You have that backwards I believe, webcomics have been on the rise since the turn of the millennium and the syndicates and the Daryl Cagles actually arrived late to the show. What they could be blamed for was a lack of foresight in how to transfer the success of the printed comic into the web medium (although I think Mr. Cagle has caught on, so don’t blame him for riding the wave of change!).

While cottage industry webcomics were beginning to thrive under the notion of free content in exchange for merchandising sales to fuel their income, the syndicates seemed to not want to change their business model and adapt to the changes of the digital era. The syndicates let their clients down by not fluidly adapting and thus have left these creators at a disadvantage. The money is made off the merchandising, not the first run comics themselves, thats basic comics 101. The “free” online comic is your promotional tool, it’s to bad that doesn’t sink in with print creators.

Based on a lot of comments and jabs coming from (some) print comic creators, they seem just as stubborn to embrace change from print to digital by seething their anger at the webcomic creators who have found a way to succeed and to me, that’s a kind of green thats not healthy for your survival.

Stop blaming others for a medium that is evolving and instead, be part of the evolution that is unfolding and jump in and add your influence to the mix. My personal opinion, for what it is worth, is that syndicates aren’t needed anymore, but online merchandising houses are very much the future of comics, who are now part of the online era (think Topatoco).

Would it have any effect if this were reversed? Possibly not. People don’t think of comics as unique to newspapers any more, and

j/k

I did ask them if they had a place in their ecosystem for animated content, and got a rejection within 30 minutes. So their rejection system is at least efficient.

If you’re going to go fishing, use the inter”net”. It works better than wrapping one dead fish in a newspaper.

I’m optimistic about print because, even in failed states like Iraq, print newspapers thrive. Of course, the Internet will continue to mature as a secondary (emphasis on secondary) market for cartoons.”

I guess my concern is that newspapers in Iraq are thriving because it IS a failed state, has spotty web access, and has a variety of political faction that each need a publishing arm. With the dramatic economic growth the 2 billion people in China and India have experienced you would expect a global newspaper growth of higher than the 8% Ted Dawson quoted if print were the future.

Obviously, zines and underground papers are important in repressive regimes because the web can be switched off, but that hardly is a market for comic strips, and I don’t think any industry wants to make betting on the economic collapse and descent into fascism of the US its plan for the future.

Ted-
sad to say- yes, it MUST be ‘either or’ but ONLY because print has abdicated it’s monopoly of the art of cartooning, specifically and news in generral. The consumer is very capable of multi-tasking, it’s the print managers who are unable to even manage any tasking whatsoever.

Instead of exploiting it’s strengths for maximum profit, print has done the COMPLETE opposite and is reaping the consequences.

Print can not save itself because they don’t know how to generate money. They don’t even know their own product, content or consumer. They only know how to service what’s left of their shrinking market. A market that has been shrinking ever since the dawning of commercial radio.

Now with the Internet that feeds on what print can not stomach, the light at the end of their tunnel is picking up speed.