Toy-based TV shows started to diminish following the Children’s Television Act of 1990.

Commercial and intellectual property strategies pioneered in the 1980s continue to influence how today’s studios revive and adapt old franchises.

Today’s media giants such as Disney, Universal, Mattel and Hasbro have built interconnected IP ecosystems that extend across films, TV, games, streaming, toys and consumer products.

A merchandising empire

This meant TV producers could distribute children’s series through these cable channels and syndicated television markets, rather than relying on the major broadcast networks.

The Antitrust Division of the US Justice Department put legal pressure on the National Association of Broadcasters to change its industry rules, arguing they had unlawfully restricted competition. So the association abandoned its code of self-regulation.

For fans of the 80s, the longevity of the transmedia franchising model is good news; they can expect several more adaptations based on their favourite childhood characters. Transformers v GI Joe, Polly Pocket and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles are all slated for future releases.

Prior to the 80s, toys were generally created only after a highly successful cartoon had been released.

Children’s TV as a giant toy catalogue

But while nostalgia is part of it, it’s not the whole story. In fact, many beloved 80s characters were deliberately created as part of franchisable intellectual property (IP) ecosystems, spanning toys, TV and merchandise.

Before Marvel built cinematic universes, companies in the 80s were creating commercial worlds centred around children’s toys. Remember Transformers, Strawberry Shortcake, Rainbow Brite, the Care Bears and the Smurfs? These characters and stories were all carefully designed to sell merchandise and generate ongoing production opportunities.

The 1980s also saw the rollout of cable TV, with a massive influx of channels, including children’s networks.

Several major changes occurred during this time. In 1983, there was a loosening of industry restrictions that had prevented children’s shows from functioning largely as toy advertisements.

Mattel provided its partners a brand bible depicting the character’s aesthetics and backstory – which had to be complied with.

For audiences who grew up in the 1980s, nostalgia alone may be enough to drive them to the theatre. Indeed, such reboots are often dismissed as attempts by modern studios to make a quick buck using “nostalgia bait”.

By 1984, the US Federal Communications Commission had also changed its rules on maximum limits on advertising for children’s TV shows. This meant cartoons created specifically to sell toys were no longer considered extended advertising, whereas they previously were.

Media and toy companies increasingly embraced a “character franchise” model, in which proprietary characters became the foundation for TV programs, toys and licensing opportunities.

From 1983 to 1988, the number of US toy-based TV shows went from 13 to more than 70. Revenue from the sales of related products tripled. These products – including toys, books, comics, lunchboxes, apparel and stationery – were often licensed to specific manufacturers who had expertise in their area of production.

But this changed in 1977 with the release of George Lucas’s hugely successful original Star Wars film. The following year, American toy brand Kenner Products reportedly sold some 40 million units of Star Wars items.

In other words, they were never just characters or toys. They were designed from the outset to be profitable, across a variety of contexts, for decades.

The creation of a single character, such as He-Man (the lead in Masters Of The Universe) or Rainbow Brite, became a whole world built on an extensive network of licences.

Lucas produced his subsequent Star Wars projects with merchandising in mind. This approach would go on to define popular character franchises.

The transmedia model endures

This act restricted the amount of children’s advertising allowed. It classified a cartoon as an advertisement if a commercial for the cartoon’s associated toy or product aired during, or immediately adjacent to, that specific episode. It also mandated three hours of educational programs per week.

Nevertheless, the underlying IP strategies developed in the 1980s still hold relevance today, even if the context has changed in the digital era.

Through these licensing arrangements, the IP owner controlled how the characters and stories were portrayed across TV, film, toys, merchandise, and various media platforms (such as into the video game space). This is known as “transmedia storytelling”.

A new Masters of the Universe film is now out in cinemas – nearly four decades on from the original 1983 cartoon series and 1987 film.

Mattel released the first He-Man toys and merchandise in 1982. This followed by a 65-episodes series, He-Man and the Masters of the Universe, in 1983.

The post Masters of the Universe shows how companies learned to monetise childhood forever appeared first on MASSIVE News.

The 5th Circuit said the FTC’s deceptive advertising claims are “traditional actions at law and equity and thus involve private rights that demand adjudication in an Article III court.” The court rejected the FTC’s argument that the claims involve public rights that may be adjudicated by administrative agencies.

“In sum, there is overwhelming evidence that Section 5 of the FTC Act did not create a new duty for merchants to refrain from deceptive advertising,” the 5th Circuit said. “That duty long predated the FTC Act and could be enforced by private parties in actions at common law or equity for fraud, deceit, or unfair competition.”

FCC power to issue fines also at risk

In Jarkesy, the Supreme Court said that “matters concerning private rights may not be removed from Article III courts. If a suit is in the nature of an action at common law, then the matter presumptively concerns private rights, and adjudication by an Article III court is mandatory.”

By contrast, matters involving public rights may be handled exclusively by the executive and legislative branches without a court’s involvement. Categories that fall within public rights include: “collection of revenue; aspects of customs law; immigration law; relations with Indian tribes; the administration of public lands; and the granting of public benefits,” the Jarkesy ruling said.

The Jarkesy precedent that helped Intuit beat the FTC is also at the center of a case in which AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile are challenging the Federal Communications Commission’s authority to issue fines for selling customer location data without their users’ consent. The mobile carriers’ fight against FCC punishment is set to be decided by the Supreme Court.

Although current FCC Chairman Brendan Carr voted against the mobile-carrier penalties during the previous administration, the Carr FCC is urging the Supreme Court to uphold his agency’s ability to issue fines. The FCC argues that companies it fines can decline to pay and eventually receive a jury trial when the government sues to obtain the fine.

“Forfeitures are among the FCC’s most important enforcement tools,” the FCC told the Supreme Court on Friday. “Eliminating them could mean that many vital rules—such as those protecting privacy, combating robocalls, and regulating broadcasting—go effectively unenforced.”

The post Intuit beats FTC in court, ending restrictions on “free” TurboTax ads appeared first on MASSIVE News.

Brendan Carr, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, on Saturday appeared to threaten the licenses of broadcasters reporting on President Donald Trump’s war in Iran after the president crafted a lengthy Truth Social post against the “Fake News Media.”

Trump, in a post on Saturday, took exception to an “intentionally misleading headline by the Fake News Media about” five tanker planes that were hit in an Iranian strike on Saudi Arabia.

The Wall Street Journal reported the story Saturday, citing two U.S. officials.

“The tankers were hit during an Iranian missile strike on the Saudi base in recent days, the officials said,” the Journal reports. “U.S. Central Command declined to comment. The tankers were damaged but not fully destroyed and are being repaired, one of the officials said. No one was killed in the strikes.”

Trump, in his post, argued “the planes were not ‘struck or ‘destroyed,’” and called out “The Wall Street Journal (in particular)” who he claims “actually want use to lose the war.”

The Journal‘s report included Trump’s Saturday Truth Social post.

In response to the president’s rant, Carr issued a lengthy post on X accusing broadcasters of “running hoaxes and news distortions — also known as the fake news.”

“The law is clear. Broadcasters must operate in the public interest, and they will lose their licenses if they do not,” Carr wrote, arguing it was “in their own business interests” to “correct course” on their reporting.

“The American people have subsidized broadcasters to the tune of billions of dollars by providing free access to the nation’s airwaves,” Carr claimed. “It is very important to bring trust back into media, which has earned itself the label of fake news.”

Journalists and media observers noted Carr’s post seemed to threaten news organizations that report stories the White House would rather not be reported.

“The state doesn’t like the war coverage, threatens the license of the broadcasters,” the Bulwark’s Sam Stein noted.

“The Trump administration is now threatening the licenses of broadcasters whose news coverage — apparently about the war — it deems to be ‘fake,’” CNN’s Aaron Blake wrote.

It wasn’t the only media criticism Trump engaged in on Saturday. In a separate Truth Social post, the president shared an image of how he’s “reshaping the media” including a section of media companies and individual people who are now “gone.”

One of the people mentioned in that Trump post, former CNN host Jim Acosta, said he’s “honored to be included” in the graphic.

“But seriously what’s wrong with this guy?” Acosta asked. “This is some goofy stuff.”

The post Trump FCC chief threatens broadcasters’ licenses over Iran war coverage appeared first on MASSIVE News.