<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Telling it like it is: Hibbs, Butcher</title>
	<link>http://pwbeat.publishersweekly.com/blog/2007/05/18/telling-it-like-it-is-hibbs-butcher/</link>
	<description>The News Blog of Comics Culture</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 20:22:33 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Guy LeCharles Gonzalez</title>
		<link>http://pwbeat.publishersweekly.com/blog/2007/05/18/telling-it-like-it-is-hibbs-butcher/#comment-159800</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2007 17:46:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pwbeat.publishersweekly.com/blog/2007/05/18/telling-it-like-it-is-hibbs-butcher/#comment-159800</guid>
					<description>I don't get the shade being thrown in TwoMorrows' direction over the past week or two. It's not like they're flooding the market with 60+ variations on the same theme every month, tieing most of them into each other in attempt to wring every possible dollar out of their core audience as possible. While there is definitely some overlap between some of their magazines, each one has a more distinct editorial mission (and target audience) than the output of most other multi-title comics publishers.

ie: ROUGH STUFF, which I enjoyed as a section in BACK ISSUE, has no particular appeal to me as a stand-alone publication, but there is definitely an audience for it that isn't necessarily interested in the BI's nostalgic editorial coverage.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t get the shade being thrown in TwoMorrows&#8217; direction over the past week or two. It&#8217;s not like they&#8217;re flooding the market with 60+ variations on the same theme every month, tieing most of them into each other in attempt to wring every possible dollar out of their core audience as possible. While there is definitely some overlap between some of their magazines, each one has a more distinct editorial mission (and target audience) than the output of most other multi-title comics publishers.</p>
<p>ie: ROUGH STUFF, which I enjoyed as a section in BACK ISSUE, has no particular appeal to me as a stand-alone publication, but there is definitely an audience for it that isn&#8217;t necessarily interested in the BI&#8217;s nostalgic editorial coverage.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: rich</title>
		<link>http://pwbeat.publishersweekly.com/blog/2007/05/18/telling-it-like-it-is-hibbs-butcher/#comment-159759</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2007 17:20:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pwbeat.publishersweekly.com/blog/2007/05/18/telling-it-like-it-is-hibbs-butcher/#comment-159759</guid>
					<description>I envy John Morrows.  As a small-press publisher who didn't make a go of it (but may try again), he's doing a great job.  On the other hand ... there is some repetition.  One magazine features an artist in depth, which the other magazines features tons of sketches by the same artist.  A great deal of &quot;Sister Magazine&quot; promotion.  Sometimes, ROUGH STUFF seems more like a supplement to BACK ISSUE or DRAW! rather than its own magazine.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I envy John Morrows.  As a small-press publisher who didn&#8217;t make a go of it (but may try again), he&#8217;s doing a great job.  On the other hand &#8230; there is some repetition.  One magazine features an artist in depth, which the other magazines features tons of sketches by the same artist.  A great deal of &#8220;Sister Magazine&#8221; promotion.  Sometimes, ROUGH STUFF seems more like a supplement to BACK ISSUE or DRAW! rather than its own magazine.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
