scifiwire

posts about #scifiwire more →
What Does Sci Fi Wire's Shakeup Mean?
Jovovich Confirmed For Clock

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

ursulahitler
01/07/09

In reply to What Does Sci Fi Wire's Shakeup Mean?
I used to follow Sci-Fi Wire daily for work reasons, and I still keep up. They've gone through some pretty dramatic changes recently, even before this big redesign. They used to present the news in a very straightforward manner, nothing was signed and the tone was very neutral. Kind of like an actual wire service, come to think of it. At some point in late 2008 I noticed bylines appearing, and things got a lot mpre chatty and informal. Normally I'm all for chatty and informal, but I was accustomed to what Sci-Fi Wire was and frankly if I want snarky sci-fi news, I come here. I don't know if they're actually trying to be an io9 clone or if I'm just imagining it, but I'm starting to miss the Sci-Fi Wire that was.

(Rant commencing in 3... 2... 1:) Man, the Sci-Fi Channel just craps up EVERYTHING. A handful of great shows in like 15 years, and most of those were made by people who had to fight the network every step of the way to get anything decent on. When will Sci-Fi just become the Wrestling & Ghost Chasers network and be done with it?
Reply

ursulahitler was starred ursulahitler was unstarred

TheAlmanac
01/07/09

@ursulahitler: I'm totally with you on this one. I stopped reading Sci Fi Wire as soon as the tone changed--even I was surprised at how much of a difference that made to me.
Reply

TheAlmanac was starred TheAlmanac was unstarred

Charlie Jane Anders
01/07/09

@TheAlmanac: @ursulahitler: That's interesting... I mean, I don't think they're more chatty or snarky than we are. They're definitely still closer to being a straight-up "newswire" than io9 is. At least, a lot of their content every day is fairly neutral reporting, like the Joss Whedon interviews today. Which were great, btw.
Reply

dlomax
01/07/09

In reply to What Does Sci Fi Wire's Shakeup Mean?
What I want to know is what's gonna happen to the content from Sci-Fi Weekly? If I remember correctly, that was how Craig Engler got his foot in the door in the first place. He started SFW and then got bought up by Sci-Fi. The thing is, Sci-Fi Weekly was good. You could always count on it for a weekly book review by the extremely genre-knowledgeable Paul Di Filippo and a monthly column by the occasionally comprehensible and always fun John Clute. I hope they keep that stuff coming.

Hey, while we're talking about shake-ups and changes, what about some original short fiction on this site? I've really been enjoying what Tor does. What, like a story a week? I'd read 'em if you could get some of the big guns in (and some new guns also).
Reply

dlomax was starred dlomax was unstarred

Ed Grabianowski
01/07/09

@dlomax: I don't think I'm giving away any secrets (what with Valleywag posting everything very openly) when I point out that all of Gawker is in "batten down the hatches" mode, with dire economic predictions everywhere you look. I kind of doubt buying fiction from any of the big guns is in the budget in the foreseeable future.

That said, I've thought for a long time that io9 would make a great place to publish fiction from new authors, and while lots of web zines trot out the tired old "we can't pay you, but you'll get exposure," this is one site that can really back that up.

That said, sifting through and editing a fiction slush pile can easily become a full-time job all by itself, which brings us back to the original problem. So...[shrug?]
Reply

Ed Grabianowski was starred Ed Grabianowski was unstarred

dlomax
01/07/09

@Ed Grabianowski: Didn't know things were so bad for them. Sure hope io9 ain't going away.

As to costs? Surely getting solicited stuff from just established authors would keep those down. I mean, as an aspiring writer, I don't want to suggest that anybody be closing markets to me, but as a start maybe io9 could just solicit from the Jim Kellys and Paul Di Filippos of the world. At market rates, what'll that cost 'em? A couple of thousand a week? They'd have my eyeballs.

I also like Golem100's idea of a contest, but what poor intern would be slogging through those entrails -- I mean entries. I mean entrails.
Reply

dlomax was starred dlomax was unstarred

Charlie Jane Anders
01/08/09

@dlomax: I don't think anybody's suggesting that we're in trouble, or that we're "going away." We've had some cutbacks, just like every other site in the Gawker network. (And, actually, just like every other media company in America.) OTOH, we definitely don't have a spare $2000 per week, just at the moment. The other reason I've never been super enthused about trying to post original fiction at io9 is because the rights issues are thorny. When I write something for io9, Gawker Media owns it afterwards, just the same as when I used to write for the Wall Street Journal. But we couldn't possibly expect a fiction author to give over the rights to their work -- we'd have to come up with a whole new contributor contract for that, specifying exactly what rights we're buying, and for how long. (Some fiction authors want their work to disappear from a website after a set period of time, for example.) I honestly don't think anybody involved with contracts and stuff at Gawker has time to figure out these issues right now. And having read fiction slush for several magazines and anthologies, I already have a sense of how much work it would be to comb through any kind of open-submissions thing.
Reply

Kishi
01/07/09

In reply to What Does Sci Fi Wire's Shakeup Mean?
Will they continue their excellent standards of journalism, like writing stories about how Dollhouse might fail, based off of a couple of comments from YouTube users?
Reply

Kishi was starred Kishi was unstarred

Annalee Newitz
01/07/09

@Kishi: To be fair, Sci Fi Wire is one of the most trusted news sources in the scifi entertainment realm. I haven't read the story you're referring to, so I can't comment on it, but I've always been impressed by Sci Fi Wire's accuracy.
Reply

Annalee Newitz was starred Annalee Newitz was unstarred

Plague
01/07/09

In reply to What Does Sci Fi Wire's Shakeup Mean?
I think you meant "can't hurt", not "can't help", CJA...
Reply

Plague was starred Plague was unstarred

Charlie Jane Anders
01/07/09

@Plague: Whoops yes, just fixed that!
Reply

AmishJohn
01/07/09

In reply to What Does Sci Fi Wire's Shakeup Mean?
I believe it means the rats are heading for the exits.
Reply

AmishJohn was starred AmishJohn was unstarred

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

#scifiwire

io9

SUBSCRIBE TO io9

What Does Sci Fi Wire's Shakeup Mean?

Jovovich Confirmed For Clock

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment