DC's Dan DiDio Out as Co-Publisher

[kjn]

DC could solve so many troubles if they were willing to break away from a unified chronological storyline.

Simply allow for an editor's note box in the first frame: "this story takes place before Black Canary met Oracle"; "this story takes place while Dick Grayson still was Robin", and so on.

[Tzigone]

DC could solve so many troubles if they were willing to break away from a unified chronological storyline.

Simply allow for an editor's note box in the first frame: "this story takes place before Black Canary met Oracle"; "this story takes place while Dick Grayson still was Robin", and so on.

Except they'd all end up contradicting each other (which I guess the kinda already do).

I like continuity - if every story is in it's own continuity, I'm not very interested and would be much more likely to pick-and-choose and not read an entire title. I don't mind reading "flashback" stories all within the same continuity, but I don't like them rewriting the past, generally, and I don't like for them to interrupt a currently-in-progress story.

Didn't DC have a Batman book like this? Where they didn't even tell you when the stories took place? That part's annoying for the less-casual like myself, who like to place everything where it belongs.

I will say one thing about this type of story - it would lend itself to more single-issue stories, I think, which I'm generally a fan of. Not sure the non-chronology would help the accessibility the way I think single issue stories would. I mean, pop in a read story and then next story all the supporting cast are gone and "newbies" are there and the hero has a different job, etc.

I do think the editor's notes you used to get explaining things were a good thing for more casual readers.

[kjn]

Except they'd all end up contradicting each other (which I guess the kinda already do).

I like continuity - if every story is in it's own continuity, I'm not very interested and would be much more likely to pick-and-choose and not read an entire title. I don't mind reading "flashback" stories all within the same continuity, but I don't like them rewriting the past, generally, and I don't like for them to interrupt a currently-in-progress story.

Didn't DC have a Batman book like this? Where they didn't even tell you when the stories took place? That part's annoying for the less-casual like myself, who like to place everything where it belongs.

I will say one thing about this type of story - it would lend itself to more single-issue stories, I think, which I'm generally a fan of. Not sure the non-chronology would help the accessibility the way I think single issue stories would. I mean, pop in a read story and then next story all the supporting cast are gone and "newbies" are there and the hero has a different job, etc.

I do think the editor's notes you used to get explaining things were a good thing for more casual readers.

Yes, this was intended to be used with more one- and two-parter stories. It's a good thing to focus on in general in order to reach new readers, and will make the publishing stream less fixed in advance.

Part of the problem for DC (and Marvel) is that they have been chasing their old readers for so long. Time to chase new readers rather than the old ones. If they lose some old-time readers due to that, that's a loss they have to be ready to face anyway.

I also think that these stories set in the past should be there to make sure that they can start with the old experienced heroes already in place, while still giving them an opening for their stories as they were just starting out. In a way, they already have a precedence for this in the Year One stories.

As for inconsistencies, it can't be worse than it already is? Especially since shorter stories also implies less complexity and fewer moving parts in each individual story.

[Tzigone]

Part of the problem for DC (and Marvel) is that they have been chasing their old readers for so long. Time to chase new readers rather than the old ones. If they lose some old-time readers due to that, that's a loss they have to be ready to face anyway.

I agree with that. But I'm old reader (well, actually, I only started reading DC in 2015, but I started with old issues), and it's not good for me. As I've said before - what's good for me isn't what's good for the business. But also, if the business doesn't give me what I want anymore, then I don't care whether or not it continues to exist. I don't have a stake in DC (or Marvel's) existence if they aren't providing content I want to read.

I try to add that caveat, but forget sometimes. Both that just because I don't like something doesn't mean it's the wrong move for DC, but also that if DC changes so much that I don't want the content, then I don't care if it survives because it becomes just another random entertainment company that has nothing to do with me.

[warzon]

Well as Sophia once said Dorothy move the coffee table I wanna do a cartwhell .lol

[Kevin Street]

Heidi MacDonald from ComicsBeat corraborate BC report about Dan Didio departure:


https://www.comicsbeat.com/crisis-on...risis-too-far/

Thank you for the link! There isn't any new information, but Ms. MacDonald does a good job summarizing what is known and presenting it as a single narrative. If she's right, then this is a sort of rebellion against Didio from within DC, the result of too many formal complaints filed with the bosses about his management style. All those editors who quit in the last five or six months seem to suggest that it's been chaotic for some time.

[Zero Hunter]

Hopefully Harras soon follows Didio out the door. Harras was always a better writer than he was an EIC. He failed at the job at marvel and he is failing at the job at DC. It is time for some new voices in charge across the board.

[Vampire Savior]

I agree with that. But I'm old reader (well, actually, I only started reading DC in 2015, but I started with old issues), and it's not good for me. As I've said before - what's good for me isn't what's good for the business. But also, if the business doesn't give me what I want anymore, then I don't care whether or not it continues to exist. I don't have a stake in DC (or Marvel's) existence if they aren't providing content I want to read.

I try to add that caveat, but forget sometimes. Both that just because I don't like something doesn't mean it's the wrong move for DC, but also that if DC changes so much that I don't want the content, then I don't care if it survives because it becomes just another random entertainment company that has nothing to do with me.

Actually, I don't think tossing out continuity and having a bunch of one shot stories or numerous branching continuities is good for business. I'm skeptical that readers--even children--would get hyper invested in such content, which is what you want. A writer could tell some neat little stories, but it's continuity that often gets people to really care about the characters and worlds they live in. And publishing 50 different versions of Superman, each with their own continuity is confusing.

[Tzigone]

Actually, I don't think tossing out continuity and having a bunch of one shot stories or numerous branching continuities is good for business. I'm skeptical that readers--even children--would get hyper invested in such content, which is what you want. A writer could tell some neat little stories, but it's continuity that often gets people to really care about the characters and worlds they live in. And publishing 50 different versions of Superman, each with their own continuity is confusing.

The one thing I'm not sure about is whether they want people to get hyper-invested. As has been referenced in-depth fans (like myself) can backfire on a company because of being out-of-phase with a wider audience or unwilling to change. A wide, but shallow audience could bring in just as much money without backlash to creative decisions or resistance to change. The trick is how the heck to make comics appeal to a wide audience again (go back to days of audience changing frequently?). And I have no idea how to resolve that one, except that I'd probably appeal to kids at least at first (fewer prejudices against the medium), and then branch out into other genres before as comics used to (even though I myself am a person who reads comics because I like superheroes, not because I like the medium).

Even then, though, instead of jumping around, just having more shorter stories of a more standalone nature that still happened in chronological order (but didn't depend on having read previous stories to know what was going on) would probably be a better tactic.

Edit: Oh, and if possible financially, make them more available to grab on impulse. Not look up online or go to a special place. Walmart issues are good, but have them at the checkout or a few in the toy or video game section, if possible. Somewhere visible where some who never actually thought of buying a comic could go "huh, Wonder Woman, cool" and pick one up. Even though different persons involved (and so no continuity there), minicomics with toys might be an interesting idea. He-Man did that back in the day. I don't buy the toys, so don't know if any comic characters have them now.

[Vampire Savior]

The one thing I'm not sure about is whether they want people to get hyper-invested. As has been referenced in-depth fans (like myself) can backfire on a company because of being out-of-phase with a wider audience or unwilling to change. A wide, but shallow audience could bring in just as much money without backlash to creative decisions or resistance to change. The trick is how the heck to make comics appeal to a wide audience again (go back to days of audience changing frequently?). And I have no idea how to resolve that one, except that I'd probably appeal to kids at least at first (fewer prejudices against the medium), and then branch out into other genres before as comics used to (even though I myself am a person who reads comics because I like superheroes, not because I like the medium).

Even then, though, instead of jumping around, just having more shorter stories of a more standalone nature that still happened in chronological order (but didn't depend on having read previous stories to know what was going on) would probably be a better tactic.

You can have a wide and hyper invested audience, like, for example, George R.R. Martin has with his A Song of Ice and Fire. First and foremost, your content has to be good enough, and I'm of the personal opinion that DC's content is generally lacking to the point where ONLY the most invested people in the characters will typically bother with it, because the comics don't tend to be generally gripping entertainment. And the people who do read them often do so simply because they're going through the motions, not because they're frothing at the mouth (a little dramatic of me, I know) to find out what happens next.

There is a lot of talk about how the business models are failing (and that is definitely important), but I think a lot of the problems also come down to the comics not being good enough and too confusing. You can have twisty and turn-y continuity heavy content, like again, Geoge R.R. Martin has. People can keep up with that, but if you're throwing "events" at them and disrupting stories all the time, and expecting readers to continue whatever story they were trying to read by buying a completely different title they aren't following, and when you leave stories completely unfinished and expect readers to just forget about it, that's when you will lose newcomers to the hobby. I've literally seen it happen. People I know who aren't regular comic readers started reading DC Comics, but then they stopped when the rug got pulled out from under them in some fashion because of the idiosyncrasies of the company's story telling.

[superduperman]

Hopefully Harras soon follows Didio out the door. Harras was always a better writer than he was an EIC. He failed at the job at marvel and he is failing at the job at DC. It is time for some new voices in charge across the board.

My biggest fear when I heard this was that Didio was just the beginning of a larger purge. Didn't the head of AT&T say something like "there are no sacred cows"? If they think the entire comics division is too much hassle my guess is they wouldn't think twice about junking it. Especially if they think they can pull in more money from TV shows and movies. Didio's firing could be more of a warning than a one off event.

[Ascended]

Oh, Kimiyo Hoshi appeared... as Dr. Light's wife. Bit of a nasty shock when fans found out.

Well, to be fair, people hated it when Arthur Light became a real villain in Identity Crisis (or whatever it was) instead of a moron who got beat up by children. Then in the New52 he wasn't evil at all, just a scientist who got caught on the edge of superhumanity, and people didn't like that either.

My biggest fear when I heard this was that Didio was just the beginning of a larger purge. Didn't the head of AT&T say something like "there are no sacred cows"? If they think the entire comics division is too much hassle my guess is they wouldn't think twice about junking it. Especially if they think they can pull in more money from TV shows and movies. Didio's firing could be more of a warning than a one off event.

They already pull in more money from tv and movies. And we're happy they do, because those adaptations are the best protection comics could hope to have.

When Disney bought Marvel, everyone said "oh noes, they'll shut down the publishing! They'll turn our comics into princess stories and have Mickey Mouse join the Avengers!" That never happened. Ever dire prediction turned out to be noise and hot air. Every single one. Marvel kept making comics just like they had been, and those comics kept being used for movie storyboard ideas and to maintain copyrights (or is it trademarks? I always forget which is which, and that's damn embarrassing). Nothing really changed for the comics when Marvel went corporate. Hell, even Marvel's desperate chase of movie synergy started before Disney bought them. That began as soon as Iron Man hit with Fraction's run.

I find it unlikely that AT&T will do anything much more drastic, as far as the structure of the publishing goes. Replace some people? Sure. And Harras can be next, please. But what's the worst case scenario? Comics are still excellent, cost effective ways to provide storyboards and plots for larger media adaptations, which are stupid profitable. They're still easy ways to maintain ownership. So what, AT&T pulls DC out of the direct market? We all know that's an awful distribution method so why would anyone be upset about it? We have multiple distribution models that work, and if DC wasn't putting 90% of their resources into the direct market they'd put those resources into digital, Scholastic, bookstore OGN's, etc. All the stuff we keep saying they should do.

So perhaps the worst case scenario isn't AT&T making big changes, but AT&T leaving things as they are.

[kjn]

Heidi MacDonald from ComicsBeat corraborate BC report about Dan Didio departure:

https://www.comicsbeat.com/crisis-on...risis-too-far/

Good overview. Though I have more than a bit of a quibble with this paragraph:

At DC, however, the very birth of their superhero line was a direct reference to somehow making the timeline fit: Flash of Two Worlds! Earth One and Earth Two! Editor Julius Schwartz’s need for tying things up would set off an ongoing editorial crisis that lasts to this day. And to think this was before fandom was even a real thing.

Julie Schwartz was a member of First Fandom, a person who pioneered social media back in the 1930s, and one of the people who started the process towards the fandoms of today.

[Serpico Jones]

Little known fact: Julius Schwartz was one of the few people who ever saw the great horror master HP Lovecraft in person. He even served as Lovecraft’s literary agent for a few months.

[Kevin Street]

MacDonald is describing the history of DC Comics in very broad strokes, so it's not surprising that the real life details don't quite fit this picture. There were definitely comic fans right from the start of the medium, but they were a fairly small group until the advent of the direct market.

I think the point she's making is that the two comic book companies had fundamentally different approaches to continuity. Marvel would sort of sweep things under the rug after a while and in return Marvel fans didn't care too much about details like who was President when certain stories occurred. By contrast DC took the approach that everything in print actually happened somewhere, and as years went by they had to invent mythologies to explain how it all fit together. Over time these mythologies, or more specifically the transition from one mythology to another, became selling points in and of themselves, and Didio in particular liked to use mythology transition events to increase sales. That's why he made so many of them, and why they seemed to be getting bigger and bigger in their effects.