Is Print Dead? (Where Can Humor Writers Find Printed Outlets?)

[Cheryl ODonovan]

Is it me, or does it seem like the Sahara out there, in terms of viable publications for humor pieces? I rarely see humor essays in major magazines, or newspapers, for that matter. I know that newspapers are dying out, and magazines are in peril. Circulations for "Time" and "Newsweek" have dropped 45% to 50%, and Conde Nast (believe one of their flagship magazines is "Vanity Fair") -- is in deep financial trouble. The "Wall St. Journal" seems to be making a comeback online, (appears as if they're charging for online subscriptions).

Everything seems to be going online. While there is some quality writing on the Internet, I think a great deal of it is dreck. As one article said, "Graffiti."

Are we humorists like that famous scene in "Airplane?" (Remember, Lloyd Bridges sniffing glue?)

"Looks like a picked a bad week to quit drinking."

Did we "pick a bad time to be a writer?" Especially a humorist?

[Cheryl ODonovan]

Henry, funny to-do list! Maybe I'll revolutionize the laundry downstairs.

It's certainly hard not to get discouraged as a writer. Bloggers have taken over the Internet, and of the 70 million bloggers, only two or three are household names -- Perez Hilton and Dooce, the cynical mommy blogger. A New York Times article indicated that self-publishing profits will soon surpass traditional publishing, because people want to be famous and they'll publish their own book and market it...

I talk about this ad nauseam with my writer and humorist friends.

I still believe in traditional publishing, in the process of working hard and having talent punch a hole through the slush pile. Today, though, it seems as though people "think" they are good, so therefore, they are.

Janet Evanovich uses humor in her wildly popular "Stephanie Plum" books. (I've not yet read them).

David Sedaris and Augusten Burroughs reign supreme as humorists right now. I've not read their work, so I'm not sure how I'd respond to their humor.

[Cheryl ODonovan]

Oh, Henry aka Moon,

When Perez Hilton was decked, (wasn't he punched by someone recently), I think people cheered. I've heard he's just plain mean. Dooce is a mommy blogger who has a nasty streak, and she just had a book come out this year... seems to me that the Internet writing successes are almost always (a) mean-spirited and sneery, (b) controversial, (c) promote flaming among commentators.

Certainly, our standards are lowering. I'm taking an online writing course (excellent, by the way, a fiction course). There is a regular Q&A feature on their home page. A young writer complained, "Do I have to read books in order to write?" If you scan a typical Internet page, it's riddled with typos, LOL's, misspellings, no punctuation -- I could go on. If the constant back-and-forthing and one-upmanship contributed to a greater understanding of an issue, or led to more enlightenment, I'd be more gung-ho. As it stands, these nasty, hateful comments all start to blend together and as the one article pointed out -- resembles graffiti.

Statistics indicate that young people (under 35) do not like to read, nor do they like to follow news. So, as newspapers fold and die, the television cable shows that polarize and editorialize news, and encourage flaming and insults... those score in ratings and only skew the truth more. I know newspapers are accused of being slanted, but I always felt a newspaper was much more in-depth and thoughtful.

Seems to me that people are reading Facebook updates more than news headlines.

The Atlantic had an article... called, "Is Google Making Us Stoopid?" He talked about how difficult it was for him to read anything lengthy, and that he'd read two books per week for years. So, I wonder if the Internet is making us even more ADHD and distractible. A scientific study did indicate that reading online is a very different animal from holding a book or magazine in your hands. Reading online, you're seeing "moving type," and using a mouse to scroll downward.

Finally, a Newsweek tech writer wrote a great article on the Kindle product, and how electronic readers are going to hurt publishers even more. He said that no one is considering the enormous amount of tech support behind a "Kindle" product, and if there is a product or system malfunction... He also went on to say that Kindle and tech companies are taking all the profits from publishers, much like iPod did from the music industry. He said that it's akin to "Sony taking all the HBO profits from a show, because the show's running on a Sony TV."

There's a book on cultural narcissism, from the obsession to reality shows, Facebook, MySpace, etc., and what this is doing to us... also another book called, "Rise of the Amateurs," on how bloggers, YouTubers and the like are affecting our entertainment, as well as our values.

If that wasn't bad enough, several studies confirm that teens today are much more self-centered than generations before, and on top of that, they're willing to cheat and steal. 60% to 65% of high schoolers (in one study) admitted to cheating on tests, and others confessed to shoplifting. So the standards are definitely lower.

[Cheryl ODonovan]

Hi, Moon:

Isn't it so true about Don Rickles? We saw him in Vegas, nine years ago. When he mentioned Chicago, my husband and I clapped enthusiastically, and Rickles cracked, "Gotta couple of seals up there." I grabbed my husband's hand and glowed. "Don Rickles called us seals! What a thrill! We're seals!"

I think younger comedians like Sarah Silverman borrowed the insult concept from Rickles but have none of his heart. Rickles is masterful at hurling wisecracks and insults, but never do you feel that it's below the belt. I saw Lisa Lampanelli do an intro recently and was sickened. I don't flinch over the foul language so much, it just seems beyond raunchy... really veering into offensive territory. Chelsea on E! is also seen as a tart-tongued comedienne, but I see her as more a personality than funny. I tend to gravitate toward Bonnie Hunt and Ellen DeGeneres, anyway. Maybe it's a generation gap, that younger people like the mean, Jerry Springer stuff.

I do see younger people reading, too, and it gives me hope. Even though my sons ridicule the whole "Twilight" phenomenon, I'm grateful it's such a mega-hit, and that it's helping keep traditional publishing alive, much the way "Harry Potter" books fueled sales.

To me, (and my friends are probably tired of me saying this), the Internet and blogging has cheapened writing. It's become an "anything goes" circus act, instead of a hard-earned craft.

Writing is taught as a basic skill, along with arithmetic and reading. Therefore, to many, being a writer isn't particularly impressive. "I could do that."

When Dooce began earning $300,000 to $500,000 from her blog (as it was reported), millions jumped on the bandwagon, adopting her cynical style. Probably Perez Hilton launched imitators, too. Successful blogs attract advertisers... but there are just a handful (a dozen!) of the 70 million that achieve a mega following. A Newsweek or Time writer went "undercover," posting a blog and trying to understand what attracts readers... and couldn't get it off the ground.

Blogs have a confessional, diary-entry quality, and most write about what irritates them. Writers hone their craft, they'd write broke or rich. Bloggers want attention.

The NYT article about self-publishing noted that many people want to be on the Oprah Club and become famous.

"Today, it's not about talent, it's about being seen."

I thought that was a great observation, and I'm not sure if I read it in a news magazine or the NYT.

Used to be... a writer worked hard, weathered numerous rejection slips, kept at it until he or she scored a book deal with a legitimate publisher. Today, people post blogs, millions of them. I've heard some are posting their novels online, trying to attract publishers.

I will tell you... who gives me a lot of hope. It's Pixar. They crank out wonderful stories, with none of the flatulence, puking and insults other animated features resort to. Pixar believes in story, and in human emotion. Imagine an elderly guy being a main character for a movie. Yet Pixar did it.

A young couple sat next to me when we saw "Up." They rudely chattered throughout the previews and the female kept flipping open her cell phone. I prayed, truly I did, that I wouldn't have to confront them.

Then, "Up" started... and I heard her weeping in that poignant opener.

That gave me faith, Moon. That stories, humor and deeper human emotions matter.

[Deanna Roy]

Interesting discussion. I'm an avid Facebooker, blogger, etc. but I certainly prefer printed things. But they are becoming rarer. I was lucky to land in a national mag earlier this year, but subsequent pieces haven't even been acknowledged to be rejected. Just silence. It's an odd thing.

The thing is, to attract an agent these days, they do like to see a platform. For a humor writer who isn't already a regular columnist, at least having a blog, Twitter, and Facebook following helps show that people read your stuff and would, ostensibly, be interested in your book.

[Cheryl ODonovan]

Hi, Henry, aka Moon (or Moon),

I have a sinking feeling mediocrity is winning... big time. From the reality show stars, (most of whom have no discernible talent, only shamelessness), to Web personalities, to insipid television shows and films.

As I say, writing is a basic skill that's taught, and the bloggers all believe they can write, and that every thought they have is significant.

Dave Barry said in a great article, "Write for your audience." Bloggers often write for themselves, and want attention in the way of validation.

Saw Garrison Keillor speak at the Erma conference last April. Terrific. He said, "Writing isn't about narcissism." Then... recently, I saw a wonderful PBS "American Masters" on Keillor. His voice and writing is powerful. When he stages his classic radio show, it's about the audience and keep them entertained. Nothing like what a blogger does. I wish I could be more positive... because there are a few bloggers I enjoy.

[Cheryl ODonovan]

Hi, Deanna (and Moon), thanks for the comments.

The challenge with the Internet is the staggering amount of clutter. How can good writers drive traffic to their sites? So far, the successful web sites and blogs are controversial and cynical. Thoughtful or clever writing is not valued. Dissing and smarting off... are.

Getting noticed on the Web as a writer is a real needle-in-the-haystack proposition. Like hurtling on the Autobahn and trying to read every single billboard as you zoom by.

Much of what I see online, in terms of blogs, is highly self-promotional. In other words, the content almost seems to play a second banana role. "Win this gift if you subscribe to my blog," etc. I've read where there are at least 70 million blogs... if not more. It has a vast, hopeless feeling of expanding like the universe, and good quality writing gets sucked into a black hole.

One success, like Dooce's or Perez Hilton -- or even the "Julie/Julia" movie (w/Meryl Streep) that's coming out... fuels millions of imitators. The craving for fame and attention is stupefying. Writing on the Web doesn't seem to be an attempt to become better writers...

People have no attention span on the Web. If the site does not capture their interest in 30 seconds or less, they're gone.

I may have mentioned this in an earlier post, but many magazines are beginning to resemble Web pages. "Us" and "People" look like coloring books, with their 50 to 75 word articles and cutlines under the pictures.

I have a friend who told me about a Sci-Fi flick she saw... about some guy with average intelligence who was somehow cryogenically preserved. Fast-forward, the dude's in the future, and realizes he's the smartest guy around. Everyone else relies on pictures (like pressing a symbol code for an activity -- e.g., pressing a button with a hamburger to order). "People" has a feature that smacks of "Highlights for Children," a before-and-after, where someone's Photoshopped the "after" photo to alter it... and the idea is to have the reader "circle" the differences.

There is emerging evidence that reading online is altering our attention spans (if I didn't already mention this). Holding a stationary book and reading it, is a much different experience than reading online and scrolling around with a mouse... the type moves, etc., which may prove my theory as to why copy is shorter on the Web. You see one paragraph lead-ins to news stories, with links to the longer story... that's a nice feature, (I've always liked). The longer article isn't terribly long, though, which troubles me. Is that all we have time for, is it all our attention spans can handle... a paragraph? "Us" and "People" certainly indicate this may be true. What does that portend for a novel?

As a humorist, I'm noticing less clever material, and more mean-spirited put-downs and vulgarities. I mean, I think George Carlin was hilarious, he could be vulgar, but he was at least a thinker. I read where Sarah Silverman poured red dye on her white pants and pretended as though her -- er -- monthly visitor -- had paid a visit, and built her routine around this. Maybe I read about her in "Vanity Fair" or another magazine with meatier articles. Maybe "The New Yorker." Menstrual cycles... funny? Huh? PMS rampages have been done before, but not like this. Maybe I'm missing something.

We can dismiss this as "make way for them young 'un's." But, when I watch a Marx Brothers movies, made in the 1930's, it still is hilarious, riotous fun. Way, way before my time. And I laughed at their antics when I was a kid. The cleverness and originality is disappearing, and to me, smart humor is timeless.

[DJ Alling]

I don't think print is dead, but I think it is suffering from the disease of "sensationalism" just like every other form of media. The sad fact today is that, unless your book is extremely commercial and mind-numbingly trendy, the old school traditional publishers aren't even going to glance your way.

Now, I do not believe self-publication is the way to go either. The fact of the matter is that without professional editing something that could have potential falls flat. However, don't mistake the hard work that goes into marketing a book, whether it be self-published or small independent press published.

Getting your work out there and seen is the goal of a lot of talented people that are drawn up short by the brick walls of the traditional publishing houses. A somewhat happy, but not altogether easy, middle ground between the big corporate publishing houses and self-publishing are the small indie publishers. (This is not meant to be a shameless plug on my part.)

Most indie publishers offer the same services as a big house, such as professional editing and cover design, just on a smaller budget. They (we) are usually more likely to take a risk on publishing where they see talent, and not just trendy commercial saleability. The catch to getting published in one of these markets is that you have to work. Marketing a book when you don't have big bucks behind you is a lot of work. So many writers think they can write a book and drop it off to the publisher and then sit back as the money starts rolling in. In this day and age when there is so much out there and so little interest in reading, that is no where near the case. You have to get out there and work your tushy off. Though facebook, twitter, and the gads of social networking sites out there seem like a waste of energy and brain cells... that is where readers are congregating, so that is where book authors have to be to catch attention.

Now, as someone very harshly, though not altogether wrongly, pointed out to me last night, my meager five years in the industry doesn't amount to a hill of beans and means squat to most writers out there. So, what I have to say on the matter can be taken with a grain of salt. But, if you really have the drive to get your words into print and into the hands of readers, looking into the small independent publishers around may be worth your while. At least it will be if your not expecting to get rich quick and don't mind hard work.

Just my take :)

[DJ Alling]

That is what happens when you are more worried about the bottom line than the story line. Of course publishing houses are businesses and have to be run that way, and of course as a writer I'd love to make millions and stay home and do nothing but write, and as a publisher I'd like to make millions for each of my authors. But when making money overrides everything else, the true talent, the great stories, get lost.

[Cheryl ODonovan]

Hi, Moon:

We write from passion. We'd do it even if we didn't earn a penny.

[DJ Alling]

Very well said Moon and Cheryl. That is exactly the way I see it. Though this may hurt me if authors contemplating submitting to my company read it: I don't write to get rich, and I didn't start my publishing company to get rich either (though my partner did, lol). I am in love with stories and the written word...and everything I do is because of that. :)

[Chuck Lasker]

I write tech articles a good bit and I've found a complete reluctance to allow humor, even to make a point. I submitted an article about the consultant-client relationship and they kept all the dry stuff, and edited out the snark. I believe that's part of the reason for magazines, especially niche magazines, going out of business. Who wants to read pure tech data? Even a humorous back page leaves the reader in a good mood. Wired magazine understands this, but most don't.

In the publishing industry, even though they've always complained that only a very small percentage of publications make money, today they will only bet on a sure thing. And their idea of a sure thing is a memoir or biography of celebrities, or authors who already have 49 books out there. It's sad because I know the world is missing out on some great new authors.

With all that said, I think self-publishing is becoming the new outlet. Print on demand sites like http://www.lightningsource.com/ are great ways to get started cheap, without having to print at your own expense thousands of copies of a book, to sell a book. And the Kindle is allowing even more opportunity to get a book out there without up front expense.