Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old January 21st, 2014 #21
Sam Emerson
Diversity = White Genocide
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Doom Fort II
Posts: 2,800
Sam Emerson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Good post, this sort of stuff is very interesting.

Sobran referred to the left as a hive, with a hive mind. They all attack at once. It doesn't really matter who makes the first move. No conspiracy is necessary among people who think the same.

Remember the Yalie jew-fag Jamie Kirchick who attacked Ron Paul, accusing him of being a racist, etc, citing newsletters published under his name.
The angle of that piece is that the big blogs give the Ron Paul treatment to regular guys who violate system taboos. Ron Paul survived with no loss of income as far as I know. A white nationalist who works at a paving company won't be so lucky. The least we can do is use the same dirty tricks on the bloggers who screw us over.

The conspiracy was getting control of the media and education. Once they had that they turned out millions of potential Huffington Post bloggers and their screaming antifa supporters.
 
Old January 21st, 2014 #22
Sam Emerson
Diversity = White Genocide
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Doom Fort II
Posts: 2,800
Sam Emerson
Default Greg Johnson interviews Charles Krafft

Holocaust revisionist and maker of the Hitler teapot. Another guy the left wing press, this time started by a real newspaper not a blog, gave the treatment.

http://www.counter-currents.com/2014...harles-krafft/

MP3
http://cdn.counter-currents.com/radi...2014-01-17.mp3

Greg Johnson interviews Huffington Post award-winning artist Charles Krafft about a very eventful 2013, during which he was “outed” as a “holocaust denier” and White Nationalist and subjected to a media witch hunt. Topics include:

* How the Krafft controversy got started
* How it went viral on the web and led to interviews and print coverage
* Why he stopped giving interviews
* Advice for White Nationalists being interviewed
* Professional fallout: being blacklisted from college speaking
* Professional fallout: being dropped from a Paris exhibition
* Professional fallout: The Sacramento Museum put a warning label on one of his works
* How this controversy has, in the end, given him more artistic and creative freedom
* The personal fallout: some friends lost but new friends gained
* Letters of support from White Nationalists and local free speech supporters
* On balance, he received more positive than negative responses
* The shocking lack of intellectual integrity in the media and “educated” public
* Professional fallout: no net loss of income, an increase in sales and commissions
* New artists Charlie has met due to this controversy
 
Old February 3rd, 2014 #23
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

how a theme song was come up with
http://deadspin.com/batman-on-steroi...s-b-1481367234

"Where I came from, I had to get my melody across in 30 seconds or less," Schreer says of his commercial work. "I always approached writing music with starting off with your best foot forward. Don't wait for the hook. Come out with the hook. Come out swinging.

[notice the similarity to the #1 failure of screenplays - starting too slowly. start IN THE ACTION is the theme]
 
Old February 8th, 2014 #24
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Non-political media templating - of snowboard photography:

http://www.yobeat.com/2014/02/06/the...d-photography/
 
Old February 11th, 2014 #25
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

more examples of templating, groupthink, whatever you want to call it:

curling coverage

http://mattenglish.kinja.com/a-hater...6416/@reubenfb

media are:

1) communists
2) copycats
3) (dumb) cunts

All these tend to produce insipid uniformity on their own, but together they're unstoppably stupid-uniform

____________________________

As with TAA distributions, so with the esoteric sport of curling:

Quote:
Here, I'll save you the trouble:

- The first paragraph will casually make fun of curling from the point of view of a befuddled outsider, like the guy at the start of an infomercial struggling to operate a can opener in black & white (Sample line: "And the sweeping - what's THAT all about?")

- The second and third paragraphs are just fact-dumps liberally copied from the Wikipedia article about curling ("Early records in Scotland indicate...")

- Next, you get to the part where your noble reporter heads to Podunk Local Curling Club to give curling a try ("It's harder than it looks!", EVERY SINGLE FUCKING ONE will report verbatim)

- Then the reporter turns a corner, manages to nail a draw in the four-foot, and then wraps up with a pithy "Curling: it's wacky, but it sure does rock!" one-liner.
 
Old February 11th, 2014 #26
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

To sum it up, journalists (in 2014), are not the kind of people who could think up an original slant or story even if their editors allowed them to provide it.
 
Old February 18th, 2014 #27
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[how wildlife photography actually works, from Wyoming Wildlife, November 1995:]

Quote:
When I first started taking photos, I snapped everything: I thought a photo of a whitetail doe with her coat just turned red for the summer, standing hock deep in succulent green grass would win me a Pulitzer. Wrong. Forkhorn mule deer sneaking through dimly lit sagebrush and seven-point bull elk at sunrise, same thing. The problem isn't so much that it wouldn't win a prize: It simply won't be published. Most magazines can't afford the high-quality paper it takes to properly reproduce dimly lit images, and editors (the editor of Wyoming Wildlife being the exception to all the above and below, of course) are under a lot of pressure from advertisers as well as readers to provide super-real images. There's not much editors or photographers can do about that: if they don't provide what the market wants, they won't be publishing a magazine very long.

What gets on the short list is what editors and advertisers tell us the readers want: studio-lit, full-frame images of essentially nocturnal animals. Large whitetail bucks are most in demand, followed by any large-antlered male - the natural-world equivalent of Arnold Schwarzenegger - and any infant in the wild. No set-up photos or zoo animals, please; and no matter how many other photographers, tourists, garbage cans and delivery trucks are in the way, like a good real estate photographer, make it look like the animal is all alone in a pristine wilderness. Since editors and readers generally live in large urban areas and rarely get out in the woods without a guide, they have the idea this is eas. So photographers cheat.

Some travel around the world, spending hundreds of dollars a day to photograph game farm animals. I heard of one pro that beat the system: He keeps a whitetail buck as a pet. He's even planted "native" fauna from other regions in various corners of his property, so he can take photos of his pet deer in "Alabama," "Texas," and "Pennsylvania" without spending a dime on gas.
This is interesting, it's code for NYC kike, if you ask me (same article):

Quote:
I had once had the art editor of a large-circulation hunting magazine call up and ask if I had any photos of mule deer, but he didn't ask for them by name. What he said was, "Hey. You got any pitchers of dem, you know, dem . . . dem udda deer?" Then he paused for breath. "Not dem regular deer. Dem udder deer. You know." Apparently, after almost twenty years in the business, for him ignorance was still profitable, if not bliss.

Last edited by Alex Linder; February 18th, 2014 at 11:18 PM.
 
Old February 19th, 2014 #28
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[from tennis.com ]

If you’ve read this column for any length of time, you know that I'm often bewildered by the way ESPN shows tennis, yet hides it at the same time. The network has spent a significant amount of money over the last two decades buying the rights to the four Grand Slams. Its biggest, and perhaps final, coup on that front came last year, when it secured the U.S. Open from first ball to last with an 11-year deal worth $770 million. Despite that commitment of time and cash, though, ESPN still covers and promotes tennis sparingly, almost grudgingly. There are no analysis shows devoted to it, and few commercials for the channel’s upcoming tournament coverage. Even during the majors, highlights on SportsCenter are sparse.

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2014/.../#.UwRUrsHKcy0

AlexLinder5 1 minute ago
Espn = jews promoting blacks. Tennis = richer, whiter, conservative sport, hence antithetical to Espn's political mission. Edit (in 4 minutes)

[notice how the writer, who is well knows, stumbles on to what is actually going on without understanding what he's come across... the point he didn't make is that a disporportionate amount of the curiously understated coverage of tennis is devoted to...black Serena Williams...and her hopeful successor Sloane Stephens]

AlexLinder5 4 minutes ago
Espn = jews promoting blacks. Tennis = richer, whiter, conservative sport, hence antithetical to Espn's political mission. Edit (in 1 minute)

DeleteShareLikeReply
AlexLinder5
AlexLinder5 just now
Should add...the writer has stumbled onto something he doesn't understand, which I've supplied above. The next point to make, supporting the thesis, is that a disproportionate share of the curiously limited (but dearly acquired) tennis coverage is devoted to the black Serena Williams and her hopeful successor, Sloane Stephens. Edit (in 5 minutes)
 
Old February 25th, 2014 #29
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Laika CatUKate Dries31L U
This article is a great reminder to me why I stopped pursuing comedy writing after finishing film school and why (despite many friends urging me to) I won't get back into that nonsense again. The industry is no longer about "good writing" and "talented writers" — but instead focuses on how many UCB classes a "writer" has taken, how funny they are on Twitter (ie: You need to ONLY use Twitter to be funny, god forbid you have another job you use it for), and how well known they are on the LA/NYC standup circuit. A good standup comedian isn't necessarily a good screenwriter, and a good comedy screenwriter isn't necessarily a good standup comedian.

For me personally: UCB classes are fucking expensive, and LA "actors" are the WORST people to be around. Also, I'm a writer — which means I'm happier sitting in a room working on jokes/a script and being a hermit, and very uncomfortable standing on a stage in front of people. I hate when people look at me. Doesn't mean I can't "write funny."

tl;dr The world of comedy has a very narrow-minded, myopic view of the ways people can break into comedy writing. If you're not a UCB alum or stand up person, you're magically unqualified and that's total BULLSHIT.

http://jezebel.com/late-night-tv-get...-wr-1511004609
 
Old March 21st, 2014 #30
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

How Cold War-Hungry Neocons Stage Managed RT Anchor Liz Wahl’s Resignation

Posted on Mar 19, 2014

The “Freedom selfie” from James Kirchick’s Twitter feed.

By Max Blumenthal and Rania Khalek

For her public act of protest against Russia Today’s coverage of the Russian invasion of Ukrainian territory and supposedly advancing the agenda of Vladimir Putin in Washington, D.C., previously unknown news anchor Liz Wahl has suddenly become one of the most famous unemployed people in America. After her on-air resignation from the cable news channel, Wahl appeared on the three major American cable news outlets—CNN, Fox News, MSNBC—to denounce the heavy-handed editorial line she claims her bosses imposed on her and other staffers.

“What’s clear is what’s happening right now amid this crisis is that RT is not about the truth,” she told CNN’s Anderson Cooper. “It’s about promoting a Putinist agenda. And I can tell you firsthand, it’s also about bashing America.”

Wahl’s act of defiance eventually earned her invitations from “The View” and “The Colbert Report,” offering her the opportunity to introduce millions of Americans to a Russian government-funded network whose Nielsen ratings have been too low to measure, but which commands a massive following on YouTube. Wahl was the toast of Washington, winning plaudits from a variety of prime-time pundits, from MSNBC’s Chris Hayes (“remarkably badass”) to the conservative Amanda Carpenter (“Liz Wahl is proud to be an American and in the last five minutes I think she made everyone else proud to be one, too.”)


The celebration of Wahl fed directly into a BuzzFeed expose on “How The Truth Is Made at Russia Today,” with writer Rosie Gray painting a portrait of an “atmosphere of censorship and pressure” on American staffers toiling in RT’s D.C. offices. RT had long been the subject of criticism and ridicule for its promotion of Zeitgeist-style trutherism and libertarian paranoia, but Wahl now placed RT under unprecedented scrutiny, with mainstream U.S. media sounding the alarm about a bulwark of soft Russian power situated just blocks from the White House.

Behind the coverage of Wahl’s dramatic protest, a cadre of neoconservatives was celebrating a public relations coup. Desperate to revive the Cold War, head off further cuts to the defense budget and restore the legitimacy they lost in the ruins of Iraq, the tightknit group of neoconservative writers and stewards had opened up a new PR front through Wahl’s resignation. And they succeeded with no shortage of help from an ossified media establishment struggling to maintain credibility in an increasingly anarchic online news environment. With isolated skeptics branded as useful idiots for Putin, the scene has been kept clean of neoconservative fingerprints, obscuring their interest in Wahl’s resignation and the broader push to deepen tensions with Russia.
Through interviews with six current RT employees—all Americans with no particular affection for Russian President Vladimir Putin or his policies—and an investigation into the political forces managing the spectacle, a story has emerged that stands in stark contrast to the one advanced by Wahl, her supporters and the mainstream American press.

It is the story, according to former colleagues, of an apolitical, deeply disgruntled employee seeking an exit strategy from a job where, sources say, she was disciplined for unprofessional behavior and had been demoted. Wahl did not return several voice and text messages sent to her cellphone.

At the center of the intrigue is a young neoconservative writer and activist who helped craft Wahl’s strategy and exploit her resignation to propel the agenda of a powerful pro-war lobby in Washington.

The story began at 5:07 p.m. Eastern time on March 5.

PR From PNAC 2.0

It was a full 19 minutes before Wahl resigned. Inside the offices of the Foreign Policy Initiative, a neoconservative think tank in Washington D.C., a staffer logged on to the group’s Twitter account to announce the following:

“#WordOnTheStreet says that something big might happen on RT in about 20-25 minutes.”

Then, at 5:16, exactly 10 minutes before Wahl would quit on air, FPI tweeted:

“#WordOnTheStreet says you’re really going to want to tune in to RT: http://rt.com/on-air/rt-america-air/ #SomethinBigMayBeGoingDown”

Up until two minutes before Wahl’s resignation, FPI took to Twitter again to urge its followers to tune in to RT.

And finally, at 5:26 p.m., at the very moment Wahl quit, FPI’s Twitter account broke the news: “RT Anchor RESIGNS ON AIR. She ‘cannot be part of a network that whitewashes the actions of Putin.’ ”

The tweets from FPI suggested a direct level of coordination between Wahl and the neoconservative think tank. Several calls to FPI for this story were not answered.

Just over an hour later, an exclusive interview with Wahl appeared at The Daily Beast. It was authored by James Kirchick, a 31-year-old writer whose work has appeared in publications from the neoconservative Commentary to the liberal Israeli paper Haaretz.

Kirchick acknowledged having been in contact with Wahl since August, but cast himself as a passive bystander to the spectacle, claiming that they merely “stayed in touch periodically over the past 6 months, and I always encouraged her to follow her conscience in making a decision about her professional future.”

Kirchick wrote that by quitting, Wahl paid “the price real reporters—not Russian-government funded propagandists—have to pay if they are concerned with quaint notions like objectivity and the truth.”

Later that evening, Kirchick tweeted a photo of himself with Wahl, calling it a “Freedom selfie.” The two had apparently gathered to celebrate.

On March 7, Kirchick and a camera person stationed themselves outside the office building on D.C.’s G Street housing RT America’s headquarters. On a self-proclaimed mission “to find out more about RT,” he badgered dozens of random passers-by with questions like the following: “What is a more appropriate punishment for the women of Pussy Riot: two years in a Siberian labor camp or public whipping by Cossacks?”

Kirchick says RT staffers called the D.C. police department to remove him from the premises. However, several RT staffers told us that a security guard notified the police because Kirchick had mistaken employees at two adjacent law firms for employees of RT—“the wannabe thugs at 1325 G St,” he called them—and began harassing them. (An update inserted at the bottom of The Daily Beast summary of the incident noted that it was building security and not RT staffers who called the D.C. police.)

So who was Kirchick, and what sort of commitment did he maintain to “objectivity and the truth?”


[this is exactly the type of people dc is filled with - right or left]

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/...ation_20140319
 
Old March 26th, 2014 #31
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

fascinating on pop music and sweden
http://www.psmag.com/navigation/book...fluence-73966/
 
Old March 26th, 2014 #32
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

there's a Natl Assoc (emph on ass) of Queer Journalists

http://gawker.com/my-very-weird-nigh...ith-1550698272
 
Old March 26th, 2014 #33
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

if you see it on tv, chances are it's fake
http://gawker.com/your-favorite-anim...abu-1506776931
 
Old April 26th, 2014 #34
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

joan rivers (jew) pays writers 600/week
http://defamer.gawker.com/joan-river...1567835338/all
 
Old April 26th, 2014 #35
Sam Emerson
Diversity = White Genocide
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Doom Fort II
Posts: 2,800
Sam Emerson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
joan rivers (jew) pays writers 600/week
http://defamer.gawker.com/joan-river...1567835338/all
The difference between a white man and a jew.

[Bob Hope's] staff writers make between a hundred and fifty thousand and two hundred and fifty thousand dollars per year.
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/199...urrentPage=all

That was in 1998. Around 1980 he was known to pay his writers $1 million a year, which was around $100,000 each. Very good money for the time.

As for that bitch Joan Rivers, when Carson threatened to retire in the eighties Rivers had been the regular substitute host for many years. When the list of replacement Tonight Show hosts compiled by NBC leaked she wasn't even on it. She made a big stink, quit, and defected to Fox where her late night show bombed.
 
Old June 20th, 2014 #36
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[how "House Hunters" actually works, from a comment on jezebel article]

My friend was on HHI, and it's a crock. They look for people who have already bought homes, so the house hunting itself is staged, I mean, "recreated." I've received a few requests on my blog from the HHI people, and their requirements are that you've bought a home overseas in the past 3-5 years. They also made my friend out to be a raging nitpicker, but we already know not to trust reality show editing, right?

http://jezebel.com/5845469/what-can-...bout-ourselves
 
Old December 4th, 2014 #37
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

inside Sony

Sony Hack Reveals 25-Page List of Reasons It Sucks To Work at Sony

http://gawker.com/sony-hack-reveals-...o-w-1666264634
 
Old December 14th, 2014 #38
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

http://thefederalist.com/2014/12/11/...Vh-UcG.twitter

Why The Media’s Fact Problems Are Way Bigger Than Rolling Stone
Too many reporters have "Jackies" -- politicians and causes they trust uncritically no matter what.
 
Old March 11th, 2015 #39
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[this should be crossfiled about ten ways, but i'm sticking it here. it's a response to the call for not-reading white male authors for a year to read more wimminzes and discoloreds]

XKToughBounty
Yesterday 10:07pm

Just to offer another perspective on this... I recently had a similar discussion with my wife, who I think is talented, amazing, and in most ways smarter and more successful than I am.

As a prospective author who is white, male, cis, and unpublished, I've been seeing a lot of very dismissive attitudes from literary agents for any fiction not featuring a multicultural protagonist who is female and/or wrestling with gender identity issues. It's entirely possible that the real problem is just that my fiction is not up to contemporary standards. However, despite the bestseller lists being dominated by white male authors writing white male characters, the agents I've researched seem to be looking for anything but. I do get that this is a response to the fact that a single viewpoint has pretty much dominated media for centuries—and I am glad that the trend is (slowly) shifting, and have supported that trend with my own money—but as someone who is himself simply trying to get published, it obviously bugs me to encounter negativity towards a demographic I can't change. (And yes, I understand that any amount of perceived bias I might encounter in this one scenario is nothing compared to what people of other demographics have had to (and continue to have to) face in every other conceivable arena. Still, after yet another form rejection, and after viewing yet another agent's bio who bemoaned how very, very bored they were with white male protagonists, I voiced my frustration to my wife.

Her response? If you want to get published, maybe you should make your main character Mexican.

Now, I spent years of my life living in Spain (which is totally different than Mexico, but whatever), and I feel like I do at least have an appreciation for international viewpoints. And I am 100% in favor of everyone in our world (a) reading and (b) having characters and or voices that they can identify with or be challenged by. But we're talking about a book that is already written (as are two sequels!), and the assumption seemed to be that I could and should just flip a switch and change the central character, whose thoughts and viewpoint drive the entire narrative, to another ethnicity. Ignoring the fact that doing so without rewriting the book would amount to paying lip service to the idea of diverse voices, I don't see why I or anyone else should have to do so. I think it's horrible that in the past, many female authors felt compelled to use male protagonists because the book wouldn't sell otherwise. I think the reverse is true as well. I think people should write what they want to write... that fiction (even commercial fiction) should be treated like the art it actually is.

Obviously, that's a bit of a tangent, and I apologize for that, but it might help you understand a little bit of your boyfriend's own frustration as a writer. That said, it was -obviously- wrong of your boyfriend not to support you (and your role in your girlfriend's video). If that is symptomatic of who he is, then you should drop him like a bad habit.

At the same time, people do respond to different things, and I'm not sure there's anything inherently bad in admitting that fact. I read between three and five books a week, and while I could definitely do a better job of finding work from, say, Africa—I have North America, South America, Europe, and some parts of Asia pretty well covered—the authors I read are generally from a wide range of demographics. However, I tend to be more choosy when it comes to female authors of urban/paranormal fantasy. Why is that? Because a lot of the books that I have purchased and read ended up predominantly being romances. Obviously, a fair amount aren't, and a fair amount of male-written urban fantasies are secretly romances, and the classification of paranormal romance now helps identify some, if not all, of those cases... but as someone who doesn't care for the romance genre, and has been disappointed by a lot of the books I bought and read as a result, seeing a female author in that genre does mean I will take a closer look at the content and tags for the book before I buy it.

That doesn't mean ALL women authors don't speak to me... and I'm sure the same is true of your boyfriend. (If not, then he is either incredibly close-minded or just doesn't read nearly enough, as there are many, many wonderful authors out there) But just as it didn't occur to my wife that casually suggesting I rewrite my entire book series to check a box on an agent's list was a fairly tone deaf thing to say to someone trying to express their own frustration, I suspect your boyfriend wasn't really thinking about things from your perspective when he made that remark.

And again... if he WAS and said it anyway... drop him. You can do better.

My apologies for the length of this post.
 
Old March 21st, 2015 #40
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

#Comicgate
Dare we dream of a response to the SJWs in the comics world?

CB: And how will you react if and when they tell you some of your art is “problematic?”

EL: I don’t need to do a thing. I’m in charge here. Readers can buy what I’m selling or not. Ideally that’s what it should be. A candy bar company makes a candy bar and you can buy it or not. Those are your two choices. The internet assumes there are two other options: that candy bars can be pulled off the shelves and returned to their manufacturers unsold or that those buying candy bars can stipulate the ingredients. You want to make a different comic book? Make one of your own. You can buy the one I produce or you can not buy it, but you can’t dictate what goes on inside those pages. One guy makes that call.

CB: Lastly Erik, what do you think the long term effects will be if the comic industry continues to acquiesce to these sort of demands?

EL: The slippery slope is a return to the Comics Code. That, or some other kind of censoring body who knows better than the rest of us. Movies have gone in a direction where everything is pre-screened to an audience who weighs in on them and decides what’s good or bad and changes are made accordingly. The danger of taking cues from the audience is pablum like Star Wars Episode I where fans weighed in on what they wanted, George Lucas gave them what he thought they wanted and then they hated what he gave them. The audience is not wiser than the creative people. If they were better writers and artists than those in the field, they would be employed in the field. They’re mouthy amateurs and their suggestions should largely be treated like the witless ramblings of an insane person.

Years ago, Stan Lee instituted a new policy because of a number of letters from readers. Some vocal fans had complained that continued stories were problematic. Since distribution was spotty at best, many readers often missed chapters of continued stories and so they asked that Marvel stop producing continued stories. And so they did. The policy went into effect and a few months later all of their books were self-contained. And then another batch of mail came in complaining about the simple, dull one-part stories throughout the line. And so that policy was tossed out the window.

The danger is in thinking that the vocal few represent the entirety of your audience. They don’t. And so what we’re getting is situations like Jim Lee giving Wonder Woman pants in the Justice League because readers demanded it, then getting rid of them because other readers demanded it, all before the pants version saw print! These publishers are running around like chickens with their heads cut off, trying to please everybody and not knowing who to listen to, and I can’t help but feel that a lot of the people yelling and screaming aren’t buying the comics, pants or no pants.


#GamerGate has changed the rules. Blue SF is on the rise and the pinkshirts are reeling in dismay. All it takes is for one creator in an industry - just one - to stand up and say "I will create what I want to create" in order to inspire others to do the same.

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/03/comicgate.html
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:10 AM.
Page generated in 0.17313 seconds.