Why does it seem like Nickelodeon puts their foot in it, perhaps more often than other studios? Based on my experience: how they sell themselves to artists, putting artists on a pedestal, how execs interact with artists, & internal network structures.
Let’s dig in. 1/

Let me begin by saying I love a LOT about Nick. I was a Nick kid, met some amazing people in my time there, and learned under some amazing execs I still keep track of & learn from. That said, I was regularly subjected to sexist nonsense & sexual harassment. It wasn’t just Savino.

That out of the way:
1) How Nick sells itself. I often saw artists going to CN/Netflix because they felt they’d find creative control and prestige. Folks went to Disney for the behemoth that it is and the $$$ and support that can come from that. Nick? Nick sold itself as “fun.”

Nick couldn’t sell itself as totally creative (look at recent series pickups), nor did it have $$$. So it marketed itself as a fun place to work. Crazy office design! Pitbull! Swings inside!! And drinking. Which led to this loose environment under which abuse could fester.

2) Nick also pushes The Creator in a way I don’t see other studios doing as intensely. The wall of creators and big banners with names is indicative of this. But if you sell a show on an identity it becomes much harder to cut that person out when they harm people.

Which brings me to 3) the role execs have with artists. And this one is tricky. A lot of times you push to develop with someone because you like them. I did it. You like their tone, you know their work. Sometimes it’s just your actual friends (animation is a small community).

But that means it’s a lot harder to step back and objectively view a victims allegations. Your own identity as an exec gets caught up in the math. If you like A, and A is accused of assault... but you approved A... does that make you a bad person?? So you don’t hear that stuff.

An example: I spent an hour hashing it out with someone why their friendship with an abuser contributed to my silence as a victim. We eventually got on the same page. I then informed them of another abuser. And they brushed it off. This was someone they liked, and had worked with

Despite the fact that we’d JUST discussed how exec friendship contributed to silence, they turned around & did the exact thing we’d been trying to deconstruct.
So friendship is tricky.
Because of Nicks position it often got projects in because of exec friendships. Which, tricky.

Finally 4) internal network structure. This is the one I’m least comfortable detailing, but I’ll say from top down, the structure felt built to protect particular indivuals and practices. Individuals did, and continue to, harbor and support known offenders.

So that’s my position. None of this is unique to Nick, but I believe the degree that these systems played out did seem unique to Nick. To really advance itself Nick needs to think about how it sells itself, it’s relationship to artists, execs friendships, and network structure.

I’ll admit, I’m not particularly hopeful. Especially when its first major IP move after posting the below is to green light Ren & Stimpy.

May the studio one day actually take “ongoing and meaningful action” towards becoming a better place.

Update: did this thread resonate with you? Are you a white cis man or in a position of power in the industry? Then speak with your own voice about what you believe. RTs are not enough. Your silence overburdens and harms women and BIPOC folx who speak out.