Gail Simone Asks... "Do We Need Tabloid And Gossip Comics Journalism?"

[Chris_Jones]

...Damn good question. Sure seems to me she's all butthurt about something someone posted. Except I can't recall anything recently about Gail that's come from Rich. Could be she's just whining for the sake of whining.

Or it could be that she's not whining and is just asking a theoretical question.

[Gail Simone]

I've defended Rich for ages as he well knows. I have taken endless crap for sticking up for Rich from people who have suffered from his need for hits and love of drama. OM, as usual, you add nothing, so I'll just direct one thing your way and then you can get back to your freakish, one-sided feud with me that you seem to need so much. If you honestly think it takes guts to face you OR Rich, you don't know me at all.


To everyone else, I have considered Rich a friend for a long time. But the last year or so, I've questioned what he does a lot more. I think I was fooling myself about him in some ways. He simply delights in the bad moves and missteps of people he doesn't even know, and I find that creepy. I've seen it. I've talked to him about it. He always pulls the same bullshit excuses...that if HE doesn't cover it, someone else will. Or that he's 'getting emails about it,' that was his excuse for posting this story again tonight.

I say, who cares? Usually he's wrong and it's NOT covered elsewhere, and who cares if someone sends an email? I find those excuses pretty weak soup.

And when you ask him about it, he always points to two or three helpful stories he's posted (like Josh Hoopes) then goes right back to the gossip. It's weird how Rich can say anything he likes about a comics pro, but if someone dares raise the question, without malice, of whether or not this stuff is worthwhile, that is somehow being 'butthurt' or some other dumbass accusation.


Oh my god! Erik Larsen has a disagreement with Neil Gaiman! Really? Mark Waid had a disagreement with a friend...really? I wonder who cares, but even more, I wonder why anyone who can actually write would waste their time pimping that drivel. And Rich CAN write.



Rich is one part of a big dumb cycle of gossip, of fake 'celebrity' news, but it is far from the only such practitioner, he's just the one most visible and the one most desperate to make himself part of the story. The same rules apply, guys. If you laugh at the idiots who read the Enquirer and follow Perez Hilton, but love petty comics gossip, you are in the glassest of glass houses. It's the same exact useless crap.

I just asked the question. As I said to Rich tonight, I should've guessed he would make it into a plug for his site. But the animosity people think I have for Rich personally does not exist. I don't like what he does, and I'm sure, if he has any common sense, he doesn't like my two issues of Teen Titans. Big deal. Sorry if I dared question the great man, but come ON. A little perspective, please. It's not Watergate, it's just gossip.

Rich made the point that others were doing this, and I say yes, absolutely true, and in fact, he is the one who made it about himself. Like most critics, he gets extremely defensive when questioned, even overly defensive.

Rich, I was talking about the whole group. I have had this same conversation with others, including Heidi, which I'm sure she'll tell you if you ask her. If I were only asking about you, I would have mentioned your name. Whatever your entourage thinks, YOU know I hav zero problem addressing you directly, since we talk regularly about this exact stuff. You know my position and I know yours.

That's it. If you ask the few regular posters of the biggest gossip forum in the industry, I don't think it's a surprise that they will answer my question in the affirmative.

AND THAT'S FINE. That's all I was asking for, was opinions. Rich knows I do that every day on my board and elsewhere. The big fuss about it is purely Rich's doing, in my opinion.

[Gail Simone]

Or it could be that she's not whining and is just asking a theoretical question.

Thank you.



Gail

[_OM_]

I've defended Rich for ages as he well knows. I have taken endless crap for sticking up for Rich from people who have suffered from his need for hits and love of drama. OM, as usual, you add nothing, so I'll just direct one thing your way and then you can get back to your freakish, one-sided feud with me that you seem to need so much. If you honestly think it takes guts to face you OR Rich, you don't know me at all.

<YAWN>

...All the vehemence and the rhetoric, and you *still* avoided answering the question. So let me phrase it again *slowly* so you'll hopefully catch it the second time:

Q: What is your definition of a *real* journalist?

See if you can provide an answer without making false accusations about me this time, would you? Thanks.

Or it could be that she's not whining and is just asking a theoretical question.

...I almost gave her the benefit of the doubt on that, Chris. But that snide comment about *real* journalists pretty much betrayed her intent with the initial tirade.

[JesseBaker]

The problem with comic journalism these days is the blatant cocking of major sites, shilling to Marvel/DC and declaring their sh#t gold when it's a sh#t sandwich. No one has the balls to ask the big questions or calling out creators via campaigns denouncing their hackery/the damage that they are doing to the industry and characters via major directions (IE why the f#ck aren't we seeing places like Newsarama and CBR making life hell for Quesada over OMD/BND or making it a mission to run out of the industry hacks like Bendis and Millar).

Comic Journalism is all about who's cock you are sucking and doing everything in your power to not piss off the person who's cock you are sucking, since said journalist is scared shitless that Marvel or DC will blacklist their site, which means no more interviews. Like that fucking matters, when 99.9% of ALL comic website interviews are glorified press releases and the interviewing giving the comic writer a handjob as far as super-softball questions that are so inane that you want to bash the writer's head in with a ball bat because of their lack of balls to go after writers with full force of a person interviewing a preening hack who fully expects no one to call out their lack of talent and tell them that they need to work at Burger King since they can't even hack it as a comic writer, let alone as a real writer.

And Rich, his problems can be summed up in that he turns a blind eye on a lot of junk that everyone knows about. The utter lack of coverage of OMD was embarrassing and the only legitimate justification I can think of for why Rich ignored such a MAJOR story was that Quesada won that "spike one news story in LITG" charity auction thing Rich was hyping awhile back (at which point, Rich should just admit to such since at least that absolves him of his being asleep at the wheel during one of the biggest comic story scandals of the decade). That and his pandering of Mark Millar, a talentless hack who along with Bendis and Quesada and maybe Ellis (jury's still out on Ellis), have done more damage to the comic industry this decade than anyone else can imagine by way of their banality being enshrined as "good".

[JJ Smooth]

"Tabloid" and "gossip" are words with such an ugly conotation in today's journalism, and for good reason since it's usually filled with libel, malicious intent, or all for self-serving purposes. I used to browse the Perez Hilton site, and in that you can see the worst form of tabloid; a perfect representation of all the nasty qualities I listed above.

We can argue if BC is a tabloid or not, but at least agree with me in that it has a higher standard than most. Rich offered updates to disspell his own rumors (the Matt Fraction Thor thing). He provided well researched articles concerning scam artists in the industry (Hoopes and Balke). I'm not calling Rich the end-all, be-all in comics, but I do respect his work.

[JJ Smooth]

The problem with comic journalism these days is the blatant cocking of major sites, shilling to Marvel/DC and declaring their sh#t gold when it's a sh#t sandwich. No one has the balls to ask the big questions or calling out creators via campaigns denouncing their hackery/the damage that they are doing to the industry and characters via major directions (IE why the f#ck aren't we seeing places like Newsarama and CBR making life hell for Quesada over OMD/BND or making it a mission to run out of the industry hacks like Bendis and Millar).

Comic Journalism is all about who's cock you are sucking and doing everything in your power to not piss off the person who's cock you are sucking, since said journalist is scared shitless that Marvel or DC will blacklist their site, which means no more interviews. Like that fucking matters, when 99.9% of ALL comic website interviews are glorified press releases and the interviewing giving the comic writer a handjob as far as super-softball questions that are so inane that you want to bash the writer's head in with a ball bat because of their lack of balls to go after writers with full force of a person interviewing a preening hack who fully expects no one to call out their lack of talent and tell them that they need to work at Burger King since they can't even hack it as a comic writer, let alone as a real writer.

And Rich, his problems can be summed up in that he turns a blind eye on a lot of junk that everyone knows about. The utter lack of coverage of OMD was embarrassing and the only legitimate justification I can think of for why Rich ignored such a MAJOR story was that Quesada won that "spike one news story in LITG" charity auction thing Rich was hyping awhile back (at which point, Rich should just admit to such since at least that absolves him of his being asleep at the wheel during one of the biggest comic story scandals of the decade). That and his pandering of Mark Millar, a talentless hack who along with Bendis and Quesada and maybe Ellis (jury's still out on Ellis), have done more damage to the comic industry this decade than anyone else can imagine by way of their banality being enshrined as "good".

Just stop. Your anti-Marvel bias and rant is annoying. Stick to the topic of comics gossip, not your own agenda.

[Gail Simone]

<YAWN>

...All the vehemence and the rhetoric, and you *still* avoided answering the question. So let me phrase it again *slowly* so you'll hopefully catch it the second time:

Q: What is your definition of a *real* journalist?

See if you can provide an answer without making false accusations about me this time, would you? Thanks.



...I almost gave her the benefit of the doubt on that, Chris. But that snide comment about *real* journalists pretty much betrayed her intent with the initial tirade.

I didn't answer your question because you have been a complete asshole to me, OM, and I don't find the way you leap on every grenade hurled Rich's way as impressive as he does.

I owe you nothing, and could not care less what you think of me.

So feel free to keep asking questions every adult already knows the answer to, if you like. Makes no difference to me.

But feel free to keep calling me a cow and a pig and a fat ugly troll, if it makes you feel important.

[_OM_]

We can argue if BC is a tabloid or not, but at least agree with me in that it has a higher standard than most. Rich offered updates to disspell his own rumors (the Matt Fraction Thor thing). He provided well researched articles concerning scam artists in the industry (Hoopes and Balke). I'm not calling Rich the end-all, be-all in comics, but I do respect his work.

...Which brings up a point: In the nigh unto two decades I've known Rich through his postings, going way back when rec.arts.comics.* was worth a frack, I honestly can't recall Rich simply regurgitating press releases. Which may be what those creators who speak about him in derogatory terms are the most angry about. They're simply pissed that he's not spinning and hyping their works regardless of whether they're good or bad.

Funny thing about this thread, tho - it's caused me to remember an incident from my paid journalism days regarding restaurant reviews that I may relate if the discussion doesn't peter out after Gail does her latest round of stomping out the door in a huff....

Speaking of which:

I didn't answer your question because you have been a complete asshole to me, OM, and I don't find the way you leap on every grenade hurled Rich's way as impressive as he does.

...Gail, you made the snide comment. If you're not willing to explain what your definition of a "real journalist", then since we can't read your mind pray tell how we're supposed to know what said definition is? Or is there something to that definition that would seriously damage your case? Regardless, since my asking offends you so greatly, would someone else care to ask the question, since she's hiding behind this rather lame excuse?

Side Note: Hey Rich! According to Gail, I'm apparently your entorage...

[Gail Simone]

The problem with comic journalism these days is the blatant cocking of major sites, shilling to Marvel/DC and declaring their sh#t gold when it's a sh#t sandwich. No one has the balls to ask the big questions or calling out creators via campaigns denouncing their hackery/the damage that they are doing to the industry and characters via major directions (IE why the f#ck aren't we seeing places like Newsarama and CBR making life hell for Quesada over OMD/BND or making it a mission to run out of the industry hacks like Bendis and Millar).

Comic Journalism is all about who's cock you are sucking and doing everything in your power to not piss off the person who's cock you are sucking, since said journalist is scared shitless that Marvel or DC will blacklist their site, which means no more interviews. Like that fucking matters, when 99.9% of ALL comic website interviews are glorified press releases and the interviewing giving the comic writer a handjob as far as super-softball questions that are so inane that you want to bash the writer's head in with a ball bat because of their lack of balls to go after writers with full force of a person interviewing a preening hack who fully expects no one to call out their lack of talent and tell them that they need to work at Burger King since they can't even hack it as a comic writer, let alone as a real writer.

And Rich, his problems can be summed up in that he turns a blind eye on a lot of junk that everyone knows about. The utter lack of coverage of OMD was embarrassing and the only legitimate justification I can think of for why Rich ignored such a MAJOR story was that Quesada won that "spike one news story in LITG" charity auction thing Rich was hyping awhile back (at which point, Rich should just admit to such since at least that absolves him of his being asleep at the wheel during one of the biggest comic story scandals of the decade). That and his pandering of Mark Millar, a talentless hack who along with Bendis and Quesada and maybe Ellis (jury's still out on Ellis), have done more damage to the comic industry this decade than anyone else can imagine by way of their banality being enshrined as "good".

Jesse, I respect your opinion and I don't even disagree with a lot of it.

But there have been journalists in comics, there have been lots of good commentators who wouldn't lower themselves to endless discussions about two pros who boo hoo, had a disagreement on the net and patched it up themselves. The Comics Journal and Journalista regularly do far better coverage of their topics than most. I understand that Newsarama and CBR function more as a sort of TV GUIDE for comics than hard-hitting journalism, but I think there's certainly room for that, too. Not every story HAS a dark side, to be honest, and a lot of people really only WANT to hear about what stories are coming up or what creators are working on which characters.


Look, I like Rich. We've been friends for years. I am certainly not above reading salacious tripe. But I don't think anyone is served by pretending a gossip column is somehow the return of Edward R. Murrow. History has just simply not shown that to be the case.

That said, I like the way you have expressed your opinion here and we can agree to disagree, maybe. Everyone's always happy to have someone ELSE's dirty laundry aired, but I don't think that speaks all that well of anyone involved in that process as reader or writer. And of course, the subject is an unwilling and unasked participant. They get no say in it. If someone's genuinely fraudulent, then that is deserved. But is it really deserved when it's simply people's personal lives? Are we that hard-up for comics news?