Wednesday, March 30, 2011

WUT WOH


Its difficult when you run a blog to keep track of issuing credit where credit is due, especially when you do it for fun and don't have a research assistant to write a daily citation page.  That said, I'd like to issue a sincere apology to the photographers and publisher of a new lit mag who didn't like me posting pictures from their recent issue.  Honestly, I was just trying to help promote the project, not undermine it.  I asked the person who mailed me a copy, but forgot to scroll down the list of contributors.  That's no excuse, just a confession of a lack of foresight.  I was out of town this weekend and didn't catch their comments til today.  If its any consolation, my butt is sore from all of the spankings I've had to give myself.  I think I may just take a few days off, sit in a dark corner, down a bottle of scotch or two and think about what I've done. . . and what I'm doing with this blog.

I AM the self-appointed President of the SocialJism Party after-all.  Private property and self-promotion are two things that make Colby sad.  Obviously apologies are also something that make me sad, 'cause I'm just so damn bad at 'em.  Me sawee mad gay dudes.  :-((

14 comments:

  1. Some people don't like to work with other people. They should be thanking you for giving them free publicity. I for one wouldn't know they existed if you hadn't put them in your blog. Now I will promptly FORGET them!
    Keep up the good work! Love your blog and look forward to it every day...

    David

    ReplyDelete
  2. Oh, that's really too bad. Your post about Headmaster got me so interested I've got my boyfriend picking up a copy while he's in Toronto. I'm really looking forward to it.

    Don't take time off from your blog. It's a delightful daily treat, keep at it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I was also interested in the publication because of your post. Now I'm not so sure. Only being available here at Marc Jacobs seemed a little pretentious and now they seem even more so.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oh, Colby... don't be sad. Your blog is great for publicizing these smaller projects that otherwise wouldn't get any attention. They should be thanking you. Keep it coming. Don't let them get you down.

    -Chris

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hey--

    Matthew from Headmaster here. We've e-mailed Colby and the other folks involved privately, and hopefully nobody is mad now. We certainly didn't know sending a copy of the magazine to one of our favorite porn stars would result in this much anger from strangers on the internet... But to Anonymous commenter #3: I'm guessing you're in LA? We're all in Rhode Island and none of us have ever been to California at all. We're doing our own distribution, so we rely on word of mouth recommendations for stores to approach. Hopefully that's not pretentious? We're definitely open to suggestions, at any rate.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think there's a huge difference between what Colby did (posting some pics to to bring some attention to a new, interesting publication) and what we typically see on the web (blatant content stealing).

    You did the honorable thing by Headmaster, Colby, so don't sweat it.

    Content creators have every right to be protective of their work -- they aren't evil, or bad, or ungrateful for doing so, despite what content consumers might say. Given how quickly and easily their hard work is swiped on the web, what sane person could blame them for being a little protective?

    ReplyDelete
  7. It was an oversight on Colby's part. No big deal.

    Headmaster is protective of their new baby. No big deal.

    No one is at fault. I think the nay sayers need to ease up a bit on Headmaster.

    I personally can't wait to get my copy of Headmaster and I thank Colby for turning me on to it. I'm in Providence and had no idea work like this was being produced. :)

    So, Colby put some ice on your sore bottom and keep up the good work. Headmaster, ignore any negative comments and continue creating art. :)

    ReplyDelete
  8. funny - i was going to track down a copy of the mag this weekend - likely at the marc jacobs store here in LA - but now i'm not into it. What did they think the purpose of sending people free mags was? like they wanted u to NOT mention it? or u were going to say "hey everyone i got a cool new mag but u just have to take my word for it because i won't be sharing anything from it."? your posting of it is how I learned about it. If you hadn't - i still wouldn't know it existed. (I don't see how that would benefit them.) I don't understand the issue. it was clear u were posting excerpts from a larger publication for promotional reasons. if they had specific limitations in mind about what to do with the thing they sent you, that info should have been included. (this is common practice for book reviewers and others getting advance or promo copies.) Their request to remove the posts is as frustratingly retarded as when i go into a cool store, lured by their cool display, and then have them stop me and say "no photos" when i'm about to take a picture of it THEREBY PROMOTING THEIR STORE.
    As a creator of books myself, i can say i always have to ask myself, is it better i give away 100 books and hope someone sees one of those free ones laying on a table, likes it, and buys one or more for themselves (or not and simply becomes aware of me and my work), OR do i keep the 100 books, and now those 100 people won't know about me or my work, and won't have the chance to tell others about me or my work, but i'll get to keep a few hundred dollars worth of product that MAYBE i'll sell in the future when people find out about my work through some other means? the answer is always clear.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It was a simple mistake and it was blown out of proportion.

    I can understand artists wanting to protect their work, but the comments left were downright rude and condescending. I can't even imagine what the emails must have been like. A simple email asking to politely take down the work would have sufficed. No need to make it public and no need to act like a wench.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I missed this whole brouhaha, though I did notice a blog posting was removed. I'm usually on top of your posts, Colby, so surprised I missed this one, but have to say that I've learned about many incredible artists, films, and other gorgeous little things from your blog. Just from this post and the comments, I have to say I'm not at all interested in this publication anymore, and that's even considering I loved Conner Habib's piece that appears in issue #1. You only had the best intentions, Colby, and have done so much to bring attention to lesser-known artists and creative types. If you must take a break, so be it, but don't be too bummed or beat yourself up.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Um 'Karl/Colby' you guys gotta learn to hide your IP when posting Fake Anons.

    Really.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anon #TOO MANY-

    You think far too much of me. I doubt I could ever learn such a masterful trick, thus the only time I'm ever "anon" is in back rooms.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I get that producers of content can get antsy about reproductions of their materials. But seriously. It wasn't entire and it came with a glowing endorsement. If you're still at the stage where you're relying for word of mouth to get it into stores you really ought to have been saying:

    'Wow - thanks for endorsing our magazine and introducing it to your 3000+ followers on twitter. Can we carry a quote from you on the next issue? How about we interview you/photograph you for some future piece?'

    Or you could shoot a well-liked, well-intentioned person down instead and kill your potential sales?

    ReplyDelete
  14. I missed the kerfuffle...almost. The post (which is now removed) had one comment when I read it. I assume more of a similar vein followed. A shame because Colby'd provided a link to the magazine site and everything, no?

    Time for a new Colby Keller paper doll, I guess. One with a shiny red bottom from being so "naughty".

    xo j.bone

    ReplyDelete