False Prophet wrote:
I get what you're saying, but agendas are almost always self-serving. The CBR forums are like any other company like DC and Marvel, or site, like OH, in that if their actions make the user/consumer experience enjoyable, that's great, but in the end it has to serve and protect itself first.
This is why I thought we stopped (or never started considering OHG) making articles and threads on the happenings of other boards. Suddenly we're talking about site-wide conspiracies and agendas and unprofessionalism and unfairness on a grand scale when frankly it's all conjecture. Just a little while ago I swear it seems like people were calling CBR DC-hating Marvel shills and BC Marvel-hating DC shills and now it's the complete opposite. People see what they want to see. That's not to say the forums are blameless, because they're not. Comics journalism and message forum are in a shitty state and a lot of mistakes are being made by individuals and those actions are casting a bad light on their sites as a whole. Writing and board moderation are easily construed as agenda-driven.
No matter how many circles one talks around the issue, if you are someone who loves most of the crap a company dishes out no matter what just b/c you are a fanboy, then you probably are not in the position to make the best decision about how to fairly handle critics of that company.
Also, though I doubt DC had anything to do with this issue, people that think there isn't a lot going on behind the scenes between websites and company people are naive. People from competing websites talk to each other behind the scenes, creators and comp employees talk to each other behind the scenes, etc. Does anyone really think that we are the only site DC tried to bully? Hell, we know the same type of stuff went on way back at rama with Brady, which is one of the reasons he divided up the forum, where it used to be all combined, splitting it into DC, Marvel, etc. Negative forums have been a company concern for a long time.
Here, I'm sure it's just an over-zealous mod (which is someone that shouldn't be modding), but what does it take for a "site-wide conspiracy"? One staff member mentioning to a mod in casual conversation that DC gave them some crap for this or that, then that mod, fan of the company, who thinks, 'yea, we do allow too many negatives to go on about this subject I love' and then a few weeks later comes up with their own idea about how to address it. That's not a conspiracy or agenda, stuff like that happens organically. Is that how it went down? Probably not, but to say that it either has to be the actions of one man or a company wide conspiracy is a bit ridiculous.
As for journalism? Don't get me started.