Is it okay to give criticism when noone asked for it?
This post will focus on indie creators and small artists exclusively - with emphasis on comic authors. Mainstream media and big names are different topic entirely and won't be talked about here as they are not as vulnerable to a random criticism as small creators are.
What is a small artist? As the name suggests, it's a person with less numerous audience, usually few dozen up to lower hundreds of active followers. Most often it's someone who creates in their free time, without any or with minimal income for their craft.
And when it comes to small comic creators and/or writers, they more often than not don't have beta readers. Sometimes a thought of needing / wanting one doesn't cross their mind. Sometimes they fear their work will get stolen and therefore they won't reach for a help from the outside. And sometimes their inner circle is unwilling or unable to give helpful constructive criticism when needed. In short - finding a good beta reader or editor is hard. Especially when you're just a beginner yourself. And here is where majority of problems with internet criticism begins.
Anyone on the internet can write anything without being held accountable. This applies to both creators and audience but is especially true for the latter.
Typical situation is: you have a small creator with their first ever published comic, naturally without a good beta reader, and an audience, where majority of people don't know or don't care about criticism or media literacy. The result is often a hot mess of heated arguments between the white knights, who fiercely defend the creator, and critics (let's drop for a second a question if the criticism is justified or not), ideally with short tempered, strongly defensive creator pouring oil to the fire. What a nightmare to come across.
This situation is partially preventable, but each party must play their part in following a set of specific rules. Which is easier said than done.
The easiest thing is to not give criticism unless specifically asked for it. Especially not in the comment section directly under the creation you're reading. Some authors and readers have a really short fuse and can get extremely defensive. So the first step to avoid arguments is to not say anything to start them. You, as a reader, always have an option to walk away and not give the creator your time. You don't owe them anything and they owe nothing to you. (But Star! What if there is something really wrong with the thing I am reading? - I will get back to it shortly, don't worry.)
Always be respectful. No matter if you are creator or reader. There will ALWAYS be people with different opinion than your own. And that's okay. As long as everyone is respectful about it. This is pear vs. apple situation - someone prefers pears, someone prefers apples and someone likes (or dislikes) both. But that doesn't mean there is something wrong with the pear or the person who prefers it. (But Star-! - I know. I am getting there.)
And here comes the tricky part. Our imaginary indie creator didn't have a beta reader or editor to catch some major issues. But more observant readers noticed them. If it's an art, pacing or plot hole issue for example, it's better to not address it unless specifically asked to or if the author is really cool about constructive criticism. (Defensive creator won't listen to you, anxious one will drop the comic. One way or another, without the right type of a person your criticism won't get through as you intended anyway.)
But what if the issue is much worse than that? Let's say it's racism, sexism, hateful themes towards specific group of people or poorly handled sexual abuse. What now? Again - the easiest thing is to walk away. You don't owe the author your time and if enough of people walk away, they might eventually drop the project as suddenly losing majority of your audience will affect them in one way or another. And you can warn your friends about it.
Okay but Star, what if this is bad and I want to say something about it? - This right here is the trickiest part of it all. Because...
1) You have an author who doesn't know they accidentally handled dark topics poorly or unintentionally sounded hateful. - In this case the issue might be brought up but carefully. If it wasn't their intention and they are sensitive enough, they might attempt to fix it. Yelling your lungs out, accusing them of racism (or anything else) will not land the way you want to (I've already mentioned defensive vs anxious creators). The first step always have to be the respectful one. First time creators are prone to accidental mistakes they rarely ever know about. Give them the benefit of doubt. Unless...
2) The author knows about it and the bad portrayal is very much intentional. This author won't listen to you and will get aggressive. They will block you from commenting or worse (send their white knights after you, attempting to destroy you). The best way to go about it is to warn others about the creator and their work.
To sum it up - criticism on the internet is a complicated topic. Everyone has an opinion but not everyone can handle listening to ones that differ from theirs.
The ideal thing is to give criticism when asked for it and/or if the person is really cool about it.
When the requirements of civil discussion are not met, you're doomed trying to navigate the chaos that will sour your taste for days.
Stay safe navigating the treacherous waters of the internet, good folks of tumbrl!
