What can animation do to earn back kids 6-11?

[JoeMabbon]

When they made the purge of action cartoons in the early 2010's, that was when they lost the 6 to 11 demographic. That's when Minecraft/Youtube took their place.

The death of 6-11 action cartoons really was the canary in the coal mine, wasn't it?

There really is something to be said about just how poorly animation did in theaters this year. Like there were two mega-hits and both of those were based on decades-old IP. It's pretty disheartening. There are some nice suggestions here about diversifying the medium and increased advertising, but there's no guarantee any of that will work.

 

[harry580]

I just want the cartoons for 6-11 to come back, I don't want YouTube & Roblox to overtake it, I mean, after all the controversies of YouTube & Roblox over kids content (elsagate, youtubers who become predators (*cough* edp445 *cough* cosmodore *cough* & clickbait titles), no, I don't want both of them to take over kids content, I just want youtube to restored back to its 2005-2010 roots & roblox back to its sample online game root, THE 2 HAVE TAKEN OUR JOBS!

 

[GWOtaku]

I kind of have to wonder - does animation *need* to get it back? Is it a problem if it means that the stories that we get aim a bit wider while still caring about that demographic too?

I'm not sure if that makes sense, I don't think I've taken enough of a hard look at the content that's actually come out the last 3 years are so.

If the issue is "nobody would make a streaming exclusive like Adventure Time or Steven Universe these days", then fair enough. But I do wonder if the "next Adventure Time" couldn't just as easily care about having sixteen year olds and still be very creative in its own way.

 

[JMTV]

There perhaps needs to be an acceptance that it's probably not going to have the cultural weight or importance that it did in the 20th Century, or even ten years ago. A smaller audience does not mean no audience. Perhaps fewer projects with greater budgets, but money spent efficiently. The downside to that is from the employability perspective, but there is something to be said for not spreading talent too thin.

And the sad part is you're kinda right. I hate to admit that, but there's nothing we can really do about it at this point.

I kind of have to wonder - does animation *need* to get it back? Is it a problem if it means that the stories that we get aim a bit wider while still caring about that demographic too?

Well, I'd argue that kids 6-11 is the middle ground demographic where you create animation fans. Not every adult want to watch edgy crap nor preschoolers want to be talked down to. Once the middle ground disappears, no studio wanted to take risk with something new since they think that no kids are gonna be watching them.

It sucks, but that's the unfortunate reality.

If the issue is "nobody would make a streaming exclusive like Adventure Time or Steven Universe these days", then fair enough. But I do wonder if the "next Adventure Time" couldn't just as easily care about having sixteen year olds and still be very creative in its own way.

I mean, the closest thing we ever get to a "next Adventure Time" hit in this day in age was Hazbin Hotel and The Amazing Digital Circus, and even then, those are independent animated shows that were popular online and streaming rather than traditional animated shows on cable.

 

[Silverstar]

Well, I'd argue that kids 6-11 is the middle ground demographic where you create animation fans. Not every adult want to watch edgy crap nor preschoolers want to be talked down to. Once the middle ground disappears, no studio wanted to take risk with something new since they think that no kids are gonna be watching them.

It sucks, but that's the unfortunate reality.

Perhaps we just need to change the phrasing. Instead of TV-Y or TV-Y7 there should be a TV-G (General) or TV-E (everyone) -- tout that shows falling into that category are designed to appeal to a general audience rather than squarely targeting kids aged 6-11. The Cartoon-Cartoons (and CN's fare in general) are the perfect example of this: they were safe enough for kids but they contained just enough of a subversive edge that teens and adults could get into them too. Shows that kids and their hipster parents can either watch alone or together and they can all wear T-shirts of the show without feeling embarrassed.

The only problem with this idea is that it would beg the question of which time slot would these shows would air on and what sort of sponsors would be required for them; granted that's only an issue to linear TV channels; shows on streaming services can be watched at any time, so that wouldn't be an issue there.

 

[CassieTheDragon]

Wasn't there a 2-11 demographic that Nielsen used in their ratings? That seems a bit more "general audience" to me. Although i'd much prefer a 2-11, 12-17 and 18-49 demographic to use separately for cartoons. As in, how many people in 2-11 watch this, vs people in 12-17, and people in 18-49 age demographics.

 

[JMTV]

Perhaps we just need to change the phrasing. Instead of TV-Y or TV-Y7 there should be TV-G (General)-- tout that shows falling into that category are designed to appeal to a general audience rather than squarely targeting kids aged 6-11. The Cartoon-Cartoons (and CN's fare in general) are the perfect example of this: they were safe enough for kids but they contained just enough of a subversive edge that teens and adults could get into them too. Shows that kids and their hipster parents can either watch alone or together and they can all wear T-shirts of the show without feeling embarrassed.

Yeah, this is something I would like to see making a comeback since TV-G rated shows are a rarity on television nowadays. I personally don't understand why TV-PG became the new TV-G for a while, but I guess that's where the money goes.

And speaking of TV-PG, it's funny that you mentioned about the Cartoon Cartoons. The Cartoon Cartoons from back in the day used to be rated TV-Y7 or TV-Y7-FV. Now, they're rated TV-PG, thanks to Checkered Past on Adult Swim. I know that's irrelevant from the topic, but I just wanna throw that out there.

It would be nice if the networks took chances on TV-G shows that all ages can enjoy instead of favoring one demographic over the other just for the sake of pleasing the advertisers.

The only problem with this idea is that it would beg the question of which time slot would these shows would air on and what sort of sponsors would be required for them; granted that's only an issue to linear TV channels; shows on streaming services can be watched at any time, so that wouldn't be an issue there.

Now, that's a million dollar in a half question right there.

Wasn't there a 2-11 demographic that Nielsen used in their ratings? That seems a bit more "general audience" to me. Although i'd much prefer a 2-11, 12-17 and 18-49 demographic to use separately for cartoons. As in, how many people in 2-11 watch this, vs people in 12-17, and people in 18-49 age demographics.

Well, there's 9-14, but most networks see that demographic as a afterthought.

 

[John Pannozzi]

Yeah, this is something I would like to see making a comeback since TV-G rated shows are a rarity on television nowadays. I personally don't understand why TV-PG became the new TV-G for a while, but I guess that's where the money goes.

Reminds me of how most Pixar movies nowadays are rated PG, when in the past they used to mostly be rated G.

 

[JMTV]

Reminds me of how most Pixar movies nowadays are rated PG, when in the past they used to mostly be rated G.

Pretty much. Same could also be said about most Disney Animated Canon films are rated PG instead of being G-rated films.

 

[Surreal Kangaroo]

Yeah, this is something I would like to see making a comeback since TV-G rated shows are a rarity on television nowadays. I personally don't understand why TV-PG became the new TV-G for a while, but I guess that's where the money goes.

Off topic, but I was thinking the other day when was the last time there was a TV-G show in prime-time on network television? Excluding holiday specials and Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy.

 

[Leviathan]

I kind of have to wonder - does animation *need* to get it back? Is it a problem if it means that the stories that we get aim a bit wider while still caring about that demographic too?

You can make a case that there's been a lot less investment in animation snce the 6-11 demographic was lost. Execs still think animation for adults and teens is a risk that won't pay off more often than not, and preschooler shows are preschooler shows.

 

[JMTV]

Off topic, but I was thinking the other day when was the last time there was a TV-G show in prime-time on network television? Excluding holiday specials and Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy.

I have no idea. Your guess is good as mines.

You can make a case that there's been a lot less investment in animation since the 6-11 demographic was lost. Execs still think animation for adults and teens is a risk that won't pay off more often than not, and preschooler shows are preschooler shows.

Especially if a show was new and original, and not based off of a pre-existed franchise.

 

[GRPHX]

There is a definition error in this regard. Action cartoons were not aimed at the 6-11 age group. It targets a much older age group. A 30 year old can also watch Ben10 Classic, Code Lyoko or Spider-Man:TAS. However, it is very difficult for someone over the age of 11 to watch Ben10 Reboot or Spider-Man 2017.

To be honest, other than Netflix's Carmen Sandiego, I haven't seen any children's animation from my Vulgar Wave era. That's because it was loosely based from the Fox Kids' Diabolik series. A TV-Y7 cartoon that could deal with themes such as death, loss and theft in today was a brave move.

 

[SpecialColorfull]

Anime and NO, not because its better than traditional animation. Air Anime on weekday strips, a premiere everyday and that will give kids the motivation power (LOL Precure) to check the channels everyday. This is easy to do with anime since it has so many episodes and can be aired in bulk.

Oh and not air shonen anime, Shonen anime is EVERYWHERE they need to do something unique and they need to DO IT NOW. Pretty Cure would be awesome to see on Nickelodeon and this time UNCUT. Glitter Force didnt and will NEVER EVER WORK.

 

[Red Arrow]

There is a definition error in this regard. Action cartoons were not aimed at the 6-11 age group. It targets a much older age group. A 30 year old can also watch Ben10 Classic, Code Lyoko or Spider-Man:TAS. However, it is very difficult for someone over the age of 11 to watch Ben10 Reboot or Spider-Man 2017.

What would make Spider-Man 2017 less for adults than classic Ben 10?

 

[GRPHX]

What would make Spider-Man 2017 less for adults than classic Ben 10?

Basically Plot and than Putting the characters into a ridiculous mold for the new generation.

Spider-Man had better versions than 2017. But Ben10 Classic was a fresh IP