I have to point out that you have ads and a donation button on your website. That means you’re following a business model that works for you.

Since Chris hasn’t addressed this, I think I should point out that nearly everyone who does this for long enough will set up an Amazon Wishlist, a Paypal button, and something along the lines of Cafepress to sell merchandise like T-Shirts.

Chris, I’d be so bold to argue, and if not him then many of us, aren’t following a business model.

Chris has a day job as do many of us webcartoonists because we’d love to be Penny Arcade but the satisfaction of a few hundred or a few thousand visitors will do.

Those who don’t use free hosting pay a nominal fee to get our stuff out there and we do it just to do it. To express ourselves, to amuse ourselves, just to share. It’s not a business those buttons are there to recoup a little here and there or service any diehard fans or those like Clint H. who are altruistic enough to want to reward us.

Ever wonder what it feels like to be the guy who took the 50 cents?

No because those of us who don’t prioritize monetary value are in this because as Chris and Scott said this is the best way to self-publish that ever was. I’m in the red, but I’m not out thousands of dollars and I don’t have boxes of unsold books in my garage. On top of that, thanks to random photo blogs, message board sigs, and Google people have read my stuff while I haven’t invested dollar one in advertising.

When Moderntales started up and I went behind the subscription wall, there wasn’t talk about doing it because all those darn amateurs were ruining it for the rest of us. It was because we felt our work and time had value and we tried a commercial model that asked people to recognize that value. It wasn’t a judgement on anyone else, it was a judgement on ourselves. And we were attacked for it. Yes, there was criticism of the business model and I think that was legitimate. But the criticism that implied our work didn’t have monetary value, that was nuts.

This, not Megaman Sprites, is what I consider the saddest thing about Webcomics. The residual bitterness over the Miscro-transaction debate. I am sorry if you prefer another term.

Some of you guys have different priorites (like making a living off a medium where no amount of security will stop the alt-print screen/Photobucket combo from pirating your material.

Some, like Scott McCloud and friends (including you), were trying to create a viable model to make money off of this.

But some were trying to recreate the syndicate system online and had dollar signs in their eyes.

On other side of the fence there were cynics, there were those like myself who think Democracy will have the cream (or the most savvy businessmen) rise to the top, and then there were readers who were either miffed or hurt that some strips/authors had been giving them something for free and now all of a sudden seemed to be demanding a payoff.

And nearly nobody recognized that the other side was comprised of various opinions/reasons they just declared the other side as the enemy.

And now, years afterwards, we’re still lobbing grenades at trenches on the other side of the line regardless of who’s in them.

The Web is a new medium that has somewhat different dynamics than print or broadcast but in broad terms it works the same way. There are specialty newsletters that convey high-value information that can charge high subscription fees, and there are websites that can do the same. But everyone else survives on ads and merchandising.

Yes, barriers to entry are lower on the Web, in a sense, but whether you’re starting up a website or a print magazine, attracting an audience large enough to support advertising is no small thing. It takes work, time, and quality content.

There is no Gresham’s Law of Web content. People will always gravitate towards content they find more valuable, in whatever sense valuable means to them. That there are 5,000 crapulent webcartoons out there doesn’t diminish the value of PvP, or Diesel Sweeties. But there would be no PvP or Diesel Sweeties without the environment that also allows those 5,000 crapulent webcartoons to be seen by their dozens of fans.

The Web is, in fact, creating a new golden age for cartoonists — at least those who are ready to embrace this new medium.

“But the sad and simple truth is that the internet is a communications medium, not a professional publishing for profit medium, …”

That’s a pretty definitive statement and I gave you specific examples that refute it.

I just don’t see how you can have it both ways – either the web can’t support a profitable publisher or it can. People are doing it – you say so yourself – so stating that’s not what the web is for is not true.

Tim, what I’m saying is that the web is designed in a way that works against for-profit publishing. I do not say it makes such a thing impossible, but I do believe it makes it more difficult, and that difficulty has nothing to do with finding a “magic formula” for making for-profit work. There is no magic formula.

So I’ll say this again: the web was designed for communication. For transmitting information. The way it has been designed makes it so that anyone who puts in a modicum of time and effort has roughly the same chance of attracting viewers as anyone else. And because of that incredible ease of access, especially in comparison to print media, people who want to make a living off their work have many more hurdles than they would otherwise, and that those hurdles are there because of what the web is and how it works.

This doesn’t mean the web has one use only. A lot of people are doing a lot of things on it that the original creators probably didn’t expect — but it’s still useful to keep in mind what it was designed for and how it works, because that helps to define your challenges.

The biggest challenge a webcartoonist has is convincing his or her audience to pay for content. Not necessarily the comics themselves, but something. Part of that challenge is that the web wasn’t built with doing business in mind — that part is tacked on, and that part has to figure out a way to entice a customer from going somewhere else. It is very easy to go somewhere else on the web, and there are a lot of places where users can waste hours and hours of time and not spend a dime, and webcomics are just a very small part of a much larger morass of content out there.

“Justcartoonists dislike webcartoonists because webcartoonists are doing more work to make less money and therefore devaluing their product. Some professional webcartoonists, in turn, are more than a little annoyed by us amateurs because we’re not really trying to make any money at all, which makes it harder for them because they’re competing with people who are saying “just come on and have a look!””

The word publisher appears nowhere in that paragraph. That’s the one I cited and that’s the one I commented on. So I stand my my remarks.

Tim, the entire essay is about publishing. What do you think these cartoonists are doing? I shouldn’t have to mention publishing in every paragraph in order to keep talking about publishing…

Chris, you say that isn’t your premise but then turn around and essentially state that it is your premise. You acknowledge that people can use the web as a publishing medium for profit, then turn around and say that’s not what the web is. The web is what it’s users will make of it. Look, I’m only reacting to your words. You stated emphatically:

“But the sad and simple truth is that the internet is a communications medium, not a professional publishing for profit medium, …”
That’s a pretty definitive statement and I gave you specific examples that refute it.
I just don’t see how you can have it both ways – either the web can’t support a profitable publisher or it can. People are doing it – you say so yourself – so stating that’s not what the web is for is not true.

As for the phrase “information wants to be free,” if you don’t want your ideas associated with that, OK. I had to bring it up because your essay sounded like it was traveling down that path.

And lastly, this:

“My essay deals with general accessibility for publishers ”

Chris, you brought up webcartoonists who want to make some money from the product they put up on the web – something you’re doing with ads on your site. And the way you did it is to put those webcartoonists in the same sphere as print cartoonists. Not publishers, the artists themselves. These are your words:

“Justcartoonists dislike webcartoonists because webcartoonists are doing more work to make less money and therefore devaluing their product. Some professional webcartoonists, in turn, are more than a little annoyed by us amateurs because we’re not really trying to make any money at all, which makes it harder for them because they’re competing with people who are saying “just come on and have a look!””

The word publisher appears nowhere in that paragraph. That’s the one I cited and that’s the one I commented on. So I stand my my remarks.

I don’t, however, disagree with you on the notion that the web has opened up things for the average cartoonist – and I don’t make a distinction between justcartoonists and webcartoonists. We’re all cartoonists. But that’s already happened – you’ve taken advantage of it for more than 12 years, I’ve been doing it for eight.

I’m far more interested in what happens next. I’m far more interested in seeing developments that allow talented people to make a living from their talent. And that’s why I’m writing a column about submitting your work to publishers over at Comixtalk.com You should check it out.

Thanks for reading.

First off, your premise that the web can’t be a professional publishing for profit medium is just not true in the factual sense.

First off, that isn’t my premise. I acknowledge that people can and do make a profit off the internet. My point is that this isn’t what the web “is” — it is a communication medium. It can be used as a publishing for profit medium but it has to work harder to do so than other mediums because of an incredibly low barrier to entry compared to other mediums.

Second, at no point in my essay did I make the point that “information wants to be free,” and for all your accusations that I’m engaging in strawman arguments I have to say that you’re doing the same thing here, and doing so rather heavily. You bring up that specific phrase very frequently, and it’s obvious that you disagree with that theory rather strongly, but it’s not clear how what I wrote falls in line with that idea. My essay deals with general accessibility for publishers — that more people can afford to create and distribute content than ever before in history. This has nothing to do with any kind of ethical imperative on how those publishers should distribute their work, simply that these days so very man can.

And a lot of people are publishing their work for free. This is simply a fact — there is no right or wrong associated with it. People are doing it, and that dilutes the ability of professionals to make money. But “dilute” is not the same thing as “prevent” and you are conflating the two in your rebuttal.

And that judgement on ourselves, that idea of self-respect, that brings me to my last criticism. You said:
“And I know for a fact that there are people out there in the webcomicking community who fervently wish that a great swath of people doing webcomics would just STOP, so that some standard of quality control and self-respectability can be put in place.”
OK, let’s differentiate the people who think somethings sucks so bad it should be destroyed, from people that encourage artists and other creative people to understand that their work has value.
Because this is important – nevermind how it affects everyone else – it’s important for every indvidual artist because people are trolling the web in the name of commerce. And these people know how to make money and aren’t afraid of the internet – it’s a valuable tool that extends their reach. They’re not evil, they’re business people.
If the web has done anything, it’s introduced the possibility of amateurs becoming pros overnight. And if that happens, you’ve got to be ready!
Look, do you know why there’s so many spam emails from Nigerian bankers? It’s because the scam works. There’s always someone stupid enough to send $15,000 to a total stranger on the off chance that they’ll make a million dollars.
Do you know why corporate comics continue to insist on owning – in perpetuity, for ever and ever and as far as the far reaches of this universe and the next – ideas that independent creators try to sell to them? Because there will always be independent creators who sell them all their rights for a pittance.
That’s not the internet revolution – that’s not information wanting to be free, that’s commerce. The internet will not replace the marketplace, it will only expand it.
Ever watch Antiques Roadshow? Ever see the people who paid 50 cents for something that just got valued at $500,000? Ever wonder what it feels like to be the guy who took the 50 cents?
Come up with an idea for a comic, publish it for free on the web to get interest, don’t believe in yourself or what you’re doing and then sell all rights in all mediums for all time for enough money to buy a medium latte everyday for about nine months – and then watch as that idea gets exploited in books, games, TV and films (delivered via the internet!) and makes a boatload of money for the people who bought your idea while you get coffee.
The first way to avoid being the guy who took the 50 cents is to understand that what you do, what you produce, has value.
I’m not talking about not having a critical eye toward your own work, I’m talking about being confident enough to walk into a publisher’s office and demanding a fair contract. And having the guts to walk away if the deal isn’t good enough.
There’s nothing wrong with having self-respect, and it’s an entirely different issue than strawman you associated it with.
Thanks for reading

I’ve never heard either of these two comments spoken nearly often enough to qualify as a “swath.”

Well it comes in waves. It was swathish at one point. It may be less swathish at present.