How will Valiant handle the outrage culture?

Sven the Returned · Wed Jul 29, 2015 5:05:10 pm

If someone says something that can be interpreted as offensive on the V movie press junket and the storm of Twitters rise. Creator or actor or whatever, will Dinesh try to force/ask for a fake apology?

I don't recall smaller publishers caving to outrage culture unlike Marvel and DC.

Blood of Heroes · Post by **Blood of Heroes** » Wed Jul 29, 2015 10:53:51 pm

I'm offended by this post.

lorddunlow · Post by **lorddunlow** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:12:39 am

What if Dino fashions an effigy representing social media and uses what he learned from Stan Lee to impregnate it?

depluto · Post by **depluto** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 7:07:07 am

This is a really good question. So far they have handled controversies on a micro level ... it seems like they don't say much in the form of public announcements but will often respond personally (even Dino) when addressed. If they get any bigger, they will certainly get caught up in the internet outrage at some point.

depluto · Post by **depluto** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 7:07:45 am

lorddunlow wrote:What if Dino fashions an effigy representing social media and uses what he learned from Stan Lee to impregnate it?

Stan Lee *SQUEE* a piñata once and gold coins shot out of its *SQUEE*.

BugsySig · Post by **BugsySig** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 8:03:33 am

Any press is good press when you are VEI right now. Whether it's suing Kirkman over Outcast or relaunching Q&W without Priest and Bright or a flame war between Rib Liefeld and VFans . At this point a social media controversy would just draw more attention and visibility to VEI.

Dino can make any statement he wants but anything he says will never carry as much weight as a Hollywood actor or director or someone of the caliber of Stan Lee. At least not for some time. So doing so would be basically pointless.

It's more likely if something happened that the person responsible'a representation or the studio would push for and force an apology.

ilzuccone · Post by **ilzuccone** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 10:59:19 am

i hate this "outrage culture" and lose respect for the companies/ people who cave to it. grow a back bone.

lorddunlow · Post by **lorddunlow** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 11:36:49 am

ilzuccone wrote:i hate this "outrage culture" and lose respect for the companies/ people who cave to it. grow a back bone.

Same. Unless you're Donald Trump. Then go dig a hole and die in it...

ilzuccone · Post by **ilzuccone** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:01:11 pm

Blood of Heroes · Post by **Blood of Heroes** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:23:39 pm

kjjohanson · Post by **kjjohanson** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 1:18:50 pm

I think the notion that there is such a thing as "outrage culture" is a little ridiculous. What I saw in recent controversies (the Joker/Batgirl cover, the Manara Spider-woman cover, the Teen Titans cover, etc.) was a person or number of people pointing out that content was inappropriate, demeaning, etc., but not outrage. That is, the reaction was not an emotional one, but rather a critical one. Sure, you can probably find examples of those that did express their opinion in emotional terms, but for the most part those were not the voices that were being given the most attention. Yet the response to the criticism (ironically) always seems to be a more emotional response that dismisses the criticism over what is perceived to be an emotional response.

Another thing: indicating that something is offensive is not the same thing as claiming that one is offended by it. The former is a critical comment (that the thing in question is likely to be interpreted as something meant to cause offense, and is therefore inappropriate), while the latter can be more emotional.

kjjohanson · Post by **kjjohanson** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 1:29:00 pm

Probably worth noting here: I think there will need to be some serious reworking for the movies to the events between Pete and Kris. It's not going to work to have your protagonist for the first movie only deal with what was at least metaphorically but possibly actual rape only through his own guilt. Assuming, of course, that the movies follow the basic storylines of the comic arcs.

Sven the Returned · Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:06:25 pm

BugsySig wrote:Any press is good press when you are VEI right now. Whether it's suing Kirkman over Outcast or relaunching Q&W without Priest and Bright or a flame war between Rib Liefeld and VFans . At this point a social media controversy would just draw more attention and visibility to VEI.

Dino can make any statement he wants but anything he says will never carry as much weight as a Hollywood actor or director or someone of the caliber of Stan Lee. At least not for some time. So doing so would be basically pointless.

It's more likely if something happened that the person responsible'a representation or the studio would push for and force an apology.

I am not sure who will be in charge in case the Outrage SWAT attacks. I doubt the Chinese investors have the cultural know how how how to deal with it, i think the crisis room will have either the V folks or the Sony folks+a pr person from the offender if he/she has a pr person.

Thomas · Post by **Thomas** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:33:26 pm

People were already outraged by the design of Rai. Anyone remember that?
http://thenerdsofcolor.org/2014/02/14/j ... reativity/

possumgrease · Post by **possumgrease** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:36:57 pm

Thomas wrote:People were already outraged by the design of Rai. Anyone remember that?
http://thenerdsofcolor.org/2014/02/14/j ... reativity/

Well, I wasn't outraged. Then I read the article. Now I'm outraged. Completely outraged. But, fwiw, I'm looking forward to Nazi X-O, although I thought Acclaim already did that. This is bad sarcasm, so I'll stop. Just working on post count instead of working on occupation.

kjjohanson · Post by **kjjohanson** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:19:48 pm

Thomas wrote:People were already outraged by the design of Rai. Anyone remember that?
http://thenerdsofcolor.org/2014/02/14/j ... reativity/

Again, that article doesn't suggest outrage. It suggests an opinion that the design is inappropriate and presents a case as to why (regardless of whether one agrees with the case being made).

depluto · Post by **depluto** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:25:49 pm

You seem a little outraged that we are accusing the Internet of outrage.

possumgrease · Post by **possumgrease** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:28:41 pm

I think everyone just needs to take a deep breath before this gets out of hand.

depluto · Post by **depluto** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:32:10 pm

Hehehe ... JK

But I see your point. Maybe what we mean is the way the world will zero in on something wrong while ignoring everything else that is wrong with the world. Like the dentist who shot the lion and is definitely breaking with some outrage. I'm sure the day he shot that lion there were thousands and thousands of people doing worse things, but everyone zeroed in on him (and his dazzling smile).

Eventually Valiant is going to do something that rallies and *SQUEE* off the mob. Hopefully not kill any lions or something like that.

Sven the Returned · Thu Jul 30, 2015 4:58:24 pm

kjjohanson wrote:I think the notion that there is such a thing as "outrage culture" is a little ridiculous. What I saw in recent controversies (the Joker/Batgirl cover, the Manara Spider-woman cover, the Teen Titans cover, etc.) was a person or number of people pointing out that content was inappropriate, demeaning, etc., but not outrage. That is, the reaction was not an emotional one, but rather a critical one. Sure, you can probably find examples of those that did express their opinion in emotional terms, but for the most part those were not the voices that were being given the most attention. Yet the response to the criticism (ironically) always seems to be a more emotional response that dismisses the criticism over what is perceived to be an emotional response.

Another thing: indicating that something is offensive is not the same thing as claiming that one is offended by it. The former is a critical comment (that the thing in question is likely to be interpreted as something meant to cause offense, and is therefore inappropriate), while the latter can be more emotional.

Batgirl cover was a variant. I would not object to a variant that shows my political idol giving a oral sex to a Klansmen. It's a variant, so was the Manara cover. Why care about it?

possumgrease · Post by **possumgrease** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 5:45:42 pm

Forget lions. I'm personally offended that VEI trademarked dinosaur hunter. That's an endangered genus (or whatever) if I've ever seen one. [SMILING FACE WITH OPEN MOUTH AND SMILING EYES]

kjjohanson · Post by **kjjohanson** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 7:40:39 pm

depluto wrote:Hehehe ... JK

But I see your point. Maybe what we mean is the way the world will zero in on something wrong while ignoring everything else that is wrong with the world. Like the dentist who shot the lion and is definitely breaking with some outrage. I'm sure the day he shot that lion there were thousands and thousands of people doing worse things, but everyone zeroed in on him (and his dazzling smile).

Eventually Valiant is going to do something that rallies and *SQUEE* off the mob. Hopefully not kill any lions or something like that.

One of my friends brought up that point on Facebook. His comment:

I understand the outrage about Cecil the Lion, but why are we surprised? Big game hunting has been a sport for over 100 years. Where's the outrage in regards to there being only 4 white rhinos alive... In the entire world?!? Where's the outrage with all the whales, dolphins, Sharks, being slaughtered on a daily basis? All the poaching in Africa. There's plenty to be outraged about aside from a lion being killed. I'm with you, I find this all deplorable, but there's more going on than just 1 lion.

My response to that:

[P]eople tend to respond more to a story than to statistics. A story can move you emotionally, and that can prompt one to speak out. Statistics cause most people's eyes to glaze over.

Similarly, I think when something pops up that's a good example of what it is that you object to, it makes sense to point it out when it's topically, because people will engage the topic more when it's current that when it's a matter of history. Look at what happened in South Carolina with the Confederate flag (even though gun control would have been a more important topic to focus on after the church shooting, IMO). Do you think, in the absence of that shooting, there would have been any movement in the effort to remove the flag?

kjjohanson · Post by **kjjohanson** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 7:46:35 pm

Another thing I should state is that I don't understand why people try to use diversion when a topic is being discussed. That is, why question why someone would try to call attention to a thing when you feel there are more important things worthy of discussing than the original topic, unless you're spending all of your free time on what you consider the most important topic humanity should be addressing. Since we're all posting on a forum for discussing comic books, I think we all recognize that we're not making the most productive use of all of our own time, so the argument that there are bigger evils is silly.

kjjohanson · Post by **kjjohanson** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 7:49:45 pm

Lady Oiorpata wrote:
kjjohanson wrote:I think the notion that there is such a thing as "outrage culture" is a little ridiculous. What I saw in recent controversies (the Joker/Batgirl cover, the Manara Spider-woman cover, the Teen Titans cover, etc.) was a person or number of people pointing out that content was inappropriate, demeaning, etc., but not outrage. That is, the reaction was not an emotional one, but rather a critical one. Sure, you can probably find examples of those that did express their opinion in emotional terms, but for the most part those were not the voices that were being given the most attention. Yet the response to the criticism (ironically) always seems to be a more emotional response that dismisses the criticism over what is perceived to be an emotional response.

Another thing: indicating that something is offensive is not the same thing as claiming that one is offended by it. The former is a critical comment (that the thing in question is likely to be interpreted as something meant to cause offense, and is therefore inappropriate), while the latter can be more emotional.
Batgirl cover was a variant. I would not object to a variant that shows my political idol giving a oral sex to a Klansmen. It's a variant, so was the Manara cover. Why care about it?

I don't see why it should matter what type of cover it was. People saw (in the case of the Manara cover) an example of a big corporation choosing to publish a cover that objectified women, and called them out on contributing to a culture that is okay with that happening.

lorddunlow · Post by **lorddunlow** » Thu Jul 30, 2015 8:06:05 pm

kjjohanson wrote:Since we're all posting on a forum for discussing comic books, I think we all recognize that we're not making the most productive use of all of our own time, so the argument that there are bigger evils is silly.

How dare you...

ValiantFans.com Board - Since 2004