How do you rate Dan Didio's tenure at DC Comics?

Comic-Reader Lad and Ascended has already given a great overviews. I don't have much to add to what they've covered.

I'm going to take another tack, with a start from [URL="https://twitter.com/GailSimone/status/1230971260886081536"]Gail Simone's tweets[/URL] about him:

[QUOTE]I liked Dan very much. We disagreed on a lot. But he did a lot that others took credit for, and when thinks went bad, he often took the blame he didn't deserve. [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]Dan was very supportive of lgbtq content. If we had something like that that we wanted approved, we made sure to go to Dan over every other editor.[/QUOTE]

This wasn't something that I knew about him, and it seems he did some good efforts in this area.

But I also looked at the various comments from other creators, listed by Bleeding Cool, and another trend became apparent.

Gail Simone, Tom King, Evan Dorkin (critical), Bryan Hitch, Liam Sharp, Jennifer de Guzman (critical), Jeff Lamire, Chip Zdarsky, Cecil Castellucci, Van Jensen, Joe Quesada, Dan Jurgens, Kurt Busiek, Cully Hamner, Mitch Gerads, Mark Russell, Jimmy Palmiotti, Donny Cates, Rob Liefeld (critical), James Tynion IV, Alex Segura, Gerry Conway, Jerry Ordway, Brad Meltzer, Joshua Williamson, Frank Tieri, Brad Walker, Scott Snyder, Tim Seeley, Sam Humphries, Shane Davis, David Marquez, Aaron Lopresti, Frank Cho, Christos Gage, Denys Cowan, Marc Andreyko, Oeming, Christopher Butcher, Nick Hanover, Philip Tan, Cara McGee, Tom Taney, Mike Perkins, Aaron Campbell, Arthur Adams, Cheryl Lynn Eaton (semi-critical), Brian Bendis

Notice something about the list? It has a preponderence of dudes. The number of women listed can be counted on one hand (Gail Simone, Jennifer de Guzman, Cecil Castellucci, Cara McGee, and Cheryl Lynn Eaton; though Jimmy Palmiotti speaks for Amanda Conner as well). But the female voices also make up half of the critical ones.

Together with the Berganza situation, and the way New 52 shaped up, I think it's fair to say that DC under DiDio was hostile or at least unwelcoming to most female creators.

Was it because of Didio or because of Harras though? Because Harras is the guy who protected Lobdell.

From the early 2000s to the 2010s was quite good with him being at DC for some good stories. He was also a part of bringing back Hal, Kara and Barry which I will always commend him for.

The 2010s was a bit less good with the New 52 being poorly planned and that lead to both some great things and some less than great things.

Overall, I gave him a C.

Didio himself as a co-publisher did not make me a fan. The talent and stories during his time made me a fan. The only reason I think he wasn't gone sooner is that other people around him had ideas.

[QUOTE=Vordan;4849669]Was it because of Didio or because of Harras though? Because Harras is the guy who protected Lobdell.[/QUOTE]

I doubt we can apportion blame exactly between the two, but at their level they arguably both failed to do their job to protect and help the people who Berganza harassed. Even if they didn't know. Because it was their job to make sure such things didn't happen, or that they knew if something like it happened.

Another, and related thing. DiDio clearly loved drama and debate, even (or perhaps especially) belligerent ones. He strikes me as the type who would go into a flaming row with someone, and then declare that someone their best buddy. I can easily see him getting along famously with Gail Simone, based on that.

But it's not a style that everyone can stand. In fact, it's a style that actively can drive away people who can't stand it. And women are often less used to it, or are conditioned against it.

B-/C+. Some good, some bad, and a whole lot of "WTFs."

[color=red]Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)[/color]

It would ideally lie somewhere between B and C. I'll opt for B.

Judging from his online triumphalism, were he to vote in this poll, Rob Liefeld would definitely be opting for an F.

That just about says it all. A man is judged by the company he keeps...

[QUOTE=Vordan;4849669]Was it because of Didio or because of Harras though? Because Harras is the guy who protected Lobdell.[/QUOTE]

Lobdell working for DC as well as DeFalco, Nocenti and Mackie are absolutely all on Harras (and Jim Lee).

[QUOTE=kjn;4849524]Comic-Reader Lad and Ascended has already given a great overviews. I don't have much to add to what they've covered.[/QUOTE]

Awww

[QUOTE]his wasn't something that I knew about him, and it seems he did some good efforts in this area.[/QUOTE]

Didio did push for diversity quite a bit. I mean, he gets his share of the blame when the company would roll back to it's tried and true (and white, male, and straight) roots, but Didio was often pushing for representation. It didn't always go well (Wallace West) and it often failed through no fault of DC's (New Age) but the man did at least *try* to move the needle.

[QUOTE]But I also looked at the various comments from other creators, listed by Bleeding Cool, and another trend became apparent.

Together with the Berganza situation, and the way New 52 shaped up, I think it's fair to say that DC under DiDio was hostile or at least unwelcoming to most female creators.[/QUOTE]

The Berganza thing truly and deeply pisses me off. As a human being who tries to not be a total waste of carbon, I'm pissed that someone accused of sexual harassment was unduly protected. As a comic book and Superman fan, I'm pissed that Berganza's "punishment" was being put in charge of one of the biggest names in fiction, and was then allowed to drive those books into the ground with quality so low I'd expect better from fan fiction. Now, to my knowledge Berganza was never put on trial and found guilty, so I'm not going to say he was a piece of sh*t who deserved a serious ass kicking. He might be innocent of the claims against him, we don't know. But just the fact that, apparently, no investigation was made, that women were turned away from the Super-office while Berg was there....I mean f*ck, do these people have no concept of CSR, or even basic human decency? I'd never allow something like that to fester in my business.

[QUOTE=Ascended;4849809]Awww

Didio did push for diversity quite a bit. I mean, he gets his share of the blame when the company would roll back to it's tried and true (and white, male, and straight) roots, but Didio was often pushing for representation. It didn't always go well (Wallace West) and it often failed through no fault of DC's (New Age) but the man did at least *try* to move the needle.

[/QUOTE]

I think the gripe is you had plenty of diverse folks that need usage but flooded the market with new ones that end up being buried with the others.

Where was Dan when McDuffie was being called everything in the book on Justice league?

Where was Dan to get on Johns about how badly Cyborg was done in justice League?

Where was Dan to get in Harvey Richard's ear about messing up Static & Cyborg & Katanna's books?

It gets to a point of tossing out Jessica & Jo while John, Kyle & Guy were after thoughts.

Where was that one POC Dan stood by and constantly supported? Miles Morales has done more than ALL POC at DC in 7 years and for 4 of those years-he stayed in his own book. Hate him or love Marvel got talent on Black Panther and even before that movie folks were supporting it. 10 spinoff books have come out of Black Panther.

Dan gets kudos for New Age because most of those books lasted up to 3 trades and that is a good thing. What is bad is no establish POC has been built up to challenge Miles and the rest.

Objectivly A minus.

[QUOTE=Ascended;4849809] But just the fact that, apparently, no investigation was made, that women were turned away from the Super-office while Berg was there....[B]I mean f*ck, do these people have no concept of CSR, or even basic human decency? I'd never allow something like that to fester in my business[/B].[/QUOTE]

You let it fester if you got skeletons to hide or you have WEAKER leadership higher above you that does not care.

Or you don't want to deal with the toxic fanboy hero worship that might happen. A situation that is happening now in another industry that saw fans go after a JUDGE and the victims and a major news paper company.

Remember we have seen folks put character over creator team. Because who was on the cover was way more valuable over who the writer or whoever were.

[QUOTE=Ascended;4849809]Didio did push for diversity quite a bit. I mean, he gets his share of the blame when the company would roll back to it's tried and true (and white, male, and straight) roots, but Didio was often pushing for representation. It didn't always go well (Wallace West) and it often failed through no fault of DC's (New Age) but the man did at least *try* to move the needle.[/QUOTE]

I don't doubt that.

But I also think it's clear that he didn't have the tools actually doing it. And to marginalised groups, good wishes and promises are plentiful. But they will only trust results.

[QUOTE=Ascended;4849809]Now, to my knowledge Berganza was never put on trial and found guilty, so I'm not going to say he was a piece of sh*t who deserved a serious ass kicking. He might be innocent of the claims against him, we don't know. But just the fact that, apparently, no investigation was made, that women were turned away from the Super-office while Berg was there....I mean f*ck, do these people have no concept of CSR, or even basic human decency? I'd never allow something like that to fester in my business.[/QUOTE]

I'm a longtime sf fan, and sf fandom had its #MeToo movement circa 2012–2014. It wasn't a fun time, but it was necessary. One of the lessons we took from there is that workplace harassment and dealing with it isn't so much a question of justice as it is about trust and about [B]safety[/B].

Do you trust a woman or otherwise marginalised person when they come forward about wrongdoings? (Also, see about only results mattering.) If a person makes other persons feel unsafe, will you do anything about it?

[QUOTE=skyvolt2000;4849861]I think the gripe is you had plenty of diverse folks that need usage but flooded the market with new ones that end up being buried with the others.[/QUOTE]

Oh absolutely. I mean, I understand the appeal of creating a new character; even if you save your best ideas for creator owned work, who doesn't want to contribute to the larger mythos of these characters and add something that lasts, even if you don't profit directly as much?

But you're absolutely right; when checking the diversity checkbox is your current focus (and it's a factor that needs its own consideration), the smart money is to push characters who are established. Even if the fanbase is small, characters like Black Lightning and Vixen are safer bets than a brand new unknown variable like Duke.

I think a lot of Didio's tenure can be summed up as "viable ideas with questionable execution." He did push for diversity a lot. But didn't seem to know how to do it in a way people would respond to. He pushed for new distribution models to escape the direct market. But tried to ride both horses at once, resulting in the direct market still dying and other distributions not being big enough to sustain a switch over. He tried to give the fans what they want. But rarely did it the way they wanted. He tried to push the DCU in a direction he thought was contemporary and might find new readers. But it felt the 1990's. And sometimes it seems he may have let his own opinions cloud his judgement, and that's not acceptable, ever, especially for people at that corporate level.

[QUOTE=kjn;4849919]o you trust a woman or otherwise marginalised person when they come forward about wrongdoings? (Also, see about only results mattering.) If a person makes other persons feel unsafe, will you do anything about it?[/QUOTE]

Well me personally, I'd trust any person making such claims enough to launch an investigation. Allegations of misconduct are not proof, but should always be taken seriously. So yeah, if it were me there'd be an investigation and if that turned up misconduct I'd take necessary steps (legal charges, termination, whatever the situation warrants). If no proof is found or the allegations are of a unprovable nature, then an alternative solution has to be found, and that would depend on the details of the situation. Maybe just separate the employees, maybe termination, it'd depend on the case.

With Berganza, the fact that women were discouraged from working under him tells me there was more than a single, "random" allegation. It tells me that the charges were very likely true (I refuse to say 100% guilty without a trial) and were more than a single altercation but was typical behavior. I won't say for certain because I don't have enough information but looking at what we do know it seems very likely I'd have fired Berganza.