Watchdogged

By Martin "Dr. Toon" Goodman

Ah, the marvelous business of animated cartoons. So many people so hard at work, both here and overseas. Artists, inkers, painters, designers, writers, producers, computer swashbucklers, voice artists, checkers, and sundry engineers to name a few of the personnel involved. Perhaps as many as 300 for a feature film; certainly less for a TV or cable product, labor being determined by quality and budget. From the schools and training facilities these wonderful people stream, eager to create magic in an industry that is just as eager to suck them up and put them straight to work. For the most part, the whole endeavor works remakably well, and there is more animated product than ever before. For the first time in recent memory the Disney monolith faces serious challenges in the feature animation arena, and there are entire cable TV entities devoted to the dissemination of cartoons twenty-four hours a day.

This marvelous business of cartoons, however, also attracts certain types who neither draw, ink, paint, nor program. One might think that they don't belong in this tooniverse at all, but they will assure you that in the best interests of our young that they do. I speak of the special interest groups and self-appointed watchdogs: Educators, politicians, psychologists, and agents of the religious right who darg their dreary agendas into Toontown like leaden clouds, attempting to adjust this happy world in accordance with their standards of political correctness, mandatory education, straitjacket morality, and self-esteem-enhancing blandness. Some of them are crackpots, some of them respected academecians. Some are simply grass-roots populists while others wield considerable political clout. All of them, however, have one thing in common: the need to let go and allow cartoons to be cartoons.

Case Number One: the Children's Television Act of 1990. This well-intentioned federal law was the result of pressure to provide educational and informational programming for children. One hour a day of 30-minute educational shows were to be broadcast between the hours of 7 a.m. to 10 p.m., and these in regularly scheduled timeslots. This law was apparently drwn up in response to complaints from such groups such as Action for Children's Television who believed that Our Children's minds needed protection from violent and mindless cartoons. Besides, a poll taken by the Center for Media Education stated that 82% of American adults were of the opinion that there is not enough educational programming aimed at children. Therefore, children were to receive educational programming whether they wanted to watch it or not.

They didn't. In recognition of the fact that children would rather watch their cherished cartoons of habit (and did, broadcasters ran them anyway, especially since the ratings backed them up. When confronted about their lack of compliance with the law, they claimed that shows such as The Flintstoneswere indeed educational, providing depictions of actual Cro-Magnon life to the hungry minds of young America. This disingenuous reply would be a matter of hilarity if one did not get to the true point: You can lead children to the Fount of Knowledge but you can't make them drink, especially if they have it in mind to quaff of cartoons. In addition, life under free-market capitalism ensured that sponsors would not pay for shows that the wee bairns had no interest in. This did not deter proponents of the CTA, who banded together in 1995 and sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission begging that august organization to make the law stand up. This amazing letter, which led to the FCC mandating three hours of educational programming a week in 1996, read in part:

"Millions of American children grow up facing crises such as hunger, poverty, family problems, and violence which leaves them ill-prepared to learn in school. Millions more are educated in underfunded and troubled school systems. The number of school drop-outs and illiterate high school graduates increases dramatically each year. These trends imperil our nation's health, security, and future. Broadcast television can play an unprecedented role in nourishing the minds of our nation's children..."

Anyone who ignores the larger social issues involved in regads to school systems, illiteracy, hunger, poverty, and violence will surely realize that replacing an hour of Tom and Jerry with an hour of Bill Nye the Science Guy will make little impact on these serious and pervasive problems, especially if kids emphatically prefer to watch cartoons in the first place. Unmentioned is the fact that during one of the most prosperous and secure eras in our history old theatrical cartoons were being broadcast on Saturday mornings uncut, with all their violence intact and stereotypes grinning wildly away. That generation raised their fists against the Vietnam War, cheered the fall of the odious Richard Nixon, and rode out recession into adulthood. No one back then seemed to walk into their high schools and randomly blow classmates away or leave neonates in toilets and trashcans to die. No, those were the children who grew up on the sanitized, politically correct, non-violent cartoons dictated by pressure groups in the post-1968 cleanup. Or do I, like my targets, leap to conclusions?

This letter was duly signed by over 80 respected groups including, among others, the American Psychological Association, the National Association of Child Advocates, the National School Board Association, and (paradoxically enough) the National Campaign for Freedom of Expression. None of these esteemed organizations have to my knowledge produced a single cartoon, but what matter. Many of the groups appeared to be concerned with violence as well. Ah, violence in cartoons, the tired old argument that seemingly predates the comedies of Aristophanes. After decades of wrangling over piles of sometimes contradictory and inconclusive research, the debate goes on ad nauseum. Do violent cartoons actually incite chidren to violence? Due to the infinite malleability of inferential statistical analysis, well known to any graduate student, the answer is a definite maybe. The most recent research seems to suggest that no one factor serves as a predictor for violence; rather it seems to be a confluence of many factors, but you can be assured of one thing: For as long as Those Who Know What's Better For Your Children Than You Do are involved, animation will be forever under the gun (forgive me if you will for mentioning guns).

Case Number Two: In 1972, Filmation produced a one-of-a-kind animated show called Fat Albert and the Cosby Kids. Comedian Bill Cosby wanted moral and educational content in this show, and in response psychologists from UCLA had a hand in the cartoon's scripting. This begat a practice, still followed in some studios, of hiring psychological consultants to guarantee that the show is on the moral up-and-up, teaches acceptance, enhances self-esteem, and performs many other functions that evil and violent blackhearts like Tex Avery and Bob Clampett never took into consideration. Many time the consultant's work shows up as a 30-second message tacked on to the end of an episode, but in his recent book Forbidden Animation Karl Cohen recounts an interview with a producer who watched his show undergo intensive analysis by a network psychologist who "puts our characters on the couch". The production company's "bible" (set of guidelines for the show) was scrutinized in order to ensure that the characters served as positive role models. This consultation was described as a humiliating experience.

Perhaps the true humiliation belongs to the psychologists who waste their valuable expertise on this ridiculous folderol and to the networks who bring them in to ward off the watchdogs. The emphasis on self-esteem, for example, has already resulted in legions of school children who cannot ably read or even write a legible sentence but who nevertheless feel damn fine about themselves and grossly overestimate their own abilities. Hundreds of school counselors are now armed with twee board games such as "Mr. Giraffe's Journey to Self-Esteem" and "The 'Can You Find Your Feelings?' Game" (yes, these really do exist, and many others as well; I have seen these catalogs often. I refrain from using the actual names of these tools). It is sad enough that experts and specialists now deign to do what parents used to but can't they at least leave cartoons alone?

Case Number Three: No animation fans can be unaware of the machinations of the ultra-conservative religious right, the force behind the Disney boycott and the Mighty Mouse "cocaine" scandal among other things. The Rev. Donald Wildmon and his ilk have seemingly made it a personal crusade to reduce every cartoon extant to the level The Get-Along Gang (can I say "gang"?) by putting enormous pressure on the networks. Their righteous members are ever-vigilant for signs of Satanism, drug use, the occult, sexual content, disrespect to Christian principles, or homosexuality. They comb over each cel with wide, paranoid eyes, finding witchcraft, satanic symbols, penises, and subliminal embeds beside every Smurf of superhero, as well as in every move Beavis and Butthead make. Their call to arms can admittedly be mighty indeed. Their preferred weapon is the boycott and sponsors flooded by letters are asked to make expensive decisions whether to back a show or not. Often it turns out that many ofthe most vocal protestors has never seen the offending incident, cartoon, or series.

All networks have a BS&P (Broadcast Standards and Practices) department which have guidelines for the producers of cartoons to follow. They may well vary at where they draw the line and inconsistencies may abound, but on the whole truly horrific things are not presented to the viewing public, and self-policing more or less works. I would gladly and sincerely renounce my opinions and cast my lot with any of the groups and philosophies described above the minute I turn on Saturday of Sunday morning cartoons and witness: Child pornography; incest; brutal, senseless murders without motive; sincere exhortations to exterminate a particular racial or religious group; vicious child or domestic abuse; calls to overthrow the government; copious use and advocacy of illicit drugs; savage rape; and cartoon characters giving advice to drop out of school and relinquish one's life to a career of crime as an acceptable lifestyle. Until that day, let those who make cartoons make cartoons, and let those of us that enjoy them, including Our Nation's Children, do so!

I assure you, civilization as we know it shall stand, having already survived the horrors of Droopy, Screwy Squirrel, and Mighty Mightor. Allow parents to decide what may or may not be viewed, not religious zealots who wish to stamp the nation in their own image, educators who attempt to amend the shortcomings of our schools in your living rooms, or child experts who cram moral lessons down our throats in lieu of a real dialogue about the problems facing today's children.

Once upon a time, there were magical productions known as animated cartoons. For nearly a century they have amused and enchanted countless children of all ages. Stand back, you watchdogs, and let them do what they do best: Entertain us.

Dr. Toon welcomes your thoughts, comments, and opinions.

Other Voices Index|Back To Menu