The big Superman news lately, aside form Man of Steel publicity, is that DC has hired Orson Scott Card to write some Superman stories. I've only seen negative responses to this news. Here's one, by Glen Weldon:
In Action Comics #1 from 1938, Siegel and Shuster slapped
together a one-page origin story in which he discovers his powers. We
don't actually see him in the baby-blue longjohns until the very last
panel of this introduction.
But when we do see him for the very
first time, these are the first words that appear directly below, the
first epithet applied to this newly-minted creation as it was unleashed
upon the world:
Champion of the Oppressed.
There it is, coded into his creative DNA from the very beginning: He fights for the little guy.
And that's why this bugs me, and why I'm not the least bit curious about what Card's Superman might be like.
Comics has handed the keys to the "Champion of the Oppressed" to a guy
who has dedicated himself to oppress me, and my partner, and millions of
people like us. It represents a fundamental misread of who the
character is, and what he means.
It is dispiriting. It is wearying. It is also, finally, not for me.
Some comics shops are refusing to carry the stories (they're digital, but apparently there will also be print copies for sale), and many people are calling for the company to stop the whole thing. Other people point out that an author's political views shouldn't have anything to do with whether or not he gets a writing gig.