The concept of webcomics is what we are most passionate about at Zingerding.  What we don’t like is the term, the actual word, “webcomics”.  The quotes are in the headline for a reason.

As media migrates to the internet, there grows a rivalry between the classic method of publishing print comics and the new forms of doing so online.  This battle is going on between newspapers and blogs, television and video sites, telecoms and voip, etc.  It’s not unique to comic strips.

It’s not a novelty anymore to find anything online.  There need be no distinction between a comic strip in a newspaper and a comic strip on a website.  The term, webcomic, exaggerates that distinction.  The craft and talent of a cartoonist and the final product are the same.  The difference is the publication method.  However, “webcomic” is a noun that defines the product, not the form of distribution.  One can argue that the word implies the publication and not the art form, but let’s look at how it’s used.  People read webcomics.  They email webcomics.  They post webcomics on Facebook.  They laugh at webcomics.  You can see how the term implies the product itself.

Wikipedia defines webcomics as comics that are published online (my abbreviation).  Their definition rightly focuses on the publication but as explained, it’s not how the term is used.

So this leaves us with an inappropriate word that’s catching on.  Traditional news media often likes to talk about webcomics as if it’s still a novelty that a comic strip is on the internet.  They are pushing the distinction.  Cartoonists have also taken to the term, partially from a time when it was a novlety, and are only pushing the distinction to their detriment.

Here’s why “webcomic” is harmful.

Readers know that what they see in the newspapers are ‘professional’ comic strips.  They also know that it’s easy for anyone to post anything online and that the quality of content can be much lower on the web.  When there is a focus on the distinction between the two, it will remain harder for mainstream readers to see beyond the “web” in webcomics, regardless of the quality of the strip.

It creates mental barrier to acceptance.  For the highly talented cartoonist whose work is on par or beyond what we currently deem professional, the term is harmful.  For the majority of cartoonists whose work is somewhere in the middle, who want a chance to share their passion through their art, improve their craft and build a readership, the term is also harmful.  In context, webcomics are ‘lesser’.

The problem with “comics” in general.

Like “comics”, the word “webcomics”, is broad and creates confusion.  It can mean comic strips, comic books, graphic novels, single-panel comics, etc.  These are different art forms the same way that music and writing have sub-genres.  Streaming music isn’t called “webmusic” and everything from blogs to online books to Twitter posts aren’t grouped under “webwriting”.   They’re all referred to as their respective form.  So just because a comic of any type is published on the internet, it gets unfairly grouped in to the greater category of webcomics.  Let’s stop generalizing.

How Zingerding addresses “webcomics”.

We don’t.  We won’t use the term.  In our view, a comic strip is a comic strip, regardless of where it’s published.  All cartoonists, from the seasoned newspaper artist to the newbie on their blog deserve to have their work defined for what it is.  Comic strips are an art form we greatly respect and our aim is to elevate their perception.  Zingerding will not make unnecessary distinctions with a word that doesn’t fit.  So yeah, we don’t like “webcomics”.

Now tell us, what do you think of the term?