(Newspaper) Funnies aren't funny anymore .. and no webcomics

Post by **Kisai** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:21 am

http://www.westword.com/2007-09-06/news ... ymore/full

Apparently (read a about 2/3rds down) when selecting new comics, stuff that is fairly popular online is 'too dumb' for print.

Yeahduff · Post by **Yeahduff** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:43 am

Pearls Before Swine and Dilbert are pretty good.

Dr Legostar · Post by **Dr Legostar** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:48 am

well it's diesel sweeties, which is frankly pretty dumb.

CaptainClaude · Post by **CaptainClaude** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:51 am

webcomics ARE dumb!

*sells up and buys a farm so's he can raise sheep*

Dave Against The Machine · Thu Sep 06, 2007 9:09 am

legostargalactica wrote:well it's diesel sweeties, which is frankly pretty dumb.

Yes and something that dumb took the Fox Trot spot in our newspaper. Grrrrrr

Dr Legostar · Post by **Dr Legostar** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 9:11 am

Dave Against The Machine wrote:
legostargalactica wrote:well it's diesel sweeties, which is frankly pretty dumb.
Yes and something that dumb took the Fox Trot spot in our newspaper. Grrrrrr

i haven't read fox trot in ages, i used to love it, i have something like 13 of the books, but when he started repeating jokes, and not even funny ones, i started caring less about it. Honestly i don't read newspaper comics anymore at all, unless i'm very bored and someone happens to have the funnies, and even then i skip most of the comics.

Rkolter · Post by **Rkolter** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 9:26 am

I do still read the newspaper funnies - all of them. But I just realized that when I find a funny comic in them, I actually make a note of it. That's not all that often.

Yeahduff · Post by **Yeahduff** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:25 am

Dave Against The Machine wrote:
legostargalactica wrote:well it's diesel sweeties, which is frankly pretty dumb.
Yes and something that dumb took the Fox Trot spot in our newspaper. Grrrrrr

Fox Trot was going anyway. And at this point, that's probably OK.

So I guess I should read the article, huh?

McDuffies · Post by **McDuffies** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:35 am

Pfff. If I was editor, I'd knock down the oldies and ignore those who complain. They're probably just a loud minority, Abracham Simpson style, but even if they aren't, they have a choice of keeping the old audience or attracting the new ones. They chose the first and that will be the slow doom of them - after all, so they have complaints if they ditch "Hagar the Horrible", how much of it is people under 40? If they stick to current policy, they shouldn't complain that kids are playing videogames instead of reading comic.

But who the fuck cares. Newspaper comics editors have been misstreating authors since the day one, they deserve to lose.

"Diesel sweeties" was an awful choice, true. The comic goes for the absurdist humor, which is very common in webcomics, but it's too different from newspaper comics and requires peculiar sence of humor. I'm actually surprised that editors picked it in the first place, and that Stevenson himself went into it - I mean, it's like taking a line of housewives who've been watching nothing but soap operas for years, and showing them "Napoleon Dynamite" and expecting them to like it. Something more conventional like "Pvp" would've worked better... well, not "Pvp" because of that backlog of old comics, but a new comic in style of Pvp.

Of course the last line of the article is downright idiotic, I don't think I should even bother being outraged about it.

Stinkywigfiddle · Post by **Stinkywigfiddle** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 10:50 am

Webcomics are way too varied to say they are anything.

*edit*
Oh wait, stuff that is popular online probably is pretty dumb.

Jesusabdullah · Post by **Jesusabdullah** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 11:30 am

I don't remember the article even mentioning webcomics, just Diesel Sweeties as an example of a new newspaper comic. I read it a couple of hours ago, though.

NakedElf · Post by **NakedElf** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 12:50 pm

Newspaper comics have been pretty shitty for a long, long time.

The problem is that they basically never get dropped. Once you're syndicated and in lots of papers, you've got it made. So why bother anymore? At least half the syndicated comics in papers to day need to be dropped immediately. The rest have the possibility of improving, especially once they realize that they could be next. I mean, even Garfield started trying to improve once papers started dropping it (too little too late, but it's a good sign that they are physically capable of improving themselves.)

The problem with most webcomics as I see it is that they aren't 'family friendly' enough for newspapers. Sinfest, for example, reads to me like it wants *desperately* to be a newspaper comic or at least to be regarded in the same vein as one, but the devil, porn, whores, pimps, bongs, and weed are not going to get published in the newspaper comics section.

Dutch! · Post by **Dutch!** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 1:07 pm

Kisai wrote:Apparently (read a about 2/3rds down) when selecting new comics, stuff that is fairly popular online is 'too dumb' for print.

I haven't read the article, but going on that one sentence... I agree.

Pretty well all of the 'popular' strips I've heard about and given a look at I think are a little too 'dumb' to read.

That said though... I still read the funnies each day I get a chance, and yeah, I'm under 40 so I'm well aware I might be in the minority in that particular demographic.

That's okay though. Means there's more elbow room.

Dracomax · Post by **Dracomax** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 3:03 pm

i bother to read the "funnies" once a month or so. turns out, i very rarely even chuckle over anything in them.

in contrast, i read webcomics every day, even ones I consider stupid, but entertaining, and don't have to buy a paper.

funny how that works.

Jackhass · Post by **Jackhass** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 7:03 pm

The ratio of good stuff to crap in the paper is still *much* better than in webcomics. I get a little tired of the constant newspaper strip bashing...it ain't all that bad.

Stinkywigfiddle · Post by **Stinkywigfiddle** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:30 pm

We should burn all newspaper comic sections!

Dr Legostar · Post by **Dr Legostar** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:35 pm

stinkywigfiddle wrote:We should burn all newspaper comic sections!

in protest?

Jim North · Post by **Jim North** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:37 pm

To keep warm. Not a big cash cow, webcomics.

NakedElf · Post by **NakedElf** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 9:54 pm

Jackhass wrote:The ratio of good stuff to crap in the paper is still *much* better than in webcomics. I get a little tired of the constant newspaper strip bashing...it ain't all that bad.

The problem, I think, isn't so much in the percentages as in that if you're only getting newspaper X, then you're only getting the comics it carries. So if half the comics in it are bad, then you're only getting 10 or 20 good comics.

Even if 95% of the comics on the web are utter crap, I don't have them delivered to my door and can easily ignore them and indulge myself instead with the 5% of really excellent comics.

Plus there's just something about the fact that Mary Worth continues to get published which just ticks me off...

Paul Escobar · Post by **Paul Escobar** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:57 am

I read the article, and I didn't see it saying that popular webcomics are dumb. Only that some Rocky Mountain News readers thought Diesel Sweeties is. I don't know that comic, but in principle it could be a valid complaint, no?

Comic Genesis Forums

(Newspaper) Funnies aren't funny anymore .. and no webcomics

(Newspaper) Funnies aren't funny anymore .. and no webcomics

Re: (Newspaper) Funnies aren't funny anymore .. and no webco