Is A Toy-Inspired Channel Worse Than Programming That Spawns Toys?
Posted by meredith on 05-01-2009It didn't take long after the announcement of Hasbro and Discovery's new kids' channel for advocacy groups to come out to voice their concerns against the joint venture. From a statement released by the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood:
"This partnership represents a new low in children’s television, a network devoted to showing infomercials for Hasbro’s toys and game. It will make a mockery of existing ad limits and the current prohibition of product placement in children's television."
This criticism raises this "chicken or egg" type question: What makes a show with preexisting merchandise attached (i.e., G.I. Joe or My Little Pony) that much different than one that spawns the merchandise after the fact? If you take Hasbro Chief Executive Steve Goldner's claims that the network won't be "overly commercialized" to heart, then what makes it different from your average kid/tween-targeted program? Even shows for younger audiences like "Yo! Gabba Gabba," which recently launched a tour and books, and "Sesame Street" are licensed to the hilt. And why? Because there's a demand. If kids and tweens embrace a character, whether it be in the form of a toy, book, film, or even, amusement park attraction (Pirates of the Caribbean), it's only natural for them to want to build on that connection with more stories and, yes, more stuff. Of course, that doesn't mean that parents have to comply with these demands and buy them all of said stuff.
That said, it's still good to raise these issues. After all, it's the vigilant watchdogs out there like CCFC that keeps the sketchier and more blatant commercial tie-ins at bay.
Ypulse readers, what do you think? Leave your thoughts in comments.
For more coverage of the tween space, check out the Ypulse Tweens Channel, sponsored by the Tween Tribune.
Categorized under: Tweens
May 1st, 2009 at 11:57 am
What does Disney do ? its all their marketing so whats the difference? I cant wait for GI Joe!
May 1st, 2009 at 3:00 pm
I understand the need for watchdog agencies to weed out the slimeys, but as both a youth marketer AND a parent, I guess I just see things differently when it comes to merchandising and programming. I absolutely love that my daughter can watch Wonder Pets on TV, and then want to read a complimentary book or play with a "Ming-Ming" doll. She loves it and there's enough educational content to make me happy. At the end of the day, it's up to mom and dad to control the experience. That's what happens in our home.
May 1st, 2009 at 5:39 pm
As a general statement, I'd say that there's a difference between limiting your creative possibilities to content you've already developed to be merchandisable vs. casting a broad creative net and seeing what kids respond to, then developing merchandise that lets them extend the relationship.
In this specific case, I'd say it's ridiculous to condemn a channel that is a year from going on air; that has yet to hire its creative heads; that has yet to develop, acquire or announce a single program. Of course, when you're not constrained by anything tangible, it's much easier to build and bash a boogeyman.
May 4th, 2009 at 7:01 am
You mention that there are toys because there's a demand. Well, there is…but there's also a need. We don't live in a country that does much financing of anything for kids, good or ill…and a lot of TV for kids can only be created if additional revenue comes in from products.
That said…I have to say this makes me a tad squeamish, but it really does depend on the nature of the channel and what kind of programming they put on it.