It's cool, but is it an editorial cartoon?
Editorial cartoonists are dropping like flies, in concert with the declining health of the newspaper industry. The Internet is the most likely culprit. As people increasingly turn to to their computers for news, some cartoonists, like Mark Fiore, are adapting as well -- becoming animators. This year's Pulitzer winning editorial cartoonist won partially for his body of animated work, and members of the AAEC are asking themselves: If it's animated, is it still an editorial cartoon?
Check out this animation by Nick Anderson of the Houston Chronicle. What do you think?
3 comments:
As far as I know, nobody says Bugs Bunny isn't a cartoon just because it's animated. Why should editorial cartoons be any different?
It would seem that they should create two categories: One for PRINT editorial cartoons, and another for MULTIMEDIA editorial cartoons.
I think Dan has a point, BUT if they're going to consider animation, doesn't that give an unfair advantage to the few cartoonists who know how to use Flash? The content should be what's important, and I think having animation in the same category as print is like having cars compete with horses and buggies in the Daytona races. So Scott-o-Rama's solution makes sense to me.
Post a Comment