TV Week article: "The New Non-Toon Cartoon Network"

[livingfruitvirus]

This requires a subscription, so here's the article:


Cartoon Network has an innovative solution for boosting its sagging ratings. Producing better cartoons? Nope. Producing non-cartoons. The network announced last week it has begun taking pitches for live-action programming and hired Ramsey Naito as VP of long-form development.

Only problem: Networks that significantly alter their programming or format run the risk of angering cable operators for deviating from their agreed-upon programming mission. "This is going to be a problem," said cable distribution consultant Cathy Rasenberger. "To add live action to a network that's defined by cartoons may be impossible to do given the content restrictions in their agreements. Allowing this is totally up to the operators. It just sounds like a major deviation."

But cable operators were split on whether such changes could cause a conflict. "We always closely watch what programmers do, especially if they make changes that take them away from how they sold us the service," said David Grabert, spokesman for Cox. "This is the first we've heard of these plans, but if we feel like they're going too far, we'll let them know."

A spokesperson for another multiple system operator said Cartoon shouldn't worry.

"Their contract with us doesn't stipulate against live action," the spokesperson said. "As long as the change doesn't alter the spirit of the channel, they're fine."

The Mostly Cartoon Network did not return a call for comment by press time.


-James Hibberd

So there you have it. It looks like they're wanting to change format, but the cable companies don't seem too worried. Not like they would have to be.

[Game Freak 4]

Should I lose all hope?

[Andrew T. Hingson]

Not yet but the signs of problems in the future are obviously there. CN as we knew it is already dead this is just one more step in the wrong direction. So one can only wonder what the ends will be but one things is certain in my mind... they aren't going to justify the means.

And something that rather bothers me... Why didn't the TZ article on the same topic mention anything about the live-action development? Curious...

[anime_guru]

kinda figured this was the reason...but then again, instead of asking whether CN moved in the wrong direction, let's ask what direction CN Should go in as it relates to their not too well additions...
First movies, then SBTB on AS...desperate for ratings CN is

[Andrew T. Hingson]

The direction they should take is focusing on making GOOD cartoons again. They should focus on being an animation network rather than a kids network specifically because they will NEVER beat Nick at their own game. So they should be their own game again and air the best cartoons they can.

[anime_guru]

the way CN used to be?
but also CN was very bold in their acquisitions in the past. So perhaps bold acquisitions should happen again?

[Andrew T. Hingson]

You don't get bolder than uncut Miyazaki movies. So boldness isn't really what CN lacks. It's more or less vision and a bit of common sense. There's no reason they couldn't air Bleach for instance but whatever...

[EscaflownePilot]

They're taking the lazy way out, pure and simple. Their current roster of cartoons aren't cutting it (surprise, surprise!) so rather than objectively stand back and say, "we need to find a way to make better cartoons that pull in better ratings", they say, "cartoons don't get decent ratings anymore, so let's start airing LA movies and develop some Disney Channel-style original series".

No cable network wants to take the time to make their format successful anymore, but rather, they just toss the format aside and latch onto whatever's successful.

And this just shows that their upfront, "We'll continue to focus on cartoons" attitude they gave everybody was nothing more than PR BS.

[Scirel]

"This is going to be a problem," said cable distribution consultant Cathy Rasenberger. "To add live action to a network that's defined by cartoons may be impossible to do given the content restrictions in their agreements. Allowing this is totally up to the operators. It just sounds like a major deviation."

Any way bystanders like us can support this person?

I like the new name. "Mostly Cartoon Network". It's excatly what they're becoming.

just watch in a few years they'll have a brand new name and focus on being the "2nd kids network/Adult swim" without any kind of comittment to animation.

[EscaflownePilot]

Ha. They won't need a new name - they merely need to do away with the "Cartoon Network" that appears below the "CN" on the logo. Heck, they don't even need to go that far. You still see "Music Television" on the MTV logo, don't you?

[Deadman]

this is not very good. i watch cartoonnetwork for cartoons not live action.

[Rabi~en~Rose]

this does sound pretty bad :( someone make the cable companies start caring as much as we do!

[Ultra Mike]

For us fairly dark pessemits, this was one of those "matter of time" things.

First You Have Life Action Hosts With Life Action Segments.

Then You Have Life Action/Animated Hybrid Movies.

Then You Have just regular Life Action Movies.

Then You Start Producing your own Life Action/Animated Hybrid Movies.

And Now This. (And If you were to include Adult Swim, I'd also say "then you start including more life action segments then needed into your shows, then have special airings of regular live action shows, then pretend to make cartoons by using life action stuff). It's really quite sad really because as others said, it's not really going to boost ratings at all. It's just going to turn Cartoon Network into something it really isn't, all for the sake of taking an easy way out. CN should be focused on fine tuning they're already made shows, getting more proftiable acquistions, and producing progrmas that aren't focused just at kids and aren't made by executives who think they know better. Maybe that will happen when this life action stuff fails, but will there even be any kind of Cartoon Network by then, or will it fade faster then UPN?

[James Bester]

Why can't CN ever get a clue? It's hard to believe this is the same network from 2000-2001. With the stupid decisions that have been made, I could care less if CN self-destructs. The problem is that they'll probably end up taking Toonami and Adult Swim with them.

[Timmay]

Well.. if I turn on CN I either see Billy or Mandy or Foster's home..

Maybe not killing your viewers by flooding them with the same cartoons would help?

[Anyone00]

An executive in the entertainment industry seems to be one of the very few professions that actively rewards incompetence.

[Andrew T. Hingson]

Well.. if I turn on CN I either see Billy or Mandy or Foster's home..

Maybe not killing your viewers by flooding them with the same cartoons would help?

The fact of the matter is major over airings of popular series stands to make said series more popular. It worked with DBZ, PPG, Eds and Dexter. Now it's working for Foster's, Billy and Mandy and Kids Next Door.

Do you know how often Sponge Bob airs on Nick? That's their business model and if they're going for kids ratings it's bound to work if the kids like the shows. Kids will watch the same thing over and over and over again. Why do you think Miguzi had the exact same schedule for almost a whole year? The same reason why CN shows so many seemingly pointless marathons of their well performing shows. Kids like reruns. At least a lot more than we older folks do. Then again... Family Guy, Futurama and ATHF tend to prove reruns of adult shows can do incredibly well as well.

[FinnMacCool]

This seems to happen to almost all highly-specialized networks: over time they end up diversifying their programming in order to reach a larger audience than the one they have.

[One Radical Dude]

I'd really like to stop this from happening, I really do. This is total bullcrap. They're trying way too hard to be something that they're not, and I hope that they find out the hard way. This may be worse than MTV's/MTV2's reduction of music videos, and TechTV's (now G4) reduction of tech. stuff. I don't bother with those networks anymore, and I would hate to say "no" completely to Cartoon Network.

[Daikun]

Cartoon Network is now an oxymoron.

[Happy]

This is incredibly desturbing. Also, I thought that Cartoon Networks ratings were going up?

[anime_guru]

I haven't heard a ratings report since the boondocks premiere and the zatch bell/naruto ratings reports back in november. Outside of that, none to my knowledge...which isn't necessarily the best thing...

[Wanted]

Cartoon Network was built by strong architects, but the construction company just didn't hire the right crews to continue the legacy.

Now, if you were to ask me, I would tell you that I don't care much for Cartoon Network anymore. None of the brands mean anything to me, and if they don't care about anyone, then why should anyone care about the people who work there, or the work that they do? I'm wrapped up in other things, and I've moved on to other animation outlets. But, when you look at the source, something's obviously wrong. Turner had to sell Turner South to FOX, and Cartoon Network's trying new things. Do the people at certain places in Turner not talk to each other? How is TNT doing fine when Cartoon Network is failing in its purpose?

[Chibi Kageboshi]

Whats the big shock? MTV doesnt play any music videos.

[bat313]

An executive in the entertainment industry seems to be one of the very few professions that actively rewards incompetence.

Agreed.

I mean ghee, lets think a moment. CN was successful when they aired classic looney toones, classic H&B cartoons, old WB shows, and even older fox wb shows like tazmania. Then they added great cartoon cartoons liked dexter and cow and chicken and decided to produce 5 news shows a year that were carbon copies of the original and kill the network. And now that ratings are down, instead of goign back to the old format we get a new station. I wish everyone got boomberang, then CN would see we want to see the classics and quality, NOT kids next door and billy and mandy 10 times a day.

[DarkSkills]

I posted this over at the Adult Swim site and I think this Variety article (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117941055?categoryid=14&cs=1&query=cartoon+and+network&display=cartoon+network) will explain a lot. I've pasted some of the more interesting points from the article below.

"Major changes are in store for Cartoon Network, which will step outside its charter for the first time and into live-action programming. Cabler (Cartoon Network) has opened its doors to the unanimated world as part of a larger development department expansion that includes select live-action theatrical movie buys and the creation of a "longform unit" (Specializes in TV programming that is longer than an hour in duration; a made for TV movie)...
Changes arrive as Cartoon (Cartoon Network) continues to trail competitors Nickelodeon and Disney in the total day race for kids 6-11. First quarter results have Nick ensconced in the top spot and Cartoon lagging Disney by a little more than 100,000 viewers in the demo. Cabler is also off 17% in primetime from first quarter 2005 but has seen Saturday morning success with new originals "Ben 10" and "My Gym Partner Is a Monkey."...
Cartoon has been testing the performance of live-action features like "Batman," "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" and "Ace Ventura" on air since late last year. Most recently, cabler drew a big 2.3 million viewers to a showing of the Jim Carrey comedy "Dumb and Dumber" on Friday. Net (Cartoon Network) will make an event out of the "Spider-Man" premiere later this summer...
Senior VP Michael Ouweleen points out that certain comedies on network TV, including "Arrested Development" and "Scrubs," are "by and large live-action cartoons. There's no reason we couldn't do something similar for kids."
And while certain cartoons such as "SpongeBob SquarePants" continue to attract big crowds, a live-action launch like Disney Channel's "Hannah Montana" can attract even more attention. "Hannah" also drew a big 5.4 million (2.3 million kids 6-11) during its premiere showing two weeks ago. Cartoon's top shows "Ben 10" and "My Gym Partner..." have averaged 680,000 and 647,000 viewers in the demo, respectively."

[livingfruitvirus]

Senior VP Michael Ouweleen points out that certain comedies on network TV, including "Arrested Development" and "Scrubs," are "by and large live-action cartoons. There's no reason we couldn't do something similar for kids."

You're kidding. Ouweleen said that?! I so hope it was because his hands are tied.

[Wanted]

Yeah... trying to justify Saul of the Mole People? Nevertheless, Cartoon Network has failed in its purpose.

[Jeff Harris]

Senior VP Michael Ouweleen points out that certain comedies on network TV, including "Arrested Development" and "Scrubs," are "by and large live-action cartoons. There's no reason we couldn't do something similar for kids."Ahem.

*megaphone reverberates with feedback*

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A "LIVE-ACTION CARTOON" IN EXISTANCE! IT IS AN OXYMORON LIKE VIRTUAL REALITY, SOFT ROCK, AND MICROSOFT WORKS. THERE ARE "CARTOONY LIVE-ACTION SHOWS," BUT NO "LIVE-ACTION CARTOONS." PLEASE STOP USING THIS TERM BECAUSE IT DOESN'T EXIST!

That is all.

[William C. Maune]

The fact is, the term has been around a long time, whether some folks like it or not. Yelling won't help anything, only discussion.

Edit: A good note from the article, it looks like Rob Renzetti is back with Cartoon Network.

[One Radical Dude]

The fact is, the term has been around a long time, whether some folks like it or not. Yelling won't help anything, only discussion.

Edit: A good note from the article, it looks like Rob Renzetti is back with Cartoon Network.

So, having Renzetti is good? If so, explain. You seem to know more about them than I do.

[William C. Maune]

So, having Renzetti is good? If so, explain. You seem to know more about them than I do.

He worked on some of the original Cartoon Network series (stuff like Dexter and PPG). Then he went over to Nick and made the excellent My Life as a Teenage Robot (which Nick unfortunately cancelled after about 30 something episodes).

[Wanted]

Then he went over to Nick and made the excellent My Life as a Teenage Robot (which Nick unfortunately cancelled after about 30 something episodes).Watching that show is like eating the most delectable treat... I've started watching it ever since it was imported over to Nicktoons Network, and I love it!

Nevertheless, to hear of his return is good. Maybe he can bring that original aspect back to Cartoon Network... talking animals in animation has been overdone.

[Jeff Harris]

The fact is, the term has been around a long time, whether some folks like it or not. Yelling won't help anything, only discussion.I don't think I was yelling. The megaphone augmented my "voice."

And discussion won't help either. Why? Because while a lot of people can complain, Cartoon Network just wipes that criticism from their minds and carries on with business as they see fit.

When the animation industry at large, animation critics, anime fans who don't like American animation, American animation fans who don't like anime, Spumco fans and haters, Adult Swim fans and haters, and people who have seen networks like MTV and G4 completely deviate from the script all agree that this whole "live-action at Cartoon Network" situation is a bad, awful, horrendous idea, then gee golly, it's a bad idea. And if anybody that criticizes Cartoon Network for doing so, like our dear lead webmistress has done as pointed out by the network last month (http://news.toonzone.net/article.php?ID=6886), then The Network will just give them a cookie and push them aside.

We're just viewers in their opinion.

Alan Moore once wrote that "People shouldn't fear their government. The government should fear their people." I'm not saying that Cartoon Network is a government, but they ARE a service, like the government.

Viewers like us help keep Cartoon Network on the air. We aren't completely powerless as we are assumed to be. People grow intimidated and give up before they even fight back. By fight back, I'm not talking about petitions to keep Cartoon Network animation-only or boycotting products seen on the network as a protest against their newfound policy of instituting live-action on an outlet originally perceived as an all-animation channel.

Petitions are bullscat, and boycotts only work when people truly boycott products on a wider basis.

If you're unhappy with the direction Cartoon Network is heading, contact your local cable (unless your cable operator is Time Warner Cable) and satellite operators. If you contact the network directly, chances are you're either going to get a form letter or have your response deleted from the servers, no matter if it's coherent and clear or "feeled wit teh 1337-speak ore gramatikal errorz." Tell cable operators that you unhappy with the direction of the network. If they get enough of these letters, then somewhere in their minds, they'll probably think that, geez, something is wrong at Cartoon Network.

And because Cartoon Network is at a more vulnerable position than, say, Nickelodeon and The Disney Channel (years ago, when DirecTV threatened to pull the Turner networks from their lineup, they basically pointed out that a suitable network replacement for CN is Nickelodeon), cable operators are not totally beholden to Cartoon Network.

I think any discussion would be great. But in the meantime, I'll carry my megaphone (my BIGGER stick [instant kudos and much respect to anyone who gets THAT reference]).

[William C. Maune]

I don't think I was yelling. The megaphone augmented my "voice."

And discussion won't help either. Why? Because while a lot of people can complain, Cartoon Network just wipes that criticism from their minds and carries on with business as they see fit.

I wasn't referrning to discussion with Cartoon Network, I was referring to discussion with each other. I'm saying this all as just me, an individual. One of the main reasons I like Toon Zone is that we can actually discuss things here, unlike a lot of message boards online. Having some folks yelling/megaphoning over the others takes away from that discussion. We are a marketplace of ideas. Some ideas are good, some bad, some better, some worse. The marketplace filters those ideas through discussion and without that discussion we are no different from the other forums online.

[Andrew T. Hingson]

Who coined that term "live-action cartoon"? Because if it's a dude I'm gonna go kick him in the crotch and if it's a woman... I have no idea. But it is an oxymoron and one a true animation fan wouldn't appreciate or support.

[William C. Maune]

Who coined that term "live-action cartoon"? Because if it's a dude I'm gonna go kick him in the crotch and if it's a woman... I have no idea. But it is an oxymoron and one a true animation fan wouldn't appreciate or support.

I dunno who coined the phrase, I just know that it has been around in the media for years. Heck, a small North Carolina newspaper (http://www.wilmingtonstar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060402/NEWS/204020304/-1/State) recently referred to the new Pink Panther movie as a "live-action cartoon."

Mainly though, I don't like seeing this stuff about how a "true animation fan" wouldn't claim such things. Whether they are right or wrong, there have been multiple Power Rangers fans who have referred to the show as a "live-action cartoon" long before the whole Cartoon Network thing. Yet, I know that those folks are also big animation fans. I realize many folks are vehemently against the whole idea of what is going on, but the last thing we need is to turn on each other and to claim that one person is a better fan than another.

[One Radical Dude]

I'm definitely considering writing to my satellite provider. I don't want to be in the "do nothing" crowd.

Willy, I don't believe that we are that close to turning against each other, saying that one is better than the other. I definitely do not want the discussions to go in that direction. And where do these people come up with these phrases -- "live-action cartoons?" If you throw in "cartoon" at the end of something, it's a "cartoon." Wow. :rolleyes:

[Jeff Harris]

I wasn't referrning to discussion with Cartoon Network, I was referring to discussion with each other. I'm saying this all as just me, an individual. One of the main reasons I like Toon Zone is that we can actually discuss things here, unlike a lot of message boards online. Having some folks yelling/megaphoning over the others takes away from that discussion. We are a marketplace of ideas. Some ideas are good, some bad, some better, some worse. The marketplace filters those ideas through discussion and without that discussion we are no different from the other forums online.Ah. Well, I'm down with that. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

To Chris and Sketch, my four half-cents about the term "live-action cartoon:"

Aside from the fact that it's an oxymoronic term, I don't like "live-action cartoon" because it's an insulting towards animation. The term generated about the mid-60s just as animation became filtered in on television and becoming more dumbed down for younger audiences. The actual term "live-action cartoon" is interchangable with the word "camp," that is, products that aren't supposed to be taken seriously or exaggerated for comic effect. The term "live-action cartoon" is never given to something serious because, by American standards, animation can't be serious. You will never see A Clockwork Orange, Batman Begins, nor The Matrix Trilogy labeled as a "live-action cartoon," but you will see something like Rat Race, Kung Fu Hustle, or Batman and Robin with this label.

You wouldn't see The X Files, Firefly, or Farscape with that term affixed to them despite similarly-themed animated shows in existance, but Power Rangers, the 60s Batman, Pee-Wee's Playhouse, and anything from Sid and Marty Krofft are given this dubious title.

Even slapstick comedies like The Three Stooges, Charlie Chaplin, and Harold Lloyd and "smart" comedies like Monty Python, Kids in the Hall, Little Britain, and Stella have become "dumbed down" by people as "live-action cartoons" even though slapstick and "smart" comedy have been around longer than animation itself.

I'm just saying the term "live-action cartoon" is an insult to those who love and enjoy animation. People that use that term feel that animation is beneath them, so they label anything with features and situations stereotypically found in animation but not in the real world as "live-action cartoons" instead of more polite terms like "cartoony live-action" or "camp."

That's all I'm saying.

[Discloner]

So sad that our fight to retain what CN used to be devolve into pesky letters to cable/satillite providers, and even then the outlook is grim. CN has a plan and damned if they'll be listening to the people who helped them stick around this long in the first place.

Cable line-ups are littered with Family Channels, and the fact that CN is slowly devolving into yet one more family channel is a sad and depressing occurance. In years to come perhaps every channel will be like the last, with a loose 'goal' (TBS's Gladiator is hilarious. G4's Star Trek is a really interesting game. CN's Dumb and Dumber is a wonderful Cartoon! The music that plays during Room Raiders on MTV's is slammin'. VH1's anaylsis of pop culture and the music that plays during is also great.). What a great day it'll be when I can pay 50 bucks a month to have 70 channels with exactly the same programming on, all because each network likes the success of another and wants to be more like their competition then just stridin' with what they've got.

I second Jeff's call for contacting cable providers. We can't rightly just sit here and whine about what's happening without attempting to do something about it. As fans, we're obligated to stand up for what we believe in, and I for one want my animation channel.

[Andrew T. Hingson]

Bah screw it...

Let CN do what they want but they should change their name to CN Kids. Then Boomerang can be retooled as THE Cartoon Network as the home of animation for all ages (with pieces of what made Boomerang worth while as well as what made CN worth while in the past and recent shows they wont air anymore like Megas, Duck Dodgers, JLU - soon, etc.).

That'd be the easiest way to fix things decently with very much hassle without spitting on the brand names of Boomerang and CN (at least directly as they are now with 90's and 2000's stuff on Boomerang and live-action on CN).

Then CN will be free to be as Nick as they want while there will still be a good animation venue besides Nicktoons Network. By making Boomerang an ad network and retooling it as a different Cartoon Network it could get picked up a lot more and that'll help the bottom line for sure.

[One Radical Dude]

The next thing they'll probably do is add live-action to Boomerang, as well. Don't rule that possibility out.

[anime_guru]

yes I can see different strokes on boomerang, and then boomerang would become ME TV or Nick at Nite x2...that's a scary thing

[Nin-Nin69]

Now that it's official, I can officially say that Cartoon Network is dead to me.

I barely catch AS now since new episodes I want to see are online. There is no real motivation for me to watch Toonami anymore outside of BoBoBo. There are too many bad original cartoons while the classics are neglected for poorly organized blocks, boring cartoons which were made to put toddlers to sleep, and above all airing live action anything.

I knew something bad would've come up since the packaging of Fridays. Sure they were trying to go after Nick and Disney, but why? You're already #1! There should be no real reason to out best someone on their playing field when you've already got the high ratings and the shows to back you up. How much higher did they want to go? 4 times the amount of people that populate the world?

The reason you're falling behind is due to the shows that you're backing up which a majority of your viewers dislike or are sick of watching. Where the frig is Samurai Jack, Justice League, and Courage? Remember these shows which gave them such high ratings over the weekdays? They would even trade good shows like Time Squad and Megas XLR over for another 2 blocks of a bad Kids WB show or another KND or Juniper Lee slot. And there are almost no more classic cartoons on CN unless AS tries to be funny (when they're not) and air "lol Chuck Norris Crappy Crap Spectacular with Ninja Stars."

So what if you don't have Spongebob? You don't need to make not one, but two shows that involves the same team while neglecting the bad writing. Sure the Spongebob movie made more than the PPG's, but do you know why? Because you didn't really push it out to the older public outside of the network while letting smug jerks like Roger Ebert walk all over it. The single made up at the last minute, "That's What Girls Do" I feel is one of the leading causes to turn people away. AS even helped out with the PPG pimpage to make the older audience feel confident about seeing a movie involving little girls. That was one of the best things AS has ever done for the CN community in their entire lifespan. Craig McCracken even came here asking people to spread the word and get more people to watch the movie in theaters. So what did they do in return? They blamed their CN studios and blamed their CC animators. None of the blame went towards the morons who are in charge of marketing and advertizment who work for WB and CN when the animators were doing a better job promoting the movie with an even smaller budget than the people that get handed $750,000 to make a trailer.

Until the day that CN understands their own faults and fixes them rather than changing their format, (which will never happen) then I no longer consider myself a loyal CN viewer. Just like MTV did back in 1996 when they got stupid VJ's, got rid of their best shows, and stopped carring about the music I like, this will never change. Nickalodeon even jumped down this path in 1996 while I've only seen 3 good shows since then. It's been 10 years now and both are getting worse and worse every year. I can see CN going down this path. And now I'm seeing this pattern where good networks go bad on the 6th year of a decade.

MTV 1981-1996
Nick 1981-1996
CN 1992-2006

Toon TV is dead and buried.

[Wanted]

Thank you. Now, you folks can either sit here and (say sweet nothings) about how you want Cartoon Network to revert, or do something about it. Get a degree in one of the fields that you think may impact animation (and one that you rather particularly like, for there's nothing worse than hating your profession), rather than just hypothesize about what Cartoon Network could and should do.

[bat313]

Ahem.

*megaphone reverberates with feedback*

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A "LIVE-ACTION CARTOON" IN EXISTANCE! IT IS AN OXYMORON LIKE VIRTUAL REALITY, SOFT ROCK, AND MICROSOFT WORKS. THERE ARE "CARTOONY LIVE-ACTION SHOWS," BUT NO "LIVE-ACTION CARTOONS." PLEASE STOP USING THIS TERM BECAUSE IT DOESN'T EXIST!

That is all.

Couldn't agree more my friend. Whether the media use's the term or not, it's not a real thing. Cartoons are animation. Animation comes in many forms, hand drawn, computer or clay mation to name a few. HOWEVER PEOPLE ACTING OUT PARTS IS SIMPLY NOT A CARTOON. IT IS LIVE ACTION. LIVING BREATHING PEOPLE ACTING. maybe they act cartoony, maybe the plots are so god awful that peolple automatically know the show is for kids and hence must be a cartoon, i dunno, but you are right my friend. The term is ludicrous.

[One Radical Dude]

All right, Jeff -- I have DISH Network, do I write to the corporate office or what? I want to make sure I write/contact the correct folks. I refuse to do nothing (I would hate to think back and ponder if I (as well as other folks) could have "saved" Cartoon Network). If our efforts fail, at least we've tried. Beats not doing anything at all.

[Andrew T. Hingson]

CN is just going to do what they want so let CN be whatever but retool Boomerang to look something like this (this being weekdays)

06:00 AM - Captain Planet
06:30 AM - Static Shock
07:00 AM - Power Puff Girls
07:30 AM - Dexter's Laboratory
08:00 AM - Courage the Cowardly Dog
08:30 AM - Mike, Lu and Og
09:00 AM - Johnny Bravo
09:30 AM - 2 Stupid Dogs
10:00 AM - Whatever Happened to Robot Jones
10:30 AM - What A Cartoon Show
11:00 AM - Cow and Chicken
11:30 AM - I Am Weasel
12:00 PM - Looney Tunes
12:30 PM - HB Toons
01:00 PM - The Flinstones
01:30 PM - The Jetsons
02:00 PM - Freakazoid
02:30 PM - Tiny Toon Adventures
03:00 PM - Teen Titans
03:30 PM - Ninja Turtles
04:00 PM - Animaniacs!
04:30 PM - Pinky and the Brain
05:00 PM - Power Puff Girls
05:30 PM - Megas XLR
06:00 PM - Dragonball
06:30 PM - Dragonball Z
07:00 PM - Justice League Unlimited
07:30 PM - Samurai Jack
08:00 PM - Dexter's Laboratory
08:30 PM - Courage the Cowardly Dog
09:00 PM - Johnny Bravo
09:30 PM - Duck Dodgers
10:00 AM - Justice League
10:30 AM - Batman Beyond
11:00 AM - Batman: TAS
11:30 AM - Superman: TAS
12:00 PM - Looney Tunes
12:30 PM - The Flinstones
01:00 PM - Sheep in the Big City
01:30 PM - Time Squad
02:00 AM - Pirates of Dark Water / SWAT Cats
02:30 AM - He-Man / The Real Adventures of JQ
03:00 AM - Thundercats
03:30 AM - GI-Joe
04:00 AM - Toon Heads
04:30 AM - Chuck Jones Show / Tex Avery Show
05:00 AM - Bob Clampit Show / Popeye Show
05:30 AM - Late Night Black and White

As not to spit on the name of Boomerang more than they already do. Maybe it CN 2 or CN Too. You may notice that from at least 3PM-6AM when CN/AS is showing comedy this channel would be showing action and vice versa. It should help keep the networks audiences from having many conflicts.

[Djm912]

I thought we stuck the fork in Cartoon Network and Adult Swim a while ago. The zombie networks CN and [adult swim] are what's left.

Don't be surprised to see CN with some kid reality shows(like the Discovery Channel) that are "in the spirit of animation" before 2008. What next, live game shows in front of a crowd outside somewhere in Atlanta?

Honestly, this is how the TV business works. If CN thinks that pulling the G4 card and becoming a crappy version of a succesful network, then so be it.

Good luck, CN. Hope you're happy with REALLY being #3 forever now. Cartoon Network was a great experiment that worked pretty damn well, but I suppose CN is what's going to get them the ratings.

[Nin-Nin69]

Thank you. Now, you folks can either sit here and (say sweet nothings) about how you want Cartoon Network to revert, or do something about it. Get a degree in one of the fields that you think may impact animation (and one that you rather particularly like, for there's nothing worse than hating your profession), rather than just hypothesize about what Cartoon Network could and should do.

I'd love to do my own series one day, but I'd get the same treatment as those on Sunday Pants. Unless I took a bunch of drugs over the next odd years and loved the idea about writing Derp Comedy while belittling the auidence, they would love my ideas. Then with a splish splash of live action we've got primetime Derp TV. If I happen to fall out with games, then I might go down the road of independent films while doing stuff for Spike and Mike. Too bad Spike and Mike don't get current animators much credit in the field since they helped Don Hertzfeldt and flash cartoons on the internet.

[One Radical Dude]

Sketch, the way I see it, these guys are probably going to eventually do the same thing to Boomerang at some point -- throw in some "live-action cartoons :rolleyes:" there. Believe it! :sad:

[remnant]

Now that it's official, I can officially say that Cartoon Network is dead to me.

I barely catch AS now since new episodes I want to see are online. There is no real motivation for me to watch Toonami anymore outside of BoBoBo. There are too many bad original cartoons while the classics are neglected for poorly organized blocks, boring cartoons which were made to put toddlers to sleep, and above all airing live action anything.

I knew something bad would've come up since the packaging of Fridays. Sure they were trying to go after Nick and Disney, but why? You're already #1! There should be no real reason to out best someone on their playing field when you've already got the high ratings and the shows to back you up. How much higher did they want to go? 4 times the amount of people that populate the world?

The reason you're falling behind is due to the shows that you're backing up which a majority of your viewers dislike or are sick of watching. Where the frig is Samurai Jack, Justice League, and Courage? Remember these shows which gave them such high ratings over the weekdays? They would even trade good shows like Time Squad and Megas XLR over for another 2 blocks of a bad Kids WB show or another KND or Juniper Lee slot. And there are almost no more classic cartoons on CN unless AS tries to be funny (when they're not) and air "lol Chuck Norris Crappy Crap Spectacular with Ninja Stars."

So what if you don't have Spongebob? You don't need to make not one, but two shows that involves the same team while neglecting the bad writing. Sure the Spongebob movie made more than the PPG's, but do you know why? Because you didn't really push it out to the older public outside of the network while letting smug jerks like Roger Ebert walk all over it. The single made up at the last minute, "That's What Girls Do" I feel is one of the leading causes to turn people away. AS even helped out with the PPG pimpage to make the older audience feel confident about seeing a movie involving little girls. That was one of the best things AS has ever done for the CN community in their entire lifespan. Craig McCracken even came here asking people to spread the word and get more people to watch the movie in theaters. So what did they do in return? They blamed their CN studios and blamed their CC animators. None of the blame went towards the morons who are in charge of marketing and advertizment who work for WB and CN when the animators were doing a better job promoting the movie with an even smaller budget than the people that get handed $750,000 to make a trailer.

Until the day that CN understands their own faults and fixes them rather than changing their format, (which will never happen) then I no longer consider myself a loyal CN viewer. Just like MTV did back in 1996 when they got stupid VJ's, got rid of their best shows, and stopped carring about the music I like, this will never change. Nickalodeon even jumped down this path in 1996 while I've only seen 3 good shows since then. It's been 10 years now and both are getting worse and worse every year. I can see CN going down this path. And now I'm seeing this pattern where good networks go bad on the 6th year of a decade.

MTV 1981-1996
Nick 1981-1996
CN 1992-2006

Toon TV is dead and buried.

CN is not #1 in ratings. WHile their animated programs are highly rated overall Nick and Disney DESTROY them in overall rating becuase live-action shows are simply more popular. Ask Disney.

So many of you guys bring up Samurai Jack and Justice League and the like but those shows are not often rating juggernauts.( Actually JLU was. Timm was just tired of the show and wanted it to end.) Samurai Jack did terrible in the ratings. It definition of cult.

The PPG movie was riding on a wave of hype. It just wasn't going to sustain itself. Also blaming marketing is classic example of " I have no idea who to really blame"

Evolution of Television. Everyone is changing formats. It's the only way to survive in today's market. Single genre stations are a dying breed becuyase they were a novelty that cable used to sell itself. Now however people want multiple things gthat appeal to them. Look at the most successful stations. Nick,Mtv, Lifetime. What do they have in common? They adapted away from giving a single genre and more into making a solid package of programming for a specific demographic. That is what CN is doing. That is the only way CN will survive.

[Andrew T. Hingson]

Not so fast there... LA comedies kick the crap out of CN's shows for ratings but you didn't mention the notable fact that Nick's cartoons kick the crap out of their live action shows in ALL demos. Sponge Bob, Fairly Odd Parents and Avatar beat Nick and Disney's live action fair easily.

Simple proof that cartoons can and do get better ratings with youth demos than live action programing. But LA shows are on the rise at the moment especially Drake and Josh, Zoey 101 and Disney's Hanna Montana. None the less... Sponge Bob beats everything and it's a cartoon. Nick sure found a pot of gold with that one. Too bad CN can't seem to make a show that is equally popular. I'd chock that up to everyone trying to be Sponge Bob and failing miserably (not just CN). Even so Foster's at least is a great show it's a shame it's not doing anywhere near as well as Nick's toons.

And yeah I'm pretty sure most of agree that CN was already dead. Adding live-action is just pissing on the grave.

[livingfruitvirus]

Not so fast there... LA comedies kick the crap out of CN's shows for ratings but you didn't mention the notable fact that Nick's cartoons kick the crap out of their live action shows in ALL demos. Sponge Bob, Fairly Odd Parents and Avatar beat Nick and Disney's live action fair easily.

High School Musical anyone? 7.5 million viewers.

[Andrew T. Hingson]

True, but that was a movie not a series.

[jarjar23]

And a premiere. Any kid movie or show premiere gets big ratings - it's just the matter of will the movie/show maintain the ratings as it's shown again (in movies case) or more epiosdes premiere (in a show case). High School Musical did EXTREMELY well, and it's STILL doing extremely well.

[Andrew T. Hingson]

Yes there seems to be a "music show" boom right now. American Idol anyone? And now Disney's Hanna Montana is really drawing in girls 6-14. So once again I must say... CN get a clue and air Full Moon o Sagashite. It's the perfect show to ride on that trend (since we all know how CN loves to ride the trends now).

[bat313]

.( Actually JLU was. Timm was just tired of the show and wanted it to end.) That's some missinformation if i ever heard it.

[HG Revolution]

1) So many of you guys bring up Samurai Jack and Justice League and the like but those shows are not often rating juggernauts.( Actually JLU was. Timm was just tired of the show and wanted it to end.) Samurai Jack did terrible in the ratings. It definition of cult.

2) Evolution of Television. Everyone is changing formats. It's the only way to survive in today's market. Single genre stations are a dying breed becuyase they were a novelty that cable used to sell itself. Now however people want multiple things gthat appeal to them. Look at the most successful stations. Nick,Mtv, Lifetime. What do they have in common? They adapted away from giving a single genre and more into making a solid package of programming for a specific demographic. That is what CN is doing. That is the only way CN will survive.

1) The last episode of Samurai Jack made the Top 30 most-watched programs with kids 9-14 the week it aired. Very few CN programs do that.

2) Not every successful network has changed goals. Nick is sticking with its goal to be a kids network and is succeeding. Comedy Central is sticking with its goal to be a comedy network and is succeeding. HBO admitted changed its goals from "uncut movies" to "uncut anything" but at least still was daring with its new goal and didn't succomb to "trends" that CN and MTV have and it is a successful network as well. If Cartoon Network improved its off-network promotion (which would heighten the ratings of already fairly-successful shows like Fosters) and made better shows they could survive without live-action.

[jarjar23]

Do you think they infact could rename the network? Not nesessarily the Children's Network, becuase it sounds too, well, childish, and viewers would get confused with it STILL being "CN". They'd need to COMPLETLY reinvent themselves.

[Mat]

I'm getting CNToo and then shooting the corpse of CN in the brains. I urge everyone who can to do the same.

[One Radical Dude]

Most people here can't get CN Too -- not, yet, anyway.

"Children's Network" sounds more generic and wouldn't be appropriate enough.

[rksexy2finger88]

This is no good this is one reason why I don't watch much cn anymore I wish cn would just show only cartoons 24/7 I liked it that way.Anyway i'm a little confused does sagging ratings mean good ratings or bad ratings?

[Gary L Thompson]

So there you have it. It looks like they're wanting to change format, but the cable companies don't seem too worried. Not like they would have to be.



Now that it's official, I can officially say that Cartoon Network is dead to me.
I barely catch AS now since new episodes I want to see are online. There is no real motivation for me to watch Toonami anymore outside of BoBoBo. There are too many bad original cartoons while the classics are neglected for poorly organized blocks, boring cartoons which were made to put toddlers to sleep, and above all airing live action anything.
I knew something bad would've come up since the packaging of Fridays. Sure they were trying to go after Nick and Disney, but why? You're already #1! There should be no real reason to out best someone on their playing field when you've already got the high ratings and the shows to back you up. How much higher did they want to go? 4 times the amount of people that populate the world?
The reason you're falling behind is due to the shows that you're backing up which a majority of your viewers dislike or are sick of watching. Where the frig is Samurai Jack, Justice League, and Courage? Remember these shows which gave them such high ratings over the weekdays? They would even trade good shows like Time Squad and Megas XLR over for another 2 blocks of a bad Kids WB show or another KND or Juniper Lee slot. And there are almost no more classic cartoons on CN unless AS tries to be funny (when they're not) and air "lol Chuck Norris Crappy Crap Spectacular with Ninja Stars."
So what if you don't have Spongebob? You don't need to make not one, but two shows that involves the same team while neglecting the bad writing. Sure the Spongebob movie made more than the PPG's, but do you know why? Because you didn't really push it out to the older public outside of the network while letting smug jerks like Roger Ebert walk all over it. The single made up at the last minute, "That's What Girls Do" I feel is one of the leading causes to turn people away. AS even helped out with the PPG pimpage to make the older audience feel confident about seeing a movie involving little girls. That was one of the best things AS has ever done for the CN community in their entire lifespan. Craig McCracken even came here asking people to spread the word and get more people to watch the movie in theaters. So what did they do in return? They blamed their CN studios and blamed their CC animators. None of the blame went towards the morons who are in charge of marketing and advertizment who work for WB and CN when the animators were doing a better job promoting the movie with an even smaller budget than the people that get handed $750,000 to make a trailer.
Until the day that CN understands their own faults and fixes them rather than changing their format, (which will never happen) then I no longer consider myself a loyal CN viewer. Just like MTV did back in 1996 when they got stupid VJ's, got rid of their best shows, and stopped carring about the music I like, this will never change. Nickalodeon even jumped down this path in 1996 while I've only seen 3 good shows since then. It's been 10 years now and both are getting worse and worse every year. I can see CN going down this path. And now I'm seeing this pattern where good networks go bad on the 6th year of a decade.
MTV 1981-1996
Nick 1981-1996
CN 1992-2006
Toon TV is dead and buried.
CN is not #1 in ratings. WHile their animated programs are highly rated overall Nick and Disney DESTROY them in overall rating becuase live-action shows are simply more popular. Ask Disney.
So many of you guys bring up Samurai Jack and Justice League and the like but those shows are not often rating juggernauts.( Actually JLU was. Timm was just tired of the show and wanted it to end.) Samurai Jack did terrible in the ratings. It definition of cult.
The PPG movie was riding on a wave of hype. It just wasn't going to sustain itself. Also blaming marketing is classic example of " I have no idea who to really blame"
Evolution of Television. Everyone is changing formats. It's the only way to survive in today's market. Single genre stations are a dying breed becuyase they were a novelty that cable used to sell itself. Now however people want multiple things gthat appeal to them. Look at the most successful stations. Nick,Mtv, Lifetime. What do they have in common? They adapted away from giving a single genre and more into making a solid package of programming for a specific demographic. That is what CN is doing. That is the only way CN will survive.

Cartoon Network Forums (http://forums.toonzone.net/forumdisplay.php?f=51) > Does Cartoon Network lack an identity? (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?p=2141816#post2141816)
Long time ago, before the mergers took place (I'm not talking about the AOL merger, but rather Turner's merger with Time-Warner), Cartoon Network did have an identity.
It's identity? A self-mocking, yet self-loving animation outlet encased with a checkerboard background. They were a cartoon network, the first of its kind anywhere in the world and proud of it. They utilized their characters (mostly Hanna-Barbera and MGM characters) to promote themselves and their environment. When they began creating their own franchises, they promoted the network as well. Cartoon Network was a fun place to be where animation ruled. Carrot-Top was the continuity announcer for a spell before having his own show. Guys like Bobcat Gothwait, Penn Gillette, and Chris Rock were also found behind the mikes at the network. And the only live-action shows on the network (Banana Splits, Skatebirds, and Big Bag) all featured cartoons.
In 1997, the checkboard motiff was upgraded with original animation with Powerhouse played in the background. Even Phil Hartman became a continuity announcer (sadly, it was a brief stay . . . dammit Bryann). Of course once all the PC Looney Tunes became availiable for air, the newer characters were more prominent, and all the Hanna-Barbera stuff shifted off to Boomerang, that's when the identity began to change. In 2001, the changes became more apparent. Cartoon Network became more homogenized with a few unpasteurized sections remaining on late-night Sundays and Thursdays. Regime changes, and the newer guys were determined to turn Cartoon Network into Nickelodeon, and dammit if they didn't almost succeed.
The newer logo introduced in 2004 no longer prominently says Cartoon Network, just CN: Cartoon Network (and they proudly proclaimed in the press that the kids they surveyed felt that this was an entirely new network). In 2005, Cartoon Network went from an all-animation outlet to a 98% animation channel with more and more live-action movies and series airing in primetime. Meanwhile, they have completely abandoned their classic cartoon roots over the years, with the new "(Get It At) Cartoon" song campaign with no older properties in it as well as this month's revamped Fridays opening (which removed all references to older characters and shows no longer on the air) as the last straws.
Now, Cartoon Network has no identity. They're no longer an all-animation network, and everybody's laughing at them. Even upstart Nicktoons Network, which proudly (and correctly) boasts that they're the only outlet airing all cartoons, all the time. Every competitor now knows that their weaknesses and are ready to pounce on them. Now, unless a real regime change with people that believe more in animation than just attracting kids takes place, Cartoon Network is stuck in this position.
And for once in my life, I don't feel sorry for them.

The Toon Zone - General Animation Discussion (http://forums.toonzone.net/forumdisplay.php?f=2) > When did the USA network stop showing cartoons? (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?p=2139449#post2139449)
The reason networks like USA and others are becoming more generic is because it attracts more viewers. USA has been the #1 basic cable network so far this year, with Disney at #2 and TNT at #3. Remember a few years ago when classic animation fans complained about Disney Channel abandoning "Vault Disney" and all their other programming for newer stuff? Well, it's certainly paid off for them.

I don’t know if anyone has tried to reply to more than one thread at once, but I feel one very critical issue has been touched on here, that goes far beyond just the loss of cartoons.

First of all, I think sacrificing the brand for the sake of getting short-term profits is just a plain bad idea for the long-term health of any business regardless of field. I firmly believe “Big Idea” (see http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=140466&highlight=Phil+Vischer%26q uot%3B+%2B+%26quot%3BBig+Idea (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=140466&highlight=Phil+Vischer%26quot%3B+%2B+%26quot%3BBig+Idea) for more details) was on the right track in regard to its business model, and if it didn’t work out--well, Walt Disney was bedeviled by bankruptcy, perpetual also-ran status in the 1920s, losing his star character to a big company and its lawyers, the infamous animators strike, and having to survive on propaganda films and pop music versions of “Fantasia” during World War II before the Disney Co. became a permanent corporate giant. I still believe that in the long run a business that just jumps on the hottest thing will never be anything more than a silver-medalist compared to a business that holds true to its foundation principles even in the face of initial reverses--and to actually abandon those principles after extended initial success is little short of insanity.

However, in the cable TV business, brand identity has more relevance than in your standard industry. If the cable companies aren’t worried about this trend of their networks flipping formats, they should be, and stockholders should put their executives on the griddle if they persist in taking a blind eye toward it. Now Nin-Nin69 and Brian Cruz seem to be saying that it is irrational to expect CN and USA to give into pressure to take a course that would reduce their profits. While I don’t dispute that argument so far as it goes, I think it’s missing the entire picture.

Back in the infancy of radio, when pioneers like KDKA and WWJ realized the lack of privacy in radiotelephone communication could be turned from its Achille’s heel into its strongest asset, the term “broadcasting” was coined to describe this new use of radio, an apt description since the original definition of broadcasting was what a farmer did in casting seed about him in a wide arc, in hopes some seed would sprout and give a good crop. By its very nature, broadcasting tended to exert a pull drawing all programming toward a bland lowest-common denominator, because broadcasters needed to deliver the widest possible audience for their advertisers.

In contrast, the nature of cable from its very beginning was to promote “narrowcasting” as opposed to broadcasting. Nin-Nin69 is absolutely right that single-genre stations were the means that cable sold itself to a TV audience chafing at the lowest-common denominator blandness of broadcasting. When prospective customers received a flyer, it would mention Home Box Office, WTBS (in those days having all the virtues and renegade aspects of your prototypical 1960s-1970s independent UHF station), Christian Broadcasting Network, Cable News Network, MTV, Nickelodeon, American Movie Classics, the Nashville Network, Home Shopping Network, the Discovery Channel, Arts and Entertainment, the Weather Channel, Entertainment and Sports Programming Network, Sci-Fi Channel, USA Network, et al. However, anyone who thinks cable (and frankly, satellite TV dish services as well) doesn’t still sell itself that way is only kidding himself. Basically, to keep the viewer from being content with “free” broadcast TV, your typical cable system brochure will extol the virtues of a lineup of CNN, Fox News, ETWN, Animal Planet, Cartoon Network, Turner Classic Movies, Court TV, Starz/Encore, Lifetime Network, Animal Planet, Speed Channel, Golf Channel, Home and Garden, the Food Network, QVC, Game Show Network, Disney Channel, etc.

The fatal flaw in regarding networks like Nick, MTV, Lifetime, Disney, TNT as the most successful on cable is that Nin-Nin69 and Brian Cruz are assuming that more viewers and more profits from advertising is the mark of success. Broadcasting success, yes. But applying it to cable/dish channels makes as much sense as regarding the Detroit Demolition as a great success in the women’s pro football league because they’ve won every game and championship for the past several years. The trouble is, the league is trying to kick them out now (evidently because the old All-American Football Conference didn’t try to do the same to the similarly devastating Cleveland Browns, that was a big factor in the league’s eventual demise, and the Baltimore Orioles’ absolute domination of the International League in the 1920s played a big factor in that league losing its independence to baseball’s major leagues).

We’re talking purely about the tragedy of the commons, folks. Regardless of how these cable networks going generic may be making their stockholders (or more likely, the stockholders of their media giant masters) happy, in the long run it has to kill the cable/dish services. Why should people continue to pay extra money each month to cable/dish services, when instead of getting their favorite genre, they’re getting the very same generic programming that they can get free over the air? Particularly, when their cable bill is going up every year because those very same channels flipping their formats toward more generic programming are at the same time squeezing their cable system every dollar they can at contract renewal time. For example, when American Movie Classics began accepting advertising, and morphed into AMC, displacing classic moves with basically the same type movies your local broadcast stations air in fringe time periods, did cable/dish services benefit directly from the influx of those advertising dollars? Obviously, the only ramification for your cable company was the loss of another major selling point in gaining/keeping subscribers.

If you think about it, not even the advertisers gain from this corporate raiding of single-genre cable/dish stations and transforming them more along broadcasting lines. Programming toward the lowest common denominator only works if there’s a limited number of outlets involved. I well remember the era of the 1960s and early 1970s, when CBS reigned unchallenged and NBC was a solid number two, while ABC and UHF independents struggled for survival. Now, you have at least five over-the-air networks, while i and PBS strive to maintain a foothold in the market as well. Now, add to this mix a dozen or two cable networks suddenly trying to compete for those same advertising dollars, and suddenly the advertiser finds that the notion of gaining an expanded base of viewers has flown out the window. Essentially it’s the same situation as the range which has been overgrazed by too many cowherds. Instead of paying for a truly wide audience on one or two outlets, the advertiser finds himself suddenly faced paying for placement on a dozen or more outlets for a shrunken audience. Of course, there will always be those advertisers who want to target their dollars to a specific narrow customer base--but with true cable narrowcasters being obliterated daily, where are they going to go to?

Now admittedly, cable/dish operators may have some difficulty enforcing brand in their contracts. While the old-line Sci-Fi and USA Network viewers might be dissatisfied with the shift in the direction of their programming, it might be difficult to prove a true format flip. The same probably holds true for movies appearing on ESPN channels (particularly since they’re sports-themed), the Family Channel through its CBN/Fox/ABC incarnations, loss of Vault Disney, AMC (since it still shows movies), the educational Learning Channel becoming the mostly This-Old-House-type TLC, etc. However, there are some format flips so self-evident that it would seem cable/dish operators should have no difficulty enforcing contracts: MTV no longer showing music, the Nashville Network abandoning Tennessee for TNN and then Spike TV--and Cartoon Network no longer showing cartoons. And even the less-defined format flips can be dealt with by hard-nosed negotiating at next round of contract renewal, like threatening to take back the channel space and restoring the genera by taking that channel space for direct use (C-SPAN came about as a cooperative arrangement between cable companies, after all).

However, apparently it’s not happening because cable/dish operators are apparently blind to the threat. In some cases, there’s some unfortunate incestuous relationships between programmers and cable companies--for example, Warner Cable would probably have to organize the equivalent of a palace coup at Time-Warner to assert its interests over the respective managements of WB, CNN, TNT, Cartoon Network, etc. However, one of the all-time worst format flips (in terms of sheer blindness to self-interest if nothing else) has to be Comcast’s own G4 channel. Apparently, they’re now trying to turn the channel into Spike TV-lite. Quite aside from the question of how on earth Comcast is supposed to benefit from splitting the audience between essentially duplicate outlets, the stunning aspect of this impending format switch is that Comcast stood to benefit directly from the original brand-name, particularly after acquiring TechTV (Comcast’s first mistake was not leaving the staff and facilities of Tech TV in place, since that had been steadily gaining audience, while its own G4 staff had still not figured out how to program a successful channel). The TechTV shows could have been tied directly into the broadband concept (digital, internet, phone, etc. services) that Comcast had been pushing, even the videogame shows of G4 could have been tied into broadband. And as big an anime fan and faithful viewer of Anime Unleashed as I am, one has to question why Comcast ever bothered to keep the block on the channel for as long as it did, if it wasn’t going to acquire a lot of game-themed anime that could be tied into G4 live shows and/or even use the block as a means to promote its own Anime Selects channel. Where in the world did Comcast get the notion that its primary purpose was to be a broadcasting service?

If viewers want to revolt against the format-flipping by USA Network, Cartoon Network, et al, methinks the only effective way to do so is to start sending cable/dish companies subscription cancellations, accompanied by the clear message that there is no reason to pay soaring cable/dish bills for programming that’s not any different from what you get on CBS/NBC/ABC/Fox/CW. If there are enough of these, sooner or later the cable/dish companies are going to start thinking in terms of lobbying for regulation and/or negotiating contractual restrictions against format-flipping, if not curtailing or eliminating advertising altogether on at least some cable channels.


I posted this over at the Adult Swim site and I think this Variety article (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117941055?categoryid=14&cs=1&query=cartoon+and+network&display=cartoon+network) will explain a lot. I've pasted some of the more interesting points from the article below.

"Major changes are in store for Cartoon Network, which will step outside its charter for the first time and into live-action programming. Cabler (Cartoon Network) has opened its doors to the unanimated world as part of a larger development department expansion that includes select live-action theatrical movie buys and the creation of a "longform unit" (Specializes in TV programming that is longer than an hour in duration; a made for TV movie)...
Changes arrive as Cartoon (Cartoon Network) continues to trail competitors Nickelodeon and Disney in the total day race for kids 6-11. First quarter results have Nick ensconced in the top spot and Cartoon lagging Disney by a little more than 100,000 viewers in the demo. Cabler is also off 17% in primetime from first quarter 2005 but has seen Saturday morning success with new originals "Ben 10" and "My Gym Partner Is a Monkey."...
Cartoon has been testing the performance of live-action features like "Batman," "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" and "Ace Ventura" on air since late last year. Most recently, cabler drew a big 2.3 million viewers to a showing of the Jim Carrey comedy "Dumb and Dumber" on Friday. Net (Cartoon Network) will make an event out of the "Spider-Man" premiere later this summer...
Senior VP Michael Ouweleen points out that certain comedies on network TV, including "Arrested Development" and "Scrubs," are "by and large live-action cartoons. There's no reason we couldn't do something similar for kids."
And while certain cartoons such as "SpongeBob SquarePants" continue to attract big crowds, a live-action launch like Disney Channel's "Hannah Montana" can attract even more attention. "Hannah" also drew a big 5.4 million (2.3 million kids 6-11) during its premiere showing two weeks ago. Cartoon's top shows "Ben 10" and "My Gym Partner..." have averaged 680,000 and 647,000 viewers in the demo, respectively."

Again, note the key word is CABLER. Cartoon Network is a cable network (for narrowcasting), not over-the-air (for broadcasting). Shows intended to be primarily ratings-grabbers like "Hannah Montana" belong on ABC, not on cable.


All right, Jeff -- I have DISH Network, do I write to the corporate office or what? I want to make sure I write/contact the correct folks. I refuse to do nothing (I would hate to think back and ponder if I (as well as other folks) could have "saved" Cartoon Network). If our efforts fail, at least we've tried. Beats not doing anything at all.

Like I said, the person to contact is not CN, but the carrier. That's the party with the most to lose from format-flipping.

[Tay the Cat]

That's some missinformation if i ever heard it.
Bruce Timm posted on here saying he was rather glad it ended, because it was straining him.