Connect with us

Business

How 'CoComelon' became a mass media juggernaut for preschoolers

Published

on

How 'CoComelon' became a mass media juggernaut for preschoolers

Fifty-five years ago, preschoolers were captivated by the TV performance of a fuzzy blue monster, two striped shirt-wearing best friends and a big yellow bird.

Today, in the now-crowded field of children’s media, one big-headed, animated toddler named JJ is running to the top.

Born from YouTube, JJ and his friends in the animated kids’ franchise “CoComelon” represent a new wave of children’s programming. Focused on songs, bright colors and a world with no sharp edges, “CoComelon” has become a children’s media juggernaut, spawning spin-offs, video games, toys, a live tour and a story-time podcast. Although its multimedia approach to kids’ content has helped expand its audience, it has also raised questions about screen time and what kind of content — if any — very young children should be watching.

Reflecting on the brand’s growth, CoComelon General Manager Patrick Reese said the company is thoughtful about the needs of its young audience and its own legacy in children’s media.

Advertisement

“We very much stand on the shoulders of giants in this space, like ‘Mr. Rogers’ and ‘Sesame Street,’” he said. “If you learn to be kind and open in those early years, if you learn that growth mindset way of thinking, that becomes your behavior for the rest of your life. And if we can create an environment and create these various shows and these various different streams of content that just make the world 1% kinder, 5% kinder, 10% kinder … we’re going to seize that opportunity.”

“CoComelon” has indeed taken the lucrative kids media market by storm.

In 2023, “CoComelon” ranked fifth on Nielsen’s list of top 10 overall streaming programs, bested only by the legal drama “Suits,” the Australian animated series “Bluey,” the long-running procedural “NCIS” and the medical drama “Grey’s Anatomy.” Beyond its presence on Netflix, the brand also commands massive engagement on its native YouTube.

“CoComelon” producer Moonbug Entertainment declined to share financial results for the franchise, but parent company Candle Media said Moonbug was the biggest and most profitable piece of its business, which also includes actor Reese Witherspoon’s Hello Sunshine production company.

The market for kids entertainment is “massive,” said Brandon Katz, senior entertainment industry strategist at Parrot Analytics. “It boasts probably the best re-watchability rates of anything in the market. What that represents is an incredibly long tail of engagement for whatever that one project cost.”

Advertisement

The genesis of “CoComelon” dates back to 2006, when commercial director Jay Jeon and his wife, a children’s book author, posted their first video to YouTube of a short cartoon played to music — alphabet-related animations that stemmed from videos they made to entertain their own sons.

By 2017, the videos had started to center on a toddler named JJ with a single blond curl. By 2020, “CoComelon” was the most-watched YouTube channel in the world, with more than 3.5 billion average monthly views, and had attracted potential suitors.

That year, it was acquired by the London-based Moonbug Entertainment, which also bought fellow YouTube children’s program “Blippi.” A year later, Moonbug was acquired by Candle Media, led by ex-Disney executives Kevin Mayer and Tom Staggs, for a reported $3 billion.

For “CoComelon‘s” Reese, who has worked on the franchise since 2018 and saw the dealmaking frenzy, the effect of the acquisitions has been stark.

There is now “CoComelon Lane,” a streaming series on Netflix that follows the adventures of JJ and his friends. In September, Moonbug released a live-action YouTube spin-off called “CoComelon Classroom,” which stars National Teacher of the Year awardee Juliana Urtubey as Ms. Appleberry. In the video series, Urtubey teaches lessons about letters, sings songs and interacts with an animated JJ.

Advertisement

Much of the creative team works at Moonbug’s office near the Grove in Los Angeles’ Fairfax district. A wall with three shelves’ worth of “Blippi” and “CoComelon” toys greet visitors.

“We’ve been able to grow so much faster,” Reese said. “We probably would not have been able to create all of these different shows, create all the different franchise moments that we’ve created, expanded consumer products and goods in the same way.”

But the franchise faces stiff competition in the preschool entertainment space from “Bluey,” which has generated 587 million hours of viewing through July, compared to 218 million hours for “CoComelon” and 45 million hours for “CoComelon Lane,” according to Nielsen data.

That disparity could be due to the difference in how “CoComelon” and “Bluey” are perceived, particularly by parents. Adults will readily admit watching “Bluey” with their kids, noting how the family dynamics feel real and relatable.

But “CoComelon” does have about a 50% co-watching rate with adults, said Staggs of Candle Media. Mayer said he and Staggs have been thanked by parents for their work on “CoComelon,” which provides relief and emotional stability for their kids during times of stress.

Advertisement

“It’s heartwarming, it’s easy to digest,” said Nancy Jennings, a professor at the University of Cincinnati and director of its Children’s Entertainment and Education Research Lab. “There’s not a lot of dialogue that you have to follow, and with the songs too, a lot of the characteristics of the show are attractive to kids in general.”

But even kids’ media is not immune to Hollywood’s recent struggles. Last year’s dual Hollywood strikes and the upheaval in the industry has touched nearly every company in the industry, including Candle Media, which is backed by Blackstone.

“Candle Media has come through a very difficult time, as the rest of the industry has … but as a whole, we’re profitable,” Mayer said. “And Moonbug is the main driver of that, and is, in and of, itself, very profitable too.”

The company must also grapple with concerns about children’s screen time.

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that families avoid screen media, other than video-chatting, for children younger than 18 months, and that children ages 2 to 5 should get only an hour of screen time a day. The primary audience for “CoComelon” is kids ages 0 to 4.

Advertisement

Research, though largely correlational, has shown that heavy exposure to screens at early ages is associated with inattention and impulsive behaviors, said Drew Cingel, an associate professor in UC Davis’ communication department who directs the university’s human development and media lab. Programs with bright colors, repetition and songs grab hold of children’s attention, he said.

“There are 24 hours in a day, and when you’re a developing child, there’s a lot of things you need to do in those 24 hours in order to get you the inputs you need to develop normally and healthfully,” he said. “Anything that takes up a sizable portion of those 24 hours can displace the time that could be spent practicing these developmental capabilities.”

Reese said that the company works with educational consultants and that there are ways for families and children to interact with “CoComelon” beyond screen time, such as through books and live tours. The company says it takes seriously its responsibility of teaching and entertaining children for the amount of time they spend with “CoComelon” content.

“It’s for every family to decide for themselves what their level of comfort is with any activity,” Reese said. “We want to create the best environment and the best tools, and the most entertaining, enriching content that we possibly can. And use us how it makes you happy.”

Every episode must incorporate music and life skills, said Rich Hickey, chief creative officer. A so-called story trust meets weekly to discuss ideas, and themes revolve around milestones and lessons that families experience on a regular basis.

Advertisement

“You really want to meet kids and families where they’re at,” said Hannah Kole, senior development executive. “We really want to make sure that those are relatable experiences that we know kids are going through.”

That can include bath time, eating vegetables or experiencing something new for the first time.

“Every day, we’re reminding ourselves that we’ve got a responsibility to a huge audience, globally,” Hickey said. “We’re trying to make a meaningful connection, that parents and caregivers will trust us that we’re going to make content that’s enriching and warm and safe for their children.”

Advertisement

Business

Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

Published

on

Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

new video loaded: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

In mapping out Elon Musk’s wealth, our investigation found that Mr. Musk is behind more than 90 companies in Texas. Kirsten Grind, a New York Times Investigations reporter, explains what her team found.

By Kirsten Grind, Melanie Bencosme, James Surdam and Sean Havey

February 27, 2026

Continue Reading

Business

Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office

Published

on

Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office

Trump has crowed about the gains in the U.S. stock market during his term, but in 2025 investors saw more opportunity in the rest of the world.

If you’re a stock market investor you might be feeling pretty good about how your portfolio of U.S. equities fared in the first year of President Trump’s term.

All the major market indices seemed to be firing on all cylinders, with the Standard & Poor’s 500 index gaining 17.9% through the full year.

But if you’re the type of investor who looks for things to regret, pay no attention to the rest of the world’s stock markets. That’s because overseas markets did better than the U.S. market in 2025 — a lot better. The MSCI World ex-USA index — that is, all the stock markets except the U.S. — gained more than 32% last year, nearly double the percentage gains of U.S. markets.

That’s a major departure from recent trends. Since 2013, the MSCI US index had bested the non-U.S. index every year except 2017 and 2022, sometimes by a wide margin — in 2024, for instance, the U.S. index gained 24.6%, while non-U.S. markets gained only 4.7%.

Advertisement

The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade.

— Katie Martin, Financial Times

Broken down into individual country markets (also by MSCI indices), in 2025 the U.S. ranked 21st out of 23 developed markets, with only New Zealand and Denmark doing worse. Leading the pack were Austria and Spain, with 86% gains, but superior records were turned in by Finland, Ireland and Hong Kong, with gains of 50% or more; and the Netherlands, Norway, Britain and Japan, with gains of 40% or more.

Investment analysts cite several factors to explain this trend. Judging by traditional metrics such as price/earnings multiples, the U.S. markets have been much more expensive than those in the rest of the world. Indeed, they’re historically expensive. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index traded in 2025 at about 23 times expected corporate earnings; the historical average is 18 times earnings.

Advertisement

Investment managers also have become nervous about the concentration of market gains within the U.S. technology sector, especially in companies associated with artificial intelligence R&D. Fears that AI is an investment bubble that could take down the S&P’s highest fliers have investors looking elsewhere for returns.

But one factor recurs in almost all the market analyses tracking relative performance by U.S. and non-U.S. markets: Donald Trump.

Investors started 2025 with optimism about Trump’s influence on trading opportunities, given his apparent commitment to deregulation and his braggadocio about America’s dominant position in the world and his determination to preserve, even increase it.

That hasn’t been the case for months.

”The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade,” Katie Martin of the Financial Times wrote this week. “Wherever you look in financial markets, you see signs that global investors are going out of their way to avoid Donald Trump’s America.”

Advertisement

Two Trump policy initiatives are commonly cited by wary investment experts. One, of course, is Trump’s on-and-off tariffs, which have left investors with little ability to assess international trade flows. The Supreme Court’s invalidation of most Trump tariffs and the bellicosity of his response, which included the immediate imposition of new 10% tariffs across the board and the threat to increase them to 15%, have done nothing to settle investors’ nerves.

Then there’s Trump’s driving down the value of the dollar through his agitation for lower interest rates, among other policies. For overseas investors, a weaker dollar makes U.S. assets more expensive relative to the outside world.

It would be one thing if trade flows and the dollar’s value reflected economic conditions that investors could themselves parse in creating a picture of investment opportunities. That’s not the case just now. “The current uncertainty is entirely man-made (largely by one orange-hued man in particular) but could well continue at least until the US mid-term elections in November,” Sam Burns of Mill Street Research wrote on Dec. 29.

Trump hasn’t been shy about trumpeting U.S. stock market gains as emblems of his policy wisdom. “The stock market has set 53 all-time record highs since the election,” he said in his State of the Union address Tuesday. “Think of that, one year, boosting pensions, 401(k)s and retirement accounts for the millions and the millions of Americans.”

Trump asserted: “Since I took office, the typical 401(k) balance is up by at least $30,000. That’s a lot of money. … Because the stock market has done so well, setting all those records, your 401(k)s are way up.”

Advertisement

Trump’s figure doesn’t conform to findings by retirement professionals such as the 401(k) overseers at Bank of America. They reported that the average account balance grew by only about $13,000 in 2025. I asked the White House for the source of Trump’s claim, but haven’t heard back.

Interpreting stock market returns as snapshots of the economy is a mug’s game. Despite that, at her recent appearance before a House committee, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi tried to deflect questions about her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein records by crowing about it.

“The Dow is over 50,000 right now, she declared. “Americans’ 401(k)s and retirement savings are booming. That’s what we should be talking about.”

I predicted that the administration would use the Dow industrial average’s break above 50,000 to assert that “the overall economy is firing on all cylinders, thanks to his policies.” The Dow reached that mark on Feb. 6. But Feb. 11, the day of Bondi’s testimony, was the last day the index closed above 50,000. On Thursday, it closed at 49,499.50, or about 1.4% below its Feb. 10 peak close of 50,188.14.

To use a metric suggested by economist Justin Wolfers of the University of Michigan, if you invested $48,488 in the Dow on the day Trump took office last year, when the Dow closed at 48,448 points, you would have had $50,000 on Feb. 6. That’s a gain of about 3.2%. But if you had invested the same amount in the global stock market not including the U.S. (based on the MSCI World ex-USA index), on that same day you would have had nearly $60,000. That’s a gain of nearly 24%.

Advertisement

Broader market indices tell essentially the same story. From Jan. 17, 2025, the last day before Trump’s inauguration, through Thursday’s close, the MSCI US stock index gained a cumulative 16.3%. But the world index minus the U.S. gained nearly 42%.

The gulf between U.S. and non-U.S. performance has continued into the current year. The S&P 500 has gained about 0.74% this year through Wednesday, while the MSCI World ex-USA index has gained about 8.9%. That’s “the best start for a calendar year for global stocks relative to the S&P 500 going back to at least 1996,” Morningstar reports.

It wouldn’t be unusual for the discrepancy between the U.S. and global markets to shrink or even reverse itself over the course of this year.

That’s what happened in 2017, when overseas markets as tracked by MSCI beat the U.S. by more than three percentage points, and 2022, when global markets lost money but U.S. markets underperformed the rest of the world by more than five percentage points.

Economic conditions change, and often the stock markets march to their own drummers. The one thing less likely to change is that Trump is set to remain president until Jan. 20, 2029. Make your investment bets accordingly.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

How the S&P 500 Stock Index Became So Skewed to Tech and A.I.

Published

on

How the S&P 500 Stock Index Became So Skewed to Tech and A.I.

Nvidia, the chipmaker that became the world’s most valuable public company two years ago, was alone worth more than $4.75 trillion as of Thursday morning. Its value, or market capitalization, is more than double the combined worth of all the companies in the energy sector, including oil giants like Exxon Mobil and Chevron.

The chipmaker’s market cap has swelled so much recently, it is now 20 percent greater than the sum of all of the companies in the materials, utilities and real estate sectors combined.

Advertisement

What unifies these giant tech companies is artificial intelligence. Nvidia makes the hardware that powers it; Microsoft, Apple and others have been making big bets on products that people can use in their everyday lives.

But as worries grow over lavish spending on A.I., as well as the technology’s potential to disrupt large swaths of the economy, the outsize influence that these companies exert over markets has raised alarms. They can mask underlying risks in other parts of the index. And if a handful of these giants falter, it could mean widespread damage to investors’ portfolios and retirement funds in ways that could ripple more broadly across the economy.

Advertisement

The dynamic has drawn comparisons to past crises, notably the dot-com bubble. Tech companies also made up a large share of the stock index then — though not as much as today, and many were not nearly as profitable, if they made money at all.

Advertisement

How the current moment compares with past pre-crisis moments

To understand how abnormal and worrisome this moment might be, The New York Times analyzed data from S&P Dow Jones Indices that compiled the market values of the companies in the S&P 500 in December 1999 and August 2007. Each date was chosen roughly three months before a downturn to capture the weighted breakdown of the index before crises fully took hold and values fell.

Advertisement

The companies that make up the index have periodically cycled in and out, and the sectors were reclassified over the last two decades. But even after factoring in those changes, the picture that emerges is a market that is becoming increasingly one-sided.

In December 1999, the tech sector made up 26 percent of the total.

In August 2007, just before the Great Recession, it was only 14 percent.

Advertisement

Today, tech is worth a third of the market, as other vital sectors, such as energy and those that include manufacturing, have shrunk.

Since then, the huge growth of the internet, social media and other technologies propelled the economy.

Advertisement

Now, never has so much of the market been concentrated in so few companies. The top 10 make up almost 40 percent of the S&P 500.

Advertisement

How much of the S&P 500 is occupied by the top 10 companies

With greater concentration of wealth comes greater risk. When so much money has accumulated in just a handful of companies, stock trading can be more volatile and susceptible to large swings. One day after Nvidia posted a huge profit for its most recent quarter, its stock price paradoxically fell by 5.5 percent. So far in 2026, more than a fifth of the stocks in the S&P 500 have moved by 20 percent or more. Companies and industries that are seen as particularly prone to disruption by A.I. have been hard hit.

Advertisement

The volatility can be compounded as everyone reorients their businesses around A.I, or in response to it.

The artificial intelligence boom has touched every corner of the economy. As data centers proliferate to support massive computation, the utilities sector has seen huge growth, fueled by the energy demands of the grid. In 2025, companies like NextEra and Exelon saw their valuations surge.

Advertisement

The industrials sector, too, has undergone a notable shift. General Electric was its undisputed heavyweight in 1999 and 2007, but the recent explosion in data center construction has evened out growth in the sector. GE still leads today, but Caterpillar is a very close second. Caterpillar, which is often associated with construction, has seen a spike in sales of its turbines and power-generation equipment, which are used in data centers.

One large difference between the big tech companies now and their counterparts during the dot-com boom is that many now earn money. A lot of the well-known names in the late 1990s, including Pets.com, had soaring valuations and little revenue, which meant that when the bubble popped, many companies quickly collapsed.

Advertisement

Nvidia, Apple, Alphabet and others generate hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue each year.

And many of the biggest players in artificial intelligence these days are private companies. OpenAI, Anthropic and SpaceX are expected to go public later this year, which could further tilt the market dynamic toward tech and A.I.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Methodology

Sector values reflect the GICS code classification system of companies in the S&P 500. As changes to the GICS system took place from 1999 to now, The New York Times reclassified all companies in the index in 1999 and 2007 with current sector values. All monetary figures from 1999 and 2007 have been adjusted for inflation.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending