Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Experience the Horrible Truth.... | In Death as in Life »

Thursday, February 15, 2007

Covering Seattle

posted by on February 15 at 0:34 AM

I know that there are people who believe that we shouldn’t mock Seattle Weekly on the Slog, and to those people now, I say: I am not going to ask this question to mock Seattle Weekly. I am genuinely curious.
(ahem)

Dear Seattle Weekly,
Why did you put Jaime Hernandez artwork on your cover this week? There was a great deal of excitement about The Hernandez Brothers at The Fantagraphics Store last week. I went to the panel discussion on Sunday—I couldn’t make the party on Saturday night—but by all accounts, both were a lot of fun. It seems like last week would have been a great time to have a Love and Rockets cover.
In fact, the cover says to go to Page 27 to read more about The Hernandez Brothers. Instead, page 27 directs us to page 33, which promotes this event, with completely different cartoonists. I understand that Love and Rockets artwork will still be on display, but wouldn’t it have been nice to mention Gabrielle Bell, Anders Nilsen, or Kevin Huizenga—you know, the artists who are actually going to be in attendance somewhere on the cover? Because, you know, Kevin Huizenga is the hottest new guy in comics since Chris Ware, and he’s definitely worth the attention, to say nothing of the other two wildly talented artists. I’m just curious what was going on in your institutional mind as you picked your cover subject, Seattle Weekly. If you could fill me in that would be great.
Oh, and while I’m asking, did you really think that it would be a good idea to name your new books column Tome Raider? Because, well, barf.
Okay, maybe that last part was mockery.
(heart,)
Paul Bobby
P.S. While we’re on Seattle newsweekly covers, I’d like to address the good people at The Capitol Hill Times: It’s spelled barista, not barrista. Thank you for your time.

RSS icon Comments

1

zzzzzzz
how very dreary, and wasting bandwidth

Posted by hilda | February 15, 2007 4:48 AM
2

Awesome post! Please more just like it. Seriously, I can't stop laughing! I live for this stuff, I really do. Please, I'd like to be informed of every typo in the Seattle Weekly. It's just so fascinating and hilarious and makes me feel so good!

Posted by ccb | February 15, 2007 6:48 AM
3

I'm not calling it a rip-off or anything like that but The Stranger has been using that "ignoring _____ since _____" for so, so, so long and it wasn't that funny to begin with. Seattle Weekly, please stop.

Posted by a reader of both... | February 15, 2007 8:42 AM
4

Keep up the childish and insecure attacks on the competition! It gives you tons of credibility!

Posted by Mardy Bum | February 15, 2007 9:09 AM
5

SW sucks so lay it on. Capitol Hill Times is cool so lay off.

Posted by j | February 15, 2007 9:28 AM
6

Paul,
You do realize their paper is run by a media conglomerate's satellite office in the midwest, which is run by people who have never been to nor set foot in Seattle? And you're surprised that their artwork/writing is out of touch?

Posted by Gomez | February 15, 2007 10:07 AM
7

@5: I'm awfully fond of Capitol Hill Times--the more small neighborhood papers, the better, I say--but I'm not fond of front-page, large-font typos at all.


@2: This isn't a typo. This is a cover pushing an event that happened last week. And a really, painfully stupid books column name.


@1: I'll put the bandwidth back when I'm done using it.


And to my old friend Gomez: I realize it, you realize it, but it still inspires gasps of incredulity from me every week. Especially this week.

Posted by Paul Constant | February 15, 2007 10:26 AM
8

Gomez is right. Reading the seattle weekly for anything new is like going to WalMart for the latest fashion. People that read the weekly are old & trying to be hip. It's like the creepy old men that buy fast cars & look at cute young girls trying to get in their pants!!

Posted by squirrel | February 15, 2007 10:33 AM
9

Not to pile on, but I just noticed this this morning, and it fits very well with squirrel's comment about "anything new":

When you go to their music page and click "notable shows," (the link is even http://www.seattleweekly.com/music/notableshows/mostrecent/) it takes you to that page from January 24th.

Posted by Levislade | February 15, 2007 10:43 AM
10

This post on the Fantagraphics blog indicates that the Stranger had a L&R cover planned itself this week, but it got bumped for Anna Nicole.

Posted by uhm | February 15, 2007 10:53 AM
11

Barrista with two rs comes up in dictionary.com

Posted by Tiz | February 15, 2007 10:56 AM
12
Posted by kasa | February 15, 2007 11:15 AM
13

#10:
We were considering an L&R/Fantagraphics cover, but since we couldn't get it on there the week before the show started (the V-day issue), and because we have a soft spot for Jim Blanchard's fine illustrations of recently deceased celebrities, we went in a different direction.

Posted by A-Train | February 15, 2007 11:25 AM
14

Also, Jim is a Fantagraphics-related artist who has a show coming up in early March, as we mentioned on page 5 of this issue. That's all. You may now return to your feud, already in progress...

Posted by A-Train | February 15, 2007 11:42 AM
15

-- this has been fun and my morning soy vanilla latte tastes so much better while reading slog.

A-Train: you the man

Posted by Aaro)))n Edge | February 15, 2007 11:55 AM
16

Paul,

It's not that people are sick of hearing you guys mock Seattle Weekly. It's just that we're sick of you guys just plain giving a shit altogether.

Big difference.

Seattle Weekly is syndicated landfill.

Ignore it.

Posted by matthew fisher wilder | February 15, 2007 12:25 PM
17

Isn't The Stranger owned by the Chicago weekly?

Posted by Nick | February 15, 2007 12:49 PM
18

Nope, Stranger is independent and locally owned.

Posted by rubyred | February 15, 2007 12:57 PM
19

Hmmm, striaght from your masthead... doesn't look to local to me?

NATIONAL ADVERTISING
The Ruxton Group (888)2RUXTON/ New York, Detroit, Chicago, Phoenix, San Francisco, Los Angeles

Chicago again?

Your also affiliated with

http://www.portlandmercury.com/portland/Home

Portland so there should be an owner outside somewhere?

Posted by Lil' | February 15, 2007 1:20 PM
20

The Chicago Reader has a minority share. The rest (including the Mercury) is local. National advertising is a service provided by Ruxton; they don't own anything.

Posted by factz | February 15, 2007 1:29 PM
21

Well, I guess the Stranger is not locally owned then. Ruxton has ties to New Times also.

Posted by matt | February 15, 2007 1:48 PM
22

Dan's column has appeared in Village Voice Media papers too.

It's all a big Roadrunner/Wile E. Coyote clock-in/whine/chase/gripe/drama/lolz/clock-out day to day funded by a pervy clientele who like sex ads.

Posted by matthew fisher wilder | February 15, 2007 2:03 PM
23

Apologies for the redundancies throughout my last post.

Posted by matthew fisher wilder | February 15, 2007 2:04 PM
24

Point taken, Paul. Sometimes, when all else fails, I'll pick up their rag, and what I read sometimes just makes my eyes want to bleed.

Posted by Gomez | February 15, 2007 2:30 PM
25

Dear Nick, Matt and Lil'

The Stranger's majority ownership is all local folks, so therefore the paper is considered to be locally owned. For example, while the Knight-Ridder chain owns 49 percent of the Seattle Times, the local Blethen family owns the rest, so it's considered a locally-owned publication as well.

PS: Do you all simply enjoy your jobs at the Seattle Weekly, or did management order you to write these posts?

Posted by J.R. | February 15, 2007 2:32 PM
26

Actually, I work for a local magazine. I just read both and notice the major differences. Not to your favor though.

From what I hear, many of your staff members are going to the Seattle Weekly. Do you have a music editor yet or do you still have freelance writers ?

PS - It is fun writing to The Stranger staff. How does it feel writing to each other all day?

Posted by Nick | February 15, 2007 3:25 PM
27

both line the bottoms of bird cages quite well.

Posted by bobcat | February 15, 2007 4:24 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).