Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

starroute

(12,977 posts)
19. Part of this involves the twisted, bottom-line way our economy works
Sun Feb 16, 2014, 12:28 PM
Feb 2014

Last edited Sun Feb 16, 2014, 03:22 PM - Edit history (1)

One of the quotes in the OP says:"Television producers and publishers have told me the same story", writes Walter, "that in society they cannot make decisions based on quality or morality, they must make decisions based on sales."

But that's disingenuous. My son, who is very interested in the doings of the comics industry, has explained to me how this applies to the recent moves by DC Comics that have pissed so many people off. DC has recently narrowed down the scope of what they publish to appeal primarily to middle-class white males in their 30s and 40s. This makes short-term economic sense for them, because if 50% of your potential readers fall into a single demographic, while the other 50% are more widely spread out, you get the most bang for the buck by focusing on that one dominant group and ignoring everyone else. But it's also a long-term recipe for corporate disaster.

Part of that marketing strategy also grows out of the fact that a single issue of a comic now costs $4 or $5 -- compared to when I was a kid and you could buy a comic or two out of your weekly allowance and still have a nickle left over for penny candy. That in itself limits the potential market to the dwindling pool of people who can afford those prices and makes it a more attractive sales strategy to target only those people.

Inequality and greed aren't the only causes of rampant sexism in the media, of course. But I suspect they're the primary explanations for why it's getting so over-the-top right now.

Is this a fundamental pitfall of our lifecycle? Just an unformed thought as I read that. Squinch Feb 2014 #1
i know i recognized the usage of body to get my way as inherently wrong. for whatever reason. seabeyond Feb 2014 #3
This is interesting to think about. We thought we were Squinch Feb 2014 #14
I don't know, sea - Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #2
the fail is in the let down of the feminist movement. hence, speak up, loudly, hard and fast, every. seabeyond Feb 2014 #5
at some point, I think Feminists will need to aline with and, redefine as a Humanist Movement - Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #8
move on. but... that very thing is what helped create the backlash today. raise our children as seabeyond Feb 2014 #9
I don't know. I try not to let DU3 cloud my vision of the world. Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #11
I'd observe that dehumanization/degradation for monetary gain is not restricted to women... malthaussen Feb 2014 #15
I think I address that phenomenon with my post #8 in this thread. Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #16
"We are the chorus, and we agree" malthaussen Feb 2014 #17
... lol ... Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #18
Naomi Wolf warned us JustAnotherGen Feb 2014 #4
it was wrong when i heard it at 12, it was wrong when i realize even i felt i was subordinate to man seabeyond Feb 2014 #6
I still say the root of the problem is lack of diversity ismnotwasm Feb 2014 #7
that is what the world wide net gives us ism. i absolutely agree, but i think that is here and now. seabeyond Feb 2014 #10
There is a just the tiniest bit closer confirmation ismnotwasm Feb 2014 #12
i didnt read it the other day. seabeyond Feb 2014 #13
Part of this involves the twisted, bottom-line way our economy works starroute Feb 2014 #19
Thank you. This is not about sales. This was demonstrated very well just recently. redqueen Feb 2014 #20
I think that toys are more gendered than they were 20-30 years ago Nikia Feb 2014 #21
Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»History of Feminism»the return of sexism. th...»Reply #19