NS: Chuck Wendig Gets Axed From Marvel

[cygnia]

I initially became aware of this from the Absolute Write forums.

In Which I Am Fired From Marvel

"And then we announced SHADOW OF VADER juuuuust last weekend, and people were excited, and I thought everything was good. I was not made aware of any issues, and my online self has always been my online self, so.
Except, yeah, no. Today I got the call. I’m fired. Because of the negativity and vulgarity that my tweets bring. Seriously, that’s what Mark, the editor said. It was too much politics, too much vulgarity, too much negativity on my part.
Basically, because I was not civil.
Which, of course, is their decision to make. I’m not their boss. (And, turns out, they’re not the boss of me, either. Har har.) (I joke because otherwise, I cry.)
My understanding over this call was that this was a Marvel decision, not an LFL decision, but I can’t really confirm that. The editor said he had made the call. He seemed genuinely upset at my tweets and profanity, so maybe that’s accurate. And again, that’s his right to do so. If they honestly feel that my presence will damage the book, I don’t want that. I want the book to shine, and artists like Juanan Ramirez and Greg Smallwood to do their amazing thing. Artists like that are gods in my mind, so I’m happy to not distract from their literal magic.
But it does set a troubling precedent. One we’ve seen already – James Gunn, Jessica White, and so on – of folks fired because they riled up the wasp’s nest of asterisk-gate. And it seems odd to be mad that I’m mad about politics when – well, look around. Climate change, kids in cages, sexual harassers at the topmost tiers of power, and so on. A call for civility as the PA GOP candidate threatens Tom Wolf with a golf cleat stomping. I dunno, man."

Comments

[owlbrigade1]

I agree that calling it the equivalent of Roseanne's behaviour is too far and certainly very disingenuous, but the level of graphic vulgarity is just beyond the pale. It is unprofessional. There is a difference between stating your honest political opinion and screaming obscenities to the world, and I think that was the latter.

[laughing_tree]

"It is unprofessional."

Disagree. It was his personal account.

[owlbrigade1]

The days when your personal online presence was separate from your professional one, especially when your name is your brand, died with the end of the 1990s.

[laughing_tree]

As long as he's not harming anyone or supporting anything that does, what business is it of anyone how vulgar the language he uses in his free time is?

[goattoucher]

It didn't bother me personally, but Disney/Marvel/SW is ostensibly a brand for kids.

On one hand, I think "Too much profanity." was just the excuse they used, and that they have been caving in to comixgaters, but, unfortunately for Wendig, the criticism is true.

I am a public school teacher, and I have to keep a professional and a private social media account to keep the fallout of my political views from impacting my career (a lot of MAGA hats in my community).

[laughing_tree]

If your school fired you for that, I'd also think that's wrong.

Your response might be, "Yeah, but that's reality." But I'm not saying it's not reality. I'm saying it's not right.

I... sort of see where you're coming from with the all-ages thing. It's hardly unknown for actors to have some kind of morality clause in their contracts. But an actor's being paid to, in part, be the public face for their show. That's the gig, along with publicity and other PR stuff. If Marvel wants its freelance writers to be the public face for their books, they ought to pay them for it. As long as they're not doing so, they have no place policing their writer's social media for +18 language.

Plus, Wendig isn't exclusively a Star Wars writer. He's a freelance writer who takes on Star Wars assignments and also writes works for adults. Neil Gaiman has written a number of children's books and two Doctor Who episodes, but would anyone think that puts an onus on him to avoid adult material in his social media, even at the time he was writing those works? There are differences in the situations but, still, it doesn't sit right with me the idea that Marvel/SW can just lay claim to some guy who's not even on staff in any way but rather just taking on freelance assignments.

[katefan]

I don't think it matters whether or not Chuck is a full time writer for Marvel of freelance; as long as he is cashing their checks there is some level of professionalism expected, especially when it is a company that has a public perception as a family friendly brand.

I honestly don't feel it was Wendig's stance on the Kavanaugh hearing or his appointment; if you look at the sociopolitical affiliations of many Marvel staff members he fits right in. But it's his delivery that was the problem. Chuck used a lot of creative profanity and even though it was a private Twitter account he represents the brand. Remember that guy in Canada who kicked that pro life protester? The hair salon he worked for fired him because they felt keeping him employed would send a negative message; that they it's okay to assault women (And I'm not coming down on pro life or pro choice here; his behavior was asinine. You don't go around kicking people in a civilized society).

And yeah, you're right. Marvel should be hiring writers, artists, letterers, colorists, etc. full time, providing them with a more secure economic future. I think if there's anything everyone here can agree to it's that.

Finally as to Neil Gaiman. I've seen Neil's tweets, I've seen him interact online. Neil is the definition of a class act. If you are going to be in the public eye a person can take a few lessons from how Neil interacts with people. He even had an exchange with Richard Meyer concerning his work history and set him straight regarding certain facts. There was no name calling, no derogatory slurs. He simply pointed out Meyer was wrong, that's it, have a good day sir. Or words to that effect. Wendig could learn a thing or two from Neil Gaiman.

[laughing_tree]

I don't see what condemning morally bankrupt people, even with great profuse and colorful profanity, in one's free time outside work has anything to do with professionalism.

Based off your description, the hair salon person was rightfully fired because he physically attacked someone. Nothing in the Wendig situation comes remotely close to that.

I agree that his firing wasn't about his political stance but rather how he expressed it. But I have no issue with how he expressed it because his targets indeed are that reprehensible in both their words and deeds. I can respect people with different political opinions. I do not respect genuinely immoral behavior.

[katefan]

That's your opinion and you have every right to express it, and so does Wendig his and I do mine. But it's in the manner of the execution that is in dispute. If improperly expressing that opinion in some way, shape or form might impact your employers then the employers might take exception to it then they might be compelled to do something about it. And that "improper" manner is a matter of opinion. Marvel/Disney's opinion was you shouldn't go on profanity laden rants to expression how you feel.

Like I and others have said, Wendig was representing Marvel Comics and Disney even if he was a freelancer. His profanity is what got him fired, he should have conducted himself with some more professionalism. As to the hairdresser/Wendig comparison, you're right that there is a big difference between words and physical assault. I was just using that as an example of an employer acting to protect their company's reputation.

[laughing_tree]

"Like I and others have said, Wendig was representing Marvel Comics and Disney even if he was a freelancer."

Unless they're paying him to do so, no he's not. Doesn't mean they can't fire him. Wendig himself acknowledges they have every right to, however right or wrong the decision might be. But it has nothing to do with professionalism because it has nothing to do with his profession.

[kore]

Remember that guy in Canada who kicked that pro life protester? The hair salon he worked for fired him because they felt keeping him employed would send a negative message; that they it's okay to assault women

That is really, truly not the same thing as swearing on a Twitter account.

[katefan]

Well, like I replied earlier I know there is a difference between words and physical violence. I was just using that as an example of an employer firing an employee because said employee's conduct might reflect badly on their company.

[kore]

But it is a poor example, because one man committed assault and the other man did nothing except express himself online. And it's also a very poor example because it's inflammatory and brings up abortion rights for no good reason.

[katefan]

If anyone is offended by my bringing up that example I apologize. I in no way, shape or form intended to bring into the conversation pro life or pro choice debates. And again, I know there is a difference between words and violent action. The point is two men did something their employers disagreed with and the employers responded by firing them because they felt keeping them employed might send the wrong message. I think perhaps we need to agree to disagree in that regard. If you feel you have a better analogy in regards to Wendig's firing to replace mine feel free to share it.

[goattoucher]

A fun addendum to this: Apparently Wendig has been this way for some time. He was certainly like this when Marvel hired him, and, I have read, his online demeanor has not changed noticeably: he is neither better nor worse than when he was hired.

This puts me in mind of the James Gunn kerfuffle: Disney knew about his old tweets when they hired him, but when some alt-right pinheads point it out, they cut him loose. When the entire cast backs him up and the stars imply they will not work on the next movie without him, they double down.

It would seem that the criticism that Disney backpedals away from comixgaters and the like has some merit.

As for my job, I like to think that I am a person of principle. that said, I am a public employee. I work for the government to take care of children. If parents were concerned that I was indoctrinating their children into a system of political belief more specific than "think critically", they would be justified in their concern.

-I- think I am right, but they might disagree, and the school must serve the entire community.

[laughing_tree]

I meant if they fired you for expressing political views in your social media account.