Tag Boomerang

The REAL Reason Why Boomerang Sucks

silverstar 3 Comments

Boomerang is in a bad place right now. There’s no denying that. The channel is badly in need of some TLC (and I don’t mean that crappy cable channel that shows reality shows about little people, toddler beauty show contestants made up like hos and women who treat their vagina like it’s a clown car.)

There are differing opinions as to what should be done with Boom: some feel the whole channel should be scrapped and re-integrated back into being a block on its’ big brother Cartoon Network where it began. Some feel it should become an ad-supported channel so they can earn some money and gain more 3rd party acquisitions like shows from the DiC and Filmation libraries like Boom’s neighbor to the North, Teletoon Retro. Some feel Turner should start taking greater advantage of the shows which they have available to them in the Turner and WBA vaults and designate certain hours and days to certain decades and eras (I’m in this camp, BTW). And of course, the retro-snobs just want all of the newer (post 1989) shows to go away and for Boom to go back to being the way it was in 2003 or 2004, when all it did was Hanna-Barbera reruns and the occasional MGM and Looney Tunes shorts.

Well, here’s your wake-up call, folks: NONE of those things are ever going to happen. Boomerang is going to stay exactly as it is now unless Turner decides to kill the channel outright or transform it into something profitable. Failing one of those scenarios, Boom will never get any better.

Hey, didn’t mean to bum you out, but that’s the truth. Boomerang is not going to improve any (unless someone at Turner gets dollar signs in their eyes), nor is it ever going to go back to being 90% H-B Rerun Boomerang. Why? I’ll tell you. No homespun crapola. No sugar coating. I’m going to share with you the reason why Boomerang is never likely to improve, and its’ certainly never going to regress. Here’s why:

1. Flat-out, Turner doesn’t care about Boomerang. Why should they? It doesn’t live off of ratings. It makes Turner no money outside of subscription fees. They just don’t care about the channel. Turner regards Boom as a dumping ground for all the shows that they don’t care about any more. It’s basically CN’s recycle bin, and that’s all they use it for.

But there’s another reason why Boom isn’t ever going to back to being early ‘all classic’ Boomerang. It’s a chilling and eerie reason, but it’s there nonetheless. There’s a HUGE elephant in the room that everyone (including myself) would rather ignore, but it’s the other reason why Boom isn’t going to change back. It’s time to turn and face that pachyderm. Ready? Sit down, take a deep breath, have a glass of water. Here it is………………….

2. We’re getting old.

Sorry, I had to say it. No one wants to face this (I sure as hell don’t), but that is why Boomerang is never going to go back to being early Boomerang, and why the newer post 1990 shows aren’t going to be leaving the channel. Face it campers, we’re all getting older.

Boomerang is never going to return to being early Boomerang, just like MTV is never going to go back to showing music videos 24/7 and Nick@Nite is never going to go back to being the Donna Reed/My Three Sons/Dobie Gillis Nick@Nite. ‘Cause we’re getting older and we’re not the primary target anymore.

Yes, as the channel’s name implies, when Boomerang was first launched it was supposed to be a haven for baby boomers to relive the cartoons of their youth, but here’s the thing: as of this writing the Gen Xers are in the same place in their lives that the boomers were in when Boomerang was first launched as its’ own channel back in 2000.

The problem with marketing a so-called “classic TV” channel of any kind is that time never stops moving forward. What’s considered “old” or “classic” changes from generation to generation, from decade to decade, and in some cases, from year to year. We’re experiencing with stations like Boomerang and Nick@Nite what our parents and grandparents experienced when the elevator music stations that they used to listen to got replaced with soft rock.

The 18 to 20-year-old demographic is usually the audience most coveted by TV networks because they attract the most advertising dollars, and people who are old enough to have grown up watching 50’s, 60’s and 70’s shows firsthand are currently outside of that demographic. The kids who grew up watching 50’s and 60’s TV (including my generation, who grew up watching these shows secondhand in syndicated reruns) are either dying off, moving on to other venues (like the internet and home video) or simply are reaching an age where they can’t be persuaded to buy useless junk they don’t need by advertisers, so The Powers That Be aren’t zeroing in on us anymore; they’re focusing the attention on the Gen X-ers, Gen Y-ers and all of the other On Beyond Zebra letters who are coming after us. The 90’s kids are in their 20’s now and the 80’s kids are in their 30’s now. They want to relive the experience of watching the shows that they grew up with too. But these kids didn’t grow up watching Leave it to Beaver,  Yogi Bear, Dennis the Menace and Rocky & Bullwinkle, they grew up watching Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, The Adventures of Pete and Pete, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and Sonic the Hedgehog. These kids don’t have fond memories of Snagglepuss and the Brady Bunch, they have fond memories of Stick Stickly and Kenan & Kel. Unfortunately for us (well, the retro-snobs, anyway), many of the folks in this generation don’t have a burning desire to watch shows from before they were born (keep in mind that they didn’t grow up with the local and syndicated venues that we did) and a great deal of them are automatically turned off by black-and-white. That’s why Nick@Nite is currently rotating The Nanny and George Lopez instead of Bewitched and Car 54, Where Are You?.

The 90’s and 00’s cartoons aren’t going off of Boomerang anytime soon, and in all likelihood their presence is going to increase before it decreases, so we Boomers are just going to have to learn to share. Boomerang isn’t a baby boomer’s channel anymore, deal with it. Be thankful you’re still at least getting a portion of that Old School Cool instead of the vintage stuff getting tossed by the wayside altogether. Yes, Boom is bad now. But It could be much, much worse.

mtv-logo
I’m looking at you.

Oh, Mickey, Where Art Thou?

goldstar Leave a comment

Recently, I read a post on the Toon Zone forums about members requesting what shows they would like to see airing on Hasbro’s fledgling cable/satellite channel The Hub (which debuted on 10-10-10 and as of this writing is 1 year and 4 months old). In this aforementioned thread, one member, a self-described “Classic television fan” requested that The Hub should air old-school Disney cartoons such Ducktales, Chip ‘n’ Dale’s Rescue Rangers, TaleSpin and even the classic Disney shorts starring Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Goofy, Pluto and company with the reasoning that “Disney Channel isn’t airing them anymore, so why not bring them to The Hub?”.

I’ve read similar posts like this before with fans wanting Disney cartoons and Nicktoons to air on Boomerang and similar requests. Now, I think at this point that it’s obvious that you’re never, never, NEVER (and did I mention never?) going to see Disney cartoons on The Hub, and it should be equally obvious why this will never happen. Disney and Viacom are notoriously stingy when it comes to loaning out their properties; they don’t play ‘sharsies’. Exactly how would Disney benefit from loaning out shows featuring it’s trademark characters to a competing network so the competitor can make money off of them? And how would Hasbro benefit from their channel becoming a vessel for the competition? A “Disney Too” channel, if you will? Answer: They wouldn’t. Not in the least. Yeah, I know that The Hub has aired Honey, I Shrunk the Kids, which is a  Disney movie, and  I know that The Hub has aired Muppet movies, and the Muppets are also currently owned by Disney, but here’s the thing: Cartoon Network has also aired less celebrated Disney movies such as Operation Dumbo Drop and Angels in the Outfield. Movies and TV shows that aren’t directly associated with the Mouse House are OK, but anything with Mickey, Goofy, Minnie, Donald, Buzz, Woody, Belle, Ariel or any other characters that are synonymous with Disney, forget about it! That would be like promoting the competition. Disney would sooner sit on those cartoons than let one of it’s rivals get rich off of them. Sure, from a fan’s perspective, that would be great, but from a business perspective, that wouldn’t be a smart move. At all. Mickey’s head doubles as the studio’s trademark. Disney loaning out it’s trademark characters to The Hub would make as much sense as KFC letting Popeye’s have it’s secret recipe.

In response to others’ statements regarding this, the Fan goes on to type:

I think Disney should let them go and air elsewhere as opposed to them just sitting around collecting dust and not getting any air exposure. From a viewer standpiont, I could care less where they air as long as they air SOMEWHERE. I want to see them.

Ignoring the fact that saying “I could care less” is incorrect. The expression is “I couldn’t care less”, as in “I couldn’t possibly care any less than I do now”. Saying “I could care less” implies that you could care more, It’s the general attitude conveyed in the above statement that annoys me. First, this goes back to what I covered earlier; Disney wouldn’t benefit financially in the slightest by “letting their cartoons go and air elsewhere” as in on a channel that’s owned by one of their competitors, so doing so would be just plain stupid. Second, In my time on message boards, I’ve read this rhetoric several times. This attitude from so-called “fans” that they’re dissatisfied that their favorite shows aren’t airing on their favorite channels anymore, but they’re not so dissatisfied that they’d be willing to get up off of their duffs and actually do something about it. Yes, it is too bad that we can’t see Disney theatrical shorts on the Disney Channel anymore. I agree with that, but it’s not like Disney has completely washed it’s collective hands of the “classics”. There are DVDs currently available of the classic Disney shorts, as well as some of the Disney Afternoon shows. If you really want to see them again, buy the DVDs. Look for them on legal streaming sites such as iTunes or Amazon.com. Look for them on YouTube. That’s a much more reasonable course of action than just sitting on the couch waiting for the networks to come around to your way of thinking.

I understand fans wanting to complain about their favorite shows not airing on “their” channels anymore, but what I don’t understand are these “TV or nothing” fans or this bizarre sense of entitlement that many (not all of them, mind you, but some) seem to carry around with them like spoiled children, as if the networks owe them something. The networks don’t owe you these shows any more than they owe you an explanation as to why they’re not airing them anymore. Entertainment is a business, just like any other, and in order for a network to stay in business, it must keep moving forward. Networks don’t program for individuals, and they can’t endlessly loop their shows from 1 era for all eternity just because a small group of fans refuse to let go of the past. Your wanting to see the Disney shows isn’t Hasbro’s concern, and The Hub is no more obligated to provide you with old Disney cartoons than The Disney Channel is.

Anyway, you’re not at the mercy of TV. There are other resources out there. You just have to look for them. And to the people who reply with “Not everybody has a job and can buy DVDs”, My response to this is: Irrelevant. Alcoholics will do whatever they have to do in order to get a drink. Junkies will do whatever they have to do in order to get their fix. You just need to think of your favorite shows as your personal drink or drug. If you want them bad enough, you’ll do whatever you need to do in order to enjoy them, and if you’re not willing to do that, then it obviously doesn’t mean that much to you, so there’s no point in complaining about it. These people always seem to be the ones making the most noise about how dissatisfied they are, but at the same time, they don’t want to do anything that requires any sort of effort on their part. If you’re not willing to leave your “comfort zone” or compromise even a little to get what you want, then don’t go around calling yourselves “fans”, because a true fan would do whatever he or she needed to do in order to get their TV goodness, and if you’re not willing to muster any of your cash to buy DVDs or get up out of your chair to search the internet, then you obviously don’t want it bad enough, which makes you only a fair-weather fan, and as we know, close only counts in horseshoes.


Point and Laugh!

goldstar Leave a comment

This morning, Damon and I came across this little thread by a member of the Toon Zone Forums. This little piece o’ flamebait was written by a member who has a serious mad-on for Boomerang and who was 47-years-old at the time of his initial post on the forum. This is the kind of post that gets closed immediately (and rightfully so!), which it did, but the statements made in this tidbit of haterade were so over-the-top ridiculous and silly that we just had to put in our 2 cents (or 4 cents, collectively). To avoid confusion, here’s the code: The original poster’s comments are typed in the default text color (in this case, black). Damon’s comments are in blue, while mine are in purple.

Nickelodeon sucks for one reason and one reason only.

We’re off to a great start so far. Hooray, one-sided rant threads!

Their morning block is too lengthy, the pre-school television hogwash that they show each morning is a load a crock if you ask me,

Nobody asked you. How is a 48-year-old adult with no children supposed to judge the merits of a block of programming designed for preschoolers? Of course, you’re entitled to watch Nick Jr., if that’s your choice, but it’s pretty ignorant for you to be so critical of the block, since you’re judging it solely on it’s entertainment value and you’re much too far outside of Nick Jr.’s target demographic for your opinion on it to be taken seriously. Either accept the block for what it is or don’t deal with it at all. Adults complaining about preschool shows is like women complaining about the shows on Spike, or gangsta rappers complaining about CMT.
I hate Blue’s Clues and i’m glad they got rid of it,
Wow. an adult doesn’t like a TV show that’s intended for kids aged 2 to 5. Shocker. I wasn’t a fan of Blues’s Clues either, but that’s because I’m a grown adult with no children and as such, I never watched Blue’s Clues often enough to have any strong emotions toward the show, positive or negative. Again, why is a grown-ass adult even watching Blues’ Clues to complain about it? You think that Blue’s Clues is immature and inane? No shit, Sherlock. It’s Blue’s Clues. The show wasn’t supposed to grow and mature, you were! You want more mature and intellectually stimulating programming? There’s everything else on TV that’s not a preschool block! 
and I hope that they get rid of Dora the Explorer also, ever since 2006, i’ve thought of her and boots as crack head alcoholics…

Comparing a 5-year-old girl and her pet monkey to crackheads and alcoholics. Very mature for a guy pushing 50. OK, comparing the behavior of, say, the Mysteries, Inc. gang on Scooby Doo to that of hopped-up dope fiends works because those fictional characters have actually displayed signs of stereotypical stoner behavior (constantly having the munchies, drifting around aimlessly with no sign of employment, spending much of their time in a van, etc.), but trying to do the same joke with Dora the Explorer doesn’t work at all because neither Dora nor Boots have ever exhibited any sort of behavior that’s comparable to that of a crack head or an alcoholic Why do you think of these characters as “crack head alcoholics”? Could it be because you have no frelling idea how crack heads and alcoholics typically act like? Doing so says far more about the person making the comment then it does about the comment itself. The irony being that anyone is who thinks that calling characters on shows tailored for little kids by mindless adult terms such as “crack heads” is a sign of maturity is the exact opposite of mature.

Get rid of Dora? Not gonna happen anytime soon. Dora the Explorer is one of Nick Jr.’s, nay, one of Nick’s biggest cash cows right now. Dora merchandise is everywhere. The little chica isn’t going anywhere as long as she and Boots continue to put butts into seats, so my advice to you is to simply change the channel when she comes on. Here’s how I handle the TV shows that I don’t like: I just pick up that little remote control device that came with my set and push those little buttons with the numbers on them. The stuff I don’t find entertaining I just don’t watch. It’s literally that simple. And was the whole “Dora and Boots are crackhead alcoholics” remark supposed to be clever or funny? ‘Cause it failed on both counts. That was neither accurate, smart nor humorous. I’m guessing you heard these terms used to describe something or someone else and thought that would be a really cool snap to make on a children’s cartoon character, but it only succeeded in making you look like a socially inept shut-in.

…and that bubble guppies and max and ruby stuff that nobody my age cares about anyway

As previously stated, nothing on Nick Jr. is intended to entertain people your age. Therefore, it doesn’t matter if you like them or not. If you truly didn’t care about these preschool targeted shows, you wouldn’t have created this dumb ass rant thread complaining about them on a public message board in the 1st place. Furthermore, in your rant, you even acknowledge that you’re too old to be watching these programs, let alone care about them, thus you defeated your own argument. Good job. Would  you like some salt to go with that foot?

 they already have NickJr. the channel so why even have a morning block on Nickelodeon if there is a channel dedicated to that jargain.

What’s “jargain”? That’s not a word. Did you mean to type ‘jargon’? But jargon is meaningless talk or writing, it’s not a block of TV shows. Anyway, I honestly don’t understand why some people think that just because Nickelodeon created a separate channel for Nick Jr., that this means that the Nick Jr. block would go away (or should go away). Most of the people complaining about this are either too young or immature to understand things from a business perspective. If you don’t get it, allow me to explain: Nick Jr. (the channel) is a digital exclusive extra channel, while Nick Jr. (the block) is basic cable. Most people are unable (or unwilling) to pay an additional fee on top of their regular cable/satellite fee for an extra digital package just to get the Nick Jr. channel. Also, Nick Jr. (the block) is doing too well in the ratings for Nick to just drop it. If you really don’t like the programming on Nick Jr., you could, I don’t know, watch something else, maybe. Nobody is forcing you watch Nick Jr. at all. Watch something else. Read a book, Go outside. Seriously. An adult over 40 shouldn’t need to be told this.

However, even though Disney Junior has a channel now, I like the fact that they still have a block on Disney channel
OK, so earlier, you were ripping apart Nickelodeon for having both a block and a separate channel for Nick Jr., and now you’re praising Disney for doing the exact same thing, even though Nick did it first. Can you say “hypocrite”, boys and girls?
the reason it is so good is cause they don’t run it too long, off by 12 or 1 which is better than Nick which runs their block from 8 to 2, Disney’s block has shows worth watching, Nick’s block runs too long with a sequence of shows nobody cares about.

“Nobody cares about Nick Jr.”? The block’s ratings say otherwise. If that were truly the case, then neither Cartoon Network or Disney Channel would have bothered launching (or attempting to launch in CN’s case) their own preschool blocks and later channels to counteract Nick Jr. By “nobody” you mean yourself. YOU don’t care about Nick Jr.’s shows, as well you shouldn’t, seeing as how you’re a grown-ass man with no kids. I honestly don’t know what’s sadder: you deluding yourself into thinking that you somehow represent Nick Jr.’s audience, or that you even want to put yourself in that position in the first place. And at what hour Nick chooses to end its’ preschool programming shouldn’t matter one whit to you, since you’re not being forced to sit through a second of it. Anybody who says, “So-and-so preschool block is bad because it goes on for too long” has obviously never had to stay home all day with a small child; if you actually had to watch some little ankle-biter during the day, you’d want all the kiddie blocks to go on for as long as possible.

8 A.M. to 2 P.M.? Those are the same hours that kids aged 7-12 are in school. Coincidence? What else is Nick supposed to air during those hours? Nickelodeon is channel for kids, and it wouldn’t make much sense running general Nick shows during the hours when Nick’s target audience isn’t at home to watch them. Nick Jr. has since become a boon for stay-at-home moms (and stay-at-home dads) to keep their little brats distracted while they go do housework or whatever. Why should Nick terminate it’s preschool block just because 1 grown-ass adult is too lazy to change the channel to something else or to get up off the couch and go do something else?

This whole argument of yours is stupid. There’s no rhyme or reason to it. You’re basically saying “I like this network’s little kid shows, but not this other networks’ little kid shows”. That makes no sense. Even if you were a teenager who just wanted all the little kid shows gone, that would also be a stupid argument for reasons already stated, but there would at least be some kind of rationale behind it, regardless of how profoundly stupid, immature and egotistical said argument would be. You can’t be against one preschool block and simultaneously be in favor of another, especially since you’re not judging these blocks on any kind of viable or rational level. Any shade of credibility you might have had (assuming there was any to begin with) got tossed right out the window the instant you indicated that you play favorites. You could just not watch the shows you don’t like, or better yet, instead of watching preschool shows all day, try and find a job so you can move out of your parents’ basement and get a life.

My final and most favorite of all Boomerang is even better than Nick, miss the days when it was a block, as for the channel, they’ve shown a lot of awesome cartoons from my past that i’ve enjoyed watching since 2003, they’ve done good lately, IMO they would get a lot of praise if they were able to find a way to bring back beloved classics that haven’t been shown in a long time(such as the Looney Tunes for example).

Um, why in the blue hell are you comparing Nick to Boomerang? The latter is a ad-free digital bonus tier rerun channel aimed primarily at nostalgic baby boomers and Generation Xers, while the former is a commercial basic cable premier kids’ channel. They’re not the same thing at all. That’s like comparing OWN to Fuel TV. And what do you mean “Looney Tunes haven’t been shown in a long time”? A sizable chunk of the LT shorts air on Cartoon Network 5 times a week, and DVDs, streaming videos and even illegal copies of the shorts on sites like YouTube and Dailymotion have been circulating both online and offline for years. You’d know that if you’d ever quit acting like Boomerang is the only channel you’re permitted to watch. I understand that Boomerang is your channel, dude, but seriously. Get off your lazy ass and leave your comfort zone once in a while to look around for other sources for these shows. You are not beholden to TV, be it Boomerang, Nick Jr., Disney Junior or otherwise. That you even care this much about this subject comes off as seriously sad, pathetic and downright fanboyish on your part, and that you’re THIS fired up about it just shows us all that despite being light years removed from the age bracket these shows are targeted towards, you’ve still got a boat-load of growing up to do.

For anybody that may not understand this topic, this is my comparison and personal opinions and views of cartoon blocks turned tv channels.
Nick Jr. and Disney Junior aren’t cartoon blocks; they’re preschool entertainment blocks. Neither are, nor have they ever been, exclusively cartoon blocks, nor has either ever been promoted as such. And again, this “comparison” makes zero sense because you’re not judging it from any kind of logical or rational viewpoint; you’re entire argument is “This block stinks because I, an adult over 40 years of age, doesn’t find a bunch of shows that are tailored for preschoolers to be entertaining!” Anyway, that’s probably something that you just should have specified at the beginning of your thread instead of the end of it.

The Art of Projection

silverstar Leave a comment

What an incredible organ the human mind is.

The mind is so powerful that it is able to create alternate universes and allow its’ user to fully believe that they reside in said universe instead of the real one.

This practice is called projection.

The dictionary defines projection as “the tendency to ascribe to another’s feelings, thoughts or attitudes present in oneself, or to regard external reality as embodying such feelings, thoughts, etc., in some way.” In the internet pop culture sense, it means the art of formulating some well-honed opinion, belief or ideal in one’s head and having such a passion and fervor for said belief system that one starts to believe in said formulation as concrete fact rather than mere opinion.

In my travels through Cyberville, I’ve encountered some truly unique and interesting projections. They’re not true, but boy are they colorful. Listed below are 6 of the more deadening, popular or jarring projections that I’ve heard over the years, with a handy little debunking of each:

PROJECTION #1: “Disney’s acquisition of Marvel, as well as their current wave of tweencoms, are an abomination of the Disney name and brand. Walt would not approve of this, nor would he allow this if he were alive today.”

REALITY: This is nothing more than opinion. The truth is that while we may not like what Disney is doing currently, the bigwigs at Disney don’t care about our gripes, because they’re raking in the money. The Mouse House is just as popular and profitable right now as it’s ever been, so they don’t view what they’re doing as a failure or an abomination of any kind.

As for “Walt wouldn’t do this/Walt is doing cartwheels in his grave over this” rhetoric, people need to keep in mind that the Disney corporation is a business. Yes, it’s a business. Some folks may want to believe that Walt was just a jolly old benevolent soul who lived in a gingerbread and lollipop factory with his crew of happy little elves, making cartoons and dreams to make children smile and would have done so for free, the truth is that Walt was a businessman. He was as much a capitalist as anyone else. He wanted to make money, and he would’ve had no problem with Disney’s current practices. And why would he? The Mouse House isn’t doing anything different than any other major conglomerate.

When Disney bought Marvel last year, so many people starting running around like chickens with their heads cut off, crying that the sky was falling and the seas were going to turn into fire. I don’t get why so many people are having conniptions over Disney’s acquisition of Marvel when Warner Bros. has owned the rights to DC Comics’ properties for years now, and no one bats an eyelash over that. Disney acquired Marvel in order to capture the preteen boy demographic that they so desperately desire (this is also why Toon Disney was transformed into Disney Close-Eyed Grin (XD)), and they’ve stated quite tellingly that they wouldn’t be interfering with any of Marvel’s productions. Does anybody really think that this means that Mickey, Donald and Goofy will be joining the Avengers or that Peter Parker is going to start hitting up the Disney Princesses for some digits now that he’s on the rebound thanks to Joe Quesada? I think not.

Regarding Disney’s acquisition of the Muppets: would it be better if Disney had left the Muppets where they were before? In the hands of some unknown German company collecting dust in some closet? At least Disney is trying to give the Muppets some exposure and is willing to actually do something with them. (If only they would start giving a crud about the Fox Kids properties that they’re just sitting on right now.)

As for the tweencoms, does anybody remember Tim Consadine? Annette Funicello? Spin and Marty? Merlin Jones? Hayley Mills? They were the Miley Cyurses, Demi Lovatos, Ashley Tisdales and Dylan and Cole Sprouces of their day. The notion that “Walt wouldn’t allow tweencoms under his rule” is a complete and total load. Even Kurt Russel starred in Disney movies as a teenager. There have always been Disney teen stars, and there will always be Disney teen stars. Get over it.

PROJECTION #2: “Behind-the-scenes politics and/or poor scheduling is what caused my favorite show to get canceled. The network is mean; they had it in for my favorite show all along and they didn’t give it a chance.”

REALITY: I’ve read this on so many message boards that’s it not even funny. OK, maybe it’s a little funny, because it’s so far-fetched and paranoid. To name just one example: I’ve heard tons of conspiracy theories regarding why Cartoon Network US dumped HiHi Puffy AmiYumi. They range from “Cartoon Network hates girls” to “Someone at Cartoon Network is prejudiced against the nation of Japan” to my favorite, “It was killed by Andre Benjamin, who’s obviously a gangster because he played a gangster in the movie Four Brothers and clearly worked behind the scenes to kill HiHI so he could get his show, Class of 3000, on the air in its’ place”. I kid you not.

Here’s the real reason that HHPAY was removed from CN: its’ ratings were terrible and CN took it off, then washed their hands of the show. That’s it. “But I read comments on YouTube that the show is more popular than what’s on Cartoon Network right now!” And we all know how credible YouTube comments are; if some shmoe on YouTube said it, it must be true.

Reality check time: Nobody launches or buys a show hoping that it will fail. If a network really had it in for a particular show, they wouldn’t bother buying it or getting it made in the first place. People will tell you (and tell you and tell you) that there’s some deep-seeded conspiracy going on when their favorite show goes away, or that network execs are just evil meanies in black cloaks, who twirl their mustaches and chuckle in malevolent glee as they randomly drop the ax on our favorite shows, just to make the kids cry. Did it ever occur to these people that the show you liked just didn’t get the ratings that the network wanted, and that’s why it was taken off?

PROJECTION #3: “Boomerang stays the way it is because they have a real commitment to the classics, conversely Nicktoons changed because they lost sight of their goal to only run classic Nicktoons.”

REALITY: No. Boomerang hasn’t made any major changes to its’ programming in going on 10 years because they have no real commitment to the channel.

Boomerang doesn’t exist because Turner or Cartoon Network have some passionate devotion to keeping classic cartoons alive. You want to know the real reason why the Boomerang channel was created? Here it is: Boomerang (the channel) was created because the suits at Cartoon Network wanted the really old shows off of the channel in order to make more room for their newer shows and acquisitions. CN wasn’t making a lot of money as the Hanna-Barbera Reruns Channel and they wanted to expand on their original productions and latter-day acquisitions, which were actually bringing them money. But they knew that some nostalgia-loving purists would complain if they just dropped the old-school toons altogether, so someone said, “OK, we’ll create this bonus tier digital ‘trash’ network that will loop the classic cartoons ad nausea, and those who wish to have this channel will have to pay an additional fee in order to receive it, so it’ll still make us money even though advertisers won’t go near it.” That’s why. All of that business about Boomerang being the “home for classic cartoons”? That’s just smoke concocted by the PR department to get people to subscribe to the channel. Boomerang, for all intents and purposes, is basically Cartoon Network’s recycle bin.

Nicktoons changed because it too wasn’t making a lot of money as an ad-free channel that ran nothing but old 90’s Nicktoons, so they altered their schedule accordingly. If the all old-school format were working and was profitable, then they wouldn’t have changed it in the first place. Nicktoons changed because it’s parent company Viacom actually cared enough about the channel to turn it into something profitable. (If only they cared enough about its’ now grown-up fans to give us proper DVD releases of its’ classic Nicktoons….) Boomerang stays the way it is because its’ parents don’t care about it.

As for the notion that “Boomerang has a real commitment to showing classic cartoons”: remember back in late 2005 to early 2006, when the channel began airing shows like Krypto the Superdog, Gerald McBoing-Boing, Baby Looney Tunes and The Mr. Men Show? Ever wonder why Boom just started randomly showing preschool shows on the channel? Well, in 2006, Turner was considering launching a preschool channel to compete with the likes of Nick Jr. and PBS Sprout. (Note that over at CN, a preschool block called Tickle U was running there at the same time.) All of this was a test-run; had Tickle U been a success on CN, Turner would’ve changed Boomerang into this proposed preschool channel. The plans were scrapped only after the Tickle U shows failed to capture an audience and bring in ratings. Had the preschool block been successful, Boomerang viewers be watching the Tickle U channel right now. So much for “commitment to the classics.” It’s all about the dollars, baby. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.

Tickle U
A glimpse of a future that nearly happened. We dodged a bullet and didn’t even know it.

PROJECTION #4: “The recent Looney Tunes marathons should have aired on Boomerang instead of Cartoon Network, because the Looney Tunes have outgrown CN.”

REALITY: If that were true, then why is Warner Bros developing a new Looney Tunes series, The Looney Tunes Show, for Cartoon Network? Answer: because it isn’t true. At all.

Since the point of the Looney Tunes marathons was to earn ratings and generate new interest in the Looney Tunes, it wouldn’t have made any sense for the Looney Tunes marathons to air on a digital extra channel that hardly anyone gets. Ideally, the Looney Tunes should be airing on both networks, but from a business standpoint, it makes much more sense for the Looney Tunes to be airing on Cartoon Network as opposed to Boomerang.

The Looney Tunes are timeless. There always will be (and should be) a place for them on Cartoon Network. Scooby-Doo and Tom & Jerry have been on CN since day 1, and there’s no reason why Looney Tunes can’t do the same. In fact, there’s only 1 (and I should stress ONLY 1) reason why they don’t: because the Looney Tunes are property of Warner Bros. and as such, the Turner half of the Turner/Time-Warner partnership has to pay the Warner half fees in order to run anything WB owned. Otherwise you’d be seeing Bugs, Daffy, Taz and the gang on CN just as much and as often as Tom, Jerry and Scooby. Believe it.

PROJECTION #5: If Ted Turner were still running Cartoon Network, things would a whole lot better on the channel than they are now. If Ted were in charge again, the Cartoon-Cartoons and Toonami would come back to CN.”

REALITY: First off, let’s fact facts here: Ted isn’t coming back. He couldn’t buy Cartoon Network back now even if he wanted to. The going price for the channel is too rich even for his blood. Second, people need to stop crediting Ted Turner for all of the things that they remember fondly about CN during the mid-to-late 90s to early 00s. Ted wasn’t responsible for the Cartoon-Cartoons or Toonami. Let’s give credit where credit is due here: the “What-A-Cartoon!” project, which led to the Cartoon-Cartoons, was the brainchild of Fred Siebert, not Ted; Toonami was created by Sean Akins and Jason DeMarco, Ted had nothing to do with either of those favorites. So let’s not delude ourselves into thinking that if Ted were to suddenly re-assume the throne of Cartoon Network, that the channel would magically transform into a 90’s nostalgia paradise which shows nothing but Cartoon-Cartoons and anime all day. If you want to know what Cartoon Network would be like under Ted’s command, just look at Boomerang. That’s how it would be, except that we’d be seeing a lot more of this guy…

“Protect the environment, or I’ll @#%!ing kill you! CAPTAIN PLANET!!!”
*********************************
PROJECTION #6: “I don’t watch cartoons, I only watch anime. Anime and action shows like Batman: The Animated Series aren’t cartoons.”

REALITY: This one’s easy to debunk. If something is drawn and animated, then it’s a cartoon, regardless of what country it comes from or what genre it embodies. Many of the people who want to claim that anime and action animated series are something separate from cartoons tend to be teens and young adults who don’t wish to be branded “immature” by admitting that they like cartoons. But you are watching cartoons. It’s simple, this

Batman_the_Animated_Series_logo
..and this

…are just as much cartoons as this

YOGI---BOOBOO

..and this.

Got it? Good. Deal with it.