Why have Marvel/DC pretty much excluded kids from reading comics?

[davidn15]

Comics aren't "darker" than anything I read or played or watched as a kid.

[speedline]

They should make comics required reading in school. "Listen class....After you finish your book report on "Of Mice and Men" go ahead and start reading "Batman: Year One". We will be having a class discussion on it Monday." I mean, why the heck not? it's modern literature.

[Jim Thompson]

They should make comics required reading in school. "Listen class....After you finish your book report on "Of Mice and Men" go ahead and start reading "Batman: Year One". We will be having a class discussion on it Monday." I mean, why the heck not? it's modern literature.

Have 'em read V For Vendetta.

[davidn15]

They should make comics required reading in school. "Listen class....After you finish your book report on "Of Mice and Men" go ahead and start reading "Batman: Year One". We will be having a class discussion on it Monday." I mean, why the heck not? it's modern literature.

Unfortunately academia has a very narrow view on classic literature

[AdamYJ]

I think your premise is flawed, actually. I think comics remain as viable for kids today as they were 30 or 40 years ago.

Viable to kids or viable to teenagers? Because there is a difference.

[davidn15]

Viable to kids or viable to teenagers? Because there is a difference.

Both. Look at the games they play.

[batman98]

I have been reading the normal titles(what you would find in the new 52, not johnny dc) since I was 7, well I bought my first normal title at 6 but 7 was when I really jumped on board. That was 7 years ago. It is about what you connect most with. At the time the Teen Titans animated show was on so I picked up the comic and fell in love. It wasn't until this christmas I found the last issue of vol 3. I now have all 100 issues, half the variants available(including 2nd printings), annuals, and the captain cold special. I don't think they aren't trying to connect with kids. I just think they have more comics that apply to their fan base. Toys r us sells some comics right next to their superhero toys.

[Shellhead]

I think your premise is flawed, actually. I think comics remain as viable for kids today as they were 30 or 40 years ago.

The price is a real problem. Most kids can't afford to buy many $3 (or $4) comics.

[tony ingram]

are kids just not into comic books anymore is that what the big time publishers think?

Most comics readers these days are over 18, and have been for about the last 25 years, which is why the publishers target that age range. There's no point in aiming their product principally at an age range which no longer reads comics in anything like the numbers they did thirty-odd years ago, because they wouldn't sell.

Really, both companies want more kids to read comics. The main problem is that the only real distribution channel for them anymore is comic book stores instead of Wal-Mart or supermarkets. Most venues like that gave up on comics years ago because it requires a lot of work to pull them out on a weekly basis (instead of monthly like magazines), strip the covers, and mail them back IF you can (20 years ago, bookstore chains were doing this; I have no idea now if they can or not).

They can't. The publishers put a stop to sale or return because they couldn't afford it.

Otherwise you eat that cost like a comic store usually does. It's a lot of work for very little return; the profit margin on comics is razor thin.

Too true.

[speedline]

The price is a real problem. Most kids can't afford to buy many $3 (or $4) comics.

True, comics are definitely not a cheap form of entertainment.

[batman98]

The price is a real problem. Most kids can't afford to buy many $3 (or $4) comics.

Are you kidding me? Where I was a kid, just about everyone go a new power ranger every week. I would go with my dad and pick up comics on a weekly basis. It isnt about not having the money it is about not knowing they exist and not wanting them as much as that new toy or game.

[Jim Thompson]

Viable to kids or viable to teenagers? Because there is a difference.

Well, teenager is a relatively new term (first being used in 1921, and not becoming something widely used until the 1940s). It's also not, I think, particularly useful, as 18 and 19 year olds are technically teenagers.

That said, I'm going to assume you're primarily talking about pre-teens, children in the five to 12 year old range -- and yeah, I think comics are fine for them.

[Jim Thompson]

The price is a real problem. Most kids can't afford to buy many $3 (or $4) comics.

In terms of inflation, comics haven't fared too well over the past few years, I agree. For example, a 1971 quarter would be the equivalent in today's money of about $1.49. When I was a kid I could get one comic for a quarter. Today, the equivalent amount of money wouldn't be enough to get even a lower end comic book.

It would, however, be enough to get some digital comics.

[Shadowcat2576]

Is your point that you can't give them "dark" comics or any at all?? As the first is obvious and the second isn't true.

The point is that even comics outside the "Dark" and "Edge" lines are not appropriate for kids. The main Batman books are pretty violent. The first issues of Batgirl and Firestorm were graphicly violent, as was GLC. Wonder Woman is tending to alternate between too sexy and too violent. These are titles featuring DC's big guns. These are the characters kids know and should want to read.

It's not all about comics not being available to kids if people like me, who've been reading comics for over 25 years is saying they can't share their favorite comic characters because of age inappropriate material.

[Conway]

The fact that the ones you are reading are called the "dark line" should be clue number one. If you think the kids ones are too watered down then theres the teen line of books which are perfectly child-friendly, plus even the top DC and Marvel books are very similar in content to most of the teen films nowadays.

You can't patronize kids like that and expect them to buy it. This idea that you can produce a separate line and kids will buy it is stupid. They don't want "Kids Batman" or "Batman Teen" they want Batman. Yes I think out of 52 products a couple can be more appropriate for a younger audience. I think the advantage DC has over Marvel is that they will not be constrained by the Disney corp. They don't have to make ugly short kids versions of their lines.

Honestly the problem is cost. If a kid goes into a store and sees a comic book for the same price as a candy bar he has a choice to make, but if that book is the same price as 5 candy bars, the choice was made for him. The reason Manga sells so well with kids in Japan is because it is dirt cheap. Our collector society needs a product that will last forever though.