- Posted by Johanna on November 27, 2009 at 11:42 am
- Category: LinkBlogging
As part of CBOs new policy it has been decided that,in future,we will only accept and publish news on titles if the publishers follow this up with a review copy. Publishers have been using CBO just to publicise themselves and making excuses as to why they can’t send review books.
CBO IS NOT HERE TO JUST PUBLISH PR/NEWS
Some publishers just think that a Press Release will keep us happy and a “Can’t send a copy for review” will suffice. NO LONGER.
Wow, who would have thought that a comic publisher would want to publicize themselves online by getting their PR posted? But it gets even better when Terry Hooper, the sole contributor to CBO, starts in with the demands about the review copies:
To make it clear:
!!!CBO DOES NOT ACCEPT PDF FOR REVIEW!!!
SEND A PDF AND ITS TRASHED AND YOU DO NOT GET MENTIONED AGAIN FOR ONE YEAR. YOU SEND PRESS RELEASES THEN FOLLOW IT UP WITH REVIEW BOOKS.
I don’t think I’d bother with someone with such a poor grasp of proper grammar and punctuation, myself, but maybe he’s better known across the pond. Even so, he seems to have a real hatred of online comics, so much so that he wants to ban those who use them from his site.
Apparently, his dislike of PDFs stems from past “legal problems as well as time wasting in the past where heavily promoted books have never gone to print”. How you get “legal problems” out of looking at a comic onscreen instead of in print, I have no idea. He’s already anticipated the response, that publishers don’t need him:
Our hits stats are good enough but you want to go and be ignored somewhere else,be my guest. Certain repeat offenders have already been removed from CBO [some may have noticed?]. CBO is a two way effort. You can’t be bothered then neither can we.
What a prodigious amount of gall! “You want coverage, you have to send me free comics.” I guess it could be worse, though. In this followup post, he mentions that a “Readers Review” will cost a publisher 25 pounds. I do share his dislike in that post for publishers that want free advice instead of paying for consulting work, but there are much politer, more professional ways to make the point. What he’s doing looks like expecting publishers to pay for coverage, in terms of goods in trade, and I doubt his website is worth as much to them as he thinks it is.
You don’t want review PDFs? That’s your right. I can understand why. There’s good reason to avoid them: they’re not always a true representation of the final product, and they’re harder to read and refer back to. But don’t be so self-righteous about it. It’s laughable.
My favorite response to all this came from David Brothers:
No name comics site demands free books, holds coverage hostage, and will wake up sober and regret it.
Update: It seems that this isn’t really a “new policy” for this site, since Hooper ranted about it on November 6, November 10 (where he declared the subject “now dead”), November 11 (asking the question “Does Anyone Actually READ CBO????” which is just too easy to poke fun at), and November 17.
The last post reveals that his daily hit count is 3-500 a day (which he multiplies into 3-5000 a week, indicating that he’s living somewhere where the weeks have 3 more days than ours do). In responding to this original post of mine, a message full of “I know you are but what am I?”, he says “Our stats speak for themselves.” Yes, they do. Now that I know that his traffic is so low, I feel kind of bad making fun of him, if not for the fact that he gives all reviewers a bad name for riding this hobby horse so long and so vehemently.