CSotD: “New” as in “newspaper” as in “theoretically”
Skip to comments
Lio has been skewering the selection of strips in newspapers this week, and it's been funny, pointed stuff.
Mark Tatulli is in a good position to rant on the topic, not just because he's funny about it, but because, between Lio and Heart of the City, he's got a pair of successful strips.
So it's not just sour grapes. Not that there isn't an element of frustration in it, of course. But this wouldn't work coming from an artist without a pretty significant profile in the business, and Tatulli has the standing to throw the barbs. Pretty good aim, too.
I particularly like today's installment because I think "new" is a critical part of the word "newspaper." When Charles Schulz had his stroke, I put our editor on notice that we'd need to look at a move, and, when Schulz died, I told him and then we made the move.
And I figured everyone else would do the same. Silly me.
We were among, as I recall, fewer than ten percent of papers that dared to cancel Peanuts solely because the artist was dead and there would be no more new content.
And a few years later, when Lynn Johnston wrapped up For Better or For Worse, papers agreed to continue with a proposed hybrid of updated reruns which, I understand, has now simply become reruns.
I admire both artists greatly, but I still think "new" has to be part of "newspaper."
Reruns are great on the Internet. I read a lot of vintage strips on-line, just like I watch reruns of TV shows on cable.
But the Internet isn't cutting down on bandwidth to deal with financial issues, nor is cable TV cutting back on its channels.
If newspapers are going to shrink their pages, cut staff and reduce content generally, they should be looking to make sure that what they do offer in print is as compelling and worthwhile as possible.
They not only can but should load up their websites with that other stuff: If you truly believe your readers can't live without those old strips, use their intense desire as a mechanism to drive traffic to your website.
Dare to be competent: Put new stuff in your newspaper.
Meanwhile, the Saturday Night Fever gag makes Lio's father laugh but leaves Lio understandably untouched. Of course, this is a joke, based on exaggeration: Most fathers of children Lio's age are not old enough to remember much about 1977 either.
Yesterday, I wrote about the GOP leadership (yeah, I know, it's an oxymoron) and their attempts at reform. Here's a quote from their massive report that I only alluded to then but which seems relevant in this context:
At our core, Republicans have comfortably remained the Party of Reagan without figuring out what comes next. Ronald Reagan is a Republican hero and role model who was first elected 33 years ago — meaning no one under the age of 51 today was old enough to vote for Reagan when he first ran for President. Our Party knows how to appeal to older voters, but we have lost our way with younger ones. We sound increasingly out of touch.
For all the blather about "the liberal media," the major decisions at newspapers are being made by the same cadre of old, out-of-touch windbags who are (also) driving the GOP into the turf.
This blog by a 20-something "retired" reporter gets it right on every point, starting with her assertion that it is not the Internet that is killing newspapers, but their own internal stupidity.
I've said it to the point of exhaustion, so I thought maybe you'd like to hear it from someone who is a decade younger than my kids and not a whole lot older than my eldest granddaughter.
And who probably associates John Travolta with the phrase "Royale with cheese," though she wasn't old enough to be allowed to see him say it in theaters.
In News Of Interest To Readers Under 60:
Matt Bors, having conducted a successful Kickstarter drive, has sent his book to the printer and is now accepting pre-orders on his website.
That's how it's supposed to work: Reruns are compiled into books. New strips are released when they are new. I know, I know, it's a really difficult concept to grasp.
And In Not-News For Readers Over Sixty:
I really do enjoy reruns, in their proper place, which is not the printed newspaper. Poor little Lio wouldn't have a clue about what was going on in this Bloom County strip from July 14, 1985.
It's not that it cracked me up when it (re)ran at Comics.com today. The appeal was that brought back memories. There ya go, that's what reruns do.
This was just about the time I was assigned to write a piece on Yuppies for the Colorado Springs Sun, which set behind Pikes Peak forever about a year later.
What I particularly remember was the features editor being much more convinced that there were Yuppies than were the three demographically-appropriate couples I tracked down and interviewed, though one of them admitted with a shamefaced laugh that they did, indeed, own a pasta machine.
The world was full of Yuppies and DINKs and all sorts of stylish acronyms for a moment, but I do think you had to be there for it to be of any possible interest, particularly since the joke is about how very little interest it was really of back then.
Comments 3
Comments are closed.