Categories
Blog Syndicate

Editorial cartoons: Great antidotes for bloated egos

Here’s a nice article by Dianne Hardisty, a former editor at the Bakersfield Californian newspaper, an excellent subscriber to our Cagle Cartoons newspaper package. She interviewed me and three of our cartoonists, Adam Zyglis, Rick McKee and Nate Beeler.

 

Cartoon by Rick McKee

Editorial cartoons: Great antidotes for bloated egos
By Dianne Hardisty

You can almost hear the screams of editorial page editors: “Find me a pro-Trump cartoonist!”

Good luck finding a “pro-Trump” cartoonist of any political stripe, including conservative, these days.

“A real editorial cartoonist is not pro-anything,” explains Rick McKee, a staff cartoonist with The Augusta (Ga.) Chronicle. His work is distributed to hundreds of newspapers around the country by the Cagle Cartoons syndicate.

“Editorial cartooning is a negative art. You may be more supportive of a certain point of view. But it’s criticism. You don’t want to be a cheerleader for any particular politician,” says McKee, who takes a conservative approach to most political issues.

Since Donald Trump was sworn in as president in January, editorial cartooning has kicked into high gear. And the new president’s combative nature, compulsive tweeting, political stumbles and thin skin have been the gifts that keep on giving to the nation’s cartoonists.

Cartoon by Nate Beeler

“It’s like drinking from a fire hose. It’s overwhelming,” says Nate Beeler, a conservative staff cartoonist with The Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch, whose work also is distributed by Cagle Cartoons.

“You can’t keep up,” says Adam Zyglis, who draws five cartoons a week for The Buffalo (NY) News and is the president of the Association of American Editorial Cartoonists. “You have to prioritize. You could easily do two, three, maybe more cartoons a day.”

And on the receiving end of this avalanche of cartoons are the nation’s opinion editors, who often struggle to give political “balance” to the commentary they present to their readers.

In emails and calls to their colleagues, editors have been searching for conservative – yes, especially pro-Trump – columnists and cartoonists. Some also are looking for columnists to explain how the largely ignored people who live in the fly-over states were able to surprise all those “brilliant” political pundits by electing Trump.

Editors are looking for the Holy Grail of “balance” for their pages. And the job is made tougher in this Trump era by 2016 voters handing control of Congress, as well as the White House, to the Republican Party.

“Power corrupts, no matter who is in power,” says the conservative Beeler, explaining that it is his job “to take on people in power.” And with few exceptions, those people will be the Republican politicians, who now have absolute power.

This imbalance has happened before, when absolute political power has shifted to one political party or another after an election. But it seldom lasts. Usually within an election cycle or two, fickle voters return to divided government, splitting up power between parties in Congress and the White House.

Cartoon by Adam Zyglis

But in the meantime, the life of an opinion editor can be pure hell, with readers screaming about what they perceive is bias in the newspaper’s sometimes lopsided criticism of those in power.

Good luck achieving some ideal concept of balance in an opinion section, when there is little balance of power in the halls of government. And with the election of Trump, there is also no shortage of criticism.

The president’s critics are not confined just to the Democrats, snotty cartoonists and the “dishonest media.” They include many people in his own political party.

With Trump showing no signs of mellowing and a small group of advisors in the White House egging him on, the fire-hose-flow of controversies shows no sign of abating, and neither does the flow of cartoons that criticize and ridicule the president.

During last summer’s presidential campaign, Daryl Cagle, a cartoonist, who worked for more than a decade drawing The Muppets, and was later on the staff of The Honolulu Advertiser and MSNBC before creating his Cagle Cartoons syndicate, wrote prophetically about how a Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton administration would look in cartoons.

“Cartooning is a negative art and a supportive cartoon is a lousy cartoon. Hillary is a rich character that we have known for decades. There is a grand history with Hillary and Bill Clinton that gives us many more clichés for a broader cartoon palette.

Here is Dianne Hardisty, who wrote this article. Thanks, Dianne!

“If Trump loses in November, we should enjoy four years of great Hillary cartoons. If Trump wins in November, the Trump-monster cartoon-apocalypse will continue. God save us.”

And, indeed, it has continued. In fact, Trump seems to be invigorating cartoonists.

“We have a newfound mission,” Zyglis says. “What we do is important. It always has been. But there is more immediacy today. This is a time we are needed the most.”

“Editorial cartooning becomes more important as democratic institutions are threatened,” Zyglis says, noting the insults Trump throws at just about every institution that stands in his ways, including the courts, intelligence agencies and news media.

“It is clear how much he despises the media. And in authoritarian regimes, satire is the first target. Look how ‘Saturday Night Live’ gets under Trump’s skin. An editorial cartoon is just a single panel form of a ‘Saturday Night Live’ skit.”

But Beeler is confident his colleagues will stand strong and prevail against Trump’s attacks because “editorial cartoons are great antidotes to bloated egos.”

 

Dianne Hardisty is a former editorial page editor, who now writes about the media and politics.

 

Categories
Blog Syndicate

More Cartooning Woes

Here’s my recent cartoon about California battling President Trump. These Trump times are making trouble for cartoonists, too.

Here’s my cartoon in this morning’s Los Angeles Daily News ...

I used to see my cartoons in The Daily News regularly – not anymore. The Daily News is part of a group of about a dozen conservative-leaning papers called the Southern California News Group (SCNG) that is run from a central editorial command post at The Orange County Register. The SCNG papers redesigned their editorial pages to eliminate the traditional spot for a daily editorial cartoon (they run the smaller,  conservative comic strip “Mallard Fillmore” on their editorial pages). My cartoon is the only editorial cartoon in The Daily News today, and likely the only editorial cartoon in all of the SCNG papers this week (I haven’t checked each paper; this is an educated guess).

The Los Angeles area is now an editorial cartoon desert. The Los Angeles Times (which has a rich tradition of editorial cartooning including decades with three time Pulitzer winner, Paul Conrad) runs only one editorial cartoon per week; on Fridays they run a David Horsey cartoon. David was hired by the Times’ online division as a columnist who also draws cartoons. In the past the Times ran a syndicated editorial cartoon every day.

Cartoonists hear a lot about editorial cartoonists losing staff jobs, but we don’t hear much about newspapers dropping syndicated editorial cartoons; this plague is accelerating as American newspaper editors are becoming more vocal in pushing back against editorial cartoons.

A conservative Pennsylvania newspaper, The Butler Eagle, recently created some buzz among cartoonists by leaving their regular cartoon spot blank as a protest, because the editor couldn’t find a cartoon that he liked. Most newspaper editors are conservative, serving red-state rural and suburban Trump voters who push back against Trump-bashing cartoons. These conservative editors complain loudly and often that there are no “pro-Trump” cartoons. Our little syndicate has been fielding many of these calls from editors in recent days. It is even more difficult for newspapers like The Butler Eagle, which doesn’t subscribe to CagleCartoons.com and doesn’t have much diversity of cartoons to choose from because of their poor choices of syndicate vendors. Even with our wider offering, we have very few cartoons that could be described as “pro-Trump”.

Editorial cartooning is a negative art. Supportive cartoons are lousy cartoons. I don’t know of any professional cartoonists who would describe themselves as “pro-Trump,” but I also don’t know cartoonists who would say that they were  “pro-Obama,” “pro-Bush” or “pro-Clinton.” A good editorial cartoonist dislikes everybody. We attack whoever is in power. We draw what the pundits are talking about on cable news: all Trump, all the time. Editors are coming off of eight years of cartoonists criticizing Obama; now that the cartoonists are focused on Trump, the editors in red-state Trumpland are grumpy.

We’ve gotten some calls from other media searching for pro-Trump cartoons online, asking us where to find them. One TV news outlet wanted to have a roundtable discussion between pro and anti-Trump cartoonists; they had searched the Web and found cartoons by amateur cartoonists posting “pro-Trump” cartoons on their own blogs. In repeated conversations, I explain the difference between professional cartoonists whose work is published by others and amateurs who post on their own social media accounts – but it seems that the distinction between professionals and amateurs has been lost. Sadly, this is happening as respect for all professional journalists is in decline while president Trump bashes the media endlessly.

Sad times for our profession continue.

 

 

 

Categories
Blog

Answering a College Student’s Questions About Cartoons

Sometimes I get emails from college students who are studying editorial cartoons; they often ask the same questions so I thought I would post this recent response I wrote to a student.

Hi James,

Your friends who think editorial cartoons are a dying art form should be told that editorial cartoons are more important around the world than ever before, and with the internet we have a far larger audience than our predecessors who were limited to print.
1. How many hours of research go into each of your cartoons?
PencilSlingerSometimes I’ll look for photo reference for the art, which doesn’t take long. You can see the whole process in real time by looking at my videos on DarylCagle.com. I live-stream on Twitch when I draw each cartoon now. Each cartoon takes about six hours.
2. How much time do you spend reviewing the news everyday?
I usually read two or three newspapers a day and watch cable TV news. Probably three hours a day. I wouldn’t call this “research” and it isn’t related to a particular cartoon.
3. What are two things that make you different from other cartoonists?
The biggest difference for me is that I have more freedom than most cartoonists.  I own and run my syndicate (CagleCartoons.com, PoliticalCartoons.com, CagleWorld.com) so I don’t have an editor or a publication of record. My cartoons are distributed to about 850 subscribing newspapers, including about half of America’s daily paid-circulation newspapers. I don’t have to draw on the topic of the day as most cartoonist do, and I can maintain an irregular schedule, drawing on topics when a cartoon is needed. I don’t have to draw about the weather and celebrity obituaries as I did when I had an editor. The two differences: more freedom, no editor.
4. Who is your favorite person to portray?

Right now both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are gifts to cartoonists.

5. What experiences do you gain in traveling and how does traveling affect your work?

Editorial cartoons are much more important and more highly regarded internationally than they are in America. I am inspired by my brave colleagues around the world and it is great fun to meet them – especially those who put themselves at risk with their cartoons. In most of the world a cartoonist can’t draw the president of his own country or he’ll be fired, sued, beaten, jailed or killed. Friends of mine have been jailed by their governments and murdered by terrorists because of their cartoons.  I enjoy the best press freedoms in the world in America. I have it easy – I only get attacked by hackers.

6. If you could give one piece of advice to someone looking at a career as a political cartoonist what would it be?

It is the same advice I would give to any aspiring, young journalist. Newsroom jobs are in decline. New journalists and cartoonists need to create a place where their work is seen by a loyal audience on the Web; they need to develop a reason why their voice is important for their audience. Journalists have to be entrepreneurs now. The days of getting a job at a newspaper and having a big publisher take care of your career are gone. There are more opportunities now, and it is simplistic to look at the decline in employee jobs as a decline for the cartooning profession. It is a big, exciting new world out there.

I have more freedom and a much bigger audience now that I have not been working for a newspaper for over sixteen years. There is no single path for everyone, as there was in the days when making a career meant applying for a job at a newspaper.

About your project …  Think of editorial cartoonists as columnists who speak with images. We rarely see students analyzing columns because it is assumed that the columnist has clearly said what he meant to say. Cartoonists depend on their readers already knowing the news. Unlike columnists, we don’t convey facts; we convey simple, visual arguments. People cut the cartoons out to stick them on their fridge; they don’t do that with columns. Images are more powerful than words.

Cartoons are often analyzed by students because cartoons are on state mandated, AP Social Studies tests in 8th and 11th grade, in all 50 states, and teachers “teach to the test.” High school kids typically don’t think much about the news and often don’t have the background to understand what political cartoonists are drawing about. Cartoonists strive to make their points clearly, so the idea of editorial cartoons as puzzles that need to be solved and need an explanation or analysis is disappointing. If a cartoon needs to be explained, it is a poor cartoon or, more often, the reader is not well informed.

Good luck with your project!
Best,

Daryl

Categories
Blog

See My Big, Long, Video Interview with Mr. Media

Here’s my long interview with Bob Andelman (Mr. Media) about my work, the editorial cartooning business and editorial cartoons around the world.

This is a cartoon I was working on when I did the interview at my drawing table.

Categories
Blog Columns

Cartoonists and Red Lines


Like blaming a rape victim for her “provocative dress,” many press pundits blame the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists (and the Danish cartoonists before them) for crossing “red lines,” and inviting trouble. In the past few days the small community of American editorial cartoonists have been getting calls from their local media, asking for comments about self-censorship and what subjects we should be forbidden to draw in a free society.

Political cartoonists have no clear red lines, but we are certainly censored. Cartoonists are a macho bunch; we want to draw provocative cartoons, bashing the reader on the head with the most powerful images possible. Editors see cartoonists as bomb throwers, to be reigned in.

There are about fifteen-hundred daily, paid circulation newspapers in America, and less than fifty cartoonists have jobs working for those papers, the vast majority of the papers use “syndicated” cartoons, culling a cartoon or two each day from a large menu of available, national cartoon options. Newspaper editors have been growing more timid, wanting to avoid reprinting anything that might offend a declining readership; they usually avoid printing the most hard-hitting cartoons. The result is that American editorial cartoons are tame compared to cartoons around the world – and in France.

Yesterday, one of the cartoonists I syndicate, David Fitzsimmons of The Arizona Daily Star in Tucson, drew a cartoon depicting the Prophet Muhammad that we delivered to our 850 subscribing newspapers. Editorial cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad are not unusual. We were flooded with calls from editors questioning our wisdom in posting the cartoon, and asking if other editors were running it before deciding to run it themselves.

Cartoons are more powerful than words. Readers don’t cut columns out of the newspaper to hang on their fridges. Editors quickly learn that cartoons generate more angry e-mail than the same ideas expressed in words. Editors prefer cartoons that are like Jay Leno jokes, about a topic in the news, but expressing no real opinion. If we want our work to be reprinted, cartoonists have to consider drawings that timid editorial-gatekeepers will let pass. This is the censorship of the marketplace.

I know cartoonists who insist on drawing offensive cartoons with four letter words; they complain that the market is unfair for rejecting them. Tame cartoonists are sometimes derided by our macho colleagues for selling-out to syndication. My French cartoonist friends joke about American cartoonists being prudes. For example, the French draw bare breasts in their cartoons frequently; American cartoonists can’t do that if they want their cartoons to be reprinted in U.S. newspapers -a bare-breasted fact that amuses my French colleagues.

Our censorship of the marketplace in a free society is nothing like government censorship, a concept that is difficult for the much of the world to understand or appreciate. Around the world editorial cartooning is a dangerous profession, and censorship is real. Cartoonists in China self-censor, never drawing the Chinese president; cartoonists in Cuba have never drawn Fidel Castro. Our cartoonists in Singapore tell me they can draw whatever they want, as long as it isn’t about Singapore. Government censorship is so common around the world that calls for red lines seem reasonable to many.

Editorial cartoons are more important around the world than they are in America. Charlie Hebdo is a top magazine in France; it is on newsstands everywhere; the top French cartoonists vie to be on the pages of Charlie Hebdo and a second, satirical paper, Le Canard Enchainé (the “Unchained Duck”). Sadly, there are no similar publications on American newsstands. Visitors to Cairo are greeted by dozens of newspapers, most with editorial cartoons on the front page. Editorial cartooning has a much stronger tradition in the romance language and Arabic speaking countries where editorial cartoonists are among the most influential voices in society. It is no surprise that editorial cartoons are the flashpoint of a clash of civilizations.

The calls for cartoonists to self-censor are absurd. In a free society we will always have a broad range of voices. Extremist cartoonists are effectively censored when there are no publications willing to convey their rants – and no audiences who want to see their offensive work. Cartoonists are constantly pushing the limits, with editors guarding the red lines, pushing back.

In France, the heroic Charlie Hebdo cartoonists lampooned issues that are important to their French audience, with Muslim extremists at the top of their lampoon-list. Cartoonists respond to intolerance with ridicule. Typically, timid editors respond to intolerance with too much restraint.

There should be no “red lines,” just good judgment. Editors should show more bravery. The cartoonists are already brave; we need more editors who cover our backs.

Stop asking cartoonists about red lines. Ask editors about red lines. Ask the editors to be more brave.

Categories
Blog

Bill Day Fundraising Update – Over $30,000 Raised and Editor & Publisher

hdr bill day support Bill Day Fundraising Update Over $30,000 Raised and Editor & Publisher cartoonsClick here to make a contribution to save Bill Day!

I have two cool news items to report in our Bill Day fundraising drive. First, we’ve exceeded $30,000, and now just have $5,000 remaining to successfully fund the work of brilliant, unemployed cartoonist Bill Day!

Second, Editor & Publisher magazine did a story on our fundraising campaign. E&P’s Rob Tornoe spoke with Bill, who said the outpouring of support in this crowd-sourcing effort means a great deal to him.

Picture 16 Bill Day Fundraising Update Over $30,000 Raised and Editor & Publisher cartoons“If we’re successful, it will allow me to continue my passion of drawing editorial cartoons at a time when it’s very difficult for me to continue,” Day said. “We’re so close, and I feel honored that so many readers feel so strongly about my cartoons to support me.”

Day went on to say that he is moved by the experience, and is thankful to everyone who has donated “for their willingness to help the cause and promote the art of editorial cartooning so it doesn’t die… their generosity is truly touching.”

Click here to make a contribution to save Bill Day!

Please continue to spread the word about our fundraising campaign. We’re in the final stretch, and need your help now more than ever!

If you haven’t donated yet, please consider doing so. There are some really great perks still available for donors – everything from signed prints of Bill’s work to an actual original piece of Bill Day artwork that you can frame and hang up in your home or office!

Again, thank you for all your generosity and support of political cartoons. You guys are the best!

Categories
Blog

Farewell to NBCNews.com/msnbc.com

For the past six years we’ve enjoyed a partnership with msnbc.com (which recently changed its name to NBCNews.com) and for six years before that, with Slate.com when it was part of the Microsoft Network – all in all, twelve years with Microsoft and MSN.com.  I regret to write that our partnership has come to an end.

nbcnews Farewell to NBCNews.com/msnbc.com cartoonsI was the official “editorial cartoonist” for Slate.com, msnbc.com and NBCNews.com.  Of-course, all of the cartoonists that work with us through our Cagle Cartoons syndicate and Politicalcartoons.com were featured on the MSN.com sites, including slide shows on news topics of the day on msnbc.com, the Today Show site and NBC Sports; we did a cartoon week in review and maintained a “CartoonBlog.”

Recently, msnbc.com changed ownership to be run by NBC, and NBC itself recently changed ownership.  It isn’t usual these days for cartoons to be cut to save costs, but we were cut for editorial reasons. The reason I was given for our departure was “the new management wants nothing to do with cartoons.” Msnbc.com/NBCNews.com has never had an opinion section, or other opinion content, so it is disappointing, but not entirely unexpected.

Readers of our Cagle.com site will see very few changes – the NBCNews.com logo is gone from our header and will be gone from my attribution in my future cartoons.  Our site will look the same as always; we’ll continue our syndication business as always at CagleCartoons.com and Politicalcartoons.com.

Our editors at MSN/Slate/msnbc/NBCNews were wonderful to work with all these years; I’ve appreciated their support for our cartoonists and our art form.  They loved what we did, let us do what we wanted and were happy with what we wanted to do – the perfect editors!  They were great.  I miss them already.

Categories
Blog

The History of Political Cartooning in Canada

Terry Mosher (who goes by the pen name Aislin) is the long-time staff cartoonist at the Montreal Gazette (I syndicate his cartoons through the U.S. through Cagle Cartoons).

In a new video, Aislin takes us through the history and importance of political cartoons in Quebec and Canada. He is putting together a collection of cartoons for an exhibition of cartoons as part of the Association of Canadian Editorial Cartoonists 2012 convention in Montreal.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bRt4uZkcnQ]

Categories
Blog

The New York Times Cartoon Kerfuffle

There was a “cartoon kerfuffle” this week as The New York Times announced that they would begin running traditional editorial cartoons again, in an email invitation to selected, top political cartoonists. It was good news that one of America’s biggest newspapers would again embrace our art form, but their offer was so lousy it only made the cartoonists angry.

What The Times proposed was having all the best cartoonists submit finished cartoons to them on Fridays, for publication in their Sunday edition. The Times wanted the cartoons to be exclusive to them; the cartoons could not be reprinted elsewhere. The Times would pick one of the cartoons and pay the winning cartoonist a paltry $250, sending him an exclusive contract only after he wins the selection contest; the dozens of losing cartoonists would get nothing. Of course, the cartoonists reacted to this offer with disgust, and the Internet has been buzzing with cartoon disdain for the arrogant New York Times the past few days.

The Times is arguably the most prestigious newspaper, and they have been without a staff editorial cartoonist for many decades – a sore spot for our beleaguered editorial cartooning profession which has been losing jobs at about the same rate as newsroom journalists, as newspapers’ fortunes have declined. Before dropping editorial cartoons entirely, The Times ran a weekly “round-up” of syndicated cartoons under the title, “Laugh Lines,” in which they selected funny cartoons that were like Jay Leno jokes, expressing no strong opinion, but good for a smile. Cartoonists suspected that the new cartoon in the Times would be the same, encouraging cartoonists to compete for The Times’ favor by submitting opinionless, funny cartoons that would further “dumb-down” the profession. The Times would also remove the artist’s signature from their editorial cartoons, an annoyance to the cartoonists.

Newspapers have gotten used to the idea that editorial cartoons are cheap, because of “syndication” where cartoonists distribute their cartoons to hundreds of newspapers through “syndicates” (businesses that charge very little for the cartoons). But syndication is no extra work for the cartoonist, distributing only cartoons that the cartoonist has already drawn for his own newspaper, and the syndicated cartoons are “non-exclusive,” that is, they can be purchased and reprinted anywhere, unlike The New York Times proposal for exclusive cartoons for only $250, with a contest between cartoonists who would spend time submitting and making changes for The Times’ editors, with only one cartoonist having his work printed and getting paid.

It is a sign of our times, of how far our cartooning profession has fallen, and of how callously editors have devalued our work that the Times would solicit cartoons under these conditions – and also a sign of how arrogant The New York Times has become, to assume that top cartoonists would participate. There has been some blowback, with prominent cartoonists writing letters to The Times dissing the offer and refusing to participate; one of my favorites came from award-winning Canadian cartoonist Cam Cardow who wrote:

“I suggest you take this idea back to the boardroom from which it was birthed and have it reconsidered. I would also humbly suggest that your editors take an afternoon off and head to the local library to study the contributions editorial cartooning has made to journalism and society. For one, you’ll be surprised to find out professional cartoonists don’t live in trailer parks, or panhandle at malls. Some of us even have all our teeth. Well, we Canadian do.”

I’m told that The Times is now “revisiting the policy.” I have a few suggestions for The Times:

1. Try reprinting the best syndicated cartoons again, with signatures of the artists in place, and without the title, “Laugh Lines,” so that cartoons which make a reader cry or think might get equal play in The Times as the little jokes.

2. Or, if you want an exclusive cartoon, trust one cartoonist and pay him or her fairly. Find someone whose point of view is in line with The Times’ editorial stance; commit to that cartoonist and give him the same freedom that you do with your columnists. After all, editorial cartoonists are graphic columnists, except that our work is more powerful than the words of columnists. Nobody tears out a column and sticks it to their refrigerator.

Added February 9, 2012:

I was pleased to read this letter from National Cartoonists Society President, Tom Richmond, to the New York Times today, opposing their editorial cartoon scheme. Visit Tom’s blog to read more of his comments surrounding the NCS position on the issue.

Ms. Aviva Michaelov
Art Director, New York Times
Opinion Pages | Sunday Review

Dear Ms. Michaelov,

I read with mixed emotions your letter of February 6th to a selection of professional editorial cartoonists calling for submissions for a new editorial cartoon feature in the Sunday Review section of the New York Times.

On one hand, I was pleased to see that the Times was bringing back an editorial cartoon to the Sunday Review. In this day of dwindling editorial cartoon voices in the press, such an addition, particularly in a publication as respected and read as the New York Times, is very welcome.

I was dismayed, however, in the way in which the cartoons were to be submitted, chosen and paid for. The editorial cartoonists are expected to submit finished cartoons completely on spec, and your editorial staff will chose one for publication each week. The submitting cartoonists are to agree that, if chosen, their cartoon becomes an exclusive to the Times, not to be reprinted anywhere. The cartoonist who’s work is chosen gets paid $250, and those who do not get chosen get nothing.

The work of creative professionals today is under siege, being constantly devalued through a multitude of fronts, not the least the internet. Writers, artists, cartoonists, designers and other creatives who are attempting to make a living with with their talents and hard work face increasing assaults by “clients” who seem to expect them to do work for either very little pay, or only the hope of being paid. Being asked to do spec work is nothing new in the cartooning world, but when it comes from a publication like the New York Times and it is specifically aimed at some of the industry’s top professionals, it is alarming.

The Times is arguably the most well-known and prestigious newspaper in the United States. It should be championing and supporting the work of the industry’s top professionals in all facets of journalism—reporters, columnists, feature writers, editorialists, and—yes . . . cartoonists. An initiative like this does the opposite. It contributes to the devaluation of the work of editorial cartoonists not just in the offer of extremely low pay and the submission of finished work without the expectation of ANY pay, but in the very nature of editorial cartoons as an individual voice of real opinion. Editorial cartoonists are visual columnists who have specific voices, and “competitions” like this discourage that individuality while encouraging the pursuit and of whatever joke might give the jury the biggest chuckle of the week. To stage such a competition among an amateur public would be one thing, to ask a specific group of well-established and professional editorial cartoonists to do it is quite another. That is a slap in the face to their work and profession.

While I applaud your desire to once again feature individual editorial cartoons in the Times, I sincerely hope you will rethink this approach. It would behoove the Times to conduct a search among the countries best editorial cartoonists for one that has a voice that is in keeping with the editorial position of your newspaper, and then commission them to produce a weekly cartoon for which they are paid a living wage for exclusive rights. Such a change would support the professional of cartooning and journalism, and be in keeping with the reputation of theNew York Times as one of the world’s leading newspapers.

Thank you for your time and attention,

Sincerely,

Tom Richmond, President
National Cartoonists Society

 

Categories
Columns

The New York Times Cartoon Kerfuffle

There was a “cartoon kerfuffle” this week as The New York Times announced that they would begin running traditional editorial cartoons again, in an email invitation to selected, top political cartoonists. It was good news that one of America’s biggest newspapers would again embrace our art form, but their offer was so lousy it only made the cartoonists angry.

What the Times proposed was having all the best cartoonists submit finished cartoons to them on Fridays, for publication in their Sunday edition. The Times wanted the cartoons to be exclusive to them; the cartoons could not be reprinted elsewhere. The Times would pick one of the cartoons and pay the winning cartoonist a paltry $250, sending him an exclusive contract only after he wins the selection contest; the dozens of losing cartoonists would get nothing. Of course, the cartoonists reacted to this offer with disgust, and the Internet has been buzzing with cartoon disdain for the arrogant New York Times the past few days.

The Times is arguably the most prestigious newspaper, and they have been without a staff editorial cartoonist for many decades – a sore spot for our beleaguered editorial cartooning profession which has been losing jobs at about the same rate as newsroom journalists, as newspapers’ fortunes have declined. Before dropping editorial cartoons entirely, the Times ran a weekly “round-up” of syndicated cartoons under the title, “Laugh Lines,” in which they selected funny cartoons that were like Jay Leno jokes, expressing no strong opinion, but good for a smile. Cartoonists suspected that the new cartoon in the Times would be the same, encouraging cartoonists to compete for the Times’ favor by submitting opinionless, funny cartoons that would further “dumb-down” the profession. The Times would also remove the artist’s signature from their editorial cartoons, an annoyance to the cartoonists.

Newspapers have gotten used to the idea that editorial cartoons are cheap, because of “syndication” where cartoonists distribute their cartoons to hundreds of newspapers through “syndicates” (businesses that charge very little for the cartoons). But syndication is no extra work for the cartoonist, distributing only cartoons that the cartoonist has already drawn for his own newspaper, and the syndicated cartoons are “non-exclusive,” that is, they can be purchased and reprinted anywhere, unlike the New York Times proposal for exclusive cartoons for only $250, with a contest between cartoonists who would spend time submitting and making changes for the Times’ editors, with only one cartoonist having his work printed and getting paid.

It is a sign of our times, of how far our cartooning profession has fallen, and of how callously editors have devalued our work that the Times would solicit cartoons under these conditions – and also a sign of how arrogant The New York Times has become, to assume that top cartoonists would participate. There has been some blowback, with prominent cartoonists writing letters to the Times dissing the offer and refusing to participate; one of my favorites came from award-winning Canadian cartoonist Cam Cardow who wrote:

“I suggest you take this idea back to the boardroom from which it was birthed and have it reconsidered. I would also humbly suggest that your editors take an afternoon off and head to the local library to study the contributions editorial cartooning has made to journalism and society. For one, you’ll be surprised to find out professional cartoonists don’t live in trailer parks, or panhandle at malls. Some of us even have all our teeth. Well, we Canadian do.”

I’m told that the Times is now “revisiting the policy.” I have a few suggestions for the Times:

1. Try reprinting the best syndicated cartoons again, with signatures of the artists in place, and without the title, “Laugh Lines,” so that cartoons which make a reader cry or think might get equal play in the Times as the little jokes.

2. Or, if you want an exclusive cartoon, trust one cartoonist and pay him or her fairly. Find someone whose point of view is in line with the Times’ editorial stance; commit to that cartoonist and give him the same freedom that you do with your columnists. After all, editorial cartoonists are graphic columnists, except that our work is more powerful than the words of columnists. Nobody tears out a column and sticks it to their refrigerator.

Daryl Cagle is a political cartoonist and blogger for MSNBC.com; he is a past president of the National Cartoonists Society. Daryl’s cartoons are syndicated to more than 850 newspapers, including the paper you are reading now. Comments to Daryl may be sent to [email protected]. Read Daryl’s blog at www.cagle.com/author/cagle.

Categories
News

Cartoonists Look Back At 9/11

It’s an understatement to say that the events of September 11 will forever be etched in the minds of millions of Americans. As we commemorate the 10th anniversary of that tragic day, I thought it would be good to ask some of the top political cartoonists to reflect on that day and how it affected their creative process.

As cartoonists are masters at combining words and symbols into one single, powerful image in a small space, it’s an interesting look back at a day none of us will ever forget.

Mike Keefe, Denver Post

On September 11, 2001, as I walked into the service department waiting room at the Empire Nissan dealership in Lakewood, Colorado, five or six people were glued to the TV set on the wall. One woman had her hand clamped across her mouth. On the screen was the image of one of the Twin Towers in smoke and flames.

An elderly man told me a jet liner had crashed in to the skyscraper.

I called my wife and told her to turn on the television. I hung up and a moment later another aircraft slammed into the second tower. “Holy Shit!” “What the Fuck!”  Gasps filled the room.

When our shock eventually turned to silence, the same elderly man said, very quietly, “There will be war.”

Taylor Jones, Cagle Cartoons

I had just started work for the morning in my home studio on Staten Island, New York. Can’t recall if I was actually on deadline, but I might have been — for El Nuevo Día, in Puerto Rico. I was listening to NPR when they announced that a plane had crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. So I switched off the radio and turned on CNN. I saw a huge hole at the top of the tower, with flames and dense smoke. Mesmerized, I watched as, a few minutes later, a second jumbo jet sliced into the South Tower. About 10 seconds later, I heard the sonic boom — the time it took for the sound of the impact to travel across New York Harbor and reach my neighborhood on Staten Island.

I worked fitfully in my studio for much of the day — an ear tuned to NPR, an eye glued to CNN or one of the network news stations. Around 10 o’clock, I drove to the local elementary school to pick up my oldest daughter from her first grade class. The principal thought all of us parents were fools to pick up our children, who were assembled in the auditorium. He was yelling at the top of his lungs, claiming that the safest place for the students to be at that moment was in school. None of the parents were buying his commentary, and, by noon, every child who could be picked up from school was safely home.

The cartoon I drew for Hoover Digest, a few weeks after the attack, was roughly based on a neighborhood in Brooklyn. I added the flags. No such “brownstone” neighborhoods exist on Staten Island. By New York City standards, Staten Island looks like suburbia, mostly. It’s the reason Staten Island is so appealing to cops and firefighters as a place to call home: A bit of green to seek respite from the brown, the fire and the smoke.

Bill Day, Cagle Cartoons

After I drew the my ‘Firemen and Flag’ cartoon, there was such an overwhelming response that the newspaper ordered shirts with the image on the back. Below the image were 3 union logos- FDNY, NYPD, and FDNY-EMS. We raised $20,000 from the sale, with newspaper staffers filling the requests and mailing them out. We divided the proceeds 3 ways and mailed it to the Union Families Fund that gave it to the families who lost loved ones in 9/11. It felt good to do something to help in some small way.

Cam Cardow, Ottawa Citizen

I had been up late the night before and so when the call from editorial page editor came at 10 a.m., I was still sleeping. She said, “Well, of course you know what topic you’re drawing today” and I responded “no.” Shocked, she asked me if I had seen the news yet and I replied I hadn’t. She said, “turn on the TV” and I asked “what channel?” “ANY channel,” she replied.

Like everyone else, my jaw dropped at the surreal images of planes hitting the towers and then she said, “I’ll need a cartoon in an hour and a half.” I knew right away it had to be a good one.

It’s amazing the things you’re capable of when adrenalin kicks in and when you have no chance to over analyze. I was pleased with my final result, given the time issues of going from concept to final drawing in 90 minutes and importance of the topic. Plus, it was the cartoon for which I was nominated for a Canadian National Newspaper Award in 2001.

Bob Englehart, Hartford Courant

I was in my studio at home working up cartoon gags for the day when my son called. “Are you watching TV?” he asked. I told him I wasn’t. He said to turn it on. “We’re being attacked.” I turned it on just in time to see the second plane hit the tower and ran downstairs to tell my wife. We watched the coverage for a few minutes and I said, “I have to go to the paper.”

I stopped for gas along the way and a customer said that the Pentagon had been hit, too. I figured it was just a rumor, but when I got to The Courant, I watched the whole 9-11 story in the newsroom. As we watched the towers collapse, I was glad I was an editorial cartoonist. At least I didn’t feel completely helpless. I could do something, but if I had been a young man, I would’ve gone out and joined the Army that day.

R.J. Matson, St. Louis Post-Dispatch

On Tuesday morning, September 11, 2011, I was in my studio in Greenwich, reading the papers, wondering what I’d draw for the New York Observer that week. The Observer hit the newsstands on Wednesday each week, and I typically faxed sketches to my editor by noon, every Tuesday, and completed the cartoon by 6pm.

I happened to be watching CNN when the first plane strike was reported and I watch the days horrifying events unfold on TV. I immediately thought of the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, which I learned about when my neighbor returned home from work mid-morning with a thick ring of black soot around his mouth. He told me about his harrowing evacuation down 80 flights in pitch black stairwells. A few days after that incident, I drew a cartoon for The Observer showing an anxious Wall Street executive at his desk on a high floor in one of the World Trade Center towers. Behind him, on the glass windows, a hammer hung by a chain and a sign read, “In Case of Emergency, Break Glass.”

I thought of that cartoon, and I wondered how people would escape the fires. I thought of my father, who ran a major company that was hired to improve the fire safety systems in the World Trade Center after 1993. The stairwells would now be lighted at least. I thought of my friends and colleagues who lived and worked downtown. I thought of my brother-in-law who was a bond trader working in one of the towers and I realized I had no idea what floor he worked on (I later learned he safety walked down about 25 flights to street level and then walked about 80 blocks north to his apartment, never looking back. He never returned to that job and moved to Denver within a week.)

I remember I was not able to reach The New York Observer by phone until late that afternoon. The Observer offices were nowhere near what we would later call Ground Zero, but I was not sure whether or not they would be able to publish that day.

Shortly after the second tower had been hit I got on my bike and rode a mile or so to a point on the Long Island Sound from which the twin towers were visible. I saw the smoke. My city had been attacked and I felt odd being thirty-five miles away. I felt I should have been there.

I returned to my studio. No word from The Observer. After the towers had collapsed, I sat stunned and absorbed the full enormity of that catastrophic day. Finally, not knowing what else to do, I started sketching and settled on this hopelessly inadequate idea which my editor saw for the first time about an hour before deadline.

Gary McCoy, Cagle Cartoons

I remember when I first heard any account of the 9/11 attacks, I was on my bedroom floor doing crunches. It was part of my morning routine before heading to work. The radio station, KMOX in St. Louis, first reported that a small bi-plane was reported to have struck one of the World Trade Center towers. As news came in, and it was verified that it was a commercial jetliner, I quickly headed to the living room, where I saw on the TV the second plane strike, and the incoming news about the Pentagon being hit.

I remember this feeling of anger, as if coming home and finding your house had been burglarized. This was our country, and some bastards were attacking it. One of my best friends at the time was a Muslim from India. So once it was determined that it was radical Muslims who committed the attacks, I was very conscious of possible retaliation in our country.

For me, as for millions of other Americans, the whole ordeal was a national nightmare come true.

The cartoon above is my commentary of local price gouging that occurred at some gas stations that tried to capitalize on the tragedy.

John Cole, Scranton Times-Tribune

Watching the events of September 11, 2001, unfold, my initial reaction was one of anger. What unspeakable monster would do something like this to their fellow humans? What twisted logic underlies such an act. Thus my first cartoon depicted a scowling Uncle Sam towering over a smoke-shrouded Manhattan skyline, looking over his shoulder to suggest he’d be looking for those responsible.

But it wasn’t until a few days had passed that I began to digest the meaning of what had happened, and what the event meant to us as a nation. It definitely brought the various shades of the nation’s political spectrum together in various (and even touching) displays of bipartisanship. Hard to imagine that happening now. So above is the first cartoon about 9/11 that I actually was satisfied with, drawn roughly five days after the fact.

Pat Bagley, Salt Lake Tribune

There was no work being done—the staff of the Salt Lake Tribune clustered in front of the televisions around the office. We quietly shared observations and information (“Could be bigger than Pearl Harbor,” “They say 20,000 people work in the towers”) as we tried to make sense of what we were seeing. We collectively gasped as the first burning tower collapsed. Then the second went down along with confused reports of other planes and other targets. When images of a jetliner smashing into one of the towers began to be played by the networks in a continuous loop, we began drifting back to our desks and work, or at least we tried to work.

I had difficult decisions to make about the cartoon for the next day. Given the day’s surreal feel, anything routine was out. There were already political figures on TV vowing revenge, but it was too soon for warrior bald eagles, steely-eyed Lady Liberties, or heavily-muscled Uncle Sams. What people felt at the moment was a need to share the tragedy and be with others. I reviewed and rejected employing a national symbol as a stand-in for our shared grief. Instead, the task seemed too much for any image and I decided on an unsigned black panel with the date. Hardly a cartoon at all, but then hardly an ordinary day.

Categories
Blog

'Like' Cagle Cartoons on Facebook

Get the best cartoons and most thought-provoking columns from Cagle Cartoons and easily share your favorite cartoons with friends by clicking “Like” at the top of our Facebook page.