RIP, altSCV — The SCV Talk Archive

RIP, altSCV

By Mike — Mike Devlin

Image not recoveredScreen-shot-2011-05-28-at-9.22.54-AM-388x480.png

Earlier this week, news came down that altSCV, the SCV-centric alt-weekly that began in February, has printed its last issue.

It was a grand experiment: a brand-new print publication, an alt-weekly, in Santa Clarita. While it was owned by the owners of the Signal, it wasn’t a publication of the Signal per se. It was it’s own thing – a locally-relevant publication with a look and point of view all its own. Unlike some previous Creekside side-projects and spin-offs, it didn’t look like, or read like, The Signal.

It was younger, more about culture and less about politics. But more importantly, it was the only publication I’ve ever seen in this town that acted as though 18-34 year-olds actually live here.

As such, they didn’t share a lot of overlap with the SCVtalk readership. To the extent that some of you were aware of it, it probably ruffled your feathers once or twice; I was ruffled, too. It wouldn’t have been what it was if it didn’t. They pushed the envelope, sometimes for pushing’s sake, but always with an original voice. I had the pleasure of having a couple pieces run in their pages, and I regret not doing more.

I suppose the easy thing to do right now is to blame The Signal for killing it, but I don’t think that’s fair. From an editorial side, they really let the staff run with the idea. It ran every week, a legit issue each time. So if anything, I give a tip of hat to their corporate overloads for letting them take an honest swing at it. That’s not to say the bosses didn’t miss a couple of opportunities. They could have thrown enough money at the website to make articles linkable. They could have loaned out some of their ace reporters to do something different (e.g. feature-length Randles piece on left-wing beards).

AltSCV was cooked up from scratch by Aleks Gajewski, who kept it going strong with the help of her #2, Gianna Hughes. You haven’t heard the last from either, I’m sure. Gajewski has hinted that altSCV might live on in another form, and I’d love to see that. She managed to gather a lot of great writers, free of the hucksters seen in other SCV pubs.

For the time being, their archives are can be found here. As always, I’m partial to issue two. Good work, kids.

Comments (9)

RAmenPirateMay 28, 2011 at 9:24 am

Thanks for writing this Mike. And thanks to Alex for your blood, sweat and tears that I know you put into it. I enjoyed every issue cover to cover.

RAmenPirateMay 28, 2011 at 9:25 am

Damn you auto correct! Aleks…

CCMay 28, 2011 at 11:12 am

That’s too bad. I enjoyed the content.

Gang FangMay 28, 2011 at 1:28 pm

The only paper in the SCV that used the word dildo. Bonus points!

MikeMay 28, 2011 at 1:30 pm

Quick note: “…the only publication I’ve ever seen in this town that acted as though 18-34 year-olds actually live here.” No slight to Proxart, which is SCV-based, but not SCV-centric.

WalkerMay 28, 2011 at 3:18 pm

That’s too bad

AlpinerMay 28, 2011 at 10:08 pm

Obviously by what is said here, it was developing an audience. But how large that audience actually was is a big question. With the type of “in your face” content/language they published, it probably was not a smart thing to deliver it to average Valencia homes like it was a free coupon “shopper.” More free distribution boxes, etc. would probably have been more appropriate for the audience they were after and economical in the long term. It probably would have found its place among SCV publications if given a few more months to solidify its audience, but I think the Signal owners let it exist not because it was some grand experiment, but probably solely because it was a convenient way to get Sunday shopping center flyers out to homes that did not subscribe to the Signal. Get a couple of complaints from a few influential Valencians and they would see it as as an expense that had no monetary purpose. Now I see that they are using the Signal’s entertainment section Escape for the same purpose. Even though I did not agree with some of what it published or the crude language used, I do give the editors kudos for trying something new and definitely unique. Taking a risk is always a good thing. May more people do the same.

James FarleyMay 31, 2011 at 8:38 am

Just got back from an out of town trip and found this. I guess I fit the role of the complaining “Valencian” as described above. (Influential? Not so much…..). When the paper started arriving I was actually pleasantly surprised. It was indeed a great alternative and although I probably don’t fit the target demographic enjoyed most of the articles. The article that sent me was the one that involved the reporter escorting the graffiti artist to the scene of his crimes. The cover of the edition showed the city seal superimposed with a spray can and spray markings. I complained to The Signal on this and was advised that I needed to complain to altSCV directly. (At the time there was no info for contact in the altSCV publication). I also notified the city’s Graffiti Task Force. A publication just can’t glorify illegal activity, as this article did, and expect the community to accept it. To her credit Aleks printed my letter to the editor in a later edition. (The devil image next to my letter cracked me up. Mike’s letter next to mine got an angel). I wish Aleks luck in the future, she does have talent.

MikeMay 31, 2011 at 8:42 am

Correction: letter next to your was Scott’s, but also a member of Down Low Too Slow (speaking of which, apologies for being “too slow” to get this thing off the ground”). I did consider it a small victory to see, by sheer coincidence, two team members with opposing letters (the only letters they ever published, I believe) to run on the same page. That’s the power of barbecue.

RAmenPirateMay 28, 2011 at 9:24 am
Thanks for writing this Mike. And thanks to Alex for your blood, sweat and tears that I know you put into it. I enjoyed every issue cover to cover.
RAmenPirateMay 28, 2011 at 9:25 am
Damn you auto correct! Aleks…
CCMay 28, 2011 at 11:12 am
That’s too bad. I enjoyed the content.
Gang FangMay 28, 2011 at 1:28 pm
The only paper in the SCV that used the word dildo. Bonus points!
MikeMay 28, 2011 at 1:30 pm
Quick note: “…the only publication I’ve ever seen in this town that acted as though 18-34 year-olds actually live here.” No slight to Proxart, which is SCV-based, but not SCV-centric.
WalkerMay 28, 2011 at 3:18 pm
That’s too bad
AlpinerMay 28, 2011 at 10:08 pm
Obviously by what is said here, it was developing an audience. But how large that audience actually was is a big question. With the type of “in your face” content/language they published, it probably was not a smart thing to deliver it to average Valencia homes like it was a free coupon “shopper.” More free distribution boxes, etc. would probably have been more appropriate for the audience they were after and economical in the long term. It probably would have found its place among SCV publications if given a few more months to solidify its audience, but I think the Signal owners let it exist not because it was some grand experiment, but probably solely because it was a convenient way to get Sunday shopping center flyers out to homes that did not subscribe to the Signal. Get a couple of complaints from a few influential Valencians and they would see it as as an expense that had no monetary purpose. Now I see that they are using the Signal’s entertainment section Escape for the same purpose. Even though I did not agree with some of what it published or the crude language used, I do give the editors kudos for trying something new and definitely unique. Taking a risk is always a good thing. May more people do the same.
James FarleyMay 31, 2011 at 8:38 am
Just got back from an out of town trip and found this. I guess I fit the role of the complaining “Valencian” as described above. (Influential? Not so much…..). When the paper started arriving I was actually pleasantly surprised. It was indeed a great alternative and although I probably don’t fit the target demographic enjoyed most of the articles. The article that sent me was the one that involved the reporter escorting the graffiti artist to the scene of his crimes. The cover of the edition showed the city seal superimposed with a spray can and spray markings. I complained to The Signal on this and was advised that I needed to complain to altSCV directly. (At the time there was no info for contact in the altSCV publication). I also notified the city’s Graffiti Task Force. A publication just can’t glorify illegal activity, as this article did, and expect the community to accept it. To her credit Aleks printed my letter to the editor in a later edition. (The devil image next to my letter cracked me up. Mike’s letter next to mine got an angel). I wish Aleks luck in the future, she does have talent.
MikeMay 31, 2011 at 8:42 am
Correction: letter next to your was Scott’s, but also a member of Down Low Too Slow (speaking of which, apologies for being “too slow” to get this thing off the ground”). I did consider it a small victory to see, by sheer coincidence, two team members with opposing letters (the only letters they ever published, I believe) to run on the same page. That’s the power of barbecue.