Disclaimer: None of what I post here is in any way the views of Blog@, Newsarama, or Imaginova Networks or anyone associated with them. These are my own opinions, and I speak only for myself. And they’re right.
There has been a bit of an uproar on Twitter in the last 24 hours, primarily instigated by three big names at Marvel Comics complaining about tweets, posts on the microblogging social network, being reposted on websites such as this one, CBR, and many others. The contention by Tom Brevoort, Brian Michael Bendis, and Joe Quesada is that this shouldn’t be done without permission or even payment to the person who made the original 140 character or less post.
…them as articles without any permission or payment to CB. Yeah, I’m looking at you, Newsarama Blog.
This brings to light something that bugged me for the four years that I covered comic books, and one of the big reasons that my focus is on video games nowadays. Press coverage of comics is so reliant on being buddy buddy with the various companies that are being covered, the majority of comic book press has become nothing but a glorified PR stream. But let’s get to the point of contention first: Twitter.
The way Quesada addressed things (you can click on his name here to get to his Twitter stream and read it for yourself; virtually no difference from me posting it directly here) was certainly with less vitriol and more respect for the people he was addressing, and I appreciate that. Bendis decided to call the very act of collecting individual tweets and posting them with commentary lazy, showing he obviously has never tried to collect a series of tweets! The problem is this: Twitter is an open forum. It’s a blog, at its heart; a blog that the three people in question (and the fourth, referenced by Brevoort, was CB Cebulski, who as far as we can tell has no problem with it at all) are all “unprotected” updaters on, meaning anyone using Twitter or NOT using Twitter can read their updates. Pulling quotes and content from Twitter is thus exactly the same as pulling content from other websites, blogs, etc. It is a process frequently known as linkblogging, and as long as a link to the original source is there, that’s fine. Some commentary should be provided along with the news, absolutely, or it does come off as a bit lazy; I can concede that point and even support it. Statements like these, however, are going to get me fired up:
@BRIANMBENDIS Yes, and the sense of entitlement. If you’re getting paid to do this, then you have to know it’s wrong.
Wow. OK, first thing’s first: the issue of payment. As I offered to Joe Quesada, I’d be more than willing to count up the number of words reposted from Twitter, divide those into the number of words posted here monthly, and send Tom or anyone else the tenth of a penny (if that) that we owe them. The thought seems to be that we’re all swimming in gold coins like Scrooge McDuck from doing some blogging, and that’s utterly ridiculous. Second, there’s not some vast conspiracy to steal all of the comic industry’s thoughts and dreams from their brain grapes. The two posts that started all this nonsense were ostensibly the reposting of Joe Quesada’s cover to Amazing Spider-Man #600 on the front page of Newsarama and CBR, and the reposting of C.B. Cebulski’s breaking-into-comics tips here at this blog amongst many others. So, an image that our readership would want to see hits a public forum; it’s now out there on the internet. The image is then reposted by reporters, including a link to the original source, and more information about the product and a link to the interview about a similar topic being run on the same site. As reporters, that’s not just the right thing to do, it’s actually the basis of the job. REPORTING on NEWS.
C.B.’s tips are a slightly different topic, to be sure, but similar enough to cover at the same time. Here we have someone very kindly trying to get information to the maximum number of people using his vast experience on the topic. He even answers a LOT of fans’ questions during the process; it’s a very cool resource for fans and aspiring creators, and thus something to report on. The aggregation of his posts was not something done with villainous intentions, as is implied by the statement, “you have to know it’s wrong.” Surprisingly enough, not everyone is on Twitter. Also, 3413 (C.B.’s current follower count) does not quite cover Newsarama’s readership, or we wouldn’t quite be a functioning website. The thought process behind aggregation was to do no more than open up this resource to a greater readership.
Now, part two of that infuriating tweet, the sense of entitlement. This part just baffles me, really. That’s the exact problem with how press is “allowed” to cover comics; there is this sense of entitlement by the folks being covered that often precludes stories from being run, under threat of not being allowed access in the future. It’s like no other industry in the level of relationship, and that of course can be a good and a bad thing. It’s certainly easier to get an interview with a creator of comics than an interview with a Senator, movie director, or foreign dictator. Let me give you an example of the bad; at Wizard World Chicago a few years back, I was chatting with a major artist who I won’t name so I don’t get him in trouble. Being one of my all time favorite artists, it was a thrill for me; it still is a thrill talking to my favorite creators, though the dynamic has changed over the years. I digress; I was talking to Artist X and asked him, press badge in full view, if his next project was on the books yet. He said, off-the-cuff, something like “Yeah, I’m doing next summer’s big event book.” The project had been rumored, and he referenced it by name, and did in fact draw it a year later. When I passed this news on to a couple of editors, they said they’d talk to Marvel about trying to get the official announcement a few months down the line. Now, in my journalism coursework, I learned that you certainly let them know you’re running the story and ask for an official comment, then run the story with or without the comment. I’ve been told time and time again, though, that’s simply not the way things run in the comics world, and I just don’t understand that sense of entitlement.
For the record, I’ve had entire blogs and even full feature articles reposted on other websites without prior permission. The only time I’ve had a problem with it is when no credit was given. As long as there is credit and a linkback, it’s a complete non-issue in my eyes.
A cursory notification could be given to the poster of the original tweet when people want to run their statements as stories. However, permission just isn’t the right word. If we were constantly waiting on permission from Twitter posts, Variety, HollywoodReporter, IGN, MTV, Marvel, DC, IDW, etc. to use content they’ve put up on the internet, we’d have a very boring and non-informative blog. The linkback is the notification in this form of media. We’re telling the public and the originator of the content where we got it from and that we’ve repurposed it to make it easier to access for our readership. Basically, if you don’t want information out in the ether, don’t put it out in the ether. It’s that simple.
At any rate, with David’s collection of C.B.’s tweets, the one that got Mr. Brevoort all up in arms, David was given permission about a week ago, before ever running anything (in fact, it was a suggestion by C.B. that made him think to do it), and then linked to the piece directly “@” C.B. (it was on Twitter) and got a thank you. Thus, the original contention against the post actually doesn’t make sense. If there was a genuine issue that he or anyone else wanted addressed, why not ask privately? It would be easy enough to contact any of us directly and address the issue without making it a public debacle first. That should point out how silly this really is.
What this all comes down to is a way of thinking about reporting. The central thesis of Journalism is if you get news, and establish that it is news, you should report it. Conversely, if you’re a public figure, and you’re putting information out in an open, public forum, you should always assume that people can and will talk about it. Without some kind of disclaimer on your twitter site, or protected updates (which would be a bit counter-intuitive in it being a publicity machine), any claim of foul play just makes the complainer look silly. That’s my opinion, and it’s right.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:34 am
It IS lazy content. Just as posting pre-packaged previews to comics is lazy content, but I don’t see anyone complaining about that.
The problem with tweets is that they are short and can easily be taken out of context. Reading tweets on twitter is different to reading tweets on a blog.
So yes, I think it’s lazy content and honestly would rather see Blog@ put more time and effort into sourcing content. But I don’t think Joe Q et al are right to be complaining about it.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:54 am
1) Once it’s on twitter, it’s in the world. Wah.
2) I looked at Twitter’s policies, and near as I could tell, you can run anything that anyone Twittered anywhere as long as you mention Twitter and provide a link.
3) If Marvel wants a twitter equivalent that they own, they should figure out an app and dump a content stream on their own site. Thing is, it will still be linkable and people will still repost it.
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:15 am
Marvel is on the wrong side of this. You linked to the source, you didn’t misrepresent the material, and you’re not taking money out of any pockets by compiling it. You did nothing wrong, and Brevoort, Bendis and Quesada should realize that.
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:17 am
Brevoort’s an ass.
This is what happens when you let your employees tweet. When it’s out there, it’s out there, even when you try to hide it or change it. If it’s too much, have your employees not tweet and save it for a blog post on your website.
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:20 am
My problem with the comics press is just like yours, except that it also applies to all the entertainment press, and is creeping into politics; journalists have to get permission of the people getting covered, or else they get cut out. It gives the “celebrities” or politicians have near complete control over their images, and it forces the reporters to throw softball questions to the recipients instead of asking questions the readers really want answered (just look at “20 Questions for Dan Didio” for an example).
Personal pages like Twitter, Squidoo, or whatever, if they’re being used to promote the creators’ work for Marvel (or any company), they’re fair game for the news sites. If Quesada was tweeting with his family, or if his tweets were private and someone was digging them out and posting them elsewhere, then they might have a point. But the tweets are not to family, and they’re not private; they’re public, and they’re promoting Quesada’s work on Amazing Spider-Man.
That makes it Fair Use. It’s no different from Marvel’s use of President Obama’s image to sell their titles. Did they pay President Obama for the use of his image to sell a thousands and thousands of issues of Amazing Spider-Man? Of course not. Using tweets that are ALREADY BEING USED to promote themselves is no different. It’s only a matter of scale.
The dirty truth about the industry is that there are really only two or three real journalists in this industry. You can tell who they are because they’re the ones that get the stories WITHOUT being spoon-fed the publishers and creators.
The bottom line is that the comics industry is in desperate need of some good publicity. The creators are promoting their work, for free, on Twitter. Their tweets are being picked up by the other news sites, and both the creators and the company are being promoted. The creators have no right to complain.
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:20 am
I’ve given this some more thought, and I think it’s going to be interesting to watch the evolution of Twitter in the coming months. Here’s a company that’s infamous for its lack of a business plan, and inability to make money on any scale that matches its visibility and ubiquitous nature, while you have hundreds of companies, like Marvel, using it as a pipeline to advertise their products and spread the hype without any filter. Twitter isn’t making a dime off of the advertising it’s moving through its pipeline, and certainly not seeing a percentage of the profits from the products advertised on it. I wonder if Quesada has approached Twitter about paying them for the ability to advertise Marvel for free there, as he seems to be concerned about people being fairly paid…or what Quesada would say to Twitter if they asked him for money for the advertising Marvel is pumping through Twitter daily, to a very specific audience. I mean - that’s advertising’s Golden Fleece - delivering a message about a product directly to the audience that will want it. And thanks to Twitter, it’s free!
I’d bet you a dollar that by this time next year, Twitter either won’t exist, it will be part of Google (which will put ads on it, everywhere), or there will be a tiered version, where companies and their employees that use it to push product will have to pay.
On a related note, do publishers pay sites and writers for the pull quotes they include in press releases - or even ask for permission?
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:31 am
LOL! The more I hear about Marvel and their shenanigans, the less I want to have anything to do with them.
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:37 am
It’s amazing the people that find your words on the Twitter. I posted a tweet that due to the new heath-acceptibility of coconut oil I’d bought a tub for use to make popcorn. not more than a day later I get a notification that I was being followed by a manufacturer and distributor of coconut oil. So, if he uses my tweet for a quote, should I get free coconut oil?
Are Tweet Rights Lwyers far behind?
http://twitter.com/IntNorbertCon
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:44 am
For the record, Tom is still commenting on the issue, now apparently in reply to people asking him about this very article.
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:45 am
I just hate the way Brevoort focuses this. He is basically dissing all of the work put in forums just to get to the point that his ideas are being basically stolen. And said ideas, which happen to be public and open to the whole world, are just short messages with little content, brief insider news, that can be used as compliments for news around the comic journalism sphere.
Bendis, Quesada and Brevoort are all putting aside the content people such as the writes at the Newsarama blog write just out of a feeling of superiority. They might as well be saying “we do all the work for you, lazy bums”. I guess the message is the same. High horses much?
So, even if the content of just a couple of posts (that are actual news) is “lazy”, what the hell about the pieces of analysis, comments regarding the industry and general critique? Are those lazy as well?
If the writers themselves (of a medium that has been dissed through the years) can’t even bear the fact that comic journalism, specially in blogs -a way to get the word across the world-, is done like this a lot of the time, then why even bother. I just… sigh.
April 22nd, 2009 at 8:14 am
I’m a little torn. I mean, on the one hand, I do agree. You’re kinda screwed in the Comics Press because you can’t ask real questions. But at the same time, what defines *real* questions? I mean, a lot of fans seem to think they have real questions but they’re actually just dick-ish questions or ones asked in a profoundly dick-ish manner. Still, I would think anyone that’s actually a real journalist would know the difference.
In any case, as far as these “Tweets” go…if you’ve used the phrase “sense of entitlement” in a rant, no matter how short the rant…you’re probably wrong. And being a dick.
April 22nd, 2009 at 8:39 am
Comics reporting is not real reporting. It never has been, comics reporting is little more than a marketing tool. Real reporters actually have to go outside of the comfortable arenas and investigate stories. the Companies know this, which is why Wizard became so dominant in the 1990’s. they played the game better than anyone.
If you want to be treated like a real reporter, act like one. Don’t be Rich Johnstone, be Walter Winchell. Start a news blog, post real stories in spite of company approval (Back it up with real sources).
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:41 am
That’s a bit unfair. Kind of like saying writing comics is not real writing. If you want to be a real writer, write a novel. I don’t really buy that, but I can see your point. There’s a serious lack of deep coverage in some fields of comics. It shouldn’t be limited to previews, snippets, previews and superhero talk. Critique and journalistic pieces are rare finds, but I still think it is a bit unfair to make such a statement.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:09 am
No, Radomski’s right. Comics reporting is reporting in the same sense that Entertainment Tonight or Extra or People Magazine or E! is real reporting. They exist to promote their particular industries, and, for the most part, the only news they report is what is given to them as promotional materials by those industries.
Take Marvel’s release of the American Son teaser. In what way was that news?
This is not a slam of sites like Newsarama, CBR or Wizard. What they do, they do very well (well, maybe Wizard not so much). But what they do is report what they’re told to report. And that’s promotion, not journalism.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:14 am
I would think a little leeway is beneficial to both parties here. If the gentlemen in question want buzz to spread about their work, then comic bloggers shouldn’t feel like they’ll get smacked for quoting or even reposting whole streams.
The reason to copy and paste segments of related tweets is that Twitter streams are constantly updated, so links to twitter pages and specific topics have a short shelf life.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:18 am
The dynamic goes both ways sometimes. The big publishers might be immune to it but if a smaller publisher pisses off the comics press somehow, they get blackballed, too… just written off like they don’t exist… So publishers have a bias. So does the comics press. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:31 am
I wouldn’t exactly consider getting paid for copying and pasting tweets in the order in which they appear (instead of reordering them for the reading audience), reporting on the news.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:32 am
Jeremiah:
In theory, yeah. But have you ever heard of a smaller press actually getting blackballed by the press? I don’t. Maybe Wizard’s done it, but I can’t think of any instances.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:46 am
Hi Lucas,
Interesting, well thought out piece. Feel free to link to our Twitter anytime;)
Filip Sablik
Publisher, Top Cow Productions
Read a free issue of Witchblade at http://www.topcow.com/witchblade
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:58 am
I wouldn’t even go so far as to compare a tweet to a blog post. It is more like an on the record quote, transmitted via Twitter rather than speech or document. This complaining by Marvel is equivalent to a politician complaining that a newspaper published a statement he made in public at a campaign rally. It’s news and it can be published with or without the speaker’s consent. Period.
Bendis and the rest of the Mini-Marvels Junior Lawyer League might want to talk to some, you know, actual lawyers before they go throwing their weight around about what can and can’t be published on the Internet.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:15 am
“Bendis and the rest of the Mini-Marvels Junior Lawyer League might want to talk to some, you know, actual lawyers before they go throwing their weight around about what can and can’t be published on the Internet.”
Especially since Brevoort basically committed libel, didn’t he? He said there wasn’t permission, and there was. Brevoort also insinuates that David Pepose is paid, and Lucas Siegel said on twitter that some of them don’t get paid. It sounds like Brevoort knows a whole lot of nothing here.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:21 am
Marvel is complaining about additional publicity? It’s not like there’s really anything negative being pulled from sources like Twitter.
If Marvel doesn’t want that traffic, I’d gladly take it. I’ve got graphic novels to sell.
You can find me on Twitter @ DuskComic
Thanks,
David
http://www.comicspace.com/david_doub/
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:38 am
David - “Marvel is complaining about additional publicity?”
that’s what I don’t get either. I mean, the CB thing aside, since he consented to that, and now Brevoort just seems to be conveniently ignoring that so he can go on arguing that he’s right…but Marvel executives put hype and information into a marketing pipeline (which is how they’re using Twitter, for free as someone upstream pointed out), and then they get testy when that material that they put in the marketing pipeline gets picked up and broadcast?
{boggles}
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:43 am
“Press coverage of comics is so reliant on being buddy buddy with the various companies that are being covered, the majority of comic book press has become nothing but a glorified PR stream.”
This is true of virtually all journalism. It is probably the real reason why the newspaper industry is in a rut, as much as they like to pretend it’s for other reasons.
What you were doing was basically reappropriating content. That’s not even journalism, there was no context, no analysis of your own or anyone else, it’s just lazy. You didn’t ask any questions, it wasn’t content you were involved in creating.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Tom Daylight:
“What you were doing was basically reappropriating content. That’s not even journalism, there was no context, no analysis of your own or anyone else, it’s just lazy. You didn’t ask any questions, it wasn’t content you were involved in creating.”
How is that quantifiably different from press releases, which Newsarama, CBR, et al are encouraged, if not mandated, to run verbatim?
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:56 pm
Mr Wesley
A press release is designed by the author/organization and is intentionally sent to journalists in order to highlight an event or information related to the author/organization. The information normally contains the who, what, where, when, why and how of the story. It’s meant to encourage journalists to develop an article about the subject.
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Brian Knippenberg:
I’m reading David Meerman Scott’s book “The New Rules of Marketing & PR” right now. In it, he addresses the issue of press releases, saying that it is more accurate to call them “news releases” today, because that’s who they’re written for and to. (p61)
It’s certainly the way that Marvel uses them with Newsarama and other sites. I doubt it would take either of us more than 60 seconds to find a handful of news releases Marvel gave to Newsarama, which posted them exactly as they were written, with a sentence or two tagged at the end.
Brevoort, Quesada, Bendis are all using Twitter as it’s meant to be used: to interact with others and promote themselves. They each have THOUSANDS of followers, and allow anybody to look at their tweets. Quesada even premiered one of his covers for ASM there didn’t he (I could be wrong about that point).
The point is, they have the opportunity to not use Twitter, or even just make their tweets private. They don’t, because they want to be seen.
So, no, I still don’t see any real difference in what’s said in official news releases from the company and what is said in a twitter account that’s visable to the entire world and used specifically to interact with fans.
Bottom line, Twitter is no different from any other public space. Anything you say is up for grabs.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:20 pm
“and I just don’t understand that sense of entitlement.”
Well, when you look at recent history, you can see what Marvel specifically is doing: they’re looking to sell the stories not to websites like this one, but to actual (dying) newspapers, such as what happened with the death of Steve Rogers.
But then, I really wonder if Marvel has a clue among those in charge with all the silliness they throw out there.
April 22nd, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Knippenberg, your description about press releases is right on, unless you’re including Marvel’s press releases, many of which include the statement that the text itself is not be changed without prior permission–meaning that you’re supposed to just reprint it verbatim. If you don’t, that’s how you end up getting taken off the list.
April 22nd, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Off to go protest Marvel by downloading CBRs of their comics….
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:43 pm
This is an interesting topic, and I generally agree with what Siegal is saying.
I’m a reporter myself, and I think if something in a tweet is newsworthy, then it’s reportable. Permission is not needed, just as you wouldn’t need to get permission when someone makes a comment during a public speech. However, it may be prudent before publishing the story on the tweet to get a follow-up from the tweeter (“You said this on your tweet, care to elaborate?”). As Siegal mentioned, a lack of a response or cooperation doesn’t mean the story should be killed.
I do have one bit of concern, something I’ve seen on the main Newsarama site and elsewhere; Kirk just pointed out. While I think it’s perfectly ethical to report on tweets and blog postings from sources or those in an industry you cover (e.g., comic book artists, publishers, etc.), I do think it is not appropriate to rip and post work by other journalists, specifically HollywoodReporter and Variety or AM New York. If they have news you don’t have, then you got scooped and you need to report it yourself by doing the legwork. Simply copying and pasting one of their stories, providing a link and attributing them is not enough – that’s lazy and it’s stealing.
In fact, some organizations can be very protective of their material. Associated Press will sue organizations who do not subscribe to their service but yet still use material from AP’s reporting – even if the organization attributes AP. It’s a copyright issue.
Now, you can certainly blog about what another news organization reported, and link to it, and maybe put some material or quotes from their story up. But that’s not a substitute for your own news story on the same subject, or just simply copying their entire story into your blog.
Of course, this point is moot if you actually do have permission from those news organizations to use their material and reprint their story.
Sorry for long post! Point being that Marvel is overreacting.
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:45 pm
I don’t have goddam time to look through Marvel’s precious tweets so I thank ye folks at the blog and other venues for reposting the juicy ones even if it is a thankless job.
April 23rd, 2009 at 2:16 am
Tom Daylight, I sure hope you linked the proprietor of your favorite board to your ill-informed comment on this topic.
As I said in my tweets on the subject, posting something on Twitter is akin to stepping up to a con panel podium and making a statement. Last I checked, Marvel was calling up comic book sites wondering where their checks were for coverage of the X-Men panel at Heroes Con.
By the way, I’ll ask for permission and pay someone for reposting their Twitter comments when Marvel goes back in time to ask my permission to quote from my review of SPIDER-MAN: REIGN that was taken out of context and pay me a small royalty on the second printings they were using it to advertise. And when they go back and change any current back cover quotes from saying “blah blah blah - NEWSARAMA” to reflect the actual individual they were quoting.
Sound ridiculous? It is. Kinda like the whining from select members of Marvel that spurred this excellent blog post from Lucas.
April 23rd, 2009 at 2:34 am
Speaking of paying people for their content, has Marvel figured out a way of paying comic creators for their work being republished on the Marvel Digital Comics service? The last time I checked, people are paying for that, yet the creators aren’t getting any of it.
April 23rd, 2009 at 2:49 am
Correction: “Last I checked, Marvel WASN’T calling up…”
September 5th, 2009 at 12:14 am
I can’t stand Joe Quesada. I don’t care what he says. It’s bad enough I had to abandon some books for good because CW made them unreadable to me.