Do kids really need high-tech gadgets?

I saw this on Engadget today. Fisher-Price is set to release an mp3 player and a digital camera for kids. I'm not talking teenagers either; judging by the photo off of their website, this seems to be targetted to very young children.
I'm an admitted techno-junkie, and this is still striking me as wrong. Whatever happened to stick ball? Actually, these kids seem too young for stick ball. But not too young for electronics that their parents likely don't know how to use.

It's not surprising that they're marketing to kids so young, though it is ridiculous. At least with high-techy gadgets like LeapFrog they're learning devices. These things are just entertainment. I guess a camera would be interesting. Although, to tell you the truth, I would rather kids be excited over music and pictures than a new Bratz barbie-clone.

Good point. Perhaps this generation of kids will be amazing cybersleuths, able to solve crime (and humanity) over the net.

I rocked my Commodor 64 in the 80s. I have no problem with cybersleuths. So long as they grow up to take killer photos of black bears hanging from ropes in their backyards, it's A-OK.

Good points, alanaw19. I think there is something to be said for letting kids try things for the potential to learn something. Looking back at my original post, I think I was a little harsh (and silly).