Police representations in children’s shows, text only

“You’ll keep us safe/That’s who you are.”
Police representations in children’s shows

Children between the ages of 2 and 4 years old spend two and a half hours watching television every day; those between 5- to 8-years old spend more than three hours daily watching, and nearly half (47%) watch more than the recommended two hours of television (Rideout & Robb, 2020; Sisson et al., 2009). Moreover, a majority of U.S. families (72%) have more subscriptions to television and video services (i.e. Hulu), and nearly half of 2-to-4 year olds and two-thirds of 5-8 year olds have their own smartphone or tablet (Rideout & Robb, 2020). Without a doubt, television—streamed or live—is the medium of choice for young children.

Television’s ubiquity and saturation in children’s lives has spurred decades of research into the behavioral, social, psychological, and developmental impact of such viewing. And while there are some contradictory findings, research has largely found that television acts as a significant part of children’s informal education (Fisch, 2014), offering knowledge through narrative structures (Samaniego & Pascual, 2007). Despite a handful of studies that have shown the watching high-quality educational content during preschool years, such as Sesame Street or Blue’s Clues, can improve children’s basic academic skills and help long-term academic performance (Baydar et al., 2008; Kostyrka-Allchorne, Cooper, & Simpson, 2017), most studies emphasize the negative outcomes of television on children, including

having problems with executive functioning (Lillard & Peterson, 2011);
less task-oriented, persistent, and autonomous learning behavior in the classroom (Pagani et al., 2010); and
decreased sleep duration (Cespedes et al., 2010).

Most studies on children’s television focus on the content and consequences of advertising (Dalton et al., 2017; Jenkin et al., 2014). Those studies that do specifically target children’s television shows via sociocultural themes frequently analyze gender representations (Hentges & Case, 2013; Luther & Legg, 2010; Walsh & Leaper, 2020), finding that gender stereotypes are often reinforced with more boy characters overall. Even fewer studies look at representations of race (Keys, 2016; Klein & Shiffman, 2009; Peruta & Powers, 2017). Gender and race withstanding, there is a dearth of research on the content of children’s television shows, analyzing how such content may shape young people’s perceptions and understandings throughout childhood. This study, then, aims to join that vein of inquiry.

More specifically, here I analyze representations of police and policing in children’s shows targeted at young children ages three to five. The literature shows that while children younger than two years old seldom understand or pay attention to screen media (Richert et al., 2010), preschoolers display a variety of learning outcomes from different media (Puzio et al., 2022).

Using the top five most popular shows on Nickelodeon Jr.—Paw Patrol, Peppa Pig, The Adventures of Paddington, Blaze and the Monster Machines, and Bubble Guppies—this study found that animated children’s shows construct the police through four significant themes: as local authority, as role models/models of citizenship, as facilitators in a community, and as easily accessible and personable. Such representations condition growing children into the dominant ideology of neoliberalism and capitalism that undergirds inequalities. By naturalizing the assumption that police are an essential requirement of and for social order, these shows perpetuate police fetishism, bolster power imbalances, and ultimately ignore the marginalization of black and brown youth through a process of criminalization.

Media depictions of police and policing

Most public knowledge about crime and justice comes from media consumption (Surette, 2007), with stories about crime and justice making up one-fourth of all entertainment (Reiner, 2002). Indeed, between 2004 and 2005, one-third of the most popular shows on television were centered around crime (Phillips & Frost 2012). Within these copious narratives, the police habe been overwhelmingly portrayed as competent and helpful, specifically at solving crimes and arresting suspects successfully, thus fighting evil and upholding the moral status quo (Doyle, 2003; Surette, 2007). Despite a slew of shows featuring corrupt or rogue cops (The Shield, The Wire, City on a Hill, Low Winter Son, to name a few), the majority of shows construct cops and policing as positive; even when officers broke the rules, it was in pursuit of catching the “bad guys” and protecting society’s moral fabric (Dirikx et al., 2012).

However, all this literature is premised on shows for adults and teenagers. There is scant research on the construction of the police for children and in children’s shows. Kort-Butler (2003) broadly queries superhero cartoons, analyzing representations of the Justice League and finding that it constructs the justice system as ineffective, corrupt, and that heroes are needed to (work primarily outside the law to) capture the worst criminals, while the show promotes themes of incarceration rather than rehabilitation. This crime and justice narrative—rather than police themselves—are the primary lens for the few children’s show analyses found. Ramsy (2020) looks at Steven Universe, unpacking the ways in which the prototypical cartoon binary model of good/evil is subverted. Generally, retributive justice – punishment for the evil-doer – is considered just, but this show instead focuses on restorative justice, which is reconciliation with victims and the perpetrators. More aligned with the current study, Kennedy (2021) analyzes the children’s series Paw Patrol and argues that the show disseminates neoliberal ideologies that sustain racial and class inequities, convincing audiences that citizens should put their trust in “specialized” individuals and corporations when it comes to fighting crime and promoting conservation. No other literature I found considers how police are represented in children’s television.

Social learning theory and script theory

The theoretical underpinning for his study comes from Bandura’s (1971) social‐learning theory and Huesmann’s (1986) script theory. The social learning theory views television as a primary influence in the development of children's socialization skills (Robertson & Rossiter, 1974). Children can learn social, family, and gender roles through media, internalizing parental interactions on TV, for example, as the norm rather than as a socially constructed role (Alade, 2018). Through watching patterns of behavior as seen on TV, as well as the corresponding consequences (or lack thereof) of others’ actions, children understand these behaviors as normative (Harms & Spain, 2016). In this way, televised stories become a context for social learning; stories teach listeners traits, behaviors, moral dilemmas and judgments, and social messages/lessons.

Similarly, script theory describes how viewers learn from narratives on television—the stories and the content therein. In this way, scripts are cognitive structures, which aid people (children included) in determining how to act in certain situations (Abelson, 1981). These scripts assist viewers in understanding people, events, and interactions, helping individuals to make behavioral choices as they happen (Abelson, 1981). For example, a child may learn an aggressive script by observing aggressive behavior in a television program and encodes this behavior into an internal representation. Applied to this paper, scripts may drive children’s decisions about how to view and interact with the police. According to Huesmann (1986), when a person confronts a social situation or problem, their memory of a script guides their behavior. And when these scripts are observed repeatedly, they become easier to recall, and thus people use certain scripts more often.

For the purposes of this study, each television show is understood and analyzed as a structured discourse, a system of knowledge and practice that represents sociocultural and material realities of society. In this way, these children’s shows function as competing systems, modelling for kids not only how to understand the police and their role in society, but also the value judgments that accompany such constructions (Kellner, 2011). For instance, “they” are helpers, which is good. “They” are safe and that we should trust them. “They” follow rules and that is important. This is not to deny viewers’ agency. Aligned with Fiske (1992), Hall (1980, 2005) and a panoply of other cultural theorists, I do not mean to construct people as simply passive consumers or “cultural dopes.” Instead, I acknowledge that viewers interpret and negotiate meanings they see on television through multiple lenses, which are mediated by multiple systems (parents, school, peers, to name a few). However, given the age range of viewers for the shows within this study (ages three through five), I argue that dominant meanings remain crucial in and tantamount to reproducing social realities. TV shows are an essential medium through which children learn about social values and mores and then internalize those for future behaviors.

Cartoons for kids

Cartoons remain the primary form of media that preschool-aged children consume, and cartoons continue to be one of the strongest influencers on their childhood (Soliman, 2015). Furthermore, television for preschoolers generally employs narrative storylines, which necessitate that the child participate in narrative comprehension. Such narrative comprehension stems from a complex sequence of processes that include the children’s interpretation of the information they are shown and building a cognitive representation of what happens in the story(Kendeou, et al., 2005).

However, in the past decade there’s been a dearth of contemporary content analysis research of animated programs. What has been found, primarily with research in 1970s to the early 2000s, is that the content of these shows is varied, and their effects distinctive. Much of the literature focuses on preschool prosocial content, such as Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood (Coates, Pusser & Goodman, 1976), Blue’s Clues (Anderson et al., 2000), Dragon Tales (Rust, 2001), Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood (Rasmussen et al., 2016) and Sesame Street (Fisch, Truglio &Cole, 1999),which have all been shown to increase children’s positive interactions with others. However, many other studies have focused on the antisocial content in children’s cartoons, particularly physical violence and its link to real life increased aggression and violence (Anderson et al., 2003; Asghari et al., 2017; Dhar, 2019). Not only is physical violence often glorified in these shows, but also other antisocial behaviors. This includes making discriminatory or harmful comments to others, yelling at them, intimidating or scaring them, threatening their safety, vandalism, and lying, amongst other examples (Atabay, 2021; Klein & Shiffman, 2012). In these cartoons, and as part of this aggression, untrustworthy authority figures are often shown, along with villains and antagonists (Staben, 2018). This is particularly important given that preschoolers pay more attention to animated characters (Anderson, Alit, Lurch, & Levin, 1979) and over 90% of the top 30 programs children watch are cartoons (Vasquez, 2004).

Preschool-aged socioemotional development

The preschool years, generally between ages three to five, are an essential time for the development of cognitive functions, as children move from a limited, egocentric view of the world to one that is more logical, realistic, and autonomous (Davies, 1999; Piaget, 1965). It is during these years that preschoolers are better able to develop and communicate their moral perspective and ideas, create more complex social relations, and gain a greater awareness about their environment, including their own interpretation of their social world (Davies, 1999). Research studies have shown that preschoolers can recognize the unfairness or wrongness of different transgressions, such as lying, name-calling, hitting, and stealing (Bierworth &Blumberg, 2010; Smetana et al., 1999; Smetana, Schlagman, & Adams, 1993; Weston & Turiel, 1980).

One of the many developmental abilities that preschoolers develop during is the ability to distinguish between fantasy and reality (Flavell, Flavell, & Green, 1987). During these preschool years, children can recognize and understand the differences between the world they live in and the world of fantasy. Indeed, it is in this time period of recognition and comprehension that television content begins to target these preschoolers (Anderson & Subrahmanyam, 2017). Information processing, as well as memory abilities, improve starting at two, advancing through the years, as does children’s attention to television content. By age three, children are ready to learn from the screen, and they have the ability to learn from shows that are tailored towards their age group (Mares & Pan, 2013). Experiencing production formats, genre, animation, and concrete audio and visual effects, children are able to judge television’s social realism. Additionally, the form of the cartoon itself makes children attentive to the screen and the narrative, thereby influencing aspects of their socioemotional development (Huston & Wright, 1998; Rajawat, 2017).

Methods

This study employs content analysis predicated on an a priori coding scheme developed through study of the literature on police and media. Nick Jr. is a popular network on cable television, with an accompany pay-for-streaming service called Noggin, which principally targets preschoolers and toddlers ages two- to six-years old. Nick Jr. is available to about 54 million households in the United States, as of 2023, thus making its influence and reach substantial. Shows were selected via purposeful sampling from the children’s shows on Nick Jr. In order to attain a manageable sample of the current lineup of 21 different shows, shows and episodes were chosen based on content, selecting for plot and characters that included the police and/or police officers. Five of the 21 shows had content that dealt with police and policing. The combined daily viewing rates for these five shows is 483,000. Table 1 notes the characteristics of the shows selected for this study.

Table 1: Shows selected for current study

Show Platform	Show Title	Targeted Viewer Age (years)	Episode Length	Episode Format
Nick Jr.	Paw Patrol	3-5	23 min	Animated
	Peppa Pig	3-5	9-18 min	Animated
	The Adventures of Paddington	3-5	21 min	Animated
	Blaze and the Monster Machines	3-5	22 min	Animated
	Bubble Guppies	3-5	24 min	Animated

In total, 20 episodes were selected, nine from Paw Patrol, [1] [open endnotes in new window] four from Peppa Pig, two from Blaze and the Monster Machines, two from The Adventures of Paddington, and three from Bubble Guppies.

In order to create inter-coder reliability, an undergraduate research assistant and principal investigator worked independently, coding a sample of the posts and responses and discussing our findings with each other. During this iterative process, the principal investigator resolved any coding discrepancies. The codes and definitions for these codes are shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Coding and Definitions

Code	Definition of Code
Local Authority	Has power and a slightly higher status in the community; someone to listen to: a leader even outside of uniform
Role Model/Model of Citizenship	Someone to look up to especially toward children; what citizens should strive to be
Facilitator of Community	Facilitates a sense of community; brings people together, and is connected to the community
Accessible/Personal	Easily reachable and as personal friends

Police as local authority

The construction of police as authority figures, legitimate in their use of power and assumed to be in a leadership position, was the most frequent depiction of police in Paw Patrol, as well as Bubble Guppies. This representation is most evident through the character of Chase in Paw Patrol, a German Shepard police dog, whose role is primarily that of the default leader when their human leader, Ryder, is unavailable. In S5, E2 “Ultimate Rescue: Pups Save the Royal Kitties” (2018), Chase serves as an escort and special security for a priceless treasure gifted to their town. Once the royal kittens, en route from their home in Barkingham, are catnapped from a train, the Paw Patrol turn in to the Ultimate Rescue team, all wearing police uniforms and acting with the assumption that such a uniform gives them the power to solve this mystery and find the missing kittens. Even within this larger trope of police coming to the rescue, where authority and expertise is assumed with just a police uniform, Chase is still constructed as the leader. As Ryder says, “Chase you’re the police pup, so I need you to lead this operation and help the others be police pups too.” Evidence is reported to Chase, and the team is led by Chase in a new advanced police van (replacing their normal Paw Patroller). Police here, and Chase as the top dog (pun intended) within this police force, are constructed in relation to the ordinary citizens of Adventure Bay. With the uniform and the designation as police comes power and control, capacities that are not evenly distributed and privilege the position of Chase over his puppy police comrades.

This association—of police with naturalized authority and capability—is repeated in the “Ultimate Rescue” episodes of Paw Patrol: in S6 E2, the Paw Patrol are police officers once again and Chase leads the team in an operation to find a phone thief; in S7 E10 the team are police in an Ultimate Rescue, hunting down the perpetrators who stole vehicles and are terrorizing the town. In these episodes, Chase is always the presumed leader. He gives orders to his team, and they follow him without hesitation (or as one fellow pup says, “On it, Chief!”). It is Chase who uses his sense of smell to track the perpetrators, despite the entirety of the Paw Patrol being dogs. “Chase-style” replaces the motto “Police-style” as the Ultimate Rescue episodes continue, making police synonymous with Chase, and making it clear there is no Chase separate from “Police Chase.” His two catch phrases, “Chase is on the case” and “These paws uphold the laws,” make clear his identity is inextricably linked to his being police. And this authority and legitimacy is not just given to Chase by Ryder (the cisgender, white boy who of course was the previously established authority); it is the other pups who turn to Chase and see him as the legitimate figure of power. Importantly, Police Chase retains this authority even when he is not wearing his uniform. For instance, Chase is the director for the pups’ movie (S3, E14), giving the other dogs jobs, taking responsibility when they mess up, and using his quick reflexes to save the victim with his net. Even opposing pup crews (S7 E24) listen to Chase when they get in trouble, heeding his instructions to extricate themselves from danger.

The construction of police as authoritative and trustworthy is even more overt in Bubble Guppies, where Officer Miranda (a lobster) teaches Gil (the main fish/child character) and his friends that police officers use laws to keep people safe (S3 E2). In what is an absurd tautology, the authority and power of Officer Miranda (as a cop) to educate kids about the police is because of the authority and power of the police. And the children-fish mirror back these claims to expertise, force, and authority. As one of them sings in a song, “Call the Police:”

“Stop the traffic/Drivers know you're the boss/While we're working hard at school/Please help folks obey the rules. We're really really glad you're out there.
Because/With your badge/Or sheriff's star/You'll keep us safe/That's who you are!
Call the police! Call a cop!/Anyone doing something wrong,/Won't be doing it for long! Hey police! Hey deputy! Call the law and you'll see!
It's great to see you on the way, To help folks out and save the day.
If something's wrong, you'll make it turn out right.”

In what is a call-and-response with the other children-fish, involving and thus implicating the kids watching at home, “Call the Cops” enthusiastically and explicitly names police as the enforcers of rules, the champions of safety, and the guardians of children and morals alike. Inherent in these poppy, light-hearted lyrics is the rationale for police to be obeyed and the justification for their using that power. And even more so, the song works to engender trust—the presumption of a shared moral framework and an inclination towards virtuousness—that allows for their legitimacy.[2]

This authority as/and legitimacy is reiterated by the inhabitation of the police persona by the children-fish themselves. In “Something Fishy Going On” (S6 E11), Molly and Gil (who were singing “Call the Police” in seasons past) are the police officers, shown as detectives tracking down mysterious lights emerging throughout town. While Officers Molly and Gil originally believed these lights were aliens, with clues and evidence they discover the lights are actually angler fish. Despite being shown as being wrong in their original assumption, the construction of the police as those who havethe authority to find the real “truth” is clear. It is their authority as police that legitimizes their search and validates their findings. Likewise, later in Season 6 (E23), Nonny acts as a detective in “Mystery on the Guppy Express,” searching for a missing kitty. Paralleling the famous book and movie Murder on the Orient Express, which celebrates the legendary Detective Poirot and his prowess at solving cases, Detective Nonny tirelessly works to solve the case and is ultimately successful in following the clues and recovering the kitty. This “mysticism of police expertise,” shown in both Bubble Guppies and Paw Patrol acts to strengthen and reinforce “claims of professional expertise [and] accumulate a legitimating aura that supports their own essentially identity-based bid for deference” (Lvovsky, 2021, 486, 482). Children see police as not onlyexperts in solving crimes but the only people that can do so, which is why the characters in these shows turn into police in order to solve these mysteries. Their success on the show, and the power they evoke while solving those crimes, is implicated in the character of the police officer who will “save the day” and make everything “turn out right.”

Role model/model of citizenship

A part of, and antecedent to, legitimacy and authority of the police is the construction of these officers as role models and good citizens. Being exemplary is often based on virtues of duty and responsibility, particularly as they relate to protection and safety. In S4, E25, “Sea Patrol: Pups Save Puplantis” (2018) Chase is in yet another leadership role, that of a lifeguard. As the magical Mer-Moon emerges as everyone heads home from the beach, all the pups have the opportunity to turn into “merpups.” While Chase was eager to join his fellow pups in merpup transformation he forgoes it, instead volunteering to remain on the beach when a ship shows up. “I'm also on duty, so I need to stay here," he tells his friends. Head hung low, Chase is clearly disappointed to be missing out, but his “duty” to report back to Ryder comes before his own pleasure. Later in the episode, when there is yet another chance to join the group to go to Puplantis, Chase once again says he will stay behind: “I really want to go with you, but nope, it's my responsibility.” Chase’s position as the police dog entails sacrifice, a social practice ascribed to good citizenship. It is the because of Chase’s notions of duty, responsibility, and public participation as a police officer that he is awarded with cultural authority (ie. leadership).

In “Pups Save the Butterflies” (S5, E15, 2018), Chase continues to uphold his authority through duties and responsibilities, even when he is less explicit about such behaviors. In this episode, Chase is out of uniform, yet he still teaches and watches over the kids of the town when they are learning to fly drones. And when a swarm of runaway butterflies causes a malfunction in the drones, it is Chase who warns the towns peoples and clears the streets, acting as de facto crowd control. His identity as a police pup remains when he’s out of uniform (evoking a sort of “blue lives” conceptualization) and extends to his behaviors and attitudes in everyday life. This construct is of the idealized citizen: ordered, responsible, accountable.

This police-as-ideal-citizen trope is simultaneously expanded on and narrowed in Peppa Pig by the character of Police Officer Panda. In “The Panda Twins” (S8 E1, 2019) PO Panda is primarily understood as the father to his two daughters. He drops them off at school and reminds them to “keep their ears and eyes open." The twins, Peggi and Pandora, like to solve mysteries because their “daddy is a policeman,” and they receive glowing accolades from daddy when they find their teacher’s lost phone. While less overt than that of Paw Patrol and Chase, PO Panda is the “virtuous citizen” who “uphold[s] dominant social norms…and [is] are seen by state and societal actors as law-abiding, upstanding contributors to society” (Gonzalez & Mayka, 2023, 266). This virtuous citizen is synonymous with being a man (panda), being a father, and being a police officer—this triad is constructed as inexorably linked. To be “law-abiding, upstanding contributors to society” is to be a police officer. And that virtuousness, that good citizenry, is conflated with fatherhood—reproducing the dominant (patriarchal heteronormative) social values. In this way, both Chase and PO Panda act as the ideal citizen, bound by honor, responsibility, and sociocultural values, thus legitimizing their power and authority to patrol, monitor, and control the rest of the citizenry.

Accessible/personal

Police as both figures of authority and as ideal citizens are made more relatable and conceivably more kid-friendly by their construction as approachable, amicable, and responsive. In Blaze and the Monster Machine’s(S4 E14) “Officer Blaze,” a police officer monster truck shows up suddenly in a time of crisis to help save the runaway chicken train caboose. As she tells the monster trucks, “Police officers are always there to help and keep everyone safe.” When Blaze and his driver, AJ, also want to be “amazing” police officers, Officer Anna gives them sirens, search lights, and an official police badge and tells them, “Let’s get out there and start helping people.” Just like that, they are police, both monster truck and driver, riding around the streets to an upbeat, happy pop police song, assisting kids because as “Officer Blaze” says, “That's what police officers do.” Grateful citizens tell Police AJ and Blaze to “keep up the good work” as they help children find their family, serve as an escort for delivery, and find a missing dog. Officer Anna makes clear she is there whenever she is needed (responsive), and to be a police officer is to cater to the needs to the public, whatever those may be (accommodating). Moreover, the ease with which Blaze and AJ become police themselves speaks to the accessibility and effortlessness of the police.

This same trope is used in “The Treat Thief” (S5 E19), when Blaze tells the audience, “Police officers are always there to help and keep everyone safe.” Officer Anna reappears, hanging out with Blaze and AJ to solve the crime of treat thief. Blaze and AJ call her their friend, making the police—even with their differential power and authority—a figure that kids can relate to, associate with, and even befriend. Catching the thief, Officer Anna ultimately reforms the monster truck perpetrator, talking to him about the binary of right and wrong and making him see the error of his ways. Interestingly, in Blaze the police officer is a woman; this gendering, as it relates to police, does double sociocultural duty. First, it reinforces the stereotype of women as approachable, relatable, and gentle—her focus on rehabilitation rather than punitive justice speaks to the hegemonic construction of women as nurturers. Secondly, it posits Officer Anna as representative of all police, offering the model of police-as-friend. But while Officer Anna may seemingly undercut the aggressive, violent, and menacing image of the cop, the gendered nature of this police construction (of an inanimate monster truck) merely fortifies gendered representations in an effort to soften the image of police for children.

Accessibility and relatability of police are also featured in The Adventures of Paddington. In “Paddington Meets a Police Officer” (S1 E19), the titular bear decides he will be a police officer after meeting one at a neighborhood watch meeting. Much like Blaze, Paddington is simply given a bobby hat (he is, of course, a British bear), and is told all he needs is “a trusty notebook, a shiny whistle, and [to] know the difference between right and wrong.” After catching the bad guy, in this case a litterbug, Paddington is given the title of “honorary deputy.” More than simply (over)simplifying and ignoring the real and psychological violence of police, these constructions extend police’s authority beyond the behavioral and physical realm and instead enter an individual’s subjectivity—how they understand themselves in relation to the police. Indeed, when Blaze and Paddington “become” police, it is in order to understand themselves as “good” (vs. the “bad” of the criminals) and justified in their use of power. To be a police officer is something anyone can (and should want to) do; with it comes control and power, as well as the rationalization of “good” for the use of that control and power.

Facilitator of community

The final theme I found in Nick Jr. shows is how police are shown as symbolic guardians of social order, as archetypical representatives of the community, primarily through community interaction. In Bubble Guppies S5 E4, “The Good, The Sad, The Grumpy,” the two main guppies are police: Molly acts as a sheriff with Gill as her deputy. Their role is to be town leaders, acting as a place where people go when something is troubling or amiss. Despite there being a mayor in this town, Sheriff Molly serves as both the spokesperson and the problem solver: “The townspeople knew they needed help, so they went to the sheriff's office.” It was up to Sheriff Molly to “go save this town.” But unlike previous episodes, Sheriff Molly does not solve crimes or mysteries; instead, she listens to the townspeople, offering empathy, making them feel better, and thus “saving the town.” As a part of the community—indeed, as pillars of the community—the police are shown as protectors of physical and emotional health. They are to be called on in time of mental and corporeal distress, thus making them mediators of community well-being.

“The Police” (S5 E16) from Peppa Pig similarly shows the police as a part of, and integral to, the larger community. While the children are at school, the arrival of police is described as a special event, and Officer Panda and Officer Squirrel meet the children with light-hearted and funny greetings. Their purpose is to teach the children bike safety, which is one part of what the kids’ teachers deign the “important work” of the police. As the narrator intones, “Peppa loves the police. Everyone loves the police.” Ostensibly, this love comes from the positioning of police as protectors of children (through the teaching of bike safety) and the maintenance of the community (as Officer Panda bumps into a tree, Officer Squirrel makes a note of the “dangerous tree on public highway”). Such a construction of the police aligns with the contemporary political movement of community policing, which promotes teamwork and collaboration within communities to make the police “more proactive and adaptable in dealing with crime as well as becoming more focused on enhancing the quality of life for the community” (Ford, 2007, 321). This model of policing, and the accompanying representations of the police as essential and contributing members of the community, greatly expand the reach and influence of the police. Not only are they “fighting crime” (and apparently solving all of that crime), but they are also mediators, planners, problem solvers, and community organizers.

Discussion

Controlling the image of the police has been crucial since the inception of the contemporary police force. In this way, “policing is as much a matter of symbolism as much as substance” and such a focus tends to reify the police and their power, which is inextricably bound to dominant ideologies of security, safety, and social order (Reiner, 2007, 259). The depictions of police on Nick Jr. children’s shows reinforce this representation, perpetuating an idealized version of police, rather than the constructed nature of their power. In these children’s shows, the police’s authority is naturalized, with structural systems of power ignored and oversimplified in the name of a generalized greater good purpose to “protect and serve.”

The naturalization of authority and power of police is not constructed, however, as threatening, discriminatory, or malevolent. Instead, police are reified through their construction as heroic and compassionate, celebrated as the model of citizenship through their roles as “helpers.” Indeed, each Nick Jr. show reaffirms the police as the gatekeepers of society, mediating between individuals and “defend[ing] the moral structure and…sense of social control” (Jackson & Bradford, 2009, 500). These shows, and their representations of police, contribute to the discourse about “what police are” (good guys) and “what they do” (solve crime, help when needed, sacrifice, protect) and thus the “normative definition of legitimate force” (Martin 2018, 141). And in doing so, these concepts support the “rightfulness, righteousness, and seeming inevitability of police authority” (McNair, 2011, 5). Not only, then, do these shows create police as a celebrity and a necessary part of society, but also validate and rationalize that authority by those same representations.

This Pollyanna representation of the police and the narratives surrounding it cannot be attributed solely to the idealistic narrative of preschoolers’ cartoon shows. Though historically cartoons for young children have been used to teach hegemonic standards such as heteronormativity, gender norms, and whiteness (King, 2010), they still have the ability to subvert dominant narratives and focus on counter-narratives that do not necessarily align with the fairytale conservative world. Examples of subversion and deviation from hegemonic scripts in children’s cartoons are quite abundant. Starting in the 1990s and continuing through the contemporary media landscape, children’s cartoons have and have had plot lines and characters that deal with queerness and LGBTQIA+ issues (Storz, 2022), subversive historical narratives that support anti-oppressive narratives (Mygind & Sereechaiporn, 2019), climate change and radical alternatives for addressing our ecological crisis (Hellman, 2024), and justice, allyship, and community responsibility around ideas of civic engagement (Webb, 2024). This ranges from the character Aang from the Last Airbender whopromotes and sustains his stance on non-violence while simultaneously addressing imperialism and war, to Arthur in his eponymous show covering mental health issues, to Korra in Legend of Korra with storylines about economic inequality and anti-colonialism, to The Dragon Prince tackling xenophobia and racism. Even more historical shows such as Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood took on public segregation, while Sesame Street covered and still covers issues of disabilities, parental incarceration, racism, and homeless, just to name a few. These shows indicate a larger shift in cartoons in discussing more complex social issues, as they continue to “challenge existing power structures, question norms, and inspire action for change by presenting transferable challenges in alternative realities” (Webb, 2024, 12-13).

While one would most likely not expect an animated show, with a target audience of 3 to 5-years-old, to offer a critique of police’s power, legitimacy, and violence, introducing the police at this age does allow for an initiation to and information about people whom they would have very little direct content. And regular exposure to these police characters, particularly for those young children who have had no exposure to police, can alter their beliefs about how the world works and how individuals (like police) behave (Reinhard, Olson, & Kahlenberg, 2017). Research shows that preschoolers “can easily have their vision about their future role in society distorted” by how characters are presented in the cartoons they watch, which “can foster misconceptions of people, places or things” (Schiau et al., 2013, 60). While much of the extant research on this focuses on gender roles (Hentges & Case, 2013; Walsh & Leaper, 2020) and villains (Kort-Butler, 2013; Webb, 2024), the same findings can reasonably be thought to hold true for police representations, which also contain the upholding of neoliberalism. Indeed, research indicates that preschoolers favor information and concepts presented by highly familiar TV characters rather than adult “experts” on the topic (Williams & Danovitch, 2019). That is, their friend Chase or fish-kid Gill seem a more desirable and trusted source of information about police than an adult with experience and expertise related to police and policing. Clearly, there are mitigating factors to the effectiveness of this police narrative on preschoolers. Educators, teachers, peers, religious leaders, siblings—all these micro systems have the ability to either reinforce the dominant narrative of police or, alternatively complicate and subvert this narrative (Johnson, 2010). However, much research (Dugan, 2012; Fisch, Truglio, & Cole, 1999; Graves, 1999) continues to emphasize how the characters, narratives, and animated aspects of cartoons affects preschoolers’ belief systems, including stereotypes, prejudices, or what makes some “good.” Thus, the power and authority concealed within these latent and inescapable systems of knowledge preschoolers’ cartoons seem to inevitably, if not inadvertently, enter and stay in the psyche of children.

The police themselves have made concerted efforts to create and disseminate a friendlier and more sociable image appealing to children, including the introduction in 1980 of the mascot McGruff the Crime Dog, the anthropomorphic bloodhound with his mantra “Take a Bite Out of Crime!” and a coordinated $100 million radio, television, and billboard campaign. The ongoing campaign has been successful: 9 out of 10 adults know McGruff and 8 out of 10 children said they were like to take advice from McGruff (Lendhardt, 2007). Nick Jr. representations can be seen, then, as a companion to the friendliness, expertise, and legitimacy of McGruff.

Clearly, however, police are not simply benevolent. Police misconduct, corruption, militarization, the use of excessive force, racial profiling, as well as the murders of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Michael Brown, Duante Hill (to name just a minuscule few), exemplify the way that “police today are more organized, more powerful, more equipped, better funded, and deadlier than ever” (Wall & McClanahan, 2024, 2). Indeed, 2023 saw a record high number of (over 1,300) police killings in the United States, with black Americans shot and killed at two times the rate of white Americans, and half of fatalities of young people between the ages of 20 and 40 (Fatal Force database, 2024). And while 2020 saw a collective moment of revolution against the police and the racist, capitalist institution that both perpetuates and is perpetuated by it, media coverage of such opposition was framed as unruly riots and television and movies have made little, if any, adjustments to their portrayals. The “bad apple” frame has continued in popular discourse, centering on individuals rather than structural defects and keeping safe the larger foundations of police and policing. And the police themselves are part of this, defining the problem, insisting on itself as the solution, and having unverifiable proof of its success. Nick Jr’s children television shows offer a powerful assist to this narrative, priming children to become the young adults who define social problems and the correct response: just “Call the Police.”

Notes

Acknowlegement: Many thanks to my undergraduate research assistant, Kim Nguyen, for her help and commitment to this project.

1. It should be noted that a main character in Paw Patrol is Chase, a puppy who is dressed like a police officer. Given that this character is nearly every episode but is not referred to as police in every episode, episodes were chosen that focused on Chase as the plot’s primary character or referenced his police identity. [return to text]

2. In the wake of the murder of George Floyd by the police in 2020, this episode was pulled from television and streaming platforms. This absence merely reinforces the interpretation of the hypocrisy of constructing the police as “keeping us safe” or “sav[ing] the day.”

References

Abelson, R. P. (1981). Psychological status of the script concept. American Psychologist, 36(7), 715. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.36.7.715

Aladé, F. (2018). Character Portrayals in STEM-Focused Educational Television Shows and Their Impact on Children's Attitudes towards STEM (Doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University).

Anderson, D. R., Alwitt, L. F., Lorch, E. P., & Levin, S. R. (1979). Watching children watch television. In G. Hale & M. Lewis (Eds.), Attention and development of cognitive skills (pp. 331-361). New York: Plenum.

Anderson, C. A., Berkowitz, L., Donnerstein, E., Huesmann, L. R., Johnson, J. D., Linz, D., ... & Wartella, E. (2003). The influence of media violence on youth. Psychological science in the public interest, 4(3), 81-110.

Anderson, D. R., Bryant, J., Wilder, A., Santomero, A., Williams, M., & Crawley, A. M. (2000). Researching Blue's Clues: Viewing behavior and impact. Media psychology, 2(2), 179-194.

Anderson, D. R., Subrahmanyam, K., & Cognitive Impacts of Digital Media Workgroup. (2017). Digital screen media and cognitive development. Pediatrics, 140(Supplement_2), S57-S61.

Asghari, M., Karimzadeh, M., & Teymouri, R. (2017). Relationship between using television and behavioral problems of pre-school children. Iranian Rehabilitation Journal, 15(4), 325-332.

Atabey, D. (2021). Cartoons: A profound outlook within the scope of children and media. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 7(1), 93-111.

Bandura, A. 1971. Psychological modeling: Conflicting theories, Chicago: Aldine Atherton.

Baydar, N., Kağitçibaşi, Ç., Küntay, A. C., & Gökşen, F. (2008). Effects of an educational television program on preschoolers: Variability in benefits. Journal of applied developmental psychology, 29(5), 349-360.

Bierwirth, K. P., & Blumberg, F. C. (2010). Preschoolers' Judgments Regarding Realistic and Cartoon-based Moral Transgressions in the US. Journal of children and media, 4(1), 39-58.

Cespedes, E. M., Gillman, M. W., Kleinman, K., Rifas-Shiman, S. L., Redline, S., & Taveras, E. M. (2014). Television viewing, bedroom television, and sleep duration from infancy to mid-childhood. Pediatrics, 133(5), e1163-e1171.

Coates, B., Pusser, H. E., & Goodman, I. (1976). The influence of" Sesame Street" and" Mister Rogers' Neighborhood" on children's social behavior in the preschool. Child Development, 138-144.

Dalton, M. A., Longacre, M. R., Drake, K. M., Cleveland, L. P., Harris, J. L., Hendricks, K., & Titus, L. J. (2017). Child-targeted fast-food television advertising exposure is linked with fast-food intake among pre-school children. Public Health Nutrition, 20(9), 1548-1556. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980117000520

Davies, D. (1999). Child development: A practitioner's guide. Guilford Press.

Dhar, A. (2019). Influence of the Animation Cartoons on the Formative years of Pre-Schoolers. NeuroQuantology, 17(6), 121.

Doyle, A. (2003). Arresting images: Crime and policing in front of the television camera. University of Toronto Press.

Dirikx, A., Van den Bulck, J., & Parmentier, S. (2012). The police as societal moral agents: ‘‘Procedural justice’’ and the analysis of police fiction. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 56, 38–54.

Dugan, T. E. (2012). Early learning with digital media: A naturalistic, ethnographic investigation of children’s engagement with and learning from television and digital technology in early childhood (Doctoral dissertation)

“Fatal Force.” (2024). The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/investigations/police-shootings-database/?itid=lk_inline_enhanced-template

Flavell, J. H., Flavell, E. R., & Green, F. L. (1987). Young children's knowledge about the apparent-real and pretend-real distinctions. Developmental Psychology, 23(6), 816.

Fisch, S. M. (2014). Children's learning from educational television: Sesame Street and beyond. Routledge.

Fisch, S. M., Truglio, R. T., & Cole, C. F. (1999). The impact of Sesame Street on preschool children: A review and synthesis of 30 years' research. Media Psychology, 1(2), 165-190.

Gonzalez, Y., & Mayka, L. (2023). Policing, democratic participation, and the reproduction of asymmetric citizenship. American political science review, 117(1), 263-279.

Graves, S. B. (1999). Television and prejudice reduction: When does television as a vicarious experience make a difference? Journal of Social Issues, 55(4), 707–727.

Harms, P. D., & Spain, S. M. (2016). Children’s stories as a foundation for leadership schemas: More than meets the eye. Leadership Lessons from Compelling Contexts. Monographs in Leadership and Management, 8, 301-325.

Hellmann, O. (2024). Can Rick and Morty Save the Planet? Re-Politicizing Climate Change Through Humor and Animation. Television & New Media, 15274764241271200.

Hentges, B., & Case, K. (2013). Gender representations on disney channel, cartoon network, and nickelodeon broadcasts in the United States. Journal of Children and Media, 7(3), 319-333.

Huesmann, L. R. (1986). Psychological processes promoting the relation between exposure to media violence and aggressive behavior by the viewer. Journal of Social Issues, 42(3), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1986.tb00246.x

Huston, A. C., & Wright, J. C. (1998). Mass media and children's development.

Jackson, J., & Bradford, B. (2009). Crime, policing and social order: On the expressive nature of public confidence in policing. The British journal of sociology, 60(3), 493-521.

Jenkin, G., Madhvani, N., Signal, L., & Bowers, S. (2014). A systematic review of persuasive marketing techniques to promote food to children on television. Obesity Reviews, 15(4), 281-293. https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.12141

Johnson, G. M. (2010). Internet use and child development: Validation of the ecological techno-subsystem. Educational Technology & Society, 13(1), 176-185.

Kellner, D. (2011). Cultural studies, multiculturalism, and media culture. Gender, race, and class in media: A critical reader, 3, 7-18.

Kendeou, P., Lynch, J. S., Van Den Broek, P., Espin, C. A., White, M. J., & Kremer, K. E. (2005). Developing successful readers: Building early comprehension skills through television viewing and listening. early Childhood education Journal, 33, 91-98.

Kennedy, L. (2021). “Whenever there’s trouble, just yelp for help”: Crime, conservation, and corporatization in Paw Patrol. Crime, Media, Culture, 17(2), 255–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741659020903700

Klein, H., & Shiffman, K. S. (2012). Verbal aggression in animated cartoons. Int J Child Adolescent Health, 5(1),7-12.

Klein, H. & Shiffman, K.S. (2009). Underrepresentation and Symbolic Annihilation of Socially Disenfranchised Groups (“Out Groups”) in Animated Cartoons, The Howard Journal of Communications, 20:1, 55-72, DOI: 10.1080/10646170802665208

Kort-Butler, L. A. (2013). Justice League?: Depictions of Justice in Children’s Superhero Cartoons. Criminal Justice Review, 38(1), 50–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016812467201

Kostyrka-Allchorne, K., Cooper, N. R., & Simpson, A. (2017). The relationship between television exposure and children’s cognition and behaviour: A systematic review. Developmental review, 44, 19-58.

Lenhardy, A. (2007). An old dog teaching prevention tricks. Police Chief Magazine, 73.

Lillard, A. S., & Peterson, J. (2011). The immediate impact of different types of television on young children's executive function. Pediatrics, 128(4), 644-649.

Luther, C. A., & Legg Jr, J. R. (2010). Gender differences in depictions of social and physical aggression in children's television cartoons in the US. Journal of children and media, 4(2), 191-205.

Lvovsky, A. (2021). Rethinking police expertise. Yale Law Journal, 131, 475-572.

McNair, A. (2011). The captive public: Media representations of the police and the (il) legitimacy of police power. University of Southern California.

Mares, M. L., & Pan, Z. (2013). Effects of Sesame Street: A meta-analysis of children's learning in 15 countries. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 34(3), 140-151.

Martin, J. T. (2018). Police and policing. Annual review of anthropology, 47, 133-148.

Mygind, S., & Sereechaiporn, B. (2019). The Educational Functions of Humorous Historical Narratives in Children’s Educational TV in Anti-Oppressive Historical Education—A Case Study of CBBC’s Horrible Histories.

Pagani, L. S., Fitzpatrick, C., Barnett, T. A., & Dubow, E. (2010). Prospective associations between early childhood television exposure and academic, psychosocial, and physical well-being by middle childhood. Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine, 164(5), 425-431.

Peruta, A., & Powers, J. (2017). Look who’s talking to our kids: Representations of race and gender in TV commercials on Nickelodeon. International Journal of Communication, 11, 16.

Phillips, N. and Frost, N. (2012) “Crime in Prime Time,” in R. Bing III (ed.) Race, Crime and the Media, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Piaget, J. (1965). The moral judgment of the child. Free Press.

Puzio, D., Makowska, I., & Rymarczyk, K. (2022). Raising the Child—Do Screen Media Help or Hinder? The Quality over Quantity Hypothesis. International journal of environmental research and public health, 19(16), 9880.

Rajawat, Deepika. "Cartoon!!! and it’s effects on socio-emotional development of preschoolers." IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS) 22, no. 2 (2017): 13-19.

Staben, J. L. (2018). The Cartoon Effect: Rethinking Comic Violence in the Animated Children's Cartoon (Master's thesis, Ohio University).

Ramsy, M. (2020). Heroizing Restorative Justice: Steven Universe and Rewriting Justice Narratives through Superhero Cartoons. Calif. L. Rev. Online, 11, 417.

Rasmussen, E. E., Shafer, A., Colwell, M. J., White, S., Punyanunt-Carter, N., Densley, R. L., & Wright, H. (2016). Relation between active mediation, exposure to Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood, and US preschoolers’ social and emotional development. Journal of Children and Media, 10(4), 443-461.

Reiner, R. (2002) “Media Made Criminality: The Representation of Crime in the Mass Media,” in M. Maguire, R. Morgan and R. Reiner (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Reiner, R. (2007) Media Made Criminality, The Representation of Crime in the Mass Media, in M. Maguire, R. Morgan, R. Reiner (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology, (4th ed) New York: Oxford University Press.

Reinhard, C. D., Olson, C. J., & Kahlenberg, S. G. (2017). Introduction: Looking Past Stereotypes of Gender Identity and Sexuality in Children’s Media. London, UK: Lexington Books.

Richert, R. A., Robb, M. B., Fender, J. G., & Wartella, E. (2010). Word learning from baby videos. Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine, 164(5), 432-437.

Rideout, V., & Robb, M. B. (2020). The Common Sense census: Media use by kids age zero to eight, 2020. San Francisco, CA: Common Sense Media.

Robertson, T. S. and Rossiter, J. R. 1974. Children and commercial persuasion: An attribution theory analysis.. Journal of Consumer Research, 1: 13–20.

Rust, L. W. (2001). Summative Evaluation of Dragon Tales: Final Report. In New York, NY: Sesame Workshop (Vol. 85).

Samaniego, C. M., & Pascual, A. C. (2007). The teaching and learning of values through television. International review of education, 53, 5-21.

Schiau, S., Plitea, I., GUSIŢĂ, A., Pjekny, S., & Iancu, I. (2013). How do cartoons teach children? A comparative analysis on preschoolers and schoolchildren. Journal of Media Research, 6(3).

Soliman, T. (2015). Cartoons’ Effect in Changing Children Mental Response and Behavior. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 3: 248-264.

Smetana, J. G. (1999). The role of parents in moral development: A social domain analysis. Journal of moral education, 28(3), 311-321.

Smetana, J. G., Schlagman, N., & Adams, P. W. (1993). Preschool children's judgments about hypothetical and actual transgressions. Child development, 64(1), 202-214.

Storz, O. "How Love Ought to Be: The Power of Sapphic Representation in Animated Children’s Cartoons" (2022). Honor Scholar Theses. 182, Scholarly and Creative Work from DePauw University.

Surette, Ray. (2007). Media, crime, and criminal justice : images, realities, and policies (3rd ed.). Thomson/Wadsworth.

Vasquez, D. (2004, November). Rudolph, that legacy of Christmas TV: It’s been a long sleigh ride, for sure, 40 years. Media Life. Retrieved May 17, 2006 from http://www.medialifemagazine.com/news2004/nov04/nov01/5_fri/news4friday.html

Wall, T., & McClanahan, B. (2024). “Little wars with the police”: Aesthetic arsenals and intellects of insult. Crime, Media, Culture, 17416590241238952.

Walsh, A., & Leaper, C. (2020). A content analysis of gender representations in preschool children’s television. Mass Communication and Society, 23(3), 331-355.

Webb, C. S. (2024). Cartooning evil: An exploration of the archetype of evil in cartoons as public pedagogy AR (Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University Graduate School).

Weston, D. R., & Turiel, E. (1980). Act–rule relations: Children's concepts of social rules. Developmental Psychology, 16(5), 417.

Williams, A. J., & Danovitch, J. H. (2019). What does Mickey Mouse know about food? Children’s trust in favorite characters versus experts. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 187, 104647.