Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 461 posts

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#441

Post by smusamashah »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #288
smusamashah wrote: post #281

We don't let our toddler watch Bluey. You can't show characters fighting verbally or physically and then later explain . You CAN NOT EXPLAIN to kids. If they see something being done, it can be done. So no Bluey for my kid.

Because your kid is never going to see humans fighting in real life? Kids don't fight other kids until they see other people fighting first? Play fighting is normal human behavior. In the show they can see the characters resolve their differences and make up. Not so much with the lady in the checkout line screaming, or the dude fighting the other dude outside wal-mart for the last playstation 7. Bluey is probably the…

My argument against that is that it's too soon for a 2.5yo kid. Play fighting is natural, agreed, but i still believe doing it with the kid yourself or with siblings (no exp with that as of now) is OK, but seeing it on TV I don't expect my kid to understand that its normal play fighting and he can do everything that he is seeing on TV. Glorifying and actually showing bad behaviour in a bad light is already a problem even for adults' TV. I can not expect kids to take the right message from their cartoons.

Again, i am only saying this not an appropriate show for a kid this age. When he grows up to age where I can sit and explain/teach him things I'll be OK with a much wider type of media consumption.

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#442

Post by geraldwhen »

dragonwriter wrote: post #436
geraldwhen wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

So the argument is no longer that presenting an intact heterosexual nuclear family is worthy of positive note, but that instead presenting exclusively intact monoracial nuclear families is worthy of positive note? With the former, I would agree, except that its so common that while it may be positive its hardly noteworthy; with the latter... just no.

[flagged]

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#443

Post by fy20 »

ceedan wrote: post #189

Bluey is great and we love it, but I do have to say that it is not as directly beneficial for very young children as something like Daniel Tiger. Daniel Tiger has episodes that directly and clearly address things that young children are going through (little siblings, using the bathroom, managing emotions, etc). Bluey has episodes that address those things but does so in ways that are less direct and comprehensible f…

My daughter really likes Daniel Tiger, but there's something about it that really annoys me that I can't put my finger on. I think it's that the characters and relationships just feel too sterile, where as with Bluey it actually feels like you could be watching a real family.

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#444

Post by sspiff »

grepfru_it wrote: post #362
sspiff wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of all the children's programming my children have watched, Bluey is by far the nicest for us (the parents) to watch or listen to, and has been the most enduring in terms of popularity with our kids. Similar to Peppa Pig, the scenarios are often recognizable in a family with young children, but they're generally funnier and the characters are more loveable. The animation style is a refreshing break from the bright co…

If you like peppa pig, give wolfoo a chance. Also the animation for bluey and peppa pig use the same software, CelAction2D. There is an ending of bluey episode which shows the animators using the software to build the scene. My little one was amazed and asked me to get the software. She has an artistic side but this pushed her into learning about animation

If anyone is looking for this, it's at the end of episode 30 from season 3.

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#445

Post by yummypaint »

The_Colonel wrote: post #64
robby_w_g wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "This family has two mommies. They love each other so proudly and they all go marching in... the... big parade," sing the lyrics. Other terms featured include "trans," "non-binary" and "queer." > “Love is love is love you see, and everyone should love proudly,” Acknowledging LGBTQ people are capable of love is somehow an example of “culture war”. It’s incredible people can be so bothered by a simple, sweet message.

Bluey is targeted towards pre-school children. I'm not really bothered if my 4-year-old daughter sees stuff like this, it's just that she won't really understand things like "non-binary". It seems like a topic more appropriate for older children - maybe from age 8 or later?

Kids have no trouble understanding these things. It's the stunted adults who create problems.

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#446

Post by tambour »

nozzlegear wrote: post #425
laingc wrote: post #22

As the father of two young daughters, I adore Bluey. Quite apart from how good the episodes are for adults, I really enjoy the following aspects: 1. It portrays wholesome and positive family relationships, particularly between father and daughters. The girls are also good to one another, with occasional conflict kindly and realistically resolved. 2. It tells simple stories without pushing political messages. Unfortun…

> 3. I don’t have to expose my kids to American accents. They’ll have more than enough of that from regular programming when they grow up. What’s the concern here? I understand American media dominates everything, so I’m guessing you don’t want your kids to pick up small bits of American accent when they’re still developing?

I'm not the OP, but as a child growing up in an anglophone country but with a 'low-prestige' accent (think Indian English or Singaporean English), it was ingrained to me pretty early on that the only 'proper' ways to speak were RP or General American, and one of the reasons was because all the kid shows I watched had characters who talked almost exclusively in those accents. 'Exotic' accents were used mostly for comedic value.

Having a greater variety of shows that model the diversity of the English language would probably have gone some way to dispelling that damaging self-belief? I really love the existence of shows like Derry Girls, because they make me less self-conscious of my 'exotic' accent.

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#448

Post by sdiupIGPWEfh »

pylua wrote: post #433
sdiupIGPWEfh wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It also sets the bar very high for parents. Every time I hear this framed as a complaint, I feel the tiniest bit guilty—just for a moment—for personally identifying with Bandit's level of playtime effort and enthusiasm. But I can also commiserate with the few episodes where he let's on just how exhausted he actually is.

It’s actually not a complaint more of an observation.

Certainly, noted that it's observation rather than a complaint on your part. But I am still rather surprised just how often I do see it framed as a complaint nonetheless.

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#450

Post by dragonwriter »

geraldwhen wrote: post #442
dragonwriter wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the argument is no longer that presenting an intact heterosexual nuclear family is worthy of positive note, but that instead presenting exclusively intact monoracial nuclear families is worthy of positive note? With the former, I would agree, except that its so common that while it may be positive its hardly noteworthy; with the latter... just no.

[flagged]

> You misunderstand.

No, I don't. A standard was set that the problem was the absence of media depicting intact nuclear families. Daniel Tiger depicts intact nuclear families, but was argued to not be a counterexample to the complaint because it also shows other families and because one of the intact nuclear families it shows is interracial.

This clearly shows that the problem is not the absence of depictions of intact nuclear families, but the presence of other families (and interracial families, even when they are intact nuclear families.)

And you’ve reinforced that with this post, complaining that there is insufficient story justification for these deviations from your preferred norm, which, again, demonstrates that your problem is not the absence of positive depictions of intact nuclear fanilies but the presence of other families (and interracial nuclear families) without sufficient justification for the departure from your preferred exclusive norm.

Post reply on HN