August 10, 2004
More about Scott Kurtz and syndication
Regarding Scott Kurtz' self-syndication/newspaper distribution deal: One of the arguments that's been brought up by some syndicated cartoonists and others was the ad argument:
Darren Bell says that "Many with built-in audiences have tried offering their strips for free or next to nothing in the hopes that editors would find the price attractive, and the cartoonist would make out with free advertising. The Simpsons, Mr. Potatohead, Pink Panther, etc... So far it hasn't worked and the free advertising has never given sufficient return for the cartoonists to continue doing it....If you offer it as an ad for your merchandise, they'll see it as an ad and eventually end up charging for it."
What some of these responders are forgetting is there have been several other comic strips that were created as advertisements, several strips that are still in papers today. The Amazing Spider-Man strip just is another strip that promotes brand awareness for the Marvel franchise. Robotman (now Monty) began life as a comic strip in order to sell dolls. Then there's Garfield. This decades-long running comic strip was created by Jim Davis for one purpose only: merchandising. (And as far as I know, Paws, Inc., does not pay newspapers to run Garfield.)
Other strips that serve as ad space? Take a look through your local bookstore's 'humor' section. See all those Foxtrot, It's Walky, and For Better or Worse book collections? Other strips that may be nothing but ads? Wander into a Hallmark store and look at the ornaments. Look for any stuffed plushie based on a comic strip character.
(By the way, that thread I've linked to above sort of breaks down into a shouting match around page five or six. From then on, it's someone that's either a troll or completely clueless about the webcomics medium taking on a bunch of people from Penny-Arcade's forums who seem to be frothing at the mouth.)
Posted at August 10, 2004 11:00 AM
Regarding Scott Kurtz' self-syndication/newspaper distribution deal: One of the arguments that's been brought up by some syndicated cartoonists and others was the ad argument:
Darren Bell says that "Many with built-in audiences have tried offering their strips for free or next to nothing in the hopes that editors would find the price attractive, and the cartoonist would make out with free advertising. The Simpsons, Mr. Potatohead, Pink Panther, etc... So far it hasn't worked and the free advertising has never given sufficient return for the cartoonists to continue doing it....If you offer it as an ad for your merchandise, they'll see it as an ad and eventually end up charging for it."
What some of these responders are forgetting is there have been several other comic strips that were created as advertisements, several strips that are still in papers today. The Amazing Spider-Man strip just is another strip that promotes brand awareness for the Marvel franchise. Robotman (now Monty) began life as a comic strip in order to sell dolls. Then there's Garfield. This decades-long running comic strip was created by Jim Davis for one purpose only: merchandising. (And as far as I know, Paws, Inc., does not pay newspapers to run Garfield.)
Other strips that serve as ad space? Take a look through your local bookstore's 'humor' section. See all those Foxtrot, It's Walky, and For Better or Worse book collections? Other strips that may be nothing but ads? Wander into a Hallmark store and look at the ornaments. Look for any stuffed plushie based on a comic strip character.
(By the way, that thread I've linked to above sort of breaks down into a shouting match around page five or six. From then on, it's someone that's either a troll or completely clueless about the webcomics medium taking on a bunch of people from Penny-Arcade's forums who seem to be frothing at the mouth.)
Posted at August 10, 2004 11:00 AM
One thing I'd like to add onto this post is that Darren had other interesting comments he contributed the discussion. When several established cartoonists and other cartoonists going the syndication route were uncivil at best, he was one of the few that brought forth rational arguments.
(This is not to say that several of the webcomics fans and professionals who stumbled onto the thread were any more coherent or well-behaved.)
Posted by: cartoonlad at August 10, 2004 11:33 AMI miss Robotman. I really do, Monty without Robotman is like Calvin and Hobbes without Hobbes. Without Calvin, for that matter.
Posted by: President Leechman at August 11, 2004 05:15 AM