by Ed West
Wednesday, 3
March 2021
Idea
16:30

Is Netflix behind the Covid baby bust?

Good TV may have a bad effect on demography
by Ed West
Turns out a fatal respiratory disease isn’t the aphrodisiac some thought it might be. Credit: Getty

When we first went into a lockdown just under a year ago I remember lots of people saying that this would lead to a baby boom in nine months because people would be locked up inside together and “nudge nudge”. And I remember thinking — really? I don’t know about anyone else, but spending my day reading about a fatal respiratory disease, with one daily outing to queue outside the supermarket like some bedraggled Soviet babushka, doesn’t strike me as a classic aphrodisiac.

And, as with a thousand Covid takes, it has indeed perished, with the pandemic leading to a huge baby bust in the United States.

This follows similar data in Italy and Britain.

Previous epidemics have had disastrous effects on demography; when Kenneth Clark visited Sienna for his series Civilisation: A Personal View the city’s population had increased from its medieval peak by a total of two people; this lack of growth was a long-term effect of the devastation of the Black Death. Normandy never really recovered from the demographic blow caused by that disease (although 100 years of English hooligans marauding across the region didn’t help.)

And coronavirus, although the vast majority of its victims are elderly and it has mercifully killed very few children, will also have a demographic impact. Hundreds of thousands of people have not been born in Britain because of the pandemic, the effect of which has been to aggravate and accelerate many of the extreme elements of modern life: killing off the high street in favour of big tech; the tendency towards more home working, which was growing anyway; declining social participation, particularly in things like church; and high anxiety levels, which have been steadily growing (if drug prescriptions are a good measure) and exploded in 2020. Some of these things might return to normal, but perhaps not entirely.

Fertility rates also reflect optimism, and few people in the past year can have felt too cheery about the future. But technology is another factor and I also wonder, not entirely facetiously, if TV plays a part.

One of the big drivers of declining teen pregnancies since in recent years has been better and more enjoyable video games. A problem that we consider a moral issue has been solved with  simple technology (although “solved” might not be entirely the right word — perhaps “turned into a different problem” in some cases).

If coronavirus had hit in the 1980s, when there was nothing to watch except Hale and Pace or repeats of Happy Days, it might have led to a baby boom, but now we have Netflix. When everything in life that allows us to have children — housing, in particular — becomes more expensive, and every form of distraction becomes cheaper, it is no surprise that fertility falls.

Pandemics in the past have often been followed by huge baby booms as people rushed to get married and replenish the population. This time, I’m not so sure; after all, there is just so much good TV to watch.

Join the discussion


  • I don’t think people would WANT to bring a child into the world nowadays with strife uncertainty and the global population out of control. I don’t think it’s to do with the TV programmes alone . It’s a conscious choice & there are many ways to avoid procreation unlike in the past.

    These are very unstable, fragile times for individuals let alone having a baby in tow to worry about.

  • Ha ha. Yeah, I think the availability of on-line entertainment might play a part in reduced reproduction rates (both human and viral!). Look at Japan (even pre-pandemic) where some young men have retreated from the world and spend all day playing video games in their bedroom.
    I suspect, though, that lack of optimism in the future is the real driver of the baby bust. Reproduction rates in the West were declining even before the pandemic for the reasons noted in the article–poor life and job prospects for young people. No one has any idea where the world is now headed post-pandemic.
    The author asserts “there is just so much good TV to watch.” For now, maybe. Until you’ve worked your way through all the classic series (The Wire, Game of Thrones, etc). So far as I can tell, the new TV series under production are woke-themed. Their main goal is to preach rather than entertain. I wonder if good TV will survive the new progressive religion.

  • So far as I can tell, the new TV series under production are woke-themed. Their main goal is to preach rather than entertain.

    This. One of my students recently bemoaned the fact that entertainment is ruined for them by blatant woke messaging. Many such shows have become entirely predictable. I think there is a generational backlash brewing against Wokeism. As far as I can tell, most young people are tired of the being told they are bad people with a historical debt to repay. My wife, who is an American, told me that wokeism is pretty much daily bread and butter in the US public education system, and that as a child she learned to tune it out. She’s also an Economics major, and has a cynical theory that certain demographics are prey to making unsound financial decisions and that is why much media, entertainment and advertising is marketed toward them. A good example of this is how innocuous cultural artifacts like Dr. Seuss has fallen victim to cancel culture for being offensive, yet music with clearly misogynistic and racist overtones is ignored or even celebrated.

  • To get involved in the discussion and stay up to date, become a registered user.

    It's simple, quick and free.

    Sign me up