Webcomics Beacon: Dogs Don't Know It's Not Beacon (4 of 4)

As I stated yesterday, Circle Jerks in webcomics lead to artistic stagnation and undue popularity. It doesn't take a lot of talent to provide meaningful criticism, but webtoonists are often blind to their own faults. This excuse does not work when the creators regularly work with other terrible webtoonists to provide criticism to OTHER terrible webtoonists. Like the crossover I discussed yesterday, running a podcast is another great way for atrocious webcomics to Circle Jerk. The Webcomics Beacon is run by some of the most terrible webcartoonists I've covered with this blog. In fact, I told you those stories so I could tell you this one.

First and foremost, this podcast is way too long. Each episode is over an hour long, and if you're talking about webcomics for more than an hour, the evidence indicates that you just like hearing your own voice. I do like that these amateurs don't talk about one webcomic for the whole hour, but rather a certain trend or meme among comics, but the topics are still too broad and general. The hosts also have a tendency to go off-topic often, which contributes to the excessive dragging-onnery of this podcast. Additionally there is a lot of dead air and simultaneous talking, all of which could be remedied with a structured program and pre-planning. Having a set rotation for asking and answering questions would definitely cut down on the confusion, and figuring out what the best questions are and focusing on those would probably cut the runtime down to a reasonable half-hour.

The bigger problem is that the hosts may or may not be giving good criticism, but the comics made by the hosts undercut that criticism by being so terrible. The idea is, "If they can't use their advice to improve themselves, why should anyone else do so?" Of course, I completely agree with this argument. A better use for a group such as this would be to turn their critical eyes inwards, and utilize each other to improve themselves. Of course, since the entire point is to increase readership for everyone involved, the hosts are not going to turn too critical an eye (least of all towards their guests) resulting in a shallow and unchallenging show. The only criticism being offered is towards those who aren't on the show, giving off the impression that the Webcomics Beacon is used to signify an impending circle jerk.

The actual website is also a mess, and has so many circle jerking links that it overloads the reader with too much irrelevant information. There's an entire section devoted to Webcomic Milestones which just tells the reader which webcomics have completed an arbitrary number of pages or existed for an arbitrary number of years, with no discretion based on quality, consistency or continuity. Another section lists every single site mentioned in the week's show, no matter how passing the reference. While nice for those who find themselves asking "what are they talking about?", reducing the size of the section to only those sites talked about in depth would keep it from being overwhelming.

It is human nature to want to promote your creations, and the Internet is an easy way to do so. However the act of self-promotion often leads to introspection and growth after being rejected. When artists take the easy way out by promoting themselves through others and cutting quick deals often end up being screwed over by a bad deal. Some might get lucky, sure, but the best works are going to come from those who aren't relying on finding a great bargain, but instead put the effort into themselves and their own works. Creating new assets to bargain with, such as a podcast, are only indicative of desperation, and it almost becomes a spectacle to watch and see just when someone gets burned. While those who wish to build themselves up through their own merits should stay away, the Webcomics Beacon signals to all those who wish to dash themselves upon the jagged rocks.