Comic Book Resources

I stayed up to watch this (12:35am in Vancouver) so maybe it was my heavy eyelids that skewed thigs somewhat but here's my take. Yes it was good for him to be on a popular show to get the word out about comics and I imagine it would be hard to wrestle the reigns from Colbert, but he needed to really drive home that comics aren't just for kids anymore and that they have a lot to offer people looking for entertainment (though Joe Q did tack on the bit about different comic genres). It didn't do any good either that Colbert asked questions like "Are comics rotting our kids' brains?" which sends a bit of a negative connotation towards comics if you don't quite get the brand of humour Colbert delivers.

It seemed like he didn't prep as much as he could have and the ass-kissing was a bit much. I agree that they definately should have mentioned where the comics can be found (ie. "Help out your local comic shop and pick up Civil War") as not doing so somewhat defeats the purpose of getting the word out about the medium.

The sound effects killed it for me.

What I find odd is Marvel's continuing insistence that Civil War somehow extremely topical and "relevant. It isn't, from what I've seen. The "high concept" sounds like a metaphor for gun control and a nonmetaphor for vigilantism, both of which are largely settled debates in terms of real-world law. It's not as if anything in the plot setup is especially topical and current.

None of that means it's a bad story, of course, but the precipitating event doesn't really have anything to do with "The War on Terror" or even with ordinary citizens surrendering their rights in the name of security as in your airport example. It's a shootout gone wrong scenario, really.

More to the point, though, what happens to the few souls who actually do manage to find Civil War at a relatively decent comics store?* They'll get an expensive 22-page story that comes out once a month for 7 months, and has a list of 70 tie-in comics at the back, some of which follow up the miniseries' major plot developments in lieu of the mini itself doing so and expects you to care that a funny-dressed man with a large hammer has shown up out of nowhere on page 22 of issue #3. Is that going to create return business?

Seems like the Colbert Report would be a natural spot to bring up low-selling, bookstore-friendly critical darlings like Runaways or perhaps even something like the MAX Punisher (also readily available in trade). It's as if Quesada is intent on not only playing to the hardcore superhero fan market, but also on ignoring every possibility of taking some of the more specialized books to other audiences when he gets a golden opportunity.

* They do exist: there's a nice one near UNC-Chapel Hill that's well-lit, clean, staffed by courteous and professional staff in bookstore-employee dress, and that stocks a wide range of material. And major metro areas have them as well.

Omar - you're right about the weird fact that Marvel and DC continually try to sell the wrong things. Everyone does this - I doubt if the studios really needed to push the Pirates of the Caribbean sequel all that much - but comics seem to do it more often. Civil War and Infinite Crisis appeal to the hardcore fan base, and they don't need Joey Q to go on television and sell them. He mentioned the "other" genres that Marvel dabbles in, which is kind of laughable when compared to DC's output, but yeah, you're right - why not promote something that might actually appeal to non-comics readers in the hopes that they would discover Civil War on their own? Strange.

Personally, I thought the appearance was a great one and Quesada put a great face on the world of comics for a mainstream audience.

One point, though, you said, "...like most DC and Marvel comics and the poor marketing..." Poor marketing? Wow, in the past six months I've seen more mainstream coverage of DC & Marvel comic books than I've seen in the last 6 years! New York Times, NY Post, Washington Times, etc ... "Civil War" in particular is selling very well and look at all the mainstream press that book has received. Cmon, it was covered on "The Colbert Report," a show that attracts a loyal audience of 18-34 year olds, precisely the people you want learning more about "Civil War." Publicity and marketing definitely play a role in these situations.

You bring up distribution and while an issue that the comics industry continues to need to address, it's really unrelated to your belief that these books are being poorly marketed.

Jonah - yeah, I suppose "distribution" is a better word than "marketing." People know about comics, but they don't have any idea where to get them. I still think it's poor marketing to ONLY mention the hardcore continuity-heavy comics, even if they're getting a lot of press coverage.

I thought the appearance was great, but I agree, it'd be nice if the comics industry (publishers, distributors, and retailers) could get their goddamn act together. But they won't. Ever. Not that I'm a pessimist or anything...

This has virtually nothing to do with the topic but I have to mention it anyway. We didn't volunteer to give up our fourth amendment (or any other rights), they were simply done away with. I'm nitpicking, I know, but I just can't seem to get over what's going on in this country.

You need to find a better comic shop.

I don't accept the idea that putting comics into bookstores is a better goal than bringing people into comic shops.

(Not that it is a bad goal, but it shouldn't be the primary one.)

Can anyone with a firmer knowledge of our legal system than I am address the question of whether our fourth amendment rights are truly "violated" when we (or our property) are searched at the airports? My first reaction was to think, "no violation," because the relationship of flyer to airline seems to be essentially a private, contractual one, of which each party can opt out if it doesn't like the conditions - i.e., if I don't want to be searched, I don't have to fly. But then I thought, Aren't the searches a result of F.A.A. (or Homeland Security?) - i.e., Federal - regulations, and therefore a violation of fourth amendment rights? I guess a crucial term could be "unreasonable" (in "unreasonable searches and seizures"), which is vague and leaves open the possibility of searches that are "reasonable" by virtue of their overall security purpose.

Those are the issues I can imagine. Now can anyone supply some facts?

Oh, and Omar is right (as usual) that the issues in Civil War are not what Marvel says (and perhaps even believes) they are. My personal take is that I'm all in favor of letting fictional costumed vigilantes continue to protect their identities - but I'd almost certainly be against it if they were non-fictional.

I agree with you in principle, Rusty, but I have to wonder if the twin movements of bettering comics stores and increasing bookstore sales don't dovetail in some way. As bookstores being to leach away the comics-reading audience, the comics shops that survive, and are imitated as business models, will tend to become more like bookstores. And because comics stores have a better distribution deal, my hope is that they can stay afloat through the initial "winnowing and refinement" stage by continuing to undersell the bookstores and offer more specialized product lines.

Of course, my basis for saying all of this is entirely anecdotal, and may not reflect wider realities: The "good comics shops" I've visited tend to run a bit like bookstores, albeit very specialized ones. The "bad comics shops" I've been to -- and oh, so many of them -- are set up like someone's basement or storage shed. In the latter case, it's less that the people running them are jerks or ubergeeks than that they don't entirely seem to think of what they do as a profession; to so many LCS operators, it's a hobby that subsidizes itself. Their inventory and the sort of customer base they end up with often reflects that, while the "good comics shops" seem to attract walk-ins and people of all ages.

The fact that Joe Q appeared was great. However I think his actual appearance wasnt that good. In fact I would go as far to say that he missed the point completely.

The thing about colbert is that he is so right wing it's absurd. He needs to be able to make comments that bring that out. For example that whole DC not being in the United States thing.

The quick round was a bad idea from the start. I just cringed my way through it and I hoped that JQ would be able to pull out the good stuff.

The whole marvel world being the same as ours was maybe not needed although the bit with Bush doing as well there as he is here was good.

After all that they didn't have that much time to talk about civil war. Joey seemed rushed and Colbert didn't get a chance to ask him many questions.

I think the whole thing would have went better if they had just jumped into the whole civil war thing and skipped everything before that.

I think it would have been nice if he'd mentioned Mark Millar.

Just saying.

Jesse -

To have a 4th Amendment Right against Search & Seizure, you have to have 2 things: standing and an expectation of privacy. Standing generally menas you own the place searched (your suitcase, house, car, etc...) but has some other exceptions.

Where airport security gets around it is the reasonable expectation of privacy requirement. The Supreme Court has held that there is no expectation of privacy when getting on a plane (although you do have one after you've left the plane). Other similar excpetions are meat packing businesses, inventory searches after arrests, probationers homes, and drug tests of railroad employees after an accident, drug customs officers, and students in extracurricular activities.

I fell asleep last night and missed the Report. I'm currently awaiting the repeat to start in 10 minutes, so I'll see what you guys are talking about then.

Although, generally whenever Quesada says something, I disagree.

Colbert is an awful interviewer anyway.

I think anybody who goes on to the Colbert Report to get a specific message out (or who watches expecting to hear one) should be prepared for disappointment. The primary purpose of the show is to be funny, not informative. It's kind of like what showing up on "Space Ghost: Coast to Coast" was like. If a guest happens to shill successfully for what they're working on, that's a bonus, but really they're there so the host can make jokes about or around them.

The Daily Show is slightly better at this than it used to be (maybe winning all those Peabody journalism awards did it), but even then, Jon Stewart is the first person to admit that he's a fake news show.

Edward is right on...

It was a hilarious interview, and Joe is much better in person than in print, but I was disappointed he got cut off at the end when he was trying to talk about the other genres.

I think he may have come prepared to talk about that stuff but ran out of time. That's just what happens in a 10 minute interview.

I really enjoyed the interview and it warmed my heart to see that Stephen seemed to as well. He looked genuinely interested in it and frankly, a guest like Joe Quesada goes a long way to help cleanse the souls of both Stephen and the audience considering Bill Donohue's appearance earlier in the week. No, he didn't really get any 'message' out there but who ever does? The only point to the interview is to give Stephen a chance to improv and be funny and he was..As was Joe. Perfect end to a perfect episode.

T: Colbert is an awful interviewer anyway.

Yeah, but you know it's fake, right?

Colbert is so right wing it's absurd.

Um....yeah. He is in fact pointing out how absurd the rightwing is by PARODYING them. It's a fake rightwing pundit show just like the Daily Show is a fake news show.

It may not be everyone's cup o'tea, but at least understand the joke behind it.

Bill: I know it's fake. But it's still makes for an awful interview. He's just really unfunny.

I think he's a bad interviewer, too. I cringe when he interviews people, even though it's occasionally funny. Usually I just watch through the first commercial break (because I like The Word) and then turn it off. Stewart has gotten a lot better with his interviews, but Colbert needs some work.

Unfunny? ..............

You wound me, T.

I think some of you are being overly critical of Joe Quesada's appearance on the "Colbert Report". Quesada promoted "Civil War" when he was on the show because that's what they brought him on TV to do. It wouldn't have made sense for him to spend all of his time talking about, say, "Planet Hulk". The hook that made it newsworthy (fake-news-worthy?) is "Civil War".

Regarding bookstores, is really necessary for him to be that explicit about where people can find Civil War comics? I imagine that most people would be able to locate a bookstore or a comic shop without prompting from Joe Quesada. I mean, where else would they go? The grocery store?

Public speaking isn't easy, especially not when you have a pseudo-antagonistic talk show host dredging up vintage 1950s arguments on the vices of your industry. I thought Quesada acquitted himself well. I think we've all seen more scholarly authors choke while in the same situation.

"He’s just really unfunny."

Is it just me, or is it always conservative folks who call The Daily Show and Colbert unfunny?

Seems like you're having trouble getting past the bias.

"I mean, where else would they go? The grocery store?"

Actually, yes. When I was a kid that's where I got comics. Kids can't drive to comic shops and they're bound by where their parents go. That's actually how I got hooked on comics, as there was little else to do there.

Unfortunately, that era has passed us by. I do think you have a good point though - if someone wants to buy comics, people know Comic Shops and Bookstores exist.

And Apodaca, I'm a "conservative folk" who happens to find the Colbert Report hilarious (although it does go over the top sometimes, especially about religion, even though I like to think God has a sense of humor).

I imagine that most people would be able to locate a bookstore or a comic shop without prompting from Joe Quesada.

You'd be surprised. The day before San Diego Comic-Con I watched, mouth agape, as a local San Diego news story reported that (colored, stapled) comics are no longer available, but you can buy 'em in trade paperbacks and bookstores.

I will bet there is a sizeable percentage of Americans...including some who watched The Colbert Report...who don't know of the existence of comic book stores, or the concept that serial stories continue across issues. Heck, I'd bet a number of them don't know comics exist anymore. It's a strong bet they don't know that Civil War is a serialized story less than halfway finished.

I bet a number of bookstores across America have people walking into today looking for "that Civil War thing with Spider-Man" and getting blank looks because the trade not only isn't available yet, it isn't even solicited. (If there was a trade solicited at this point we could tell from the Amazon ranking numbers, but alas.)

I applaud marketing (or, publicizing) a comics event to a larger audience than just us fanboys. But at a certain point you do have to come out and say "It's a serialized comic in seven chapters, and parts one through three are available at your local comic book store right now. Part four will be available next month."

I'll give Joe Q. the benefit of the doubt--it was a short interview and just saying that takes up valuable time. He may have wanted to or actually have said it and there wasn't time.

In my local area, you can either go to bookstores and buy old comics in TPB form, or figure out which of the four gaming shops in the county is the one that actually carries new comics (the other three don't bother anymore). Going inside a really nice comic shop basically involves driving six hours to a major city. I think it's fair to say that for the average American living in fly-over territory, where to get comics is actually a confusing subject. I wouldn't know if I didn't happen to want them already. I've given a lot of thought to ditching the local shop and getting books online just because it's a hassle to drive out for them once a month.

For those of you who haven't actually seen it, check out the full clip here.

While Quesada wasn't as smooth as he could have been -- playing it a little too straight when he should have tried to match Colbert's irreverance, and kissed much less ass -- the fact that comics have reached a point where he'd be on the show at all is notable. As for his not talking about other comics, that's just silly. It was a 5-minute appearance specifically to promote Civil War.

PS to Apodaca: I'm a "liberal", more or less, who doesn't find Colbert terribly funny most times. It's not who or what he's mocking, it's just that he misses more often than he hits. Jon Stewart was similarly uneven in the early days of the Daily Show. Bill O'Reilly, OTOH, is always funny!

The thing about colbert is that he is so right wing it’s absurd. He needs to be able to make comments that bring that out. For example that whole DC not being in the United States thing.

Paddy: The "Stephen Coblert" on the Show is a "right wing" caricature. Stephen himself is not.

"Is it just me, or is it always conservative folks who call The Daily Show and Colbert unfunny?

Seems like you’re having trouble getting past the bias."

I could argue tha it's only liberals who find the Daily Show and Colbert funny because it panders to their viewpoint. Like Guy says, he misses a lot more than he hits. It's a one-note joke...a really sarcastic parody of Bill O'Reilly. It's a SNL sketch stretched out over 5 nights a week.

And I can appreciate a parody of conservatives when it's GOOD. Check out this blog for example, it skewers conservatives but it's actually funny a lot of the time.

That being said, Stewart, while overrated, is WAAAAAY funnier than Colbert, I'll give him that. He's found his legs lately.

"That being said, Stewart, while overrated, is WAAAAAY funnier than Colbert, I’ll give him that. He’s found his legs lately."

That's pretty accurate. Although in that segment at the end of the Daily Show, Colbert usually outshines Stewart. Unfortunately, he usually isn't that good in his own show (even though I still like it).

The part of the show that I like in Colbert is when he mocks the Talking Points Memo. I find that to be funny sometimes.

Ugh. Funny but ugh. Anytime a superhero comicbook writer, editor, or publisher uses the phrase "post-9/11 world" when talking about their latest anti-fun take on a superhero character or in this case their latest bloated and pretentious shockfest, I'm out.

My thought on Quesada as promoter:

1) Comics should sell themselves in more places than just bookstores and comic stores. It is not his fault that two decades' worth of his predecessors voluntarily choked off the distribution of their own product, and I don't think it's something he can single-handedly reverse (certainly not while on the Colbert Report.) It's going to have to be a long-term goal of the company, not a short-term one.

2) That said, if you want to keep the industry afloat until then, just saying, "1-888-COMIC-BOOK to find the store nearest you" every single time you're promoting any comic anywhere will help, and takes less than five seconds.

3) As nice as it is to hear someone talking about comics somewhere outside of comics stores and Internet sites like this one, let's not kid ourselves that a few mentions in the daily paper and an interview on a basic-cable talk show is "great marketing". If this is more marketing than someone's seen in the last six years, that's a sign of how fundamentally awful a job they've been doing over the last six years.

Marvel should be advertising in publications like 'Rolling Stone', 'Entertainment Weekly', with taglines like, "In 2004, we destroyed the Avengers. In 2005, we decimated the X-Men. This summer, the Marvel Universe will be torn apart. Civil War. Summer 2006. Call 1-888-COMIC-BOOK to find the store nearest you." And a picture of Cap fighting Iron Man. Simple, effective, and appealing to people who haven't read comics in decades. (As opposed to their current marketing plan, which is to advertise in Wizard and Previews and to distribute posters to comics stores...places where anyone who walks into them will almost certainly notice the comics anyway.)

Marvel should also be doing more with its movie tie-ins. Instead of doing a 'Free Comic Book Day' at the local comic store, they should give away free comics on the opening weekend of 'Spider-Man 3', with that ubiquitous ad again, "Call 1-888-COMIC-BOOK to find the store nearest you." (As opposed to giving free comics to people already walking into a comics store, which is nice, but hardly solves your basic problem of nobody knowing comics stores still exist.)

Honestly, it's the most fundamentally obvious thing in the world: If your product is only distributed to comics stores, then your advertising budget should be 90% trying to get people into comics stores, and 10% trying to get them to buy specific comics. As it is, Marvel (and DC, don't think I'm singling out either company) still has the basic marketing strategy of waiting for people to walk into a store demanding their product, then selling it to them.

I've wondered for years why Marvel and DC don't advertise in places like Rolling Stone and Entertainment Weekly. I know advertising costs money, but those two can't be hurting for cash with the money they get from the movies. I have NEVER seen an ad in a non-comics magazine for any kind of comic. Yet Wizard is full of stuff for video games, for instance. I think John's idea is a good one. Can anyone tell me why the Big Two don't advertise in magazines at all?

I’ve wondered for years why Marvel and DC don’t advertise in places like Rolling Stone and Entertainment Weekly.

Honestly, I've always interpreted it as a lack of faith in the wider appeal of their product, particularly in Marvel's case. And, you know, a general lack of marketing savvy.

Advertising in broad mainstream publications like those mentioned is very expensive, and with the laser focus on ROI by most marketers these days, it's simply not cost-effective for anything other than their guaranteed big sellers that the DM is going to overwhelmingly support anyway, either by choice or by force, via retailer strong-arming"incentives". It's part of the chicken-egg / self-fulfilling prophecy side effect of the direct market system.

It's interesting that you bring up what Colbert said about Captain America being "America Right or Wrong." I was always wondering why Cap would be anti-registration. (Then again I don't really read Captain America so I don't know too much about Steve Rogers).