Support a roster of four smart political cartoonists – Marxist environmentalist Stephanie McMillan (“Minimum Security”), conservative Scott Stantis (Chicago Tribune), anarchic wild man Steve Notley (“Bob the Angry Flower”) and yours truly. For $5 a month, you get all our stuff pluseverything else at Beacon. Click here to support the Four Cartoonists of the Apocalypse.
8 Comments.
Been there, done that, bought the T Shirt (no really!)
** C’MON YOU FREELOADING WANKERS OUT THERE, PONY UP! **
It’s a sad commentary on our lamestream media that I get so much of my information from cartoonists. You guys should be commenting on the news, not reporting it.
During the early years of the War on Terra, it was cartoonists who tipped me off on the made for TV movies, The “Rescue” of Jessica Lynch and The Pat TIllman Story (I’m pretty sure it was Ted for the latter) ((Thanks, Ted)) Even before the illegal invasions, it was the cartoonists who were pointing up the lies propagated by the front pages of the papers they were published in (or not published in, as the case may be)
I can’t believe there are still only 74 backers for this out of a requested 400. This is such a great idea. I am doing whatever little shilling I can among friends, but it isn’t going well. I am just about the only consumer of political cartoons among all the people I know. …Or perhaps I am the only person willing to admit I like [good] political cartoons among the people I know.
Every time something like this fails to meet its goal I think of the crowd funded Robocop statue and sigh so hard in exasperation I risk loosing my lungs.
We have to change how we finance news, that’s all there is to it.
When there were only three TV networks, and newspapers were several inches thick, they had enough money to send people overseas to check out what was really going on. They could do real investigative reporting.
Those days are gone, & the likes of Rupert Murdoch have corrupted whatever is left of real reporting.
Beacon seems like a good way to go. There’s still a little bias as I’m going to support those who report things I want to hear – but it’s better than leaving the billionaires in charge.
This, particular group sounds good to me, it’s a mixed bag & Stantis isn’t as disgusting as most conservative cartoonists. I read Prickly City regularly.
“We have to change how we finance news, that’s all there is to it.”
Agreed
“There’s still a little bias as I’m going to support those who report things I want to hear”
Yah, but that is unavoidable. Even in a hypothetical News utopia with hundreds of different thick newspapers and the like, all bristling with the best possible journalism, we would all probably purchase the news sources that appeal to our personal biases at least slightly more then those that wouldn’t.
“When there were only three TV networks, and newspapers were several inches thick, they had enough money to send people overseas to check out what was really going on. They could do real investigative reporting.”
I kind of disagree here. What shitted up the news and reporting was maximization of profit above all other values including integrity itself. Maximum profit requires news to devolve into entertainment and emotion triggering pieces that are as best disguised as possible to look like legitimate news. If the largest mass of the lowest common denominator of the populous can feel like they are getting their daily dose of “News” while actually just being entertained when experiencing your “News” source, then you win the news wars and maximize your profit. If you actually have pieces that require thinking and might induce learning then your news is already not as easy to consume nor as entertaining as the other “news” sources available so it is going to loose to them profit-wise. The masses want News-light, same great allows-me-to-pretend-I-am-informed-and-thus-my-opinions-carry-weight taste, with none of the actual hard thinking and uncomfortable learning calories. Besides doing actual investigative journalism requires a lot of time and money so that eats into your profit from the bottom line while the results eat into your profits by usually failing the Entertainment test.
I think that actually may be part of the reason this funding campaign here is going poorly. “But how? You just said the masses want entertainment that passes as news. Wouldn’t four entertaining cartoonists discussing news satisfy this perfectly?” NO. I said people want things that look like serious news but are just entertainment. This is the exact opposite, it looks like entertainment (and probably will be entertaining) but will actually contain serious news and viewpoints. Again, the exact opposite of what the masses seem to want in this day and age.
“This, particular group sounds good to me, it’s a mixed bag & Stantis isn’t as disgusting as most conservative cartoonists.”
While some of Stantis’ opinions and ‘toons really wrankle me, he seems like an upstanding guy. I actually feel bad for him in this lineup because he will be way out on the right alone from what I can tell. I have a feeling a lot of potential discussion may end up accidentally becoming one against three with him the solo. I feel like he could use a fifth horseman/woman on his side to balance things out a bit better.
I can’t say that ‘the goode olde dayes” were better, all I can say is that they weren’t quite as bad. 🙂
I remember Woodward & Bernstein investigating Watergate – I can’t see that happening today. The coverage of Vietnam helped turn public opinion against the war; contrast that to the unabashed cheerleading of the media in The War on Terra. Hell, even air pollution got better coverage than global warming.
“I can’t say that ‘the goode olde dayes” were better, all I can say is that they weren’t quite as bad.”
Oh I agree totally there, I think the News used to be far far better. My point wasn’t that the news was always bad. No I was disagreeing about the explanation of what made it bad. What happened since the goode olde dayes isn’t a matter of there being too many too small news sources now – it is a matter of competing to maximize profit over everything else, including the delivery of any actual news. As it turns out News isn’t as profitable as that which passes for news but is actually entertainment. So slowly over a number of decades we have devolved from “News” being actual news to it being just hollow entertainment. The transition happened slowly at first then really exploded when they hit their stride and lost all their shame concerning hollowing out the news to nothingness. Now there is nothing left of actual info – but it is more profitable then ever! (assuming you own the place and don’t work there). Its especially more profitable then those “silly” olde days where they actually worked hard to report real news such as things like Watergate.
“Ha! Informing people, that cost so much money and took so much effort, and the people mostly just wanted entertainment anyways – so long as it let them project to others that they were informed individuals. We sure were silly to do that whole “News” thing on the news back in the day! What a waste!”
322 backers to go
22 hours left
0% chance
damn.
The joys of capitalism