The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

[Herald]

Nah, I'm advocating a press and message board blackout of books considered to be crap. That's not passive. It's basically a shunning tactic, which isn't passive at all.

1. It's sure not active, especially along the lines of putting a bill into law.
That requires work. So does commenting on a work you find to be bad.
Those are active.

2. The idea that all the websites that do reviews and all the forums that comment on comics are going to stop reviewing and commenting on said books is absurd, at best.

3. As I mentioned, it still wouldn't stop them from doing the same thing again, anyway.
Nobody saying anything about the books doesn't tell the company what it's doing wrong.
Therefore, they'll just keep doing it because they don't know any better.

[Flynn the Pirate]

Great article, as always Blue.

It seems to me that simply not buying a book, as opposed to continuing to give a book that one finds offensive or written poorly the attention it may or may not deserve, is the best way to enact the change that many call for.

The corporations who publish comics don't see internet whining as large enough of a inhibition against publishing a book, just as the aforementioned corporations don't see critical acclaim as a reason to keep publishing the self-same books. What matters is the bottom line. Oh, in the latter case they may string a book along (see the entire Cosmic Line post-Annihilation for evidence of this), but ultimately they will pull the plug if they think that it will not make any sort of monetary return for them.

Speaking as someone who has on more than one occassion railed against a book month in and month out, I say this with no small amount of head-hanging: whether or not one wishes to speak out against a creative move on a message board or in a blog, if one is still buying the book, then at the end of the day one is just making noise. Again, I'm not saying not to be vocal in one's opinion, but if one deludes oneself into thinking that by posting angry diatribes on the internet is somehow making a stand while not taking the real step of no longer purchasing the book, then the only ones who are making any sort of gains are the same people that are being railed against.

[Stalzer2002]

Great work, Blue. It constantly amazes me about how people just don't get it. It's like that one burger commercial with Paris Hilton a few years ago. The damn thing aired more on the news than it did as a commercial. Without publicity these things simply wither and die. This notion that railing against these two books will stop them is absurd. All it will do is drive the idiots who watch Jersey Shore, went to Charlie Sheen's live shows and made Kim Kardashian a multi-millionaire to the stores. It's like Breevort said a few months ago, they'd rather you hate the books than be apathetic towards them. This is exactly what he was talking about, and they're doing exactly what the Didiot and his crew want.

[chap22]

Great work, Blue. It constantly amazes me about how people just don't get it. It's like that one burger commercial with Paris Hilton a few years ago. The damn thing aired more on the news than it did as a commercial. Without publicity these things simply wither and die. This notion that railing against these two books will stop them is absurd. All it will do is drive the idiots who watch Jersey Shore, went to Charlie Sheen's live shows and made Kim Kardashian a multi-millionaire to the stores. It's like Breevort said a few months ago, they'd rather you hate the books than be apathetic towards them. This is exactly what he was talking about, and they're doing exactly what the Didiot and his crew want.

b/c, as always, there is no such thing as "bad" publicity.

[BlueStreak]

b/c, as always, there is no such thing as "bad" publicity.

That's why I propose taking the publicity away.

[Herald]

b/c, as always, there is no such thing as "bad" publicity.

Tell that to Tiger "I Lost All My Multi-Million Dollar Endorsement Deals" Woods.

[Royal Nonesuch]

Wait, there are boobs in comics?!

::goes out and buys some comics::

[Herald]

This notion that railing against these two books will stop them is absurd. All it will do is drive the idiots who watch Jersey Shore, went to Charlie Sheen's live shows and made Kim Kardashian a multi-millionaire to the stores.

Yeah, I'm sure they ALL read comic book forums and blogs religiously.

It's like Breevort said a few months ago, they'd rather you hate the books than be apathetic towards them. This is exactly what he was talking about, and they're doing exactly what the Didiot and his crew want.

Like I keep saying, the hype and the sales numbers on these books are going to die down in any case. Making people hate the books to the point of railing against them AND dropping them will only exacerbate this exodus. If THAT is what they want, they're even more foolish than even I thought.

[SuperginraiX]

There's also other ways to protest things like this. Instead of causing a big internet stink, write an actual, physical letter. I hear those are taken more seriously because it means you wrote an actual, physical letter instead of contributing to the overall negativity of the internet. If I were a publisher, I'd let sales and real letters drive change (mostly sales) and would take the internet with a grain of salt.

And that's not really a new thought. On Shooter's blog, he had someone ask him about letters written about Secret Wars. He said that even though Secret Wars drew a lot of negativity in the fan press, the letters they received were mostly positive. Sales were through the roof. As far as he was concerned, that spells success (and sequel).

We on the forums spend most of our time complaining about things we don't like (I, for example, will NOT let Steve Rogers leaping out of the Quincarrier for no reason in Fear Itself #3 go no matter who tells me to stop). I'd say most creators expect that and are less moved by all the negative chatter. Because there is a LOT of it.

Even SDCC Batgirl made a point to spread her message personally.

[chap22]

Tell that to Tiger "I Lost All My Multi-Million Dollar Endorsement Deals" Woods.

sure, right after he tells me that golf TV ratings and tournament attendances are STILL exponentially higher when he's playing in a tournament than when he isn't. it may be b/c they want to see him crash and burn, but people still want to see him. and it ain't like he's hurting for money.

[GHERU]

Nice article
What is confusing me about this whole "DC hates women" movement is that the focus is on these two books and ignoring two other books that came out this month that shows a different side of women, Batwoman and Supergirl. Both books, IMO, are what people say they are looking for.

Oh, and Batgirl, another good DC book about a female.

I haven't read WW yet, but even Hawk and Dove seemed to fullfil the requests of the "DC hates women" crowd.

T&A may not be everyones cup of tea but 2 (3 counting Voodoo) books out of 7 does not, IMO, make a trend.

The cover of Catwoman said everything anyone needed to know about the risque nature of the book and Red Hood's cover told me explicitly that it was not for children and that it was going to be a "brains off" kind of book

I, kinda, get the whole controversy, but at the same time, people shouldn't expect comic books with T and/or T+ on the cover to be PG.

[Punchy]

Nice article
What is confusing me about this whole "DC hates women" movement is that the focus is on these two books and ignoring two other books that came out this month that shows a different side of women, Batwoman and Supergirl. Both books, IMO, are what people say they are looking for.

Oh, and Batgirl, another good DC book about a female.

I haven't read WW yet, but even Hawk and Dove seemed to fullfil the requests of the "DC hates women" crowd.

T&A may not be everyones cup of tea but 2 (3 counting Voodoo) books out of 7 does not, IMO, make a trend.

The cover of Catwoman said everything anyone needed to know about the risque nature of the book and Red Hood's cover told me explicitly that it was not for children and that it was going to be a "brains off" kind of book

I, kinda, get the whole controversy, but at the same time, people shouldn't expect comic books with T and/or T+ on the cover to be PG.

Also Birds Of Prey

[xaraan]

The end is the most important part... outside of any controversy these comics were not good and definitely not worth 2.99. Hell I don't even think they would be worth .99.

[flexmentallo]

Actually, that's a complete misunderstanding of my second comment, Christian. Here's what I said on reddit:"And the idea that people shouldn't be able to complain about something that is obviously disgusting them about mainstream comics and prohibiting them from caring about or enjoying these comics is exactly why mainstream comics are in the midst of going through an ungraceful and ugly death."I'm not talking about the blogosphere at all but readers who are told they shouldn't be able to take issue with poor treatment of female characters in comics. It wasn't directed explicitly at DC but at the people who attack readers who voice their dissent and my point is that by shutting these people out, many of whom are either new or lapsed readers, we are effectively increasing the hostility that many people feel comic fandom is full of. In that same comment I then went on to question why comic fans are so resistant to doing anything that would make comic fandom a more hospitable place.We all work in the same industry here, so I figure there's no real reason any of us would want this industry to continue to lose readers, which makes this something more than just a DC issue and definitely something more than a plea for comic companies to simply listen to "the blogosphere." I'm also available all the time on DM and through Comics Bulletin, so there's no real reason to distort random reddit quotes either. Although I do appreciate the novelty of constructing an article almost exclusively from what went on in the past week on r/comicbooks.-Nick

[chap22]

The serious posts are the best.



How do some people not get that Blue's tongue is practically sticking THROUGH his cheek in these "articles"? It's called Idiot's Guide Weekly, people...it ain't hard-hitting journalism. :rolleyes: