most recent trickles friends calendar user info slide back slide back slip forward slip forward
Trickle of Consciousness - What will $20 get me?
jkason
[info]jkason
Add to Memories
Share
What will $20 get me?
Dirk Deppey links to (and rightfully dismisses) this nonsense, an article ostensibly responding to the entitlement issues of the online comics community, but which is instead the journalistic equivalent of a blow job. A sloppy, adolescent one, at that.

The offenses here are legion, among them the fact that Meeley (the author) desperately needs an editor--or at the very least a sound beating with a grammar book. Teach him how to use a comma. Teach him how to recognize sentence fragments. For God's sake, have somebody teach this man the difference between its and it's.

Even forgiving the torturous use of English, the argument itself makes little sense. This isn't about entitlement in general, it's about trying to argue that CGE's recently-publicized financial troubles are no one's business but CGE's: "The issue with CGE and the freelancers was private business, that should have remained so." Why, sure, because the financial status of a company that's made a recognizable name for itself isn't news anywhere outside of the childish comics community, right? I mean, you can't find news about businesses or financials out in the more grown-up real world.

I'm suspicious of Meeley's assertion that Bob Kane (creator of Batman) became "rich" off the Dark Knight, as by and large very few of the Golden Age (or Silver Age, for that matter) creators even managed "comfortably secure" as a result of their various work-for-hire properties, though I'll let it go without more information either way. Whether Kane was rich or not, the financial distribution of monies made on a property the size of Batman is, again, more than enough to make it newsworthy; so, too, is the attribution--or lack thereof--of creator's credit (to Bill Finger) for the same reason.

If I'm suspicious of Kane's untold millions, I'm downright flummoxed by how Meeley can say:

And to you 'newshounds' out there, quit with the doomsaying. Saying CGE is 'going under' isn't going to do anything, save make some who might actually TRY the work pass on it because they think it's not worth their time.

I don't know what sites Meeley's reading, but I've never seen a single article (on Newsarama, Pulse, ICv2, or even Journalista! for that matter) claiming CGE was going under. Each site reported information on the financial details which have never been disputed by any of the parties involved. Freelancers say CGE isn't paying; CGE says they're not paying. Maybe I missed it, but can someone point me to the "CrossGen Going Under" headline?

Bear witness, too, to great and powerful non-sequiturs like:

Do you want them thinking all those stupid cliche's [sic] about comic fans are true, or do you want to show them that comics are not only a great source of entertainment but something that people of all ages and races can be a part of?

Cliches like the fact that comics fans are childish? Myths that might be dispelled by having comics news sources cover grown-up topics like, say, financial news? And what does any of this have to do with "all ages and races"?

I should concede that, somewhere in the middle of the essay, Meeley actually has an example that supports his initial thesis (he points to the long-running debate about who is "the real Green Lantern"), but it's one paragraph in the midst of a lengthy and repetitive diatribe against "doomsaying" CGE, and as such his only truly persuasive example reads as little more than a distraction. Well it might be, as this and the above-mentioned Kane example seem shoehorned in the middle of the essay as a means of proving Meeley's not just ranting about a single news story.

He's ranting about a single news story. He's got about three points to make on the matter, though he seems to think that making one's point is the same thing as continually restating said point. No, that's what we call redundant.

In the end, Meeley suggests that the end of company-sponsored message boards might fix the problem. Personally, I think maybe getting rid of message board posts masquerading as journalism might be a more inspired choice.

Tags: ,

Comments
From: (Anonymous) Date: September 9th, 2003 12:51 am (UTC) (wanna link?)
I think maybe getting rid of message board posts masquerading as journalism might be a more inspired choice

Ya took the words right outta my mouth.

-Carrie
From: (Anonymous) Date: September 9th, 2003 03:29 pm (UTC) (wanna link?)

If that's how you feel....

...then you should swing by BF and join the ongoing discussion about this column right now, Jason. Here's the link: http://www.brokenfrontier.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3793

Stop by and see us!!

Chris Hunter
jkason From: [info]jkason Date: September 9th, 2003 06:10 pm (UTC) (wanna link?)

Re: If that's how you feel....

I looked over the thread, but I don't think there's really much more I have to contribute beyond what I said in the blog entry itself. Since I see you were nice enough to link to it, I'll probably forgo registering for another message board at the moment; I tend to lurk more than post for the most part. I'll definitely keep an eye on it, though, to see how folks respond.
From: (Anonymous) Date: September 9th, 2003 04:05 pm (UTC) (wanna link?)

To clarify

This is strictly and OP/ED piece, Jason. This wasn't a "message board post masquerading as journalism" as you put it. Heck, it was just like your piece above, complete opinion with no journalistic merit at all.

Just wanted to clarify that. Thanks!

Chris Hunter
jkason From: [info]jkason Date: September 9th, 2003 06:25 pm (UTC) (wanna link?)

Re: To clarify

I might argue that journalism has a broader definition than you're implying, and that OP/ED (or lifestyles reporting, or entertainment reviews, for example) actually falls within that, though I don't really feel it's worth an extended argument. I thought the line you're quoting was a snazzy closer, but if it doesn't work for you, that's a perfectly reasonable critique.

And for the record, I try to make sure my writing is generally as meritless as possible. It saves time. :)
From: (Anonymous) Date: September 9th, 2003 09:23 pm (UTC) (wanna link?)

Re: To clarify

LOL!! It was a snazzy closer as well!! Meritless is the new new black, I hear!

But I did enjoy your thoughts on the matter, Jason. Guess I need to bookmark this page, huh?

Chris Hunter
chrishunter@brokenfrontier.com
jkason From: [info]jkason Date: September 10th, 2003 02:45 pm (UTC) (wanna link?)

Re: To clarify

Bookmark away! I should warn you, though, that I don't always blog comics. I do, however, rant in much the same manner regardless of topic, so there should be amusement to be had with or without sequential art content.
gamaliel8 From: [info]gamaliel8 Date: September 9th, 2003 05:36 pm (UTC) (wanna link?)
I was astonished at this petulant rant when I read it last night. Apparently Meeley is unable to make the distinction between news reports and fanboy rage on the message boards on those same sites. Of course, there are people like the idiot on comicon who has a one man CrossGen Death Watch, but Meeley can't seem to figure out that the idiot isn't a news reporter. The line is blurred when sites like comicon post their news on the message boards themselves, but if Meeley can't make a simple distinction like this, he shouldn't be writing opinion columns and should stick to those message boards.

The "none of our business" argument has always irked me, not just because it is never consistenly applied by those who employ it. Why are these people haunting message boards and web sites if they want to declare a large chunk of industry news out of bounds? What's left - Who's stronger, Hulk or Thor? Judging from Meeley's opening sentence, that seems to be what he wants.

If a company isn't paying people, I'd think at the very least other professionals and aspiring creators would want and need to know this information. I wonder what they'd say back in the 70s when Jerry Siegel was bagging groceries and the unfavorable publicity forced DC to give him and Schuster a pension. "Oh, it's none of our business, it's a private business matter, that's what the legal system is for..."
From: (Anonymous) Date: September 9th, 2003 07:25 pm (UTC) (wanna link?)
Meeley lost me when he asked, as so many other whining fans have, "Why did they have to take it to the fans?" The fact of the matter is, WE DIDN'T "TAKE IT TO THE FANS." Robin first posted his CrossGen chronology on a professional inkers' group, and I posted his chronology with a few addenda of my own on my blog. From there it finally hit the comics news sites. The problem is that, for whatever reason, some fans seem to regard these sites as their exclusive domain, and it's just not so. The sites are frequented (although not always posted to) as much by pros as by fans. The point of going public (besides that we were in a position to where dozens of other freelancers aren't, since Robin had never signed a non-disclosure agreement) was to alert the comics community of a newsworthy situation that wasn't being covered as newsworthy situations in other companies had been. If the fans don't want to know (and why is it these same fans always want to know everything negative about Marvel, for instance, but not CGE?) it's easy enough to skip the threads in question without whinging about it.

As for CGE going under, I sincerely hope they don't. I harbor little hope of ever seeing the $1300 that would have helped us attend San Diego and could now help me pay for bifocals and new orthotics and other medical necessities, but we'd certainly never see it were the company to implode. Still, the news of their CFO resigning can't be seen as a positive sign.

- Elayne (http://elayneriggs.blogspot.com)
From: (Anonymous) Date: September 9th, 2003 10:09 pm (UTC) (wanna link?)

Why?

I just have to wonder why it can't be seen as a positive sign. I keep seeing this, all over the internet. Why not? The only fact surrounding Beattie's departure is that, he is, in fact, departing.

What if he was doing something detrimental to the company? His departure could then be seen as a positive.

Just not enough information, at this point, to determine whether it's positive, or negative.

Perceptions, opinions, and assumptions are not facts.
jkason From: [info]jkason Date: September 10th, 2003 02:55 pm (UTC) (wanna link?)
All points I should have made, Elayne, and I feel like a bit of a schlub letting myself get distracted by proper pronoun usage instead (blame my three years teaching comp in grad school, I suppose).

I think fans seem to forget that, just because the professional comics community is small--just because "everyone knows everyone else," as it were--doesn't mean its members are in constant contact with one another. Especially given current technological advancements, comics pros have been able to spread far and wide. Given that, spreading the word about a possible pitfall for pros (go alliteration!) isn't a simple matter. Message boards tend to be one of the few places you can count on "running into" the most people, pro or fan.

To his credit, Chris Hunter actually touched a little on those points (as well as pointing out the blurry line between fan and pro which makes determining who one is "taking it to" more difficult to determine) in his own follow-up on the BF boards.
From: (Anonymous) Date: September 11th, 2003 01:04 am (UTC) (wanna link?)

Why, thank you!!

You know, I try to touch on points that seem to go ignored all of the time, Jason. Glad that you saw that. And by the way, I didn't edit that piece.

Be sure that you do stop by to read all of our regular columns, though, Jason. They're all "good readin'" ;)!

Chris Hunter
From: (Anonymous) Date: September 9th, 2003 07:52 pm (UTC) (wanna link?)
In respose to Ms. Riggs statement I offer up this counter point from the BF thread:


Out of curiosity, I started reading through some of the older threads on the Comic Book Inkers Union discussion group. It looks as though the posters were aware that Rich was reading the threads there long before the 8/13 story broke. In fact, Rich had reported material from that group earlier: In the 6/30 LITG Rich reported on a dispute between Chuck Gibson and Red Sky Entertainment/Fuzion Comics, and Robin Riggs commented:

Robin Riggs wrote:
Okay, so much for this being a nice quiet place to chat with folks about the business. Rich Johnston's latest column has a nice cut and paste of Chuck's back and forth with Jason over Red Sky. That means that either Rich is trawling these groups or someone here is feeding it to him. Either way I'm not posting anything but bland niceties from now on. Like him or loathe him a lot of people read that column and I certainly haven't been posting with that audience in mind.

So I guess it was a bit disingenuous for the Riggses to claim that they only posted on a private group and didn't know anyone else would pick it up. Especially when Robin Riggs wrote on 7/14 "Are you getting all this, Rich?"

This isn't to say this presents the whole story, either. In that same post from 7/14, Riggs said "Rich had that [CG] story long before we started talking about it here," so Rich still could have gotten the story in the 6/16 LITG elsewhere, and then the inkers group started discussing it in reaction. And Rich had popped up himself on 7/1 to assure the group that he didn't specifically trawl the board for rumors (although Rich never said he wouldn't use anything he happened to stumble upon while lurking, either). Finally, I don't know that I see anything wrong with Riggs going public with the information.

Just thought I'd share the additional details I'd found, since it adds more to the story in my mind.

From: (Anonymous) Date: September 9th, 2003 10:31 pm (UTC) (wanna link?)

Bigger troubles.

I think CG has bigger troubles than they let on. If guys like Meely are having problems with the disucssions that are ongoing now. Just wait till things get worse. CG has already borrowed a great deal of money to get where they are now, which is almost broke. Is it any surprise they are having problems getting new investors when they see several liens already against CG? Things will get worse before they have a chance to get better.
see the 14 drops in the bucket or add a drop
time and tide
Back April 2012
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930
what's around here?
blogging along...
comics from the ether
power pack
news of the comic
on this page
Anonymous (no subject)
Anonymous If that's how you feel.... [+1]
Anonymous To clarify [+3]
tags