Please allow me, if you will, to state at the offset that I am not against comics journalism. I am for it, wholeheartedly. It’s just that I sincerely continue to be amazed at how much it fumbles the ball while at the same time publicly commenting on the upwards trajectory it faces and the need to attract more readers.
I was reluctant to write this piece for a few reasons, one being that I am not proactively seeking content and just waiting for something to blow up– you know, the way a site like Bleeding Cool does. And I don’t mean that with snark, actually- it’s just the nature of certain sites. I occupy my own little corner which is never in competition or consideration because I have absolutely no ambitions to make my living as a *coughs* comics journalist.
I know what you’re thinking- “you, the most gracious and reassuring of ALL people that talk shit on the comics industry…? Yes yes, dear readers- I am not trying to be a personality or get hired somewhere. I have already turned down a very kind offer from a somewhat recent Eisner Award winner and I imagine, should anyone else believe I might be the next Kim Thompson (R.I.P.) I will turn down that next offer as well. Why is that important?
Because the people I’d like to speak on today have a completely different mindset and completely different ambitions- therefore, they should heed my suggestions to better their wares and improve their output. God knows that COMICS JOURNALISM desperately needs it.
There are several reasons comics journalism has dwindled in influence and importance, obviously- from the accessibility of social media to the increase in fans of the medium writing about the medium- so, really, anything people working in that sector can do to bring more eyes on their work? I’m all about it.
One of my main problems with modern comics journalism? The comics journalists themselves. It’s not because I don’t agree with them, you see…
It’s because they don’t agree with me. Or anybody else with a difference in opinion or contrary view of the work they presented.
This is a key component in why their stature among hobbyists and industry figures continues to diminish, plain and simple. They lack the commitment of Ethel Payne and the scope of vision of Bill Moyers. They lack the sardonicism of Groth and the humanity of Spurgeon.
And yet! They push forward with their amateurish efforts and consumerist outlook. We will look at a disposable case today which prompted this articulation of long-gestating thoughts, a story that wasn’t even that consequential on a wider scale but one whose execution left much to be desired, as well as the response to the response that we’re going to discuss. Any comics journalists out there…? Maybe you’ll learn something.
On June 28th, 2025, comicsbeat.com hosted an article by Javier Perez. Additional credit for editorial contributions went to Ollie Kaplan.
From Perez’s article:
- “An auction concluded yesterday, June 27, 2025, at Heritage Auction. At the auction, Jock‘s Detective Comics #880 Joker Cover Original Art (DC, 2011) was sold for $288,000. While this would typically be a cause for celebration, Jock posted on social media that he likely won’t get a cut of the sale, as he had previously sold the work to a buyer who held onto the OA for a while.”
At the outset, you may be momentarily taken aback to learn that this is literally a story of a previously sold piece being resold at a profit. Which is… how the original art industry has always worked.
As we see, the more experienced Kaplan thought to add the much important context that this was a pre-sold piece, and not a case of Jock being purposely ripped off by an agent or publisher, something I believe Perez should have realized:
- “When asked if he would be a percentage of the money earned, Jock added, “it is what it is, eh… I’ve made peace with it johnny. all good.” (Editor’s note: the piece was sold to a buyer who presumably has the resale right, any proceeds that would go to Jock would be an act of good faith, not a contractual responsibility.)”
This point was picked up on readers, many of whom commented their feelings about the article seeming either misleading or naive, or both. Which we’ll get to in a moment.
Recently, I’ve noted how often people in “comics journalism” are advertising, whether subtle or otherwise, just how little they get paid, how they wish more people supported their endeavors (which, largely, seems to consist of re-tweaking existing press releases from publishers and distributors), how people need to “support comics journalism” and I have really found it, well, off-putting and embarrassing. I believe a good journalist is not seen and serves the overall message of their work.
Here, Perez puts out a passive-aggressive, lamenting comment ostensibly about Jock not sharing in the profits of something he had previously sold, but finding a way to connect his own plight into the mix as well:
- “Poverty and comics don’t mix (unless you’re a creator or comics journalist).”
The abundance of issues within this statement are significant. For one thing, this outlook speaks of the lack of awareness and classism in most comic book fans and comic “journalists”- if you got to go to San Diego Comic Con, believe me- you aren’t in poverty. If you got a press pass to go- which I’m not positive that Perez did- even more so.
It’s a tone-deaf statement that is indicative of the entire “woe is us” campaign from people who write about things other people wrote first.
I was moved enough to wade into the comments section- against my better judgment, only because I really do not want Heidi or Beat staff to think I’m purposely trying to stir up anything to either provoke or in some attempt to gain attention for my own writing– to offer my own response to this article. Not long after, my comments- and, I later learned, others- began vanishing.
I could see erasing comments that were insulting, personal, invasive- but there wasn’t one, not one. When the Beat began to restore comments, I noticed one of the ones that was removed (that I hadn’t seen previously) was one complimenting me for articulating the argument. But I wasn’t writing for credit or controversy. I was literally surprised at just how non-prestigious and, well, blog-like this article was. Regardless of my criticism, The Beat is a big deal, right…???
Ollie Kaplan, the aforementioned editor of this piece- I surmised she had to wade in and fix it up here and there- was pushing back against some of the comments. Even if the comments were wrong, none were rude I feel. I just think it’s a bad look to push back in such any sort of defensive manner, even if I can imagine the frustration an editor would have in people not interpreting the piece as they thought they would:
As I said before, comments began being removed. Until Heidi restored several, I initially thought it was just mine. Not so. I… sort of get it? But why would discussion be frowned upon?
This is problematic with The Beat and smacks of something, oh I don’t know, the Trump Administration would do. Notably, Ollie Kaplan wrote an article earlier this year about JD Vance going after the free press (I didn’t look up Kaplan and discover that; I literally remembered their name and that article from when I read it months ago), so it makes the defensiveness and censorship even more disappointing.
But I suppose the rules only apply to some.
One of the reasons that fandom thrived and became a “community” was due to letterhacks, APAs, Newsarama, The Journal’s “Blood & Thunder“, Comics Buyers Guide and so forth- as Heidi MacDonald knows even better than I do.
I would think encouraging a discussion would be both helpful and beneficial towards growing an audience. Unfortunately, the pushback from Kaplan and the closing of comments by MacDonald display another disturbing pattern in the comics press that is doing nothing to help raise awareness of their work…
As I pointed out, when someone gives you constructive criticism, whether it is sugar-coated or not- and as long as it isn’t hateful or just obvious trolling- the thing to never do is to wade in to tell them why they’re wrong (unless it’s a very basic factual error), or defend yourself.
I believe people have a right to defend their work when people make blatant lies about them- this did not happen in the response to Perez’s article, unless there were hate-filled attacks that I somehow didn’t see which (understandably) MacDonald or Kaplan wouldn’t want to restore.
How someone in any media field responds to criticism is crucial- both for their growth and advancement in said field but also in how they are perceived as a writer, public speaker and so on. I was reminded of discovering Adam Freeman- sorry, ATOM– and his podcast about “Direct Market Solutions“- and being immensely turned off when a few commentators, one of which was a comic shop owner, offered their own experiences- and Freeman immediately shot them down, telling them what they said wasn’t true. While he later apologized, it is devastatingly poor judgment to tell actual vendors going through the direct market that their experiences aren’t valid. Freeman did so because their experience contrasted with the story he wanted to get across.
Anyway, Freeman is selling something and has a consulting service he’s trying to promote to attract potential clients- but still. Take feedback. I’ve been insulted and had public figures purposely try to mislead and imbue what my work here was about- oh well.
When this happens, you combat it with your research, you combat it with factual statements, you consider their motivations for making such statements. If you want to grow your comics writing site and your comics writing audience…?
Don’t delete critical comments.
I’m not knocking comics journalism, mind you- I’m holding them to better standards. I cannot stress or articulate this enough. But what these people are really saying is that they believe they shouldn’t have to have a day job- their job writing about the dwindling and receding comics industry should sustain them.
Guess what? I wish it could. Truly. But it doesn’t. And it won’t.
Perez was writing a report, not a blog. There’s no reason to interject little things about your lack of income in comics coverage in what are otherwise supposed to be factual news items.
(See also: Mark Waid not resisting the urge to write the ugh-inducing “game knows game” in an obituary about Jim Shooter, which does not fall under sharing personal remembrances or giving personal insights, but is a misguided gesture designed to correlate a connection between the guy proud that he yelled at Rob Granito with the guy that got the train running on time at Marvel Comics.)
With the rise of online accessibility, there’s bound to be a continued erosion of traditional journalistic standards. There’s certainly a sense of urgency to get stories out there and keep your views up and compete with other outlets that are competing with your own site’s audience attention.
The journalist and educator Paul Bradshaw wrote about some of the issues which affect a majority of online journalists and their stubbornness to either edit or respond to constructive criticism. Besides cognitive bias, there’s also the problem of sunk cost fallacy, which Bradshaw explains as:
- “A second reason is the sunk cost fallacy. This is the tendency to continue to pursue a project regardless of its quality — purely because we have already invested enough effort in it. If you’ve ever insisted on staying in the cinema even when you were not enjoying a film, or finishing a meal that you didn’t like, then you’ve already experienced this.”
In regard to what I find to be an extremely misleading headline in Perez’s piece, Bradshaw points out the common refrain in news that “If it bleeds, it leads“- this is negativity bias, which means that people respond more to negative things and remember them better than positive things, which do not surprise them.
I feel there’s an almost tangible sense of classism in how the people “in” comics react to any and all pushback or criticism. It’s built upon the inherent tier-based structure of both fandom and the comics industry, where the next level down from the “cool kids” are the selected few of the nebbish dorks they’ve deemed permissible and who “know their place”. When you upset that apple cart by daring to speak out, they’re upset.
And what upsets them? Not that you criticized them, actually. That you had the audacity to go against what they said.
So many people on this lower rung build their entire identity on their placement in comics. I mean, I get it- if you’re getting press passes, that IS something to appreciate. But no matter how many times you’ve gotten to sit on a panel or be photographed with a professional comic book writer, it doesn’t mean anything you say needs to be taken as gospel or people who haven’t shouldn’t dare disagree with you. This is misguided thinking.
The audacity to speak out, call out, and HOLD THEIR WORDS ACCOUNTABLE– this is what irks them, and especially irks them about Four Color Sinners. You see- we’re not in their club, we’re not on their tier, we don’t belong to those circles that have an “in” at FanExpo. This awareness and misplaced sense of importance imbues them with a kind of confidence and self-esteem that is somewhat unearned, in my estimation.
If you’re a public figure (or are trying to be), if you put out things that you wrote, that you said, that you stand by- then be prepared for responses. Be prepared when it isn’t praising you or your work. I’m still amazed that so many people with wider audiences than mine (and who are trying for it, unlike me) still display such dismissive attitudes and fannish (rather than professional) conduct.
- “There’s too much democracy in the culture, not enough in the society. This is a false equality. It’s not true. I mean, it’s a lie. It’s a lie that your opinion is as important as the thing you’re watching. If it is, make the thing. It’s just a lie. It must come from the way they raise children now.” – Fran Lebowitz, 2011
Comics Journalism has become self-aware yet more oblivious if that’s even humanly possible. They monitor a never-ending gurgitation of press releases, publisher solicitations and creator quotes. From those, they take what they can to be part of the zeitgeist and anxiously, desperately, sincerely try to get their foot in the door of an industry whose opportunities are ever shrinking and ever evolving.
Unfortunately, much like the rest of the world, their audience has passed them by and nearly made them obsolete. The way to have a readership is through connection. I don’t mean personal connection but the delivery and consolidation of greater thoughts than how expensive items at SDCC were for you. Connection like being open to the cheers and the hits whenever you put something out into the world.
All of this is common sense- yet seems above the heads of many people who should know it already. As long as people care– and need easy digestible content to kill time in a waiting room or subway- then there’s a place for reporting on the comic book industry and the comic book medium. The key is to find the words, fine the tone, find the message. The message is not you.
Oh! And if you’re going to be even subtly misleading in constructing a headline, very few people are going to find this cheeky or amusing. You’re just going to- at the least- mildly annoy those readers. And give them one more reason to stop visiting your site.
Believe it or don’t… I want comics “journalism” to succeed.
It just has to get better first.
*Dedicated to every single reader who agreed with what I wrote in this article; anybody who disagreed just doesn’t exist in my world. In all seriousness though, anyone who wishes to help comic creators- PLEASE consider making even a small donation to the HERO Initiative and/or the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund. You’ll be very glad that you did- and every donation helps!*
https://www.heroinitiative.org/donate-to-hero-initiative/
Four Color Sinners 
A proofreading note. You refer to Heidi MacDonald at one point as “Heidi Thompson” and refer to her as “Thompson” twice afterward. Feel free to delete this comment after correcting.
LikeLike
Oh gosh, you’re right- thanks RS! Heidi Thompson is someone I worked with, I don’t know why I made that mistake. Sorry Heidi MacDonald.
LikeLike
Well said! I would’ve pointed out though that the author’s response in that message thread was purely about his being bitter over autograph exclusives and the price of remarks on signatures. Kinda missing the bigger picture IMO.
I feel he used the Jock story to really bitch about collectibles that he can’t afford. Hibbs used to be “a” reason to visit the Beat…
LikeLiked by 3 people
Oh damn, I meant “remarque” lol, the writer of that article rubbed off on me 😭
Huh, an actual comics writing dude complete with an editor still spelled the term wrong! lol kinda pours salt on the wound there
LikeLiked by 2 people
…I had to think a moment what a “remark/remarque” is or was, before just looking it up and then remembering it’s those little doodles that creators are putting next to their autographs- like those terrible Wolverine heads Roy is doing. But! If that’s what a paying customer wants.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Allow me to suggest there has only been ONE real journalist in comics: Joe Brancatelli, who another commenter mentioned here recently. Apparently, he’s been uploading and even updating some of his work. Read this startlingly professional coverage and I make him to be about 20 years old when he wrote it:
https://joe.joesentme.com/73/090173.html
We have not seen his like again in comics. I am sorry I wasn’t around when he was originally writing.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I mean… yes, but… I’m glad we had Gary and Kim too.
And now Will!
LikeLiked by 1 person
But also Chuck!
LikeLike
There would have been an angle to take on the resale of Jock’s artwork that would have been interesting. That is the notion of “The Artist’s Resale Right” (ARR) something that CARFAC (Canadian Artists’ Representation/Le Front des artistes canadiens) has been pushing for. The idea is that a visual artist would receive 5% of the proceeds of any sale of their work in the secondary market, after the art has been initially sold.
As CARFAC notes, “The ARR is a royalty that would allow visual artists to be rewarded as their career progresses and their reputation grows… The full value of an artwork often isn’t seen on the first sale. It is common for visual art to increase in value over time, as the reputation of the artist grows. For example, Inuit artist, Kenojuak Ashevak, sold her piece Enchanted Owl in 1960 for $24. It was later resold for $158,500. Ashevak received nothing from the sale.”
In Jock’s case, the 5% of the $288,000.00 sale would have netted him $14,400.00, nothing to sneeze at.
Sadly, the piece in The Beat has only one mention of resale rights, and they don’t mean it in the same sense that CARFAC does. The Beat only defines it legally; that the current owner of the art has the legal right to resell it. No one argues that point because the piece wasn’t stolen. “(Editor’s note: the piece was sold to a buyer who presumably has the resale right, any proceeds that would go to Jock would be an act of good faith, not a contractual responsibility.)” CARFAC’s point is that ARR would specifically NOT be an act of good faith, but WOULD be a contractual responsibility.
It’s truly a shame that Perez, Kaplan, and presumably MacDonald didn’t delve into the sale of Jock’s artwork from this point of view. Such an article might still have been contentious, but would have been informative. For example: perhaps Heritage Auctions, eBay, and other such sites could facilitate the collection of a 5% fee that goes to the original artist, regardless of their age and circumstance. Perhaps organizations like CBLDF or the Hero Initiative could also help implement and publicize such a measure.
Lastly, please note that there is a thorny issue regarding work-for-hire and original art, something that CARFAC’s position does not develop. In their detailed FAQ, they note the following: “’If I sold my house, I don’t expect to receive royalties on future sales. Why do artists deserve future payments on something they already sold?’ With copyright, ownership and duration of rights are more complex than they are for most other physical objects. You do not own copyright in your house, car, etc. Artists retain copyright even when their work is sold, unless they sign those rights over to someone else. When it comes to visual art, the intellectual property is related to a physical object. That is what sets visual artists apart from other artists. They are usually the creators of a singular, original object…”
How the work-for-hire aspect of a potential ARR would be resolved is, I think, worth exploration. Even Wikipedia has a piece on it. What’s dismaying about The Beat’s piece is that it doesn’t even broach the subject.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Always appreciate hearing from a great working comics artist like Von Allan; your insight and experience with this issue is greatly appreciated and adds to the conversation here. Thank you.
I do want to say- and I want to be careful to really, really stress that I do not mean this as a slight or a derogatory remark- that I do not think Perez would even begin to think about those aspects you mentioned. His entire perspective in the article was to somehow link an authorized and legal sale of original art reselling at profit to how expensive it is for HIM to get collectables and signed merch at expensive comic cons.
Your comment alone is reason for this to be explored further, but these are not the sort of topics that comics journalism covers extensively *enough*- though I always hope it can change.
There’s a lot dismaying about The Beat. I do recognize it has to adapt somewhat to survive these challenging times for all media, but- pushing back, deleting comments, etc.- that’s not a good approach or a good look. And silencing criticism is what the Republicans do.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Regarding The Beat: Yup, sadly I agree. And yup, I do recognize that they have to adapt, too. And importantly, they know their revenue and traffic data and we don’t. And they presumably do analysis to determine what type of articles “get the clicks” and “views” and generate revenue. Fair enough. The few times I look at the site, though, it seems just full of click bait and other surface-level pieces. And as you’ve pointed out in the past, so much of it seems like adaptions of press releases. I just took a quick look at Ollie Kaplan’s output at the site and easily found articles like a piece on the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers teaming up with the Turtles. Not only is that not journalism, it’s a thinly veiled advertisement.
And not to be harsh, but compare Kaplan’s (or, to be fair, Rich Johnston or Milton Griepp or so many others) to Edward Zitron’s recent piece. Fuck it, I’ll quote Zitron: “I also must be clear that I am nobody. I started writing this newsletter with 300 subscribers and no reason other than the fact I wanted to, and four years later I have nearly 64,000 subscribers and an award-winning podcast. I have no economics training, no special access, no deep sources, just the ability to look at things that are happening and say stuff. I taught myself everything I know about this industry, and there is nothing stopping you from doing the same… Don’t watch the mouth, watch the hands. These companies will tell you that they’re amazing as many times as they want, but you don’t need to prove that — they do. I don’t care if you tell a single human soul about my work, but if it helps you understand these people better, use it to teach other people.”
More broadly, I wish there was comics content from sites like The Beat or Bleeding Cool or ICv2 or CBR or whatever that I would enjoy reading, but sadly there rarely is. I gave up reading all of them ages ago. I use Google Alerts to cover what topics and keywords I feel that I want or need to know, and I simply don’t worry about the rest. Life is way too short and I have far better things to do with my time.
On Comments: And yup, either have well-moderated comments or don’t have them at all. In the case of the former, the comment moderation policy must be crystal clear and it must be adhered to. That’s the only way that commentators as well as lurkers will trust that comment moderation is honest and fair. Under no circumstances should comments be deleted just because someone doesn’t like (or is offended by) the TONE. If the CONTENT of a comment violates the moderation policy, then delete it. Otherwise? Let it ride.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I feel that another factor in the shallowness of the original article, and many other ‘news’ posts online, is the whole need for rapidly produced content superseding a well-researched article. You get a lot of opinion and hot-takes in comics journalism these days and a lot less research and building a well-rounded piece that informs or challenges because that takes time that the online news-cycle doesn’t allow for. The beast needs to be fed. Clicks need to be made. I realize that comics journalists are underpaid (if paid at all) and undervalued, but the quality of a lot of what’s out there isn’t providing an argument for why that should change anytime soon.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is all interesting info! Thanks!!!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’re very welcome!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’d also just like to share my observation that most- not all- of people writing and reporting on the comics industry tend to suffer from their own consumption habits in that they seem to only read comic books and other things strictly related to pop culture. I think that is displayed on a very subtle level with Javier Perez’s underlying hook in his piece- that average fans (consumers) like him have to shell out more and more for luxury exclusives like autographs and remarques that come with said signatures.
This displays a lack of “bigger picture” comprehension as well as being a bit unintentionally tone-deaf when you complain about such a thing and then equate that with being broke. There are so many people who are really, genuinely POOR who never get to go to any comic convention, much less the ones that Beat writers are going to.
As I said, these people’s identities exist as what their author bios say. You’d think Ollie Kaplan cared about critical response based on some of their other articles, but no. Oh well. Everything happening to the comics industry is a self-inflicted wound that’s been growing for years and years- from Diamond’s bankruptcy to the “death of comics journalism”. But the entitled never see it coming.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Is there a word or phrase for this behaviour? “Confirmation Bias” doesn’t seem to quite fit. “Consumption Bias” maybe?!
It’s funny; back in 2018 I went to the Ottawa ComicCon for the first and (so far) only time. I hated it, but I went because Jim Shooter was there and I was hoping I could talk with him, primarily about storytelling. We had a lovely conversation and he was kind and generous enough to give me some of his time. And yes, for one of the few times in my life I asked him to sign a book of his and he did. Didn’t charge me a dime, either. Even better, I had emailed him in advance because I was having a bugger of time finding a copy of his comic SEVEN. I was hoping I could buy it a copy from him. His emailed response: “I don’t sell anything but if I can find an extra copy I’ll give you one.” He found one, brought it, and gave it to me! It was an incredibly decent thing to do. He didn’t have to, but he did.
Why did I hate the ComicCon? Mainly because everything is so heavily commodified. I find it really gross and alienating. A decade (!) ago Red Letter Media mocked the whole thing pretty thoroughly when they attended the Chicago ComicCon. As you noted, one thing I find alarming is that I think that journalists should be mocking this stuff, not championing it. They certainly should not want to be a part of it. Why? Because their very closeness to it will undoubtedly influence how they cover it. A journalist should have a very healthy skepticism of the whole thing, not any affection for it.
Tying one’s identity to a product is never a good idea. Tying one’s identity to a product when one is a journalist who is supposed to cover it? That’s a terrible, devastating idea.
Given what’s just happened in the US with the budget, we’re going to see poverty expand. The “Haves” and “Have-Nots” will grow further apart. And maybe, just maybe the “Think They Haves” will start to wake up. That applies to comics “journalism,” too.
LikeLiked by 2 people
For what it is worth, the comicsbeat article did have the effect of me checking out this site and now I am a fan of your writing and will keep coming back thanks.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Two readers brought to my attention that Javier Perez wrote a follow up article about the auction house, and that it ends with a seemingly out of nowhere (in regard to the rest of the article) reference to criticism he received in his previous article about Jock’s artwork.
“Anyway, apologies. I’ll be better tomorrow.”
Now consider the person that is only reading this article and has no idea about the one that precedes it. For that person, ending an article like that is baffling and odd. Or, they think it’s just a familiar tagline that Perez ends all his articles that way.
Again: this is further proof of the self-centered and amateurish outlook of such “writers”- to add that at all is disappointing, to put in a passive-aggressive, pseudo-teenaged advertisement like that- Heidi MacDonald deserves any declining views, honestly. To keep cultivating anti-journalism like that.
The Beat is now The Joke. And anyway, Perez is lying- he won’t be better tomorrow. He can’t be.
This is what happens when you have a generation of contributors who only know how to consume pop culture and nothing else. Who have an outlet that enables their flawed worldview of themselves as someone who should be heard.
Harlan Ellison once said, “In a world where high art dominates, you can have trivial art and enjoy it. But in a world where there is nothing but trivial art, in a world where there is nothing but Star Wars, in a world where there is nothing but comic books, in a world where there is no Dostoevsky, where there is no Colette, where there is no Tolstoy, and all you have is trivial art, what you have then is the bastardization of art, and what you have is a triviality, raised and defied to a level where it seems important, and so we wind up spending all of our time paying attention to that which is persiflage…”
LikeLiked by 2 people
There’s a dangling sentence here, I think: “Or, they think it’s just a familiar tagline that Perez ends all the” Unless I’m missing a joke, dagnabbit!
Oh, and please check your email: I’m having issues leaving a comment!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am not good at checking the FCS email and I need to work on that. Thanks for the edit!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I just went to Comicsbeat to have a look at the original article and the comments –the entire article has apparently been deleted. I guess you really rattled them.
I was particularly interested to see if the original article touched on original art sales by contemporary artists. As you probably know, there are a handful of current artists who are reaping massive windfalls from selling their art themselves (either directly or through a representative). Nick Dragotta and Tradd Moore among the more notable successes here, but there are more than a few current artists who are selling their art for substantial amounts. It’s a sign of how amateurish comic’s journalism is that an article about the Jock cover selling for $288k wouldn’t mention that in fact successful comics artists are sometimes making big money selling their OA (and by doing commissions).
A lot of pop culture commentary and ‘journalism’ seems to be based on ‘vibes.’ Not just vibes, but fan-vibes. I appreciate your website and your old-school dedication to collecting receipts and holding people accountable. Keep up the good work.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I appreciate your thoughtful comments and thank you for taking the time to read my rants. I do think that “comics journalism” suffers from the same phenomenon that the comics industry itself suffered from – that being fans getting into it, where those fans only consumed comic-related content and nothing outside of it.
As the comics industry gets smaller and more insular, the potential for actual newsworthy stories shrinks- and so, in turn, shrinks the “comics journalism” cottage industry. We cannot justify having hundreds of people who desperately want to be in the industry- but cannot create stories or characters of their own- so what do they do? They report on press releases. A press release is put out so they don’t NEED to talk to reporters.
It’s sad; it’s self-inflicted all the same.
LikeLiked by 2 people
While the original article has been deleted, it has been saved via the Wayback Machine on the Internet Archive. Here’s the link:
https://web.archive.org/web/20250629014145/https://www.comicsbeat.com/jock-oa-sells-for-288k-at-auction-artist-wont-see-any-money-from-the-sale/
LikeLiked by 2 people
I believe Perez’s article was taken down not because we alerted Heidi or Ollie Kaplan that it was a poor article; I think it was taken down because they realized enough people were aware it was a poor article- they already knew.
Basically, they just try to push these things through to create clicks and there’s no strong editorial oversight. I think if you’re going to speak as highly about yourself and your peers as Heidi does- and that’s fine, Heidi herself has put the time in since the Eighties- you shouldn’t make such rookie mistakes.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Fix Comics Journalism? Well, the world could certainly use…. the ‘next Kim Thompson’….
“Recently, I’ve noted how often people in “comics journalism” are advertising, whether subtle or otherwise, just how little they get paid, how they wish more people supported their endeavors…”
Yes… it’s annoying. Don’t they know? That’s ALL of the arts. They don’t give away acting jobs in Hollywood, they don’t give them away in comics either.
Ollie Kaplan: “Collectors are thriving…”
No they’re not. Again, a small percentage are.
The truth is Comics Journalism sucks because Mainstream Comics pushed GOOD comics off the newsstands for years and kids grew up reading SHIT, instead of Charles Burns or Jamie Hernandez. And MOST Comics Journalism supported the big corporate comics. And when the Internet gave people immediate information they didn’t need to wait monthly for – Comics Journalism publications died.
And now? You want the latest news from Scott Snyder or whoever your favorite artist/writer is? You follow THEM on FB/IG/X/whatever, not ‘Comics Beat’. I WISH they could survive, I’d liked ti read TCJ back in the day, but let’s face it – they still need the pull of Marvel/DC and it just doesn’t seem to work next to real comics. TCJ mostly stuck with the formula and… who knows? They still are there. Thank God. Even though it’d be nice to have… ‘the next Kim Thompson’. But they still snubbed ME. (More on that in a minute…)
“The audacity to speak out, call out, and HOLD THEIR WORDS ACCOUNTABLE– this is what irks them, and especially irks them about Four Color Sinners. You see- we’re not in their club, we’re not on their tier, we don’t belong to those circles that have an “in” at FanExpo. This awareness and misplaced sense of importance imbues them with a kind of confidence and self-esteem that is somewhat unearned, in my estimation.
Yup… I made a case for my book, Stan Lee Lied: Your Handy Guide to Every Lie in the Origin of Marvel Comics, last year upon release, to the ‘Comic Journalists’ web site Editors… They ignored it. I know the reason(s). Even TCJ wouldn’t touch it – they are after all now in bed with Marvel Comics doing reprint books with them – again, as I say, a reason it’s hard to take Comics Journalism seriously…
It’s all an ADVERTISEMENT… they don’t truly WANT critical thinking/conversation, etc. Here’s a new Green Lantern, just shut the fuck up and buy the $4.99 new #1 and all 7 variant covers. It’s an incestuous business. And that’s what it’s producing.
“The way to have a readership is through connection. I don’t mean personal connection but the delivery and consolidation of greater thoughts than how expensive items at SDCC were for you. Connection like being open to the cheers and the hits whenever you put something out into the world.”
People can say what they want about Bleeding Cool, the one site who DID do a story on my book – they took it for exactly what they KNEW it would do – generate cheers, jeers, and HITS on their site. It was their #1 news story for two weeks and they even let me post an excerpt in a 2nd story.
Fucking Brillant.
The other sites? Not so smart. I guess the 7th #1 release of a Spider-Gwen comic didn’t work out as well as a news story for them.
Josephine Riesman’s Outstanding “True Believer: The Rise and Fall of Stan Lee” was a great book that shined a lot of TRUTH on the Stan Lee Myth – it is ESSENTIAL reading – I GET why it got coverage – it’s a seasoned, experienced professional writer with a major publisher, agent, etc. And I am EXTREMELY happy for its success, and the fact that it annoys Roy Thomas.
I’m proud of my little book. It just keeps on selling month after month, coming up on one year. I’m amazed at its resilience. One of the most IMPORTANT book on comics in years – the TRUTH about Stan Lee and the DECADES worth of LIES… Lies that Comic Journalists ALLOWED…. And the Comics Journalism sites didn’t pan it or praise it – they IGNORED it. Here was a chance to atone for their culpability in allowing Lee’s lies to become a part of the mainstream, AND support independent publishing AND get some website hits, AND put the news out AND tell the freaking truth.
And they missed it.
Comics Journalism not doing so well? Well… That makes sense.
The flippers who want those Green Lantern 7th edition #1 reprints so they can CGC with a signature and a Remarque and make so much money on don’t need any information from a site like that.
Those of us who really want to cuss and discuss comics DO.
They just don’t know how to cater to us.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The Beat turns out 10-15 stories a day, some of them praised and useful to the industry, and you use one poorly edited one to declare all of comics journalism dead and useless? In a story in which you call me Heidi Thompson until someone points it out in the comments?
It’s almost as if……people make mistakes.
I confess, I just learned about this piece, and did not read this entire piece or more than a couple of comments because I’m too busy preparing to cover the biggest comics event of the year, but I did do a word count and 3000 words over a total nothingburger. I wish I had time to do that. I do give you props for writing it out instead of doing a more lucrative YouTube video.
In the end I took down this story because it did not meet our standards. I did not need 3000 words to tell me that. I have addressed this with our staff and we will endeavor to do better. They are good and talented people who love the comics medium, and they don’t deserve to be called names or belittled. They are people with feelings who work hard and they deserve respect for that. Also it is not our policy to remove comments unless they are abusive or spam. The comments should not have been removed and I apologize. I can guarantee that we will fuck up again, because we’re human, but we will acknowledge and learn from our mistakes.
Because if there is one thing that I, Heidi Thompson, stand by it is that I acknowledge and learn from my mistakes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It took me literally about a dozen tries to post the above comment and it came out with the formatting all messed up. Mistakes made and acknowledged.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Beat turns out 10-15 stories a day, some of them praised and useful to the industry, and you use one poorly edited one to declare all of comics journalism dead and useless? In a story in which you call me Heidi Thompson until someone points it out in the comments?
It’s almost as if……people make mistakes.
I confess, I just learned about this piece, and did not read this entire piece or more than a couple of comments because I’m too busy preparing to cover the biggest comics event of the year, but I did do a word count and 3000 words over a total nothingburger. I wish I had time to do that. I do give you props for writing it out instead of doing a more lucrative YouTube video.
In the end I took down this story because it did not meet our standards. I did not need 3000 words to tell me that. I have addressed this with our staff and we will endeavor to do better. They are good and talented people who love the comics medium, and they don’t deserve to be called names or belittled. They are people with feelings who work hard and they deserve respect for that. Also it is not our policy to remove comments unless they are abusive or spam. The comments should not have been removed and I apologize. I can guarantee that we will fuck up again, because we’re human, but we will acknowledge and learn from our mistakes.
Because if there is one thing that I, Heidi Thompson, stand by it is that I acknowledge and learn from my mistakes.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I appreciate you taking the time to write this Heidi, I do. I have always said that you have paid your dues and earned your rep and so forth- *that* is why I feel you yourself should hold your site to higher standards. You’re the one that claims you are part of an illuminati that, were just one member of said illuminati were cloned, it could save the comics industry. Alright! It’s not for me to argue that. It’s up to you to maintain such lofty self-appraisal.
I was not singling out one article. I was saying this one article is indicative of the overall amateurish output that largely constitutes comics journalism these days- please note I am not targeting The Beat, but overall- that being said, The Beat should be the keystone, the go-to spot.
I appreciate your attempt to maneuver your comments to subtly imply I was just making a mountain out of a contributor making A MISTAKE, especially as you’ve removed the piece so that no one unfamiliar with it could then go check it out. 😉
Folks, if you’re reading this- it wasn’t a, y’know, mistake. The entire piece was a mistake in terms of intent, logic, and common sense. I’m not the only person that thinks so.
You don’t have to apologize, mistakes happen. I do feel anyone painting me as someone trying to create heat or manifest outrage- the way your illuminati comrade RJ has done for years- is mistaken or probably has a deliberate motivation to do so. As I’ve said, I wouldn’t have to write any of this if comics journalism did it.
Why should I- apparently a novice- have to find Clair Noto and share her story?? So many “comics journalists” are writing about themselves or writing about pro wrestling or writing about corporate press releases, that’s why. It’s sad. It’s inevitable all the same.
Thanks for counting my words, if I really wrote 3,000 over a “nothingburger” what does it say about the fact that more than six times that number read it and shared it the first day it was posted?
Javier’s tone and outlook are too fan-ish, too amateurish to constitute as journalism. I respect you standing by your contributors though.
LikeLiked by 2 people
LMFAO She threw in a dig about my boy’s day job gtfo with that!!! 🤣🤣🤣
LikeLiked by 2 people
“They are good and talented people who love the comics medium, and they don’t deserve to be called names or belittled. They are people with feelings who work hard and they deserve respect for that.”
“who love the comics medium” – Your love for a subject does not make you immune from constructive criticism! Someone else commented here they liked Brian Hibbs’ column, and Hibbs is another guy that has preached the “look, we love comics, okay?? We deserve better!” and I don’t subscribe to that outlook.
“they don’t deserve to be called names or belittled” – Who did that? Asking honestly. I would not call Perez or Kaplan names… and DIDN’T. Is pointing out a bad article belittling someone? …the fuck? Heidi, I feel you are equivalent to a parent shielding a child from real world matters, which then causes them not to gain real life comprehension.
“they deserve respect for that”- No. They deserve to NOT be DISrespected, but no one owes you respect because you work hard. Ask any person working in general labor jobs (which you’ve- now- repeatedly mocked or made light of)- you SHOULD be respected, but it isn’t owed. Too many shitty managers would attest to that.
Again, I will no longer visit THE BEAT or chime in, so worry not. The feelings will not be hurt, at least not by me. Later Gator!
LikeLiked by 1 person
when did fourcolor insult your writers? btw I like The Beat and I liked Hibbs retailer columns
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reposted with paragraph breaks which Gutenberg erased
>Thanks for counting my words, if I really wrote 3,000 over a “nothingburger” what does it say about the fact that more than six times that number read it and shared it the first day it was posted?
It tells me that there is a large cottage industry of people who like to criticize me. Also boasting about traffic when you’ve rightly called out clickbait journalism in the past seems….ironic?
> I feel you yourself should hold your site to higher standards.
I do. That’s why the post was removed. I do hope/plan to revisit the topic of Jock’s art sale at a later date, probably after Comic-Con, because it should be examined. But what I see here (and yes I’ve scanned the article and comments) is the internet equivalent of the two old men sitting around in their wifebeaters outside the garage that you always see, tut tutting and gossiping over every little thing. Statler and Waldorf in the wild. There is no actual call to action just nit picking over every little thing. We’re caught in an endless feedback loop: The article was shit, but taking it down was a sin. I feel like my staff is being led down a cobblestone path by Rebecca Welton as she chants “Shame, shame, shame.” I’ve seen this play before.
FCS, your Clair Noto piece was great, no question. We absolutely need more citizen journalists/historians/fans/readers/former Holland Hotel workers trying to uncover the secret history of comics and finding the people that Pap Pap History has forgotten. I’ve admired your coverage in the past, but in this and the last post you wrote about me (which I likewise just discovered) you jump to so many conclusions that aren’t based on evidence that I’m going to have to take a lot of what you write with a grain of salt going forward.
As mentioned, I’ve been down this perp walk before, and I appreciate the kind words you’ve given me, and get that we’re mostly? on the same side of things. IF you wanted a modern day Blood and Thunder, well, I took the bait. For better or ill, my career and work speak for themselves and I’ll take the brickbats. But I won’t take insulting my staff and writers. The Beat has always been committed to encouraging and promoting new voices, and I will continue to do that. Learning means sometimes making public mistakes, and also learning that people with a lot of time on their hands will sit in a balcony mocking you from afar.
PS: everything about attempting to write and post a comment here makes me glad I never installed Gutenberg. It’s torture.
LikeLike
Heidi, with respect, I’d like to respond to a few of your points even if your mind seems made up:
“It tells me that there is a large cottage industry of people who like to criticize me. Also boasting about traffic when you’ve rightly called out clickbait journalism in the past seems….ironic?”
That is not intended as a boast… but as confirmation that readers are interested in the discussion of comics journalism as a whole. (Notably, your name or image appears nowhere on the title or title screen)
Yes, THE BEAT is singled out but that’s as much because I consider The Beat to be one of “the” sites that represents comics journalism. Also, we both know my writing is not clickbait, but I recognize your maneuver there, le sigh. As for a cottage industry of people willing to criticize you… honestly Heidi, if you’re fair you know I have nothing to do with that, I am not affiliated or associated with anyone else that may or may not criticize you- I was unaware of the ComicsGate fuckers until fairly recently, and certainly don’t have anything in common with their outlook or their disgusting, rampant sexism. (If this is who you mean) And I don’t think those dorks would be reading my work.
“But what I see here (and yes I’ve scanned the article and comments) is the internet equivalent of the two old men sitting around in their wifebeaters outside the garage that you always see, tut tutting and gossiping over every little thing. Statler and Waldorf in the wild.”
Class, read carefully to see all the signals that Heidi is intoning in this sentence- one which is designed to say one thing but infer other things. It’s structured to both diminish and imply in an attempt to get a certain kind of response. By saying “I’ve scanned the article and comments” is Heidi’s way of implying that she hasn’t read every single word (because she’s too busy/too important and this site is too beneath her), by saying it’s the equivalent of two old men sitting around is meant to infer that we’re just a collection of whiny, entitled old guys (so that any valid points made will be overlooked), and so forth. I know Heidi has taken a lot of unfair shit from online (male) trolls, but- anyone who has read (or SCANNED) over my work knows I’m not one of those sexist cocksuckers. Therefore, my criticism probably stings deeper since it isn’t motivated by enraged male entitlement from dorks who never got laid.
“There is no actual call to action just nit picking over every little thing. We’re caught in an endless feedback loop: The article was shit but taking it down was a sin. I feel like my staff is being led down a cobblestone path by Rebecca Welton as she chants “Shame, shame, shame.” I’ve seen this play before.”
I’m sure you have, but there was an actual call to action: do better. Be better. When someone pointed out my mistake, I didn’t delete anything, I apologized and corrected it. I should also like to remind you that you are a public figure; I am not. Yours is a news site; mine is not. This doesn’t mean I’m beyond criticism; it means that you can’t break down or lash out anytime someone DARES to criticize lazy and ineffectual writing on your site. No one is trying to shame anybody.
“We absolutely need more citizen journalists/historians/fans/readers/former Holland Hotel workers trying to uncover the secret history of comics and finding the people that Pap Pap History has forgotten.”
Again, I (legit) love it that you reference my former job at the Holland Hotel. As if this is a qualifier for me writing about what I do. You know (obviously) absolutely nothing about what I did after that long-ago job, which is how I prefer to keep it. But trust me- one day, it’s going to be a very entertaining reveal. As a wise woman commented on here, there’s nothing shameful about having a job. (And- to anyone who ever gigs as a singer or stage performer- hotels are easy gigs and sometimes less of a hassle than bartending or being a server! That’s free advice, btw)
“I’ve admired your coverage in the past, but in this and the last post you wrote about me (which I likewise just discovered) you jump to so many conclusions that aren’t based on evidence that I’m going to have to take a lot of what you write with a grain of salt going forward.”
It’s possible I jump to conclusions though I’m pretty religious about citing references and exact quotes in every single piece I write. However, I must again take exception with your repeated comment- though I suppose it’s pretty revealing- where you say, “this and the last post you wrote about ME” (emphasis mine), I have never written an article about YOU, I have written articles which MENTION YOU and there is a distinct difference.
People in comics eat out on their infamy and significance and yet seem surprisingly fragile if anyone dares speaks without seeking their approval or endorsement. They also seem fragile if you offer constructive criticism. That’s partially what I attempt to write about- there’s a tier system in every level of comics, and I don’t adhere to any of that shit. I’m going to speak out and continue speaking out. I know people in comics that CAN’T, and I get it. But Heidi, you’re a known and established figure. You’ve done a lot of good stuff, do you think you’re above someone writing about the bad stuff? And anyway, who the fuck am I???? Apparently, a lowly hotel employee who isn’t on your level- who gives a fuck? Ignore me! For what it’s worth, I found The Beat to be an invaluable resource in the past for finding Fundraisers for various creators and comic-related issues. But, if it pleases you, I’ll just never look at it again or comment. There, problem solved and you’re welcome.
“IF you wanted a modern day Blood and Thunder, well, I took the bait.”
I honestly do not want that; I honestly do not want a “let’s you and that person fight” etc. etc. etc. Go talk to your close personal friend RICH about that sort of thing. I believe, honestly, that discussion and debate can begat positive results, so I encourage that, just like I encourage this exchange between us, albeit in comment form. I know some people don’t like RSMartin, I know some people don’t like Michael Hill, etc.- I’d still rather they discuss those differences than just insult and block each other. Otherwise, nothing ever gets resolved or accomplished. It ain’t like these guys are going to stop caring about the subjects involved, we may as well talk.
“But I won’t take insulting my staff and writers. The Beat has always been committed to encouraging and promoting new voices, and I will continue to do that. Learning means sometimes making public mistakes, and also learning that people with a lot of time on their hands will sit in a balcony mocking you from afar.”
Again. I have never insulted your staff and writers. You cannot display any instance where this has happened, but I strongly suspect this is you trying to change the narrative. Your staff and writers displayed amateurish behavior, such as lecturing anyone that commented in a patronizing tone and telling them what the point of the article was *supposed* to be- in fairness, the author (Perez) did NOT do that, so credit there. Also, another (weak) attempt to bait me by suggesting I’ve got a lot of time on my hands, and I mock people from afar. Firstly, anyone- me included- will be mocked for their public output. You know this way better than I do. Secondly, I mock people to their faces.
As for Gutenberg, I have no idea what that is, but I apologize for all of my blog’s shortcomings. Thank you again and good luck with THE BEAT and all of your future endeavors. Remember, I am not a part of any comics illuminati. I am not a federal judge; I cannot influence your life in any way. I did once work at a hotel you mocked. Today I make three times a hotel worker’s salary but make sure to tip exceedingly well anytime I stay in a hotel. Be safe in San Diego!
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think its a shame that fourcolorsinners isnt represented on the beat. you added comicsfrontier (a good site! btw) but wont add this site because you disagree with each other. the Noto interview alone was award worthy and no other site did it, they just talked about it.
For me, every comic site can blur together when its just talking about the big 2’s new reboots. (i know the beat is much more than that!) we need a voice like fourcolorsinners. f.c.s. i hope you didnt throw the towel in and will be coming back soon. journalism is about diverse voices.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thanks for sharing your kind thoughts. Regardless of my disagreements with The Beat, I don’t think what we do here constitutes journalism in the sense of most sites- also, we’re not active with consistent coverage of the industry. But I appreciate this comment! I have about 286 unapproved comments and it’s just been overwhelming, but most of them are yelling at me to start posting again. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
annnnnnnnd, what is the point of mentioning where a hotel a guy once worked at if not to try to make an insult?? there is nothing shameful about having a job, ever. gross
LikeLiked by 3 people
Sam, thank you. The reason to mention that was classist, pure and simple- one of my only critiques of Ms. MacDonald is her inherent and public classicism. I believe it’s a mistake to mention the Holland Hotel, since now (for context), I am forced to inform any unaware readers that Heidi once mocked (in a condescending manner) the Holland Hotel in a Beat article about hotels skyrocketing around the time of New York Comic Con.
I did work at Holland Hotel- years and years ago, when I was performing at The Actor’s Studio and Off-Broadway- and I find NOTHING SHAMEFUL ABOUT HAVING A PART-TIME NIGHT JOB WHILE I HUSTLED ONSTAGE DURING THE DAY.
The other problem with this comment is that Heidi gives away what little she knows about me, which will make later reveals of my jobs *following* that youthful hotel gig much more illuminative towards her dismissive tone. By the same token Sam, Heidi is the writer that talks about people having to eat ramen and broadcasts “how she rolls” among the high movers of San Diego. I just think we’re from different worlds, so I don’t take offense. But yeah everyone, I once hustled at a hotel job and I stick by my defense of it- it had a nighttime security guard (at least back when I was there), and I only responded to possibly remind the illustrious HeidiMac that not everyone gets press passes and that comic conventions themselves were becoming increasingly expensive so the financial benefit of staying in nearby New Jersey was nothing to poke fun at.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Got to love Heidi pointing out that she’s too busy because she’s (nudge nudge, wink wink) covering the biggest event of the year. Yeah, SDCC is a big event, but not for pros. Not for Indy creators. Not for retailers like me and my spouse. But you do you Heidi, and keep supporting corporate interests over comics.
i also find it rich that you’d compare the author’s mistake of misremembering your name with what that writer did in the JOCK piece. It’s two entirely different things. One writer got your name wrong and one writer lacks fundamentals of how basic commerce works.
Also, was Heidi’s name on the headline?? I must’ve missed that.
LikeLiked by 3 people
THANK you, m’lord. I was really not trying to single out or insult Heidi, she’s just- y’know- the BOSS of the Beat. She’s the Perry White.
I’m interested in hearing more about the vendors/retailers side in regard to what you said about San Diego, if you want to elaborate more. Thanks!
LikeLiked by 1 person
FCS previously praised me for acknowledging the honest utility of bargain hotels in New Jersey (where I grew up and I’m proud to say so) and I was actually doing a call back to that when I mentioned the Holland Hotel. Everyone seems to be projecting their own ideas about whether a part-time desk job is “low class” or not. I never said any such thing. That said, how on earth can the statement “I have never written an article about YOU” be taken with a straight face, “class”, when this exists?https://fourcolorsinners.com/2025/04/27/what-youre-really-saying-is-how-do-i-save-my-job-in-comics-on-the-impending-and-present-death-of-comics-journalism/
The AI generated artwork in the hero image on the article was a bit of a surprise for me, and I’m honestly surprised that flies around here.
Likewise, the statement in the disparaging comment above “It’s structured to both diminish and imply in an attempt to get a certain kind of response” on a website that uses headlines like ““Makes a Big Deal Out of Trumpeting Respect and Admiration For Someone, Then Actually Treats Them With Disrespect…” – On The Complete Lack of Ability Or New Ideas From Roy Thomas” also….baffles me.
FCS’s projection of my motives is really strange, especially the “ramen and peanut butter” quote, since I was very clearly referring to myself. I’ve said this many times about myself, and I’ve also eaten lots and lots of peanut butter sandwiches because writing about comics is not a very lucrative job, which I’ve also said repeatedly, in print, on podcasts, on panels, in private conversations, pretty much anywhere.
I really have taken the bait here, but I think most of us here are actually on the same side most of the time. FourColorSinner, I welcome your comments on The Beat. We are accountable to the community, and I make that clear to all our contributors. I won’t be held accountable for something I didn’t do, though, and I’m sure everyone here feels the same way.
LikeLiked by 1 person
1) If I misunderstood your comment about peanut butter and ramen noodles- and, seemingly I did- I sincerely apologize. I took it in a different tone.
2) You’ve said “taken the bait” twice now as if I am trying to get you to respond/get upset- I assure you I’m not, and, whatever else I am, I am not lying about anything here on FCS.
3) Stay baffled. Also, that article you post is not about you. You are included in the article, as are other comic journalists that I helpfully list with you, literally in almost the first paragraph.
4) I did not know that was an AI generated image; it was on a writer’s Bluesky and I asked if I could use it. I’d rather make an oversight error like that, though. Glad you were able to construct a list of complaints though, based on only having the time to “scan over” the various articles you cite.
LikeLiked by 1 person
In fairness: Khushi used a photograph of his husband to generate the image that the author of F.C.S. asked to use and the chap weeping isn’t meant to be a “comic journalist” but Khushi saw it would fit for those purposes; the word balloon was added by author of F.C.S.
H.MCD is looking for things to use against this site, okay. But she doesn’t understand the point of Khushi purposely using A.I. once (he is an accomplished street artist) to make a point. And he saw no issue with allowing F.C.S. usage for such a hilarious article.
Cheers,
EiSHAL
LikeLiked by 1 person
and btw everyone, Heidi chose to ignore this article- which isn’t surprising, but also… baffles me.
wait! it’s not baffling. this article makes everyone in comics journalism circa 2013 look, well, not competent.
LikeLiked by 1 person
everything you write is a backhanded compliment or something that centers any single thing to be about you, you, you. marcia, marcia, marcia.
who wants to criticize you just to criticize you, girl? i don’t even read mainstream comic websites but the summary of the article he criticized here was pretty concise and you yourself admitted it didn’t live up to your usual standards. just let it go! what has four color sinners ever claimed that you can tell him what should fly here or not? this guy has integrity and done so much behind the scenes for struggling creators its laughable to try to paint him as a guy trying to get the clicks or get the drama.
LikeLiked by 2 people