don't think there's anything wrong with young children watching TV if that's the parent's choice. Although I don't think it's ideal, we do it, more than I'm proud of actually. But I feel informed in this choice.

Now, how about a refund for the parents who were told they had to supplement with formula?

While I don't trust large companies to tell the truth, I would like to hold companies that lie and mislead responsible. That said, even the best of television is a poor substitute to real life experience and adult interaction: it takes six times as many television exposures as real life exposures for children less than five to learn the same thing, and the scope of what a child under five can learn even with the extra exposure from television is fairly limited in scope (for example, children can learn additional vocabulary from television but not grammar). However, children can learn some things from quality, developmentally appropriate television, albeit less efficiently. I think my daughter learned more from watching Signing Time when I brushed her teeth than she learned when I brushed her teeth while holding her down as she cried.

I have to agree with CanadianMama on this one.

It comes to a point, where individuals in society have to accept responsibility for their own choices, desicions, and actions, rather than put the blame elsewhere. In this case, it is a mega-cooperation, but it all starts somewhere, right?

I have had neighbours, friends, family, etc. give me all kinds of terrible parenting advice. I was told to give my son cows milk when he was 6 months old...people who tell me to spank my child, ignore my child, let my child cry. But I don't do any of these things, because I use my better judgement, and do what I feel is right for my child. If I were to listen to the advice of others, and blindly go into what it is they are telling me to do....then my kid would be a totally different kid. And would it be right for me to place the blame else-where?

Look at the case of the parents who sued McDonalds, because their kids where obese as a result of their food. Again, the blame is passed else where...but who allowed their child to take their meals in a restaurant which served food with high fat content and low nutritional value?

By all means, I agree, the baby einstien videos ARE stupid. Thankfully, my kid hated them. However, I do not plan to return them, because I purchased those videoes, realizing that they were not educational, and that they were more of a crutch to help me get some dishes done, get a shower, or go to the bathroom. The marketing said that they were "educational", however piles and piles of information available contradicted that..it was just up to me to read it.

I think the refund makes a lot of sense. If you tell someone you are selling them a house and they buy it but it turns out there is no house, they deserve a refund. If you tell someone you are selling them an educational product and there is no educational value they deserve a refund.

I think it's cool they're offering a refund, but there are a lot of baby products out there that are much more detrimental that people think is good for thier baby. Nursery water has flouride added to it, which is toxic. Many bottles have BPA and other toxins. Sadly, the list goes on and on and on.

I beleive that there should be some responsibility but on the other hand I have watched those videos, and never bought on for my son so I cannot yay or nay the refund. I beleive false advertisment is wrong but will we start requesting refunds from everyone or every other company in the world that false advertises? alot of people would be owed money. there is false advertising everywhere. It is up to the consumer to do the research and determine if a product is right for them.

They aren't being required to offer the refund. It's voluntary.

To me there's really no grey area. If a company is lying to get people to give them their money and they get caught, they need to give people their money back. The fact is that consumers are taken advantage of regularly. This does not mean that we should not protect them lest they think they are safe and become too trusting. I can't follow that line of reasoning. Should we just stop advocating for consumer protection so that no one is confused into thinking they are protected?