Editorial and the Public Opinion Court of Spiderman comics?

[Matt14teg]

It is indeed evident that recent changes to Spider-Man's status quo have left the editorial teams in significant hot waters amongst certain fans. Controversies surrounding Zeb Wells' run and discussions about "One More Day" (OMD) are among the negative factors that have spilled over to new titles such as Spider-Boy and Jackpot. While it remains to be seen whether this is simply a passing storm for the Spider-Man editorial team, there is no denying that the online presence of Spider-Man comics has shifted toward a more negative sentiment.

Regarding the editorial team's stance on fan criticism, they have previously expressed a lack of concern for it. It is unclear whether they will hold firm to this statement or decide to change course based on the recent backlash. It is important to note that despite the negativity, there are still fans who enjoy the current run. However, a vocal group (whether it represents the majority or minority is uncertain) has made their dissatisfaction known.


What might the editorial team or other writers do to restore some semblance of public love for Spider-Man comics, if that is indeed necessary?

[Garlador]

I’ll just say what I’ve said for 16 years now.

Listen to what most readers are asking for.

DC listened and fixed a lot of problems people had with Superman, Nightwing, The Flash, Starfire, etc. They didn’t act obstinate and tell readers to swallow the bad medicine.

Once the fans had a status quo they liked, writers could then actually move FORWARD instead of always being held back by badly-received stories that defy the history and nature of their big heroes.

Until the rot is removed, nothing can grow and truly thrive. Editorial hasn’t admitted a problem exists, thus they refuse to address it.

[clonegeek]

I’ll just say what I’ve said for 16 years now.

Listen to what most readers are asking for.

DC listened and fixed a lot of problems people had with Superman, Nightwing, The Flash, Starfire, etc. They didn’t act obstinate and tell readers to swallow the bad medicine.

Once the fans had a status quo they liked, writers could then actually move FORWARD instead of always being held back by badly-received stories that defy the history and nature of their big heroes.

Until the rot is removed, nothing can grow and truly thrive. Editorial hasn’t admitted a problem exists, thus they refuse to address it.

What Spider-Man really needs is some controlled fires to burn away a lot of the crap they have added in the last 15 ish years

[Tuck]

What might the editorial team or other writers do to restore some semblance of public love for Spider-Man comics, if that is indeed necessary?

Spider-powered animal companion and a partnership with Mt. Dew.

[Matt14teg]

Spider-powered animal companion and a partnership with Mt. Dew.

hell yeah thats what im talking about

[Garlador]

Spider-powered animal companion and a partnership with Mt. Dew.

[Matt14teg]

I’ll just say what I’ve said for 16 years now.

Listen to what most readers are asking for.

DC listened and fixed a lot of problems people had with Superman, Nightwing, The Flash, Starfire, etc. They didn’t act obstinate and tell readers to swallow the bad medicine.

Once the fans had a status quo they liked, writers could then actually move FORWARD instead of always being held back by badly-received stories that defy the history and nature of their big heroes.

Until the rot is removed, nothing can grow and truly thrive. Editorial hasn’t admitted a problem exists, thus they refuse to address it.

They've pivoted in terms of PR now; it seems the goal of the game is silence.

[The_Sneezing_Stormtrooper]

At this point, fire them and get some new blood in. This editorial team has had long enough to figure out how to tell a good Spider-Man story and things have gotten worse if anything. DC didn't get better until Didio was fired and neither will Spidey.

Regardless of how I feel about the direction, we have an editorial team who can't keep track of kid's names, shirt colours, recap page information and probably a lot of other little details that I can't think of off the top of my head.

They've done a bad job both with both creative direction as well as the technical aspects of editing a book and their sales tactics seems to revolve solely around outrage selling. Replace them and let's get this book back on track already. I see no real reason to keep this team around any longer.

[Matt14teg]

At this point, fire them and get some new blood in. This editorial team has had long enough to figure out how to tell a good Spider-Man story and things have gotten worse if anything. DC didn't get better until Didio was fired and neither will Spidey.

Regardless of how I feel about the direction, we have an editorial team who can't keep track of kid's names, shirt colours, recap page information and probably a lot of other little details that I can't think of off the top of my head.

They've done a bad job both with both creative direction as well as the technical aspects of editing a book and their sales tactics seems to revolve solely around outrage selling. Replace them and let's get this book back on track already. I see no real reason to keep this team around any longer.

I remember reading something about how the dark web arc missed its quota sales only getting 75%; it could be the recent changes are to try to gain interest back into spiderman using the variant spam for collectors and rage bait for the audience. The real question is how long can they keep it up for, they have quotas to hit every year that are getting hirer and comic book sales are definitely not increasing in the industry -> Steve orlando tweet about scarlet witch being 8th most sold and still facing cancelation; is concerning.
steve orlando.jpg

[MaydayStan]

Gut/Fire them all. We need new blood, and new blood that will actually listen to what fans want, rather than what *they* want.

[Xenon]

Spider-powered animal companion and a partnership with Mt. Dew.

Can it at least be Dr. Pepper?

[Coop]

I’ll just say what I’ve said for 16 years now.

Listen to what most readers are asking for.

DC listened and fixed a lot of problems people had with Superman, Nightwing, The Flash, Starfire, etc. They didn’t act obstinate and tell readers to swallow the bad medicine.

Once the fans had a status quo they liked, writers could then actually move FORWARD instead of always being held back by badly-received stories that defy the history and nature of their big heroes.

Until the rot is removed, nothing can grow and truly thrive. Editorial hasn’t admitted a problem exists, thus they refuse to address it.

I'll agree here about the DC point. It's only in the last year or two that I have been interested in DC Comics again, prior to that I exclusively read Morrison's Batman and after that ended so did my money going into DC products . It was rot, like you said. Even Rebirth had the rot on it.

Spider-Man feels like the new 52 post OMD. It's not even about the marriage. It's the antagonist relationship with fandom. the pushing of shock and outrage over substance.

I'm not touching this MJ spin off with a 10 foot pole let alone buying it. I'm not interested in seeing Paul. I'm not paying money to read comics with Paul in them. The slightest chance of Paul being a part of the MJ comic makes the entire concept a non-starter. It's got the stink of this run on it and this run gets absolutely zero financial support from me

[Lee]

The people angry about comics online are rarely representative of the larger readership. In 2005 "the fans" were angry about New Avengers. In 2006 "the fans" were angry about Civil War. In 2013 "the fans" were angry about Superior Spider-Man.

Publishers will follow the money. Buy what you want to see more of. Ignore what you don't.

[Mister Mets]

I don't know if there's much editorial can or should do.

The book seems to be selling, so changing things to appease people who would rather it be like books that sell worse isn't a smart strategy.
It comes out on time. There aren't public spats between creators. Firing people could lead to worse outcomes on most metrics.
The main problem for much of the audience is that they want a status quo they're not getting, and the reason they're not getting that status quo is that editorial thinks it's not good for the long term.

Their main issue would be the larger Marvel Comics. Instead of changing the top title, Marvel should figure out how to get interest in the event books and the Avengers. I started a thread on this on the Marvel board about a general sense that I couldn't tell you what's going on in major Marvel titles, and that's not a situation I've been in for some time.

https://community.cbr.com/showthread...too-splintered

One big thing I'd do is copy the way the films have a big bad, and set up an event mini-series in two years with a showdown with an A-list villain (It could be someone new, it could be Doctor Doom, it could be someone getting a Black Hand style upgrade.) The big change from previous arcs is that the villain can win, setting up a rematch a year later.

[Garlador]

I don't know if there's much editorial can or should do.

The book seems to be selling, so changing things to appease people who would rather it be like books that sell worse isn't a smart strategy.

You could easily make this argument pre-OMD. It was selling just fine, so changing things to appease people who rather it be like books that sell worse isn’t a smart strategy…