www.ComicBookPage.com

I think it almost entirely falls upon the person themselves if they read a spoiler. If you really care about not getting spoiled on anything, then why are you even reading a review or anything about the comic? You must be planning on reading it so read it before you read any discussions about it.

The one exception is people making spoilers in forum post titles. But if you didn't want ASM 700 spoiled and you enter a thread titled "ASM 700 ending!" [even without a spoiler tag], you're kind of asking for it

If you care about spoilers, don't read/listen to anything about that comic until you've read it. If you trade wait or are weeks behind, it's your fault.

Lastly, I think it's pretty rare when knowing a spoiler could really alter your reading experience. ASM 698 is an example of where knowing the twist could ruin the reading of the comic, but usually you can still enjoy the comic even knowing what happens .... if it's told correctly anyway. Hell, knowing about twists here and there has led me to start reading/watching things because it sounded great.

JohnMayo wrote:

boshuda wrote:Most comics have about a month or two where spoilers should be avoided. Walking Dead, for some reason, has a special place in people's hearts where you should never reveal anything. It's so taboo I honestly don't think a comic podcast/review site should do any more than tell people the latest issue shipped. I don't even like discussing how the comic differs from the show.

In general I personally read so far behind things that I don't like spoilers at all. I remember some one spoiled the fate of Little Boy Blue in Fables and it detracted from the story.

Essentially, what you have written seems to be saying is reviews containing any spoilers shouldn't happen until a month or two after the issue ships and Walking Dead shouldn't be reviewed at all. That seems a bit extreme.

We review issues 12 days after they are released so people have time to read them before we discuss them. We also announce an episode in advance which issues we'll be featuring on the next Weekly Comics Spotlight. I think we are playing fair in that regard. Personally, I don't like reviews that come out the instant the issue hits the stand as I like to read the issues before reading/hearing reviews of them.

Personally, I try to give out as few spoilers as possible. Sometimes a spoiler or two needs to be revealed in order to fully discuss an aspect of an issue. I tried not to give specifics about the issue and to stick to general thematic aspects of the issue.

As for Walking Dead being some sort of special case in terms of spoilers, I have to disagree with you. If you'd pointed out that it wasn't a featured issue on the episode and therefore shouldn't have any spoilers then that I might have agreed with.

I'm still curious where you draw the line on what is and isn't a spoiler. From what you've written, it seems like discussing almost anything about the contents might be considered a spoiler.

On the subject of The Walking Dead -- I have to disagree John. It is right now a special circumstance and nothing should be revealed in a review other than 'good/bad/great/horrible' types of statements.

TWD is odd in that it is evergreen and still picking up readers who are starting fresh.

I personally do not read TWD, but I watch the show. I've read the first trade and picked up issues 100 and 101, but that's it (still haven't read those issues). I may eventually go back and start reading it from the beginning -- still toying with this idea. As such, I appreciate the lack of spoilers without heavy warning.

If you are going to do a spoiler for TWD or a review that touches on major plot points, you have to disclaim and provide a ton of warning.

Now, I will say that I think you guys do it right on CBP -- you disclaim at the beginning of the show and provide timestamps, so if someone wants to avoid TWD spoilers, they can do it easily. Even so, I think you have to specifically disclaim and warn off of TWD -- even if you insert something into the middle of the recording post-fact.

Probably should be its own thread, but I think there are rules about how long to wait and when it is appropriate to spoil a property, and it has to do with its cultural 'shelf life' if you will.

For example, I still think spoilers should be avoided for Watchmen even though it is almost 30 years old. Unless you call out that you are doing a deep dive on Watchmen (or similar property) in advance.

A review podcast imo is primarily aimed at both people who have and haven't read the book so that those who have can discuss and those who haven't can make an informed decision.

Something that goes through generations of readers or is evergreen is delicate business. I sympathize with getting Fables spoiled too.

JohnMayo wrote:
If you'd pointed out that it wasn't a featured issue on the episode and therefore shouldn't have any spoilers then that I might have agreed with.

THAT is the only thing I don't like when listening to (or reading) a review program.

I couldn't really care less about spoilers in general, though I completely understand how they can/do ruin the reading enjoyment of others. But what you guys do, and most of the good sites also incorporate, is a timeline or show-notes with a time stamp telling exactly when an issue will be discussed. That allows the readers to decide, if listening to the podcast, when to fast-forward or stop listening.

I have, on occasion, done that very thing, as I get my books every month (instead of weekly or bi-weekly) I am almost always behind on what you guys are discussing. Sometimes I don't feel like waiting, so I look at your show-notes, and skip the parts I don't want to listen to. That is still a rarity, for as I said, comic spoilers usually don't bother me.

However, If I am listening to a podcast and they/you are reviewing Conan #blah blah, and you suddenly spew "It's like last week in The ADVENTURES of HILLBILLY PETE when Joe Bob found out his wife May Bell was sleeping with Tater", those kinda things do irk me.

Spoilers out of the blue like that can cause a little snark from me, and again, I don't mind spoilers.

Bottom line however, I think you guys do a bang up job of NOT spoiling stuff. You give a great description of the work and content with-in but rarely do I ever say "Eww, too much info".

Trev wrote:
Probably should be its own thread, but I think there are rules about how long to wait and when it is appropriate to spoil a property, and it has to do with its cultural 'shelf life' if you will.

For example, I still think spoilers should be avoided for Watchmen even though it is almost 30 years old.

While I understand your point of view, I have to say that I disagree. I say that '1 year' is the most that anyone should be respectable enough not to spoil anything. That gives anyone new to the scene, a shot at reading 'subject X' without being spoiled. but after a year, I say go buck-wild with all the spoilers you want.

As for the old stuff, like WATCHMEN, I get your cultural shelf life stance (or idea), but I think that is asking too much from the general public (or internet poster ). I mean isn't that like asking people not to talk about ... SPOILER ....Darth Vader being Luke's father?

abysslord wrote:I think it almost entirely falls upon the person themselves if they read a spoiler. If you really care about not getting spoiled on anything, then why are you even reading a review or anything about the comic? You must be planning on reading it so read it before you read any discussions about it.

Provided there is some sort of indication a spoiler is coming, then it can be avoided. I used to share an office with a coworker that started conversations with major spoilers. ("I can't believe they killed so-and-so. what did you think of that?") It drove me nuts.

This is why I stay out of a number of threads on this forum. I'm not sure if there will be spoilers or not in some threads like the Superior Spider-Man thread so i stay out of them.

abysslord wrote:The one exception is people making spoilers in forum post titles. But if you didn't want ASM 700 spoiled and you enter a thread titled "ASM 700 ending!" [even without a spoiler tag], you're kind of asking for it

Yeah, spoilers in thread titles really annoy me.

abysslord wrote:If you care about spoilers, don't read/listen to anything about that comic until you've read it. If you trade wait or are weeks behind, it's your fault.

I think this is less a matter of blame than one of consideration. Why risk spoiling something if you don't have to? Spoiling a story in inconsiderate to both the person you are spoiling the story for and the creators of the story.

abysslord wrote:Lastly, I think it's pretty rare when knowing a spoiler could really alter your reading experience. ASM 698 is an example of where knowing the twist could ruin the reading of the comic, but usually you can still enjoy the comic even knowing what happens .... if it's told correctly anyway. Hell, knowing about twists here and there has led me to start reading/watching things because it sounded great.

Last night I watched The Dark Knight Rises. Having certain knowledge going in fundamentally influences the way I watched the movie and my thoughts on at least one character. I am certain the knowledge I had going in (which I admittedly would not have had if I'd seen it in the theater on opening day) altered my viewing experience. It didn't necessarily improve or hurt my experience but it certainly did alter it.

I don't think it is rare for spoilers or other outside knowledge to heavily influence what you think of a work. If someone praises a work you might go into it with higher expectations and perhaps not like it as much. If people slam something, you might expect it to be lousy and come out thinking it wasn't that bad and like it more than if you didn't going in expecting it not to be that good.

Perry wrote:

Trev wrote:
Probably should be its own thread, but I think there are rules about how long to wait and when it is appropriate to spoil a property, and it has to do with its cultural 'shelf life' if you will.

For example, I still think spoilers should be avoided for Watchmen even though it is almost 30 years old.

While I understand your point of view, I have to say that I disagree. I say that '1 year' is the most that anyone should be respectable enough not to spoil anything. That gives anyone new to the scene, a shot at reading 'subject X' without being spoiled. but after a year, I say go buck-wild with all the spoilers you want.

As for the old stuff, like WATCHMEN, I get your cultural shelf life stance (or idea), but I think that is asking too much from the general public (or internet poster ). I mean isn't that like asking people not to talk about ... SPOILER ....Darth Vader being Luke's father?

I'm not talking about general internet, I'm talking about a podcast focused on a specific subject that is generically covered (in this case 'new comics reviews'). anything that involves an audience not specifically seeking information on the spoiler topic.

To follow your example (which I *almost* drew on bec. everybody here would understand it easily) -- i think once it reaches a certain level of cultural relevance, then fine.

But there are still new readers and watchers coming to these materials, and we have to respect that. It is not appropriate to spoil Empire to a 6-10 year old who hasn't yet seen it -- it's liking randomly telling a kid how Christmas works without any context.

I draw on that bec. I was just thinking this weekend about when it would be appropriate to introduce Star Wars to my kids.

With TWD or Fables, we are talking about the same thing -- spoiling what could be fundamental plot points to new readers without appropriate warning.

I'm not saying that happened here, but this has become a generic discussion on spoilers at this point.

It's delicate bec. you have to balance what you expect of the audience in terms of cultural literacy, how long the plot point has been in the public, and what the ramifications of the spoiler are to that persons enjoyment. In the absence of specific knowledge about the particular listener, you have to behave in an generic manner.

For example, I once had someone on another board inadvertently spoil a major plot point in The Wire within another thread. The plot point had been out for 3 or more years, but tons of people are coming to the material fresh all the time and I was only on season 2 of The Wire at that point.

Nobody wants to be the person who spoils a plot for someone, do they? Especially if they had the joy of discovering it for the first time on their own. That is just robbing someone else of that same joy and imo does more harm than good.

Trev wrote:On the subject of The Walking Dead -- I have to disagree John. It is right now a special circumstance and nothing should be revealed in a review other than 'good/bad/great/horrible' types of statements.

We can agree to disagree on this. I did try to keep my comments away from any specifics. Perhaps I missed the industry wide memo that went out to all of the reviewers about this special status of Walking Dead.

Trev wrote:TWD is odd in that it is evergreen and still picking up readers who are starting fresh.

True. Walking Dead is fairly unique in that regard. I wonder how many of the people picking it up new are doing so because they have heard nothing at all about the story other than 'good/bad/great/horrible' types of statements.

Trev wrote:I personally do not read TWD, but I watch the show. I've read the first trade and picked up issues 100 and 101, but that's it (still haven't read those issues). I may eventually go back and start reading it from the beginning -- still toying with this idea. As such, I appreciate the lack of spoilers without heavy warning.

Again, I consider spoiler warnings to be a matter of courtesy and one worth extending regardless of the property or how long it has been out.

Trev wrote:If you are going to do a spoiler for TWD or a review that touches on major plot points, you have to disclaim and provide a ton of warning.

Now, I will say that I think you guys do it right on CBP -- you disclaim at the beginning of the show and provide timestamps, so if someone wants to avoid TWD spoilers, they can do it easily. Even so, I think you have to specifically disclaim and warn off of TWD -- even if you insert something into the middle of the recording post-fact.

I'm not planning on giving Walking Dead any sort of special treatment in this regard.

Trev wrote:Probably should be its own thread, but I think there are rules about how long to wait and when it is appropriate to spoil a property, and it has to do with its cultural 'shelf life' if you will.

That is a slippery slope if I ever saw one.

Trev wrote:For example, I still think spoilers should be avoided for Watchmen even though it is almost 30 years old. Unless you call out that you are doing a deep dive on Watchmen (or similar property) in advance.

"The avalanche has already started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote."

Trev wrote:A review podcast imo is primarily aimed at both people who have and haven't read the book so that those who have can discuss and those who haven't can make an informed decision.

It can be a difficult judgement call. Often we reference specific pages and panels in a discussion to highlight what is and isn't working for us. Personally, I figure people that have read the comic are listening to the discussions for any possible insights into the work they missed or for another opinion on it. Those that haven't read the issue need enough information to make the purchase decision on and in those cases, spoiling the story seems counter-productive.

Trev wrote:Something that goes through generations of readers or is evergreen is delicate business. I sympathize with getting Fables spoiled too.

Alas, Fables doesn't seem to have the special status you and a few others seem to have afforded Walking Dead...

JohnMayo wrote:
Last night I watched The Dark Knight Rises. Having certain knowledge going in fundamentally influences the way I watched the movie and my thoughts on at least one character. I am certain the knowledge I had going in (which I admittedly would not have had if I'd seen it in the theater on opening day) altered my viewing experience. It didn't necessarily improve or hurt my experience but it certainly did alter it.

I don't think it is rare for spoilers or other outside knowledge to heavily influence what you think of a work. If someone praises a work you might go into it with higher expectations and perhaps not like it as much. If people slam something, you might expect it to be lousy and come out thinking it wasn't that bad and like it more than if you didn't going in expecting it not to be that good.

After thinking about it more, I think you're right. I made my statement without really thinking about examples .... spoilers will usually at the very least alter your experience.

My mom told me about Sixth Sense so watching that film was different for me than someone else.

As far as positive/negative reviews, I don't consider that as spoilers but I agree that does change the way you feel about a film. An average film becomes much better when people have been slamming it, and vice versa. I saw the Dark Knight film with Ledger as the Joker when it came out on DVD, so way after the hype machine, and I thought it was mediocre at best. I need to rewatch it someday to see if I was influenced by everyone saying it was the greatest thing ever.

Trev wrote:To follow your example (which I *almost* drew on bec. everybody here would understand it easily) -- i think once it reaches a certain level of cultural relevance, then fine.

But doesn't that go against your Watchmen example? When you stated -

Trev wrote:For example, I still think spoilers should be avoided for Watchmen even though it is almost 30 years old.

Trev wrote: But there are still new readers and watchers coming to these materials, and we have to respect that. It is not appropriate to spoil Empire to a 6-10 year old who hasn't yet seen it --

No, and I think we both agree that spoiling, for the sake of spoiling is a @#$% move anyway. But if that same kid came across two others talking about Empire, is it their responsibility to stop discussing or is it the kids fault if he stays and listens? (Yes, I see the fault in putting responsibility on a child, just rolling with it )

Trev wrote:It's delicate bec. you have to balance what you expect of the audience in terms of cultural literacy, how long the plot point has been in the public, and what the ramifications of the spoiler are to that persons enjoyment. In the absence of specific knowledge about the particular listener, you have to behave in an generic manner.

Again, I think we agree, in principle, I believe you should behave in a way that spoils nothing (or nothing major) ... up to a point. My feeling is after a year, who's at fault for you (not "you" specifically, but "you" as the general public) not having read a certain item? Is it the people discussing said element? I can't expect others to not discuss spoiler elements, after one year, when it is 'I' that has chosen, by ignorance or decision, not to get involved with it in the first place.

Trev wrote: For example, I once had someone on another board inadvertently spoil a major plot point in The Wire within another thread. The plot point had been out for 3 or more years, but tons of people are coming to the material fresh all the time and I was only on season 2 of The Wire at that point.

Ouch. Yes, that sucks, and if that thread was not about the Wire, I can understand your disappointment, but I have to go back to my one year spoiler limit. It's not their fault you have not seen the Wire (good show, by the way) and to force limitations on what others can or should discuss after a year, restricts their enjoyment of discussing the property in question.

Trev wrote:Nobody wants to be the person who spoils a plot for someone, do they? Especially if they had the joy of discovering it for the first time on their own. That is just robbing someone else of that same joy and imo does more harm than good.

Absolutely correct. I agree 100%. But after a year, I don't want to have to worry about either:
A) Editing my discussions on a property
B) Typing or verbalizing- "SPOILERS", every time I am discussing said property.

We are not off on the thought's of spoilers, just the time that should pass, I think.

Perry wrote:

JohnMayo wrote:
If you'd pointed out that it wasn't a featured issue on the episode and therefore shouldn't have any spoilers then that I might have agreed with.

THAT is the only thing I don't like when listening to (or reading) a review program.

I couldn't really care less about spoilers in general, though I completely understand how they can/do ruin the reading enjoyment of others. But what you guys do, and most of the good sites also incorporate, is a timeline or show-notes with a time stamp telling exactly when an issue will be discussed. That allows the readers to decide, if listening to the podcast, when to fast-forward or stop listening.

I have, on occasion, done that very thing, as I get my books every month (instead of weekly or bi-weekly) I am almost always behind on what you guys are discussing. Sometimes I don't feel like waiting, so I look at your show-notes, and skip the parts I don't want to listen to. That is still a rarity, for as I said, comic spoilers usually don't bother me.

However, If I am listening to a podcast and they/you are reviewing Conan #blah blah, and you suddenly spew "It's like last week in The ADVENTURES of HILLBILLY PETE when Joe Bob found out his wife May Bell was sleeping with Tater", those kinda things do irk me.

Spoilers out of the blue like that can cause a little snark from me, and again, I don't mind spoilers.

Bottom line however, I think you guys do a bang up job of NOT spoiling stuff. You give a great description of the work and content with-in but rarely do I ever say "Eww, too much info".

Yeah, I can understand that. Spoilers out of the blue like that annoy me too.

The fact that Walking Dead wasn't one of the featured topics in the episode is a valid point but I'm way too lazy to include in the show notes all of the various comics we mention in the general discussion part of the episodes.

Perry wrote: As for the old stuff, like WATCHMEN, I get your cultural shelf life stance (or idea), but I think that is asking too much from the general public (or internet poster ). I mean isn't that like asking people not to talk about ... SPOILER ....Darth Vader being Luke's father?

Why spoil Star Wars for younger generations? Unless you are discussing genetics and the Force or the impact of that specific revelation, does that story point really matter? The original Star Wars trilogy is great fun so why not let people that haven't seen it yet go in without major spoilers?

A time line after which it is okay to spoil things makes no sense to me. Everything is new to someone that hasn't experienced it yet. The metric shouldn't be age or perceived cultural importance but if the person has seen the material or not. In the case of broadcasting, be it on podcasts, on forums or any other form of communication which reaches out to an unknown audience, I suggest spoiling as little as possible only when you need to for a specific discussion point and to do so in manner that allows people to avoid the spoilers should they want to do so.

Trev wrote:Nobody wants to be the person who spoils a plot for someone, do they? Especially if they had the joy of discovering it for the first time on their own. That is just robbing someone else of that same joy and imo does more harm than good.

Very well put.

FYI, I did an episode with Sean and Jim from Raging Bullets about five years ago on spoilers:

http://www.comicbookpage.com/Podcast/?p=10

The discussion does include spoilers so you have been warned...[/img]

Wow, I am surprised at the volume of replies and as always I thought my question about reading habits would be more discussed than the spoilers but that is the fun part about posting.

As to spoilers for me, I am generally buyer beware so it is on me, the listener, to screen material I listen to if I want to avoid spoilers. As John noted, what caught me off guard in this instance was that it wasn't a featured book. In fact, I was catching up on episodes because I had not read Avengers Arena in a timely fashion so wanted to read before the review. Normally in the wrap-up part, Bob and John just spend a line or two on the other books but they drilled down a bit more about this issue.

Like some of the others, I am more sensitive about spoilers on some books than others. Walking Dead I am most sensitive on because for me the vast majority of what I like is the twists and turns of the plot. I hope it means I am not heartless, but I am not so much into the characters except to see how they will react. They are believable characters that are well built but it is the surprises that grab me. There is no other comic where I value that sort of page-turning, can't wait to see what happens next experience. I appreciate the art, but if he switched to stick figures, I would probably continue on it. Personally I like to read it in chunks to get a bunch of those twists and turns together. It also feels like any possibility is on the table.

I feel like anyone could die although one character would surprise me more than others. Consequently I don't like any names of any characters doing anything. In this instance a character's name was given by Bob and conjecture about that character's role. Obviously if they killed a major character it would be all over the press (even if the identity was withheld - see number 100), so it is practical to assume that all featured characters are still alive but I hate having that confirmed and hearing conjecture. I like a blank slate so Kirkman can take me for a ride.

I was generally spoiled about ASM 700 but that was just media saturation on the subject. I made sure I read the issue before listening to podcasts about it but I realize big headline comics now get covered in all media so tough to avoid it. I enjoyed the book and I don't think the spoiling changed my experience much. Part of it is even if you don't know the specifics, you know that a big event is going to happen.

I read a fair amount in trade so it is on me to avoid spoilers. People can talk about what they like, when they like, but for podcasts I just let them back up a little until I catch up. For most books, a plot point or two don't make any difference. Often I am so far behind that I forget the spoiler by the time I read the book.

It did not spoil my enjoyment of the episode at all. As I noted, I think you guys give enough detail without gratuitously spoiling things. You probably do spoil stuff but I make sure I read it before or make sure it is a book where I don't care if I am spoiled (plenty of those for me). This was just an instance where you guys spoke at greater lengths in the wrap-up than you normally do in my opinion. I would not suggest changing anything as you guys have a great rapport and back and forth. I am likely just too sensitive about the Walking Dead. I also wanted to give you guys compliments on the balance that you strike. This was the first time in listening (for awhile now) that I can remember it going too spoilery for my tastes. Thanks.

JohnMayo wrote:

Perry wrote: As for the old stuff, like WATCHMEN, I get your cultural shelf life stance (or idea), but I think that is asking too much from the general public (or internet poster ). I mean isn't that like asking people not to talk about ... SPOILER ....Darth Vader being Luke's father?

Why spoil Star Wars for younger generations? Unless you are discussing genetics and the Force or the impact of that specific revelation, does that story point really matter? The original Star Wars trilogy is great fun so why not let people that haven't seen it yet go in without major spoilers?

I'm not trying to spoil anything. I am just saying that after that many years of a product being released, it shouldn't be on me to watch who I am talking to or what I am talking about.

I am not saying (nor am I stating that you are suggesting) that is okay to walk up to a kid and say "Hey, you know that Vader guy? Well guess what ...."


All I'm trying to convey is that after a certain amount of time, and of course depending on the environment around me, I should not have to remain vigilant and worry about spoiling items or situations during my conversations. I am not saying it is okay to spoil things, but just saying that the onus should not always be on the people that took the time, a year ago or so, to read/watch/listen to the product being discussed.

Kids are an entirely different animal as they seldom get to choose what they buy or listen to.