Bengo's Choice: Investigative Journalism or Libel?

My faithful reader might be wondering why I stopped updating for the past month. Simple answer: I decided to take a vacation from this blog for a month, starting about 2 weeks before I made the decision. I had begun to run low on vitriol and needed to spend some time drilling some from the nearby gulf. The comics I have in my queue were either too young to work with, had spontaneously stopped updating, or were otherwise outside my capacity to review. So I decided to relax for a while and see if a month would give these guys enough time to mature into viable targets. Unfortunately, something far more inane occurred. Ben Gordon finally decided to leap from his bell tower of insanity to the the warm blue waters of the Crazy Sea. If I might be serious for one week, I'd like to point out how utterly ridiculous Gordon has become.

Gordon's magnificent swan dive into madness began almost six month ago, when he decided to take issue with a business model presented in How to Make Webcomics by those Halfpixel guys, namely an assertion that a firmly established webcomic might expect 5-10% of its readers to purchase any items from its online store. Gordon seems to think that this means that buyers will only purchase a single item whose profit is $5, failing to account for repeat customers. Gordon also seems to take a flawed mathematical approach, using monthly traffic numbers to approximate annual income. The use of "Traffic" as a term is also incredibly vague. Is he talking hits, unique visitors, or what? I wouldn't consider every unique visitor to qualify as a "reader" for the purposes of Halfpixel's sell-through rate. Gordon also seems to claim that several of his "case studies" give conflicting data but fails to deliver enough data regarding his case studies. While he seems to want them to remain anonymous, he is trying to imply that the expected income from the Halfpixel model doesn't match up with their actual incomes, but this figure is never given. Information like the age of the comic he's studying, selection in the comic's online store, or anything which would lead anyone to follow his conclusion from the data he's given. In summary, Gordon's rebuttal to the model presented in How to Make Webcomics lacks sufficient evidence to convince anyone but the most gullible.

This led to an intense mistrust of anything Halfpixel did, such as purchasing the webcomics.com domain and tries to find anything remotely suspicious about Halfpixel that he can muster up. Unfortunately, there's not a lot out there so he has to make a lot of it up.

At the same time, Gordon began developing a grievance against Dumbrella, namely for their sponsorship of webcomics blog Fleen. Now I don't know about you, but if McDonald's is producing a blog, I'd expect it to focus on Big Macs and McRibs, not the overall state of the fast food industry as a whole. They have access to information and sources that normal people don't have. But Gordon would have you believe that it would be best for all blogs to cover the same industry with the exact same scope, i.e. all webcomics blogs should cover the entire breadth of the webcomics realm evenly and fairly. Of course, since Gordon fancies himself a real life journalist, this is nothing more than a Journalistic wet dream he has. Wanting amateur webcomics bloggers to be held to some journalistic ideal seen only in films and comic strips. Whether Gordon is justified or not in disliking Fleen, this began an unhealthy obsession with Dumbrella, to supplant his already obsessive dislike of Halfpixel.

Gordon's desires soon turned to uncovering some kind of major corruption scandal in the world of webcomics. He began by developing some kind of "Corruption Metric" for webcomics, but of course he only states what he is measuring, not HOW he is measuring it. But until he found a big conspiracy, there was nothing to test his self-created metric against. Gordon was so intent on finding a big conspiracy that he managed to convince himself that one existed.

Until this past month, his obsessions were fairly harmless. But beginning in February, Gordon moved from harmless stalking to destructive libel. Inspired, perhaps, by the emerging popularity of Twitter among webcartoonists, Gordon began his quixotic crusade by attacking the advice given by Scott Kurtz in How to Make Webcomics, "Fake it 'til you make it," as inciting a plethora of webcomickers to fake their popularity until they actually become popular. In actuality, this is common advice for nervous people, telling them to act like they're highly skilled until they gain their confidence and self-worth. Gordon seems to have forgotten that he has manufactured this intention by Kurtz, and has taken further steps to sabotage his career. This blog post by Bengo was the first shot in a war against scientific integrity.

The next day, he posted a lengthy assault against a small collection of his enemies, accusing them of being a Twitter "faking gang," or a gang of people who created fake Twitter followers for each other. His premise is that a large quantity or Twitter followers is a significant status symbol among webcartoonists, and by inflating this number by dishonest means, one can attract gullible idiots who just want to read whatever's popular. He also tries to connect Twitter cheating to other statistical cheating, but applies circular logic later to convict his opponents to both. They are guilty of Twitter cheating because it's known that they cheat on their other stats, and they are guilty of cheating on their other stats because they are known Twitter cheaters.

His only stated method for identifying fake Twitter accounts is that they have a limited number of people they follow, with few posts of their own. Gordon has made claims that there are more conclusive techniques to identify fakes, but has yet to divulge them: "Various techniques allow us to identify fakes; too many to list today." At this point Gordon attempts to prove the fakers by showing their visitor numbers. These attacks are levelled largely at Scott Kurtz, but Meredith Gran of Octopus Pie also suffers a grand assault. Gordon's main argument is that OP went through large jumps in readership twice over the last year, therefore it must be doing something shady to generate those readership increases. The truth of the matter is simply that Octopus Pie was barely a year old, and at an age where large jumps in popularity are both drastic and common. Consequently, the graphs provided for PvP show nothing more than a single month of poor performance in November, followed by a large increase in December of 2008. The most likely reason is a glitch in the data provided (by a third party, no less), as well as a month where people have a lot of free time. However, presented by Gordon, this is a suspicious increase in traffic by the mastermind of a vast conspiracy.

After this less than damning evidence against Gran and Kurtz is presented, Gordon begins the most troubling part of his "report." He begins listing names of people he believes are fake Twitter accounts, with nothing more than the names of the people he thinks created them. Failure to grasp the behavior of Twitter in the hands of webcomics fans will be Gordon's undoing; these people are merely fans who wanted to follow their favorite creators. They signed up for Twitter just to follow these people, because otherwise they'd have no reason to have a Twitter account. People really are capable of realizing that their lives aren't interesting enough for other people to read about, and therefore feel no need to use this service for themselves. This behavior, continued in later blog posts by Gordon, is reminiscent of Senator Joe McCarthy naming suspected Communists, with no evidence whatsoever.

In the comments of this post, Gordon dismisses alternative sources of data as unreliable (for no discernable reason, no less) and asserts that his accusations of Twitter faking are, indeed, factual. Gordon fails to realize that in order for something to be factual, evidence is first required to verify. His speculation on Twitter cheating is not fact simply because he says it is, and using these false facts as evidence against these cartoonists for faking their other statistics is a terrible logical fallacy.

Several of Gordon's blog posts in February take snipes at his accused Twitter Fakers, turned an innocent party into some kind of exclusive nightclub circle jerk, and otherwise masturbated his own journalistic ego into a Grand Mal seizure of self-congratulation, before attempting to seriously sabatoge Scott Kurtz's career. Kurtz had been asked to host the Harvey awards this year at Baltimore Comic-con, because of a positive response to his presentation in previous years. Due to a manufactured grudge against Kurtz, after imagining a conspiricy, Gordon decided that Kurtz wasn't "good enough" to host these awards, and has started a letter writing campaign to have Kurtz uninvited. This is, of course, a ridiculous course of action to take when your only motivation is something you yourself have manufactured.

Gordon's most recent post on the subject gives more detail to his proposed motivation behind Twitter faking. In essence, the Webcomics Industry is largely run on the character of its creators. By faking popularity, Gordon asserts that popularity can be generated. Communities spring up around popular comics, and these communities will generate traffic in return. But it's a double-edged sword. Levelling audacious claims against webcartoonists with absolutely no evidence to support them, even things as seemingly innocuous as forging Twitter followers, can damage someone's reputation to the point where they begin to lose readers because of it. And that, my friends, is known as libel. Gordon, if he has no actual evidence to support his claims of Twitter forging other than wild speculation and circumstantial evidence, has committed libel, and should begin apologizing immediately.

Ultimately, Gordon is just a fringe blogger who desperately wants to be an investigative journalist with a lot of importance in the field of webcomics. Unfortunately, he has yet to realize that the way to get there is not by publishing audacious claims, inciting career sabotage, and committing grand acts of libel, but by dedicating himself to writing an honest, if boring, blog. Cover the dull stories, and use them to improve your writing skills, Bengo, and when something big actually does come along, then you can use those skills to really make it big. This route is self-destructive and dangerous, and part of me hopes you make the right choice.

PS: Joe McCarthy is a terrible role model Read more→

The Year In Review: Best... Worsts of 2008

It's hard to believe I'm still posting on this stupid blog about terrible webcomics. I had originally planned on losing interest sometime around October, but unfortunately I had by then accrued a list of comics to review that was longer than my list of known aliases. So I kept reading awful webcomics and writing down my less-than-professional opinions, and before I knew it, it was the end of the year. I decided that I should make a top 10 list of the worst comics reviewed on anti-snark this year, but after I realized I had only been reviewing for half a year, I shortened it to the top 5. What follows are not just the worst comics, but also the worst responses to my reviews, as well as the worst interview subjects of the multitudes I had interviewed. So without further ado, here are the 5 Best Worsts of 2008.

5. Hijinks Ensue
I don't recall when I first found Hijinks Ensue, but I do remember that my inital reaction was basically "Oh look a ripoff of Movie Comics." After reading more, though, I realized that I had been far too generous. The jokes revolved around moronic television shows and idiotic films, and consisted entirely of nerdwankery.

Visually, it reeks of unoriginality and shameless copying of character designs from more popular webcomics. While this is a common occurrence among terrible artists, usually it isn't so poorly done that you start feeling bad for the ripped off. Whoever said "Imitation is the greatest form of flattery" never experienced the insult that is being imitated by Joel Watson and his rusty, mechanical drawing hand. Perhaps if Watson had a life that didn't consist of sitting on his butt watching television and movies, he'd learn how to give more life and originality to his drawings, but the chances of that (like the chances of Steve Jobs creating something that nerds won't blindly purchase) is slim to none.

The art managed to be utterly reprehensible, despite the fact that the cartoonist uses a Cintiq tablet. There's a reason for this, of course. A great tablet will not make anyone a better artist, no matter how expensive/Mac-friendly it is. Joel Watson is one of the greatest offenders of the "Tools Make the Artist" crowd, which is why Hijinks Ensue receives the award of "Worst Application of a Cintiq Tablet" and is #5 of our list of 2008's Best Worsts.

4. Dead Winter
After four weeks of reviews, I wanted to try something new, so I asked Dave Shabet of Dead Winter if he would bless me with an interview about his terrible zombie webcomic. As I recall, his exact words were "get away from me you skeevy pervert." I tried for over an hour to change his mind but in the end, he wasn't going to budge. I had sunk so many resources into the interview questions, that cancelling it would have meant the end of Anti-Snark, so I came up with a bold solution.

Since Dave Shabet was too good to answer a few questions, I decided that I would answer them as though I were him. I tried to give readers what I felt was an accurate representation of Shabet and his work, but about halfway through answering my own questions I remembered that I had no readers so I felt pressured to jazz the interview up a little bit. The result was an inconsistent personality that I had created for him, and the whole thing was really unbelievable. This is why I have decided to present Dead Winter with the award for "Worst Interview" and placed it fourth in 2008's Best Worsts.

3. Bizarre Uprising
I had added this amalgam of retarded anime tropes and terrible plots to my expanding queue of cannon fodder sometime in September, but every time I looked at it, I decided it wasn't atrocious enough for me to review at that time. When I finally forced myself to take a shot at it, I hoped merely for an underwhelming article as a result. After prodding through the archives, however, I was amazed at how astonishing, how truly horrendous, how utterly ridiculous the plot truly was.

Here's a synopsis: A teenage boy finds out he has magic vampire powers, and begins training with some off-the-wall school mascot that is a pig or something. He gets into fights with people far more experienced than he, only to defeat them because he believes in the heart of the cards or some equally tropish anime facet of his personality. Girls begin to swoon over him for no reason other than he's the artist's fantasy-insert, and even goes so far as to turn a lesbian straight. After one of his ex-girlfriends is shot from 100 yards with a pistol and killed, we find out that the mascot vampire trainer is actually the main character's dad and also that he is the king of vampires. We also learn that Jesus Christ (our one Lord and Savior) is a vampire, and he begat all the other vampires. Meanwhile, the protagonist's best friend seduces the hero's unusually hot and not-at-all parental mother (I'm sensing some disgusting incest fantasy by the artist) AND his girlfriend, then cries foul as he is unconvincingly male-raped. This male-rape subplot extends for nigh on 5 years before it finally concludes unsatisfactorily. The hero does some boring crap that is not even interesting in the slightest, and the reader is left wondering if he missed something in the middle or if the writer simply failed to include some quantity of important details (hint: it's the latter, and that quantity is in the triple-digits).

Needless to say, if you love reading terrible webcomics just to gaze at the ensuing train wreck, none other will satisfy you better than Bizarre Uprising. I only wish I had reviewed it earlier in the year, so I could hope to see some troubled reaction by the creators, who feel it acceptable to only produce one page per week, despite the troubled writing and the sloppy, amateurish artwork. Bizarre Uprising recieves the title of "Worst Webcomic of 2008" and ranks third among our list of the 5 Best Worsts of 2008.

2. Webcomics Beacon
During the month of September, I reviewed the Webcomics Beacon, a terrible podcast about webcomics, as well as the webcomics done by the hosts of the podcast, in order to illustrate that these people should not be doling out advice about webcomics. Shortly after, one of the hosts noticed the review of his comic and decided to take offense, posting predictable rants about how he couldn't believe anyone would spend their time being negative towards webcomics. It's just inconceivable that anyone who enjoys reading these pieces of trash would rather point out the negatives rather than the positives!

I figured he'd quit there, but to my surprise he continued his tirade on the actual podcast itself. He refused to link the big bad review and didn't even give the name of the website, because he didn't want any of his five listeners to give any pageviews to me, since I make so much money off a single page view. I never figured anyone would take my amateurish scrawlings so seriously, so I was quite surprised when I heard what ol' Fesworks had to say. Essentially, he is upset that anyone would bother giving a negative opinion of his work, since he's clearly just a hobbyist and not a professional, and how he gets upset when people are giving professional comic advice, which is not so useful to those who comic for the hobby of it. Of course, this is just code speak for "I want to draw comics but I don't want to put any effort into getting better at it!" Any real hobbyist would still want to put effort into improving his skills so that he could get better.

By devoting so much attention to what was really just a half-hearted negative review of his webcomic and podcast, Fesworks and the Webcomics Beacon crew have earned the title of "Worst Tantrum of 2008" and secured second place in our list of 2008's Best Worsts.

1. The Floating Lightbulb
Our number one spot on the list of worsts goes to the blog that inspired me to return to Anti-snark in the first place. The Floating Lightbulb is a webcomic blog that updates nearly daily, where cartoonist Ben Gordon attempts to give advice to budding cartoonists, thereby elevating himself in the arena of webcomics. Unfortunately, his advice is generally not backed by anyone's experience, and is inspired solely by Gordon's perception of what cartoonists should be doing, rather than anything that might actually work. Gordon is fuelled by his massive ego, tenuous grasp on reality, and fragile self-image.

Often posting lengthy diatribes about websites that do the same thing as one of his many other websites, claiming redundancy and inefficiency, Ben Gordon is quick to write off the webcomics.com guys as some sort of evil corporate empire. Unfortunately what Gordon fails to realize is that his own attempts are shoddy, amateurish and unusable, and ANY attempt to do what he's done is automatically going to be better. Gordon clearly wants to be a webcomic bigwig, but until he can improve the quality of his writing, website organization and comic skills, the best he can do is inflate his standing by acting bigger than he really is. This is why Gordon has been awarded the "Worst Attempt at Being Relevant" and is our Best Worst of 2008.

I hope that reading this has been an adequate time-waster and helped you kill a few minutes. Let the staff of Anti-snark know of any terrible webcomics or webcomic-related sites that you know of, so we can continue to bring you the same hard-hitting journalism next year.

Read more→

Psychedelic Treehouse: Tips on Shoddy Craftsmanship, From the Expert Shoddy Craftsman

How does a webcartoonist improve himself? Practicing alone might seem sufficient to some, but without direction, most will just practice themselves into a hole. Rote learning can make you more efficient, but not necessarily better. There are websites which can guide an artist into developing his skills well, by giving good examples and exercises, and lead to a greater understanding of anatomy, and higher quality art. Likewise, there are aids for the writers out there who want to escape terrible characters, awful pacing issues, and atrocious plots. But aside from the art, what is out there to help you present your webcomic? I have yet to find a good site about webcomic production, but I am knee deep in bad ones.

Psychedelic Treehouse is yet another webcomic site by Ben Gordon, aka scartoonist, in which he attempts to combine information that he feels is useful to webcartoonists who wish to improve the business of their webcomic. The first thing anyone will notice, however, is the terrible page layout of PT. The first textual paragraph is a bunch of metatags, presented as a jumbled mess of phrases, some of which link to subsections of the site, while others do not. The purpose of this section puzzles and confuses me. It is an ugly site feature, and will repel users looking for a more professional site to give them advice. After this massive text chunk, Gordon gives two substanceless taglines, followed by a link to a useless "list" style website. By the time the reader reaches any true substance in the Psychedelic Treehouse, he or she is already fatigued by all the empty content they've had to wade through.

Down in the bowels of the front page, PT turns into a two-column format, with the left column being a left-justified list of various categories and subsections, with no organization or formatting cues. The right column is a centered list of site credits and contact links. The formatting wraps lines in odd places, creating lines with two words, followed by a line break. All the credits in the right column are chaotically arranged, and the reader's eye bounces all over the place, instead of following the list cleanly. The left side is only slightly better, with section titles and descriptions having various assortments of font styles and sizes, with very little consistency among either.

But what kind of substance does The Psychedelic Treehouse actually offer? Perhaps it is a diamond in the rough, an object of immense value with an ugly presentation. And perhaps Jesus himself will swoop down on the back of a giant rooster and smite all the terrible webcomics. The majority of sections found on the PT are simply lists of things. A list of webcomics, a list of webcomic collectives, a list of comic portals, blogs, publishers, award winners, podcasts, books, and commission-taking artists. There are even three whole pages of 'miscellaneous' link lists. The most useless of these 'lists' is a gallery of webcomic logos. What is the purpose of these lists? A collection of information is useless if the average reader still has to digest and analyze it himself. These lists are simply pure streams of data, with no evaluation provided by Gordon, thereby making it about as useful as a list of quantum physics equations to the average kindergartener. Ben Gordon is apparently incapable of giving the necessary commentary on the lists he provides, since he has not done so, but with the quality of his writing, I'm not sure I'd want to see it.

A few sections attempt to be more significant than just a meaningless pile of lists, which is what I'd expect from topics such as Site Design Tools and Networking, topics that Ben Gordon has obviously neglected himself. Of course, they're merely lists of links accompanied with a summary of the link, which I suppose is an improvement, but ultimately, it's not enough. Many subsections again devolve into mere lists. One section on Fonts is prefaced by an amazingly inaccurate assessment and analysis on the use of fonts, making the claim that "If you use an exotic font to letter your comic, many people in your audience will see whatever their search engine thought was the closest match." How is your browser supposed to alter the comic image to change the font used, I'm not sure, but Ben Gordon has asserted that it happens, and presented it as fact. The presence of patently idiotic statements detract from the validity of Psychedelic Treehouse as a webcomic resource. It also doesn't help that the font chosen for the page header is Comic Sans.

The remainder of Psychedelic Treehouse's content consists of extremely short 'essays' about webcomics (as well as interviews and reviews crossposted from his other sites). The problem is that these essays are written to push Gordon's concept of what cartoonists should be doing, whether he has any factual basis for saying so, or not. This checklist is full of minor and inconsequential things that only matters to Gordon, but he has presented it as a definitive checklist for new webcartoonists. The truth is, I'd trust his advice about as far as I could throw him. He puts more emphasis on how to make money from a comic, as well as shameless self-promotion than he does about any kind of substantial improvement in quality.

Ben Gordon provides very little ethos when talking about building a better webcomic site. His own sites are so jumbled, scattered, disoriented and downright terrible. Trying to pass his Psychedelic Treehouse off as an essential resource for webcomickers is laughable. It is essentially a Webcomic Junkyard: Massive piles of junk with a single potential nugget of value contained within. He makes no effort to sort the wheat from the chaff, and as a result his information becomes massive and unwieldy. Anyone looking to improve their webcomic should avoid this site like the plague, since you will waste more time digging for gold without a map than you will spend applying the useful advice to your own product. If Ben Gordon built this Psychedelic Treehouse with his own two hands, then you should think twice about turning it into a clubhouse; the shoddy craftsmanship will fall apart on you at the worst possible moment. Read more→