Stu Snyder To Leave Cartoon Network

[Shaka Zulu]

The man who tried to make live action shows a staple of the channel is taking off at the end of March:

When Snyder became the executive VP and COO of Turner animation in 2007, he made the shift toward live-action and reality shows one of his priorities. “We did all the research in terms of what kids wanted to watch, what they were watching on TV at the time, on our network and across all networks,” he said in 2009. “I think these new shows, whether reality or live scripted, really open up and broaden the audience, so you can be thinking about new advertising categories.” His forward-thinking approach included adding golfing and military training shows to Cartoon Network. Predictably, his actions were not appreciated by viewers who liked tuning into Cartoon Network to watch…oh, I don’t know…cartoons.

Farewell To Stu Snyder, The Man Who Tried To Make Cartoon Network Cartoon-Less

Personally, I'd think that having live action on CN would be the same as having it in the Saturday morning blocks on the Big Three U.S. networks back when I was a kid, and that CN was just following in that tradition. However, I might be wrong on this one. Any opinions?

 

[sojourner]

Yay! For once diluting a brand has actually turned out bad from a business standpoint. If this had happened during the 90's MTV would still show music videos.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Personally, I'd think that having live action on CN would be the same as having it in the Saturday morning blocks on the Big Three U.S. networks back when I was a kid, and that CN was just following in that tradition. However, I might be wrong on this one. Any opinions?

I remember those kinds of shows and they were universally terrible. Give me cartoons any day.

In any case, trying to fill Cartoon Network with live-action stuff is just bizarre. Of course, animation is expensive to produce, at least relative to some cheap live-action reality crap. I assume this was all just about money.

 

[Christopher]

The live-action shows aren't the problem. CN has had some good live-action programming, like Paul Dini's Tower Prep. Yes, their name is "Cartoon Network," but that's a brand, a convenient designation, not some kind of contractual guarantee of content. As Shaka Zulu says, there's a long tradition of including some live-action programming within cartoon lineups. I grew up watching "Saturday morning cartoons" when that was still a thing, but those "cartoons" included live-action shows like Shazam, Isis, Space Academy, Land of the Lost, etc. And I'm sure plenty of younger folks grew up watching Power Rangers religiously alongside Batman: TAS, Spider-Man, and the Disney Afternoon (was that still around in the '90s?).

No, CN's problem is the very narrow and sexist demographic priorities that have led the network to consistently kill every show that committed the intolerable offense (in their eyes) of appealing to female audiences or to anyone older than the young boys their advertising is targeted toward. And so they've shut out all of the DC adventure shows and killed a lot of other good shows like Tower Prep. At this point the only show I watch on CN anymore is Dragons: Riders of Berk.

So I'm not sure I'd consider Snyder's departure good news. At least it sounds like he was willing to consider appealing to new demographic categories. A refocus on cartoons all the time won't be much of an improvement if those cartoons are still narrowly targeted at preteen boys.

 

[Peach Wookiee]

I'd move a show like Tower Prep to one of Turner's mixed property networks or see if the Hub would make a deal.

 

[Christopher]

^Again, focusing on whether a show is animated or live-action is missing the point. CN didn't kill Tower Prep because it was live-action -- they killed it because it was popular with girls and they did not want girls watching their network. Again: They canceled it because it was popular. There are very profound problems underlying Cartoon Network's programming philosophy, and dwelling on the superficial question of whether their shows are drawn or photographed is a distraction from the much more important issues that have undermined the network's programming.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

I remember those kinds of shows and they were universally terrible. Give me cartoons any day.

Not all of them were bad (I still have fond memories of the The Harlem Globetrotters Popcorn Machine, The Krofft Supershow, H.R. Puffnstuff, etc.) As I said, all that Snyder was doing was what the Big Six (now Five) networks had done in the past. But people love their anime too much and can't see anything other than cartoons, it seems.

In any case, trying to fill Cartoon Network with live-action stuff is just bizarre. Of course, animation is expensive to produce, at least relative to some cheap live-action reality crap. I assume this was all just about money.

It was about money, in that cartoons cost a lot to make compared to animated series (and have to have the costs of the 'toons in question offset by merchandising toys and other things-the failure of the merch selling being the reason that the Green Lantern and Young Justice shows were canceled.) Aside from the reality-TV dreck, I didn't see anything wrong with the live action/adventure shows or movies. I wonder what they will put on the air that's animated that will fill the network hours now.

^Again, focusing on whether a show is animated or live-action is missing the point. CN didn't kill Tower Prep because it was live-action -- they killed it because it was popular with girls and they did not want girls watching their network. Again: They canceled it because it was popular. There are very profound problems underlying Cartoon Network's programming philosophy, and dwelling on the superficial question of whether their shows are drawn or photographed is a distraction from the much more important issues that have undermined the network's programming.

Agreed, although to be fair and balanced, the Disney Channel (to say nothing of Nickelodeon) has a ton of programming (all live action) that focuses on girls and girl characters (Hannah Montana, That's So Raven, A.N.T. Farm, Dog With A Blog, Good Luck Charlie, Shake It Up, Sonny With A Chance, Kim Possible) that offsets what Cartoon Network's been doing (although what Cartoon Network's doing by getting rid of the female-orientated shows is still wrong as Chris points out.) Again, what they will do to fill up programing time, I have no idea; it take a while for an animated show to be made, from conception to execution, and that's time that could be filled by a show. Plus, not all animated shows succeed.

 

[publiusr]

My favorites are Aqua Teen, and the old Boomerang adventure shows.

Old programs like the original Space Ghost, Thundar, Superfriends--that sort of thing--were my favs.

I had no use at all for the Flintstones, Yogi, etc.

For the most part, I like my cartoons serious but live action funny

 

[Mr. Adventure]

There's been some decent cartoons in his tenure: Flapjack, Chowder, Regular Show, Adventure Time, Scooby Doo Mystery Inc., Steven Universe among those I've watched. All of them were at the least interesting and not really what I would think of as cookie cutter shows. We had Generator Rex, Sym-Bionic Titan, Batman Brave and the Bold, Young Justice, Green Lantern, Beware the Batman, Clone Wars and so on. Yeah, the decisions to short or cancel some of these has been frustrating but a lot of material has seen the opportunity to be made.