[...] After last year’s controversy, I’m thrilled to see so many news sites have already published the list of Glyph Comics Awards Nominees [...]

Besides several mentions on my message board in the months before ECBACC, and besides several mentions in my online column, the event was the lead item in my “Tony’s Tips” column for COMICS BUYER’S GUIDE #1617, which came out about a month before the show.

ECBACC will be the focus of my next CBG column. I’ll also be writing about the show online, once I see how much I can get into the print column.

Maybe not required reading, but there are those who seem to enjoy my work. And – let me check – my manhood is sufficient enough that I don’t need to get into pissing matches with Augie or Dirk, both of whom do fine work.

CBR may not have carried your press release (there are many of mine they have not carried, if I recall correctly), but they did include a mention of the awards and the convention in another press release.

I’ve seen more clear-cut racism from those crying “racism” than otherwise.

Similarly, I’ve bought more ice cold lemonade from kids crying “Ice cold lemonade!” than otherwise.
Oh, okay, it’s not really similar. But is sounds similar!

Rich, your attitude is the healthiest I’ve seen in this whole thing. Thanks for being such a good example.

Thanks for adding your perspective, as well, Dirk. You’ve answered some of my questions and I’m no longer seeing the coverage of this event as a questionable one, or even an issue of benign laziness. The problem most likely was poor publicity on the even organizers and participants’ part.

My original point was that sometimes what seems like benign laziness has a subconscious bias at work and you don’t change that without having a discussion about it. Perhaps I’m a bit hair trigger on that point because I’ve seen very reasonable-sounding explanations given for comics’ issues with all sorts of biases in ways that end up amounting to “That’s just the way it is.” The hardest biases to battle are the subtle ones that don’t call attention to themselves. However, you don’t get anywhere by being disrespectful.

Johanna, I think I agree that it might have been a mistake to post anything about this. It certainly was a mistake for me to comment on it.

As Johanna notes, the principal reason this event got no coverage was the incompetence of the people who put the show together. Other excuses may be more comforting to one’s worldview, but they won’t solve the problem next time out.

(Funniest comment on this thread: “Tony Isabella was invited to the show and wrote, on his message board, about the show before and after going to it. If the mainstream press missed reporting it, they did so willingly.” Because God knows, we all read Tony Isabella’s message board.)

Who knows what press releases were sent, received, lost, or forgotten, but complaining about the online comics media’s non-mainstream coverage is like complaining about Dairy Queen’s salad bar.

I have no idea what “demand” you think white cartoonists don’t get but black do. If people want their projects covered, they need to send out PR, regardless of how important the cause or what color their skin. Whining that because overworked part-time journalists didn’t seek you out, you think they’re racists won’t get the success of the show covered. In fact, it will make it more likely that people will continue to avoid the situation entirely.

If results are what matter, how come some of those who care about the show have wasted screens of text and hours arguing with me when just a fraction of that effort put towards creating the press release about how the show went would have got them the coverage they say they want?

(And fyi, I don’t cover Wizard because of their sexism.)

The only hint of this con that I had heard of was an interview with Jamal Igle on Comic Geek Speak about a month or so ago. After that — nothing. It was a small show with a narrow focus without much publicity, sandwiched inbetween larger cons with broader focii and better publicity agents. (Wizard World Philly and Pittsburgh come quickly to mind. With the way the con circuit works today, I’m sure there’s another one or two I’m missing.)

That was the sound of my whiplash in trying to keep up with the subject change. What are you talking about?

It’s this kind of outrageous exaggeration that made me wonder if I should even mention the event and the resulting discussion, and now I’m thinking twice about having done so. This type of rhetoric does those with a good cause no favors.

Just for comparison, how many other 200-person shows get national online press coverage in the comic field?

If the mainstream press missed reporting it, they did so willingly.

We all tend to have a bias that prioritizes what’s closest to ourselves. It’s a subtle bias that’s requires a bit of introspection before it can be challenged because its takes more effort to notice. It’s a subtle racism not motivated by any kind of hostility, just disinterest.

That’s why it’s important to have a discussion when an underrepresented community feels like their story was ignored. Sometimes it turns out that story isn’t newsworthy, but if you stop and ask if you’ve missed a worthwhile story your radar gets a little bit of fine tuning that can improve your future coverage.

Assuming in the day and age that “there are no Black authors” is pretty venal. (Actually it takes a bit of effort.) But assuming that there are no comic book conventions dedicated to African American creators and images? I will guarantee you that there are Black comic book fans out there that had no idea the show existed? Are they “lazy”?

(And yes, the phrasing is intentional.)

I didn’t see any of the “big” news sites comment on last year’s Phoenix Comic Con – should I blame State-ism? (And I know for a fact we sent out press releases. I sent them.)

IMO, there’s a fine line between benign laziness and laziness born out of passive disinterest in people that don’t look like you and it sounds like this instance could have happened either way… which is why its good to have a discussion about the lack of coverage.