Subject:
|
Re: Sept/Oct LEGO Magazine
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego.direct
|
Date:
|
Thu, 19 Sep 2002 11:59:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1024 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Simon Bennett writes:
> This is appalling.
Now hang on... I think "appalling" is a little too strong.
> When did this patronising of children start? When I was
> young I don't remember suffering this sort of thing. I remember reading my
> dad's Eagle annuals from when he was a child (60's) and they had
> fantastically detailed information about science and technology subjects. I
> have no idea what age group they were aimed at except to suspect that the
> concept of 'aiming' them would be completely alien to the writers but I had
> no problems with them at the age of 7 or 8.
I'm not sure that I agree that the copy in question is "patronising". We do
a lot of testing with the magazines (nearly every issue if I'm not mistaken)
and fun stuff like the Redini spots come back with positive marks. Sure, we
adults think it's a little silly. Sure, we might not remember our favorite
activities as kids including silliness like this. But I guarantee if you
were to go back in time, you would find that we all had some amount of this
that would seem dumb today. I recently found some old Spiderman comics from
my childhood... talk about "appalling" dialogue! I could barely make it
through those issues! Does that mean that the comics were inappropriately
pandering to children? No! It means that they were appropriately targeted
and appropriately developed! (I don't think you can argue with the success
of the Spiderman comics over the years)
> Children are intelligent and naturally able to assimilate information
> quickly. I would venture to suggest that Lego-playing children and those
> from within that group who can put together a very coherent question and ask
> it of TLC are even more so.
Sure, we can, but where's the fun in that? Sure kids can soak up info like a
sponge. This is the reason why kids only a year apart in age can be worlds
apart in mental development. Kids don't have to "learn" every second of the
day. Playing can be learning, as much as reading a book. But more
importantly, non-serious, educational activities have to be balanced by a
freedom to have fun and just be silly.
I hope that I am not fanning the fire on this issue, but I think it is
important to remember that we aren't kids. Asking our own kids, or just
guessing what kids like isn't marketing research. For that matter, anything
outside of our own age range is hard to assume. At several past jobs, I have
worked on projects targeted to Senior Citizens, for example, and was
continually surprised how much my mid-20s mindset didn't mesh with their
issues. I could guess at what they wanted, but I certainly could judge for
certain until I asked a true representative sampling. (My own grandparents
for instance, didn't represent the opinions of the majority!)
> As I say, appalling.
One last thought: How many times has a parent or adult thought something
their kids were into was dumb? I know my parents thought my interest in punk
music was pretty silly, since they knew for a fact that it "wasn't real
music". (But I still disagree with them on that front!)
Again, I hope this doesn't add fuel to the fire, but rather helps explain
where the Magazine team is coming from.
Jake
---
Jake McKee
Sr. Producer
LEGO Direct
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
 | | Re: Punk!
|
| In lugnet.lego.direct, Jake McKee writes: (snip) (...) Do you still listen to it, then? 'Cause I need tips about good punk bands... :-) Pedro (22 years ago, 19-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
| | | Re: Sept/Oct LEGO Magazine
|
| (...) I wouldn't go as far as describing it appalling. I would find some of the responses in bad taste. I find them really dumb, and not really fun (or funny for that matter). I have seen some corny, dumb jokes, especially in kid's publications, and (...) (22 years ago, 20-Sep-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
| | | Re: Sept/Oct LEGO Magazine
|
| In lugnet.lego.direct, Jake McKee writes: <snip> I can agree with all of what you said and still feel that giving blow off answers was wrong. Write in a style that's accessible to children and a style that's funny, and appropriate to their age (...) (22 years ago, 20-Sep-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
| | | Re: Sept/Oct LEGO Magazine
|
| Jake, I think it is disappointing and a bit sad that Lego would reply to letters from children in such a manner. In your post you mentioned this - (...) ask (...) You are correct - children are extremely intelligent. (I'm often stunned at what my (...) (22 years ago, 20-Sep-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Sept/Oct LEGO Magazine
|
| (...) This is appalling. When did this patronising of children start? When I was young I don't remember suffering this sort of thing. I remember reading my dad's Eagle annuals from when he was a child (60's) and they had fantastically detailed (...) (22 years ago, 19-Sep-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
24 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
