>comics "journalism
>>80597590
"HERE'S WHAT _____ COULD LOOK LIKE AS ____"
>PICTURES OF CHRIS HEMSWORTH WITHOUT A SHIRT!
>SCANDAL: Ike Perlmutter uses personal finances to donate to a politician we don't personally like!
>Marvel could not be reached for comment on this atrocity.
>EXCLUSIVE
>isn't exclusive
>MORAL OUTRAGE!
>White character cast with white actor in new TV series!
>Has Marvel no shame?
>>80597844
>EXCLUSIVE
>links to USA Today/Washington Post
What would count as actual important / socially relevant comics journalism? Would it have to tie into bigger or other things the subjects had done, like >>80597825
for example?
>>80597590
well it is a pretty sweet poster probably the sweetest poster I've ever seen
>>80597590
>Expecting anything from comic book REEEEEEEEsources
At least they let you filter out all the /tv/ shit on their homepage
>>80600015
The primary focus of comics journalism should be:
>Here is a comic.
>Here are the names of who made the comic (and even this is a luxury, not a necessity)
>It is coming out on this date.
>It will cost this much
If the book is delayed for whatever reason, that also merits an article.
If a writer or artist dies, that is also worthy of an article.
If a company goes out of business, then that is worthy of an article.
That's it. That is all there needs to be.
Anything else, literally EVERYTHING ELSE, is either clickbait or an opinion piece done by a blogger pretending to be a reporter.
Basically if you're visiting any site other than ComicList you're doing it wrong.
What about interviewing an author about his work and his influences and such?
You sure there's not more too?
What about tying it in to, say, a comic company's charity work or shady things? Proper relevant stuff?
>>80600315
>What about interviewing an author about his work and his influences and such?
Fuck that. He can talk about that stuff on his blog or at conventions or in the forward of his anthologies.
But that does remind me. Convention announcements. That is also article worthy.
>What about tying it in to, say, a comic company's charity work or shady things? Proper relevant stuff?
That's not relevant to the product they put out.
>>80600366
You play a hard line. Good. I like you. Keeps me on my toes.
But what about, specifically, asking him questions about his influences, or inspirations, or methods, etc, that he hasn't chosen to discuss on the blog or even thought to talk about? To bring it to a wider audience?
And if they've done something shady, it's relevant, because then the people that buy the comics are propping them up. I know it's more corporate than comics at that point, but it still ties in as it's a comics co.
Especially if the thing they did was something that a comics company would have a unique interest on doing or only be able to do, to get people thinking about the possibility it happens at the others.
>>80600162
>Comics journalism should be Diamond Previews
>>80600366
By the way, with all your opinions on this, it makes me wonder - are you a journalist at all?
If you are, do you want to hit me up and we can talk more at some point about shit in general?
>>80600544
What kind of journalist wants all press releases all the time? That's pretty much what we have now.
I think late-90s early-00s Newsarama and CBR were pretty much perfect as far as "journalism" goes. They posted rumours, they posted interviews - interviewed everyone from inkers to biggest wigs - they didn't get any "exclusives" i.e thinly veiled press releases, they invited creators to write columns and intervew each other, it was a mess but it was fantastic.
I have an article bookmarked where I think Berganza and Joe Casey literally apologize for having a few fill-in artists inside an issue instead of the solicited guy
>>80600544
This guy is saying that comics "journalism" should be nothing but a bunch of regurgitated press releases. Nothing that DC and Marvel's marketing departments wouldn't tell you themselves.
Who wants that? What journalist would?
>>80600798
I certainly don't want just that... but how is my example a press release, exactly? It's not an interview on its own either, more like a discussion, sort of say, for a local radio station on local personalities.
Gibe lnk to bookmark pls.
That sounds like a fantastic concept alright.
[email protected]
this will last for two weeks, so you can email me here or something. I don't know why but I get the feeling we'll be talking more in the future.
Perhaps we could work together on something. You seem like an ideas man.
>>80597590
So is there any ACTUAL journalism besides, I regret to say it. Rich? Its all just reposting press releases, tepid reviews and the occasional interview.
Why is comic journalism so shit?
>>80601246
Nobody cares about comics, except for the folks at TCJ but one of their articles triggered /co/ or something so they suck now.
>>80600366
How the hell are interviews about the work not about the work?
>>80601111
>how is my example a press release, exactly?
I'm not that >>80600162 guy, I was talking ABOUT that >>80600366 guy
Give me a sec on the bookmark.
>>80600536
Yes, and?
Animation journalism isn't much better tbph.
>>80601387
You're an idiot and I'm glad you're not in charge of comics journalism.
>>80601111
>>80601302
>http://web.archive.org/web/20020611232817/http://www.comicon.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=14&t=000075
No Casey but the interviewer guy actually reached out to a group editor to (a) asking "the fuck is up with shit art in this book?" (b) get some info on upcoming artists
And here's a little something from the bookmarks I consider to be THE face of the comics journalism of this decade
>http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=column&id=43
>>80601480
>not that article defending TFA from a random fan video in COMIC BOOK Resources
>>80601411
What's cartoon brew like now? I haven't been to that site in along time
>>80601246
That's a problem with "geek culture" news sites in general. They're bland promotional machines.that tell you what DC/Marvel/EA/Bethesda want you to hear because they're too dependent on the companies who produce content to move too far out of their influence.
It's part of the inherently consumerist, corporate nature of "geek culture" in the 21st century. That's what happens when the vast majority of your audience mainly wants to hear about material owned by Disney/Time Warner/etc. and/or being cross-promoted with Doritos and Mountain Dew.
It sucks that there are a lot of people like >>80600366 who don't even want other content. They want someone to help them consume the product and think things like "criticism" just get in the way.
>>80601279
/co/ is way too easily offended.
>>80601480
Thanks! Seriously, get to me o nthat email address up there and we can chat further or when I starta new thread I can tell you, cause I am tired as hell right now, so off t boed.
Bai!
>>80597825
>>SCANDAL: Ike Perlmutter uses personal finances to donate to a politician we don't personally like!
The irony being he didn't donate to Trump. He gave money to a charity at an event Trump was hosting. But why let the truth get in the way of a false narrative? It's the liberal way after all.
>>80597765
This is actual news, though.
>>80601687
It doesn't have enough content or opinion pieces.
>>80600544
Not a journalist, but I did major in english and communications, so that was a potential career path at one point. I like language, and respect the power it represents, and I know how to construct a narrative, be it in a fantasy novel or in a movie, or a news article.
>>80601286
Interviews can have a goal in mind. You ask the right questions to lead the interviewee into agreeing with your stance, or make them look bad, etc.
>>80602332
Hit me up at my email address here and we can talk more in the coming days, if you like.
Bye for nao.
>>80601111
Comicbookrecources newsfeed
Red - non-comics-based press releases
Orange - comics-based press releases
Yellow - comics press releases in various forms
Green - comics-related article (it's an "abandoned plot points" column so not opinion-based or new material-based)
Blue - ??? Listicle-tier "geekmedia" ad (?)
>>80600798
>What kind of journalist wants all press releases all the time? That's pretty much what we have now.
No, what we have now is 30% press releases, 50% opinion pieces, and 20% clickbait bullshit (top ten lists, look at how some random artist on deviantart "fixed" these costumes!)
>>80602390
>Red - non-comics-based MOVIE press releases
>Orange - comics-based MOVIE press releases
Fixeredered
>>80601693
Criticism should not be the goal of journalism. The truth should be an objective goal. All your doing is trading the yoke of consumerism for whatever other ism is the hot button issue at the moment (sexism, racism, etc).
So now instead of a site going "DC sucks (because Marvel paid us) it's "DC is sexist! (because Disney paid us)"
Same shit. Slightly different language. There's nothing of actual use in there at all.
>>80602503
That's not criticism, not the kind we're asking for
Get people who understand writing and art to review comics
>>80597590
>Comics journalism
>About a movie
>"""""Comics""""""
>""""""""""""""""Journalism"""""""""""""""
>>80602595
The very nature of reviews requires the critic to inject their personal biases into it. It's not realistic to expect objectivity when the very nature of observation changes the perception, the very meaning, of a work of art. And at the end of the day, it boils down to this.
Either you agree with the review, in which case you're not being told anything you didn't already think, feel, or know, or you disagree with it and disregard it, in which case you've wasted your time reading it. Like what you like and hate what you hate. You're an adult. You don't need people telling you how to like something inherently subjective, even if their opinion meets some arbitrary (and easily subject to change) metric of being :informed",
Want an example? There are tons of people that understand film and storytelling that hated Man of Steel. How do you think their reviews went over with the fans of that movie?
>>80597866
Reminder that TMS accepted a pretty over the top satire piece that the male writer (writing under a female pseudonym) whipped up in like 30 minutes just to see if they'd accept something so ridiculous as long as it fit the narrative.
