New BATGIRL Writer Announced

I cant handle the amount of angry men in these comments, its hilarious <3

I wish she would move on to greener pastures

DC folded under pressure...chumps.

Something's strange about this revelation to me. I mean, if she's back on the book so easily, then why was there the need for her to even announce her being fired? Just doesn't add up with all this, unless the uproar was so great among us fans that the high ups at DC figured a big mistake was made in firing her. Don't get me wrong, I love that Simone is remaining the Batgirl writer but it just is strange as all hell to me that all of this hubbub over her being tired would come to light in the first place.

@Mr. Kamikaze: I definitely feel you on Batgirl as the whole series so far has just come off as being okay at best.

@tbone1225 said:

They probably fired her because she didn't want to be some backseat to Snyder's crossovers. When everyone was pissed and started boycotting DC, they probably hired her on and said she wouldn't have to be a part of the next crossover. Mark my word: when Snyder makes another cross-over, it will not include Batgirl.

Not even close Gail and Scott are close friends.

They came to their senses, good.

@shackle said:

The more I hear about Gail Simone, the more inclined I am to believe that, while she's an adequate writer, she's also a first rate drama queen.

Don't be fooled by Gail's hater's exaggerating and lying. She is probably one of the most gracious and humble people working in the business and in no way was whining or creating drama over this issue at all. Compare to, say, Liefeld, who decided to go out in blaze of fiery vitriol and insults.

Also, said Gail (in response to this message: "This is going to sound ridiculous, but I'm sad that you accepted DC's offer to take back Batgirl. If it's what you truly want, then I'm happy for you, but I can't help but feel like they made a serious mistake, andmaybe it's petty of me, but I wanted them to face the consequences...")

No worries, I received several notes like this. I understand, I know everyone means well.

But there are several things here, some I can’t talk about yet.

First, good faith.

When the thing first happened, I was pretty down, it was my last book at DC and clearly it was a sad thing to happen for everyone.

But I got calls and emails from all the bigwigs at DC immediately, and they were incredibly supportive and kind, and they made it very clear that they wanted me to be happy, and that they still wanted to work with me. Not just sympathy, but practical plans for the future as well. From everyone, including some projects I could not have imagined in my wildest dreams.

I was very touched. It meant a lot to me.

And for the record, I didn’t do any sort of ‘power play,’ to get Batgirl back, I didn’t even know that option was on the table.

But they promised to work with me and look at our options, and they FOLLOWED THROUGH. That’s a big deal. It’s easy to make empty promises, but they followed through both personally and professionally.

And I have to say, even if nothing had worked out, even if I’d still been mad, it is not in my nature to try to hurt people I’ve enjoyed working with for years. Writing comics is my dream job, I’ve loved doing it. Because of DC, I’ve gotten to write Wonder Woman, Black Canary, Batgirl, the Secret Six, on and on. I’ve gotten to travel the world, work with amazing artists…I wouldn’t forget all of that over a disagreement.

They went way above and beyond to try to make this right for everybody. They did. The whole story isn’t out yet, but a lot of people took this very, very seriously and went to bat for me, and they did it in good faith. I could not have expected this result, I didn’t even know it was a possibility.

There are things that I still want to do in Batgirl, things that are personally important to me. That’s a big reason to come back, right there.

I don’t have ‘Stockholm Syndrome,’ I have left many books in the past when I felt it was not comfortable to stay. I had many other offers (some of which I am still doing, by the way).

DC didn’t NEED to ask me back and I didn’t NEED to stay. It happened because we all talked in good faith and had very frank, open, helpful conversations. My nature is that if someone reaches a hand out to you sincerely, that you take it and extend your own.

And there’s more announcements to come, very cool stuff that people will never be expecting in a million years. Thrilling stuff that I have dreamed of doing for a long time.

On top of that, we all talked out the Batgirl stuff, our bat-team, and it’s been lovely. I swear, the issue I come back on, 19, is just ridiculous. People will be talking about what happens in that book for ages.

I’ll be able to talk more about some of this stuff, soon. But I strongly feel that in light of those discussions, I made the right decision.

@arnoldoaad said:

@SiycoBat said:

You mean inconsistently average-to-good. I won't deny that her work with Birds of Prey and Secret Six were her crowning achievements as most would say but I personally wouldn't go as far as to call her the best writer at DC unless you wanna say that she's the best female writer.

Editors are not there at DC just to allow the writers to do whatever they want. They are there to make sure that the book is running in a good creative direction and most importantly, make sure that book is running in a good direction according to DC's perspective. It doesn't matter how good a writer is, no good editor in their right mind is going to just completely leave his job to a writer and expect the writer to know everything about what DC expects from the book.

I fully agree that what Cunningham did to Simone was completely tasteless and crude but as far as being taken off a book goes, it's a common reality to any writer that doesn't meet the proper creative direction that DC expects. That's the breaks for dealing with writing characters for a big-time comic-book company and being responsible for writing characters that are really not their own property.

Honestly, the writers that truly have total control over their own book, IMO, are the ones that are making up their own stories and own characters and not playing in someone else's sandbox.

I approve this message

It has always been my opinion that if a good writer is writing a characters primary stories, they should at the very least be in the loop for all of their work. A prime example of this was DC giving Lobdell teen Titans, Superboy, AND Red Hood ATO, so that he could make everything flow together nicely. when i said given free reign, i meant that. of course i didnt mean the editor should just hand over all responsibility. She would still be following the companies overall direction.

i know shes not the best. But she's easily one of the best writing female leads. She certainly is a favorite among the female-readers. She can write teams and individuals equally well. She's a major reason for Catman and Deadshots revival. And she is everyone's first choice to pen batgirl at all times.

it just doesnt make sense to me how shes not the right choice to write AT LEAST all of batgirl's appearances in a company line-up that even has Liefeld writing (and sinking) more than one title.

The more I hear about Gail Simone, the more inclined I am to believe that, while she's an adequate writer, she's also a first rate drama queen.

I haven't read Batgirl issues yet, perhaps I will start to read it.

@Gambit1024 said:

I would've told DC to go f*ck themselves.

Me too.

At first I thought this said "New Batgirl announced" and was excited.

@SiycoBat said:

You mean inconsistently average-to-good. I won't deny that her work with Birds of Prey and Secret Six were her crowning achievements as most would say but I personally wouldn't go as far as to call her the best writer at DC unless you wanna say that she's the best female writer.

Editors are not there at DC just to allow the writers to do whatever they want. They are there to make sure that the book is running in a good creative direction and most importantly, make sure that book is running in a good direction according to DC's perspective. It doesn't matter how good a writer is, no good editor in their right mind is going to just completely leave his job to a writer and expect the writer to know everything about what DC expects from the book.

I fully agree that what Cunningham did to Simone was completely tasteless and crude but as far as being taken off a book goes, it's a common reality to any writer that doesn't meet the proper creative direction that DC expects. That's the breaks for dealing with writing characters for a big-time comic-book company and being responsible for writing characters that are really not their own property.

Honestly, the writers that truly have total control over their own book, IMO, are the ones that are making up their own stories and own characters and not playing in someone else's sandbox.

I approve this message

@Grim said:

@SiycoBat said:

@Brazen_Intellect: Same here. I keep hearing all over the internet.

"OMG GAIL SIMONE GOT FIRED! FUCK YOU, DC!!"

"DC IS SEXIST BECAUSE THEY FIRED GAIL SIMONE!"

"GAIL SIMONE WAS THE REASON I WAS INTO BATGIRL!"

I kept hearing mostly emotional outbursts and accusations of sexism at DC where honestly, there is none.

the thing is... Gail has been consistently good-to-epic in everything shes done. She put much of the fire beneath DC's female characters ad female fanbase. And they have spent the last year treating her like a newbie. There was no real reason not to give her free reign over Batgirl, Suicide Squad, and Birds of Prey. But what they gave her instead was half control over Batgirl.

im not sure if its a sexism thing or not (with Dan and Jim at the helm, id like to think not), but it is kinda odd that a consistent and nearly universally praised talent like Gail keeps making her way to the chopping block, while guys like Liefeld who constantly lowers sales keeps getting handed things. She has been proven capable of writing and selling multiple titles at a time. Why isnt DC using her to her fullest potential?

You mean inconsistently average-to-good. I won't deny that her work with Birds of Prey and Secret Six were her crowning achievements as most would say but I personally wouldn't go as far as to call her the best writer at DC unless you wanna say that she's the best female writer.

Editors are not there at DC just to allow the writers to do whatever they want. They are there to make sure that the book is running in a good creative direction and most importantly, make sure that book is running in a good direction according to DC's perspective. It doesn't matter how good a writer is, no good editor in their right mind is going to just completely leave his job to a writer and expect the writer to know everything about what DC expects from the book.

I fully agree that what Cunningham did to Simone was completely tasteless and crude but as far as being taken off a book goes, it's a common reality to any writer that doesn't meet the proper creative direction that DC expects. That's the breaks for dealing with writing characters for a big-time comic-book company and being responsible for writing characters that are really not their own property.

Honestly, the writers that truly have total control over their own book, IMO, are the ones that are making up their own stories and own characters and not playing in someone else's sandbox.

And it's a very merry Christmas!

@MadeinBangladesh said:

Great. I'm looking forward to the new writer. I soooooooooo hated the previous writer.

Ummm it's the same writer?
BB

Great. I'm looking forward to the new writer. I soooooooooo hated the previous writer.

@blackkitty said:

I think you're completely mistaken on this. Gail is vocal on twitter and a highly available talent. DC fired her, most likely because of her comments. Now I've heard she's a sellout, whether she dediced to make those changes or not is completely irrevelant to her re-hiring. It was the backlash of both fans and creators against DC that drove them into a tizzy. Suddenly the editors and powers that be saw dollar signs crashing down around them, feared Batgirl would go from a solid midseller to the next cancellation and knew no writer they got to take over would repair the damage. as a result they were forced into rehiring her. I love how people are accusing her of being a sellout with absolutely no facts, it amuses me.

oh come on

be realistic, when has that ever work?, just weeks after the fact, I never saw any campaigns about this and just looks at the bring back Wally West/donna trot/stephanie brown fronts what had been going for years with no result

the fans had absolutely nothing to do with this, and the backlash of it came and went away like it always did

and the facts are there

she was fired, her scrips for issues 17-19 were toss into a well deserved dumpster and the editorial completely rewrote them

when was the last time something like that ever happen with just a month of the comic being released, when even the solicits of the issue are wrong

besides

if the Gail fanbase was so big and had so much pull then WW, Secret Six and BoP would had have good sales but they didnt

and the big difference is that SECRET SIX DIDNT SUCK!

What a twist!

@blackkitty said:

I love how people are accusing her of being a sellout with absolutely no facts, it amuses me.

It's because people are just trying to find more excuses to hate her, so they resort to making things up.

I think you're completely mistaken on this. Gail is vocal on twitter and a highly available talent. DC fired her, most likely because of her comments. Now I've heard she's a sellout, whether she dediced to make those changes or not is completely irrevelant to her re-hiring. It was the backlash of both fans and creators against DC that drove them into a tizzy. Suddenly the editors and powers that be saw dollar signs crashing down around them, feared Batgirl would go from a solid midseller to the next cancellation and knew no writer they got to take over would repair the damage. as a result they were forced into rehiring her. I love how people are accusing her of being a sellout with absolutely no facts, it amuses me.

@tbone1225 said:

They probably fired her because she didn't want to be some backseat to Snyder's crossovers. When everyone was pissed and started boycotting DC, they probably hired her on and said she wouldn't have to be a part of the next crossover. Mark my word: when Snyder makes another cross-over, it will not include Batgirl.

that makes no sense cause she WANTED to be in the backseat of Snyder's crossovers

cause all the writers were given the choice to follow up or not and the only writer that said no on both times was J.H. Williams III on Batwoman

@Dud317 said:

@arnoldoadd Dude just because she was rehired while the editor is still in place doesn't mean she's under his thumb. First, based on your logic, then the editor could also be under DCs thumb since he's still there. Secondly, if they didn't like her idea and wanted something else then they would've just gotten a button pusher to do what they wanted. That is how the entertainment industry works. "If you don't do what I want then I'll get someone who will." Believe me, I've been in the music business for almost 10 years. It's not likely that Gail sold out and is more likely that DC actually listened to the fans on this one.

Gail is in the book because she is that button pusher

havent you heard enough of Perez on Superman or even Liefeld on all his books and all those writers who were fired and replaced or just left

the facts are clear, she wrote something on chps 16-19, the editor demanded a chance and she didnt complied, so she was fired and those chps were completely rewritten, and before DC could find a competent writer to fill in she folded to Brian's wimps and was allowed a second chance.

she is a f*cking sellout

So kids the moral here is: if you suck at your job and get fired bitch about it on the internet and you'll get your job back.

@LarryDavis:

Secret Six was great sucka!

:)

I have no horse in this race but based on all the 'DC listened to the fans' comments and all I'd just like to remind you all that:Correlation does not imply causation. In other words the fact that fans went out and complained and then Ms. Simone was put back on Batgirl do not necessarily have anything to do with each other, the fact of the matter is until proven otherwise by Ms. Simone or DC higher ups it would be premature to say they had anything to do with each other.

@doordoor123 said:

@Billy Batson said:

:(

@fps_dean said:

So why fire her in the first place?

To make a stunt?
BB

@fps_dean said:

So why fire her in the first place?

As far as I know, her editor got her fired, but DC brought her back because they didn't think she should have been fired. Or at least that is the talk that is going around.

I think they just want to keep their female writers so they can avoid all of the sexist remarks.

I read a couple of rumors about DC wanting to do awful things to Batgirl, and Gail refused so they let her go, and another about them turning her into a "slut" and she refused (which I can't say I blame her).

Or maybe it was something contract-related too?

They probably fired her because she didn't want to be some backseat to Snyder's crossovers. When everyone was pissed and started boycotting DC, they probably hired her on and said she wouldn't have to be a part of the next crossover. Mark my word: when Snyder makes another cross-over, it will not include Batgirl.

@arnoldoadd Dude just because she was rehired while the editor is still in place doesn't mean she's under his thumb. First, based on your logic, then the editor could also be under DCs thumb since he's still there. Secondly, if they didn't like her idea and wanted something else then they would've just gotten a button pusher to do what they wanted. That is how the entertainment industry works. "If you don't do what I want then I'll get someone who will." Believe me, I've been in the music business for almost 10 years. It's not likely that Gail sold out and is more likely that DC actually listened to the fans on this one.

huh?

@SiycoBat said:

@Brazen_Intellect: Same here. I keep hearing all over the internet.

"OMG GAIL SIMONE GOT FIRED! FUCK YOU, DC!!"

"DC IS SEXIST BECAUSE THEY FIRED GAIL SIMONE!"

"GAIL SIMONE WAS THE REASON I WAS INTO BATGIRL!"

I kept hearing mostly emotional outbursts and accusations of sexism at DC where honestly, there is none.

the thing is... Gail has been consistently good-to-epic in everything shes done. She put much of the fire beneath DC's female characters ad female fanbase. And they have spent the last year treating her like a newbie. There was no real reason not to give her free reign over Batgirl, Suicide Squad, and Birds of Prey. But what they gave her instead was half control over Batgirl.

im not sure if its a sexism thing or not (with Dan and Jim at the helm, id like to think not), but it is kinda odd that a consistent and nearly universally praised talent like Gail keeps making her way to the chopping block, while guys like Liefeld who constantly lowers sales keeps getting handed things. She has been proven capable of writing and selling multiple titles at a time. Why isnt DC using her to her fullest potential?

Well that was surprising.

My God, you people are naive.  
 
They exploited Gail's fanbase by "firing" her. It was a marketing ploy.

@Ravager4 said:

@arnoldoaad I saw much less people who were happy than were upset or confused, but that's besides the point. I don't assume to know anything about the situation and am going to wait and see, instead of waving my finger around yelling, "She's a sellout!" with no evidence aside from personal beliefs.

oh, she was a sell out when she accepted the job on day one despite thinking that reinstalling babs as batgirl was a terrible idea

@charlieboy said:

@arnoldoaad: I actually saw a bunch of complaints posted by Gail's fans on DC's facebook page. There was quite a bit of uproar about it.

Oh no, cause DC always hears their facebook page

like that time where they put a poll and leave the question open for options and was flooded with "the new 52 sucks""fix the continuity" comments

and they deleted that

again its to early for a reaction from that

@arnoldoaad: I actually saw a bunch of complaints posted by Gail's fans on DC's facebook page. There was quite a bit of uproar about it.

@Ravager4 said:

Well the internet was certainly abuzz when it happened, mostly because the decision made no sense whatsoever.

for just a couple of days

its way to soon to see a reaction caused by that

if she was rehired, it had nothing to do with that

But the only thing we know is that Gail was fired, people got upset, then she was rehired.

a lot of people got happy when she was fired, some people didnt care and some people where happy that Batgirl was going to be redable but where still upset that she was fired by e-mail

We don't know the specifics about anything, except that there was some sort of disagreement. It wouldn't make much sense to rehire Gail solely for giving in to a demand after they had already hired a new writer to take her place, so something strange is happening for sure, but we don't know what that is. Maybe they'll elaborate and enlighten us, but until that time we can't just assume anything, as much as you'd like to.

cause they didnt hire a new writer, Ray Fawkes is only there temporary cause issues 17-19 needed to be rewritten cause "Brian no like it

@arnoldoaad said:

@Ravager4 said:

@arnoldoaad: Or, you know, someone made a mistake when they jumped the gun in getting rid of her instead of trying to compromise, and someone higher up decided to rectify the mistake after a huge fan and media backlash. Or any number of different things. Point is, we don't know what happened behind the scenes, no one does. Not you, not me, only the people involved. You can try to play off your theory as irrefutable fact as much as you like, but that doesn't make it anything more than that, a theory.

what huge media backlash?, until yesterday no one was talking about it?

and about jumping the gun, please, be serious, this is not a decision that could have possibly been taken likely and the higher ups had to know about it

the facts are still there, Brian fired Gail, Brian rehired Gail, Brian Still is the editor of Gail and Gail is right under his thumb

Well the internet was certainly abuzz when it happened, mostly because the decision made no sense whatsoever.

But the only thing we know is that Gail was fired, people got upset, then she was rehired. We don't know the specifics about anything, except that there was some sort of disagreement. It wouldn't make much sense to rehire Gail solely for giving in to a demand after they had already hired a new writer to take her place, so something strange is happening for sure, but we don't know what that is. Maybe they'll elaborate and enlighten us, but until that time we can't just assume anything, as much as you'd like to.

@Ravager4 said:

@arnoldoaad: Or, you know, someone made a mistake when they jumped the gun in getting rid of her instead of trying to compromise, and someone higher up decided to rectify the mistake after a huge fan and media backlash. Or any number of different things. Point is, we don't know what happened behind the scenes, no one does. Not you, not me, only the people involved. You can try to play off your theory as irrefutable fact as much as you like, but that doesn't make it anything more than that, a theory.

what huge media backlash?, until yesterday no one was talking about it?

and about jumping the gun, please, be serious, this is not a decision that could have possibly been taken likely and the higher ups had to know about it

the facts are still there, Brian fired Gail, Brian rehired Gail, Brian Still is the editor of Gail and Gail is right under his thumb

@arnoldoaad: Or, you know, someone made a mistake when they jumped the gun in getting rid of her instead of trying to compromise, and someone higher up decided to rectify the mistake after a huge fan and media backlash. Or any number of different things. Point is, we don't know what happened behind the scenes, no one does. Not you, not me, only the people involved. You can try to play off your theory as irrefutable fact as much as you like, but that doesn't make it anything more than that, a theory.

@Ravager4: look she was fired for a reason, and Brian is still the editor so if nothing was changed is because she was put in her place

cause otherwise the Editorial would have never allowed Brian to fire her

like it or not

she is now Brian Cunninham's Biatch

@arnoldoaad said:

@Ravager4 said:

@arnoldoaad said:

management

Really? You know this for a fact? I'm curious, what are your inside sources?

Pure Logic

Look

she was fired because she wrote something in issues 17-19 and the editors said "you cant do that", fired her and call new writers to rewrite those stories

If she was fired for a reason

then she can only be rehire for the exact opposite reason

Oh, of course, because everything is that black and white and cut and dry. I know you like looking for any and every reason to hate Gail and this book, but let's at least try not jumping to the worst possible conclusions.

Nothing to see here...move along.

@doordoor123 said:

I think you got that mixed up. DC has several female writers and Marvel only has one.

Isnt the writer of Ms Marvel a "female writer" too?

Kelly something

and i think there are some more

ALSO

I needed to repost this

Wow this is so great. Get ready for another year of

@G-Man: Thank you so much for posting this. Made my day!

YES!!!! I am so excited that Gail is staying on the book!!!

I guess I missed something.

Bizarre.. anyways despite my open-mindedness about the whole new 52 in my opinion it was a huge mistake to bring barbara back as Batgirl. When she was Oracle that was a character which really was intriguing and became such an important part of the dcu. When the whole new 52 began barbara as batgirl the series was just so average I thought. Really a shame, I miss Oracle. But really it all came down to Dan Didio wanting babs back just like he did Barry Allen. So how's it all working now for you dc?.... a sub-par batgirl book, and a writer boondogle as mentioned above. l was at least excited that Ed Benes was drawing the book, but what he drew one issue? I guess dc can't decide who they want to draw the book either. oh yeah this book is really on track.........

@LarryDavis said:

@doordoor123 said:

I think they just want to keep their female writers so they can avoid all of the sexist remarks.

This is dumb, though. There are talented female writers out there, but for some reason they keep latching on to her. Marvel has a fairly good stable of female writers I enjoy, but DC just has her, I think. Is Marjorie Liu doing anything at the moment? :V

@Jake Fury said:

@LarryDavis said:

Ugh. I was hoping we could have Bryan Q Miller back, or someone else who actually knows how to make good comics.

Gail wrote Secret Six. Your point is invalid.

Secret Six wasn't particularly good either, but you are correct that it was at least decent. It had to be a fluke.

I think you got that mixed up. DC has several female writers and Marvel only has one.