Support NeoGAF

[Dugna]

I don't understand this at all. I'm 'investing' in their 'brand'? I'm paying money so that I get more games.

You're investing into the person to make games, which then you make articles about. Then those articles generate views to give you more money, so the more successful that person is the more money you get back for what you put in basically the simple version of Investing.

Which is why this is brought up and why Kotaku had to actually address it because it's definitely a conflict of interest.

 

[unbias]

That's really not what investing is...

By all means, explain the initial expectations of giving money and what the person gets out of it, right after giving money to a kickstarter. With investments you are not guaranteed a return on the money you put into a project, however if I buy a season pass or pre-order a product I'm guaranteed to get what I pay for.

 

[Fuz]

Honestly... I saw that image before, and I thought it was a sarcastic fake on the state of gaming journalism.

Wow. Just wow.

 

[jschreier]

If you're still not sure about the Patreon decision, here's another perspective from Kotaku's Kirk Hamilton: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1s6d10g

 

[JackDT]

You're investing into the person to make games, which then you make articles about. Then those articles generate views to give you more money, so the more successful that person is the more money you get back for what you put in basically the simple version of Investing.

Okay, I just want to focus on this cause I'm already lost. I recently bought Elite including the upgrade that lets me get all future DLC. If I write a bunch of articles on Elite and get ad views on those articles, that is an example of me making money on my 'investment'?

How is that different than buying anything, writing an article about it, and making ad money on the article?

 

[FoneBone]

You're investing into the person to make games, which then you make articles about. Then those articles generate views to give you more money, so the more successful that person is the more money you get back for what you put in basically the simple version of Investing.

If you're writing about something for page views, I'm sure as hell you'd get a much better return from writing about Assassin's Creed XVIII or whatever than from writing about a relatively obscure indie dev.

EDIT: Also what JackDT said - you could say that about anything for which you paid money and then wrote about.

 

[unbias]

Okay, I just want to focus on this cause I'm already lost. I recently bought Elite including the upgrade that lets me get all future DLC. If I write a bunch of articles on Elite and get ad views on those articles, that is an example of me making money on my 'investment'?

How is that different than buying anything, writing an article about it, and making ad money on the article?

That DLC would have existed regardless. You didn't invest in the project, you bought a service to get future content paid for by investors. What you did is help the investors get a return on their investment(for them the hope of return was money for their monetary investments).

 

[Dugna]

If you're writing about something for page views, I'm sure as hell you'd get a much better return from writing about Assassin's Creed XVIII or whatever than from writing about a relatively obscure indie dev.

yeah I agree, but you're still getting a return from writing articles on the person you're supporting on patreon which still makes it a investment. Just because one makes more money doesn't mean the other doesn't make money.

 

[FoneBone]

If you're still not sure about the Patreon decision, here's another perspective from Kotaku's Kirk Hamilton: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1s6d10g

And some good responses here: https://twitter.com/kirkhamilton/status/504715600120520704

 

[tim.mbp]

Journalists also donate money to political campaigns that they cover.

Most mainstream outlets, AP, Reuters, NYT, etc., ban any reporter from political contributions.

 

[unbias]

And some good responses here: https://twitter.com/kirkhamilton/status/504715600120520704

Twitter and good responses... Yes, because that is where good discussion takes place, on twitter.

 

[ActuallyHulk]

People seem to forget that you get rewards for contributing to someone on Patreon - and the more you contribute, the better the rewards you get.

Personally I have to give many props to Totillo, he actually takes games journalism seriously and doesn't want any of the garbage that usually pollutes it on his websites.

I think people need to keep this in mind. You're not just getting the product, your getting all sorts of goodies as well as tiered rewards. Also to be honest this isn't the end of Kotaku or indie devs. Joystiq has the same policy and they've been doing just fine. I'd wager that a link in an article is worth way more than Jason's 5 bucks.

 

[JackDT]

That DLC would have existed regardless. You didn't invest in the project, you bought a service to get future content paid for by investors. What you did is help the investors get a return on their investment(for them the hope of return was money for their monetary investments).

If enough people didn't buy and the game isn't very successful, the content would not exist.

 

[unbias]

If enough people didn't buy and the game isn't very successful, the content would not exist.

Yes, and the investors would lose their money.

 

[JackDT]

Yes, and the investors would lose their money.

If an MMO doesn't have enough subscribers, it goes away. If Elite doesn't get enough purchases there will never be DLC. If Rocket doesn't get his shit together, DayZ may never come out of early access and not be broken.

 

[Jarate]

I think one of the main things is that game journalism is just in a shitty state right now, and this is mostly just a reaction to that.

Sites like Kotaku are fine for what they are, they gather bloggers and other interested writers to write about something they are passionate about. Unfortunately, practically every big gaming "journalism" site acts like Kotaku, and makes opinion pieces as opposed to actually being journalists.

Kotaku is a blog site which is fine within itself, unfortunately, practically every gaming site is a blog site and not something that's has "journalistic integrity." These people may write well and be entertaining, but are they aware enough to not have bias in their pieces, are they actually Journalist Majors from college looking to write about video games. The issue is is that there's nothing that seems to caters to an onset of adult readers who want to read about games as if it were a newspaper article and not an opinion piece.

That's why you see a lot of backlash to people complaining about reviews saying that "DRAGONS CROWN IS SEXIST, LET'S GIVE IT A 6.5" or we see shit like this with the Patreon. I don't think that said things are bad, but unfortunately, gaming journalism hasnt given us enough reason to doubt that they wouldnt be unbiased with regards to these things, so that's why these issues become so big. it's not that it's super bad, but it's just another large item that gets added to the katamari ball of games journalism.

All this stuff should be taken more as "we are not happy with games journalism, be less biased and have more journalistic integrity" then "this patreon issue is bad and we are only angry about this"

 

[The Blue Jihad]

Journalists also donate money to political campaigns that they cover.

Yes, they do.

And Olbermann got the boot for it.

 

[jschreier]

Sites like Kotaku are fine for what they are, they gather bloggers and other interested writers to write about something they are passionate about. Unfortunately, practically every big gaming "journalism" site acts like Kotaku, and makes opinion pieces as opposed to actually being journalists.

Kotaku is a blog site which is fine within itself, unfortunately, practically every gaming site is a blog site and not something that's has "journalistic integrity." These people may write well and be entertaining, but are they aware enough to not have bias in their pieces, are they actually Journalist Majors from college looking to write about video games. The issue is is that there's nothing that seems to caters to an onset of adult readers who want to read about games as if it were a newspaper article and not an opinion piece.

None of this is true.

 

[JackDT]

These people may write well and be entertaining, but are they aware enough to not have bias in their pieces, are they actually Journalist Majors from college looking to write about video games. The issue is is that there's nothing that seems to caters to an onset of adult readers who want to read about games as if it were a newspaper article and not an opinion piece.

That's why you see a lot of backlash to people complaining about reviews saying that "DRAGONS CROWN IS SEXIST, LET'S GIVE IT A 6.5" or we see shit like this with the Patreon. I don't think that said things are bad, but unfortunately, gaming journalism hasnt given us enough reason to doubt that they wouldnt be unbiased with regards to these things, so that's why these issues become so big. it's not that it's super bad, but it's just another large item that gets added to the katamari ball of games journalism.

http://www.objectivegamereviews.com/

 

[Jarate]

None of this is true.

If I might ask, how many writers in Kotaku have 4 year college degrees in Journalism? How many "game journalists" have even that.

If there a few, then that's fine, then i will admit my wrongdoing, but even then, Kotaku isnt a beacon of gaming journalism when a lot of the articles that get posted are reposts of thing and opinion pieces, especially when most of the writers were most likely bloggers before working for Kotaku.

http://www.objectivegamereviews.com/

Once again, it's another site of bloggers who, while they might be good writers, are not what people are looking for.

 

[unbias]

If an MMO doesn't have enough subscribers, it goes away. If Elite doesn't get enough purchases there will never be DLC. If Rocket doesn't get his shit together, DayZ may never come out of early access and not be broken.

• If an MMO shuts down, you stop paying for it.
• If elite didnt actually give you what was advertised, they get sued if they dont refund you.
• DayZ may not come out of early access but you bought an early access game, not a full game, so you got what you paid for.

 

[JackDT]

I'm using Patreon right now. I get charged when a game comes out from a creator. The problem is that I committed up front? If I wait until they announce it's out, then pledge, is that ok?

 

[JackDT]

• If an MMO shuts down, you stop paying for it.
• If elite didnt actually give you what was advertised, they get sued if they dont refund you.
• DayZ may not come out of early access but you bought an early access game, not a full game, so you got what you paid for.

And if a company I put money towards on Patreon comes out with nothing, either I get charged nothing "content per pledge" or whatever they call it, or I stop paying for it.

 

[jschreier]

If I might ask, how many writers in Kotaku have 4 year college degrees in Journalism? How many "game journalists" have even that.

If there a few, then that's fine, then i will admit my wrongdoing, but even then, Kotaku isnt a beacon of gaming journalism when a lot of the articles that get posted are reposts of thing and opinion pieces, especially when most of the writers were most likely bloggers before working for Kotaku.

A degree in journalism is not what leads to journalism. Producing journalism is what leads to journalism. Given that Kotaku regularly breaks news and takes deep journalistic dives into all sorts of topics, I don't think it matters how many of us have degrees or how many of our articles have opinions in them.

 

[unbias]

I'm using Patreon right now. I get charged when a game comes out from a creator. The problem is that I committed up front? If I wait until they announce it's out, then pledge, is that ok?

If you pledge to get something that is already out that you want that isnt an investment. If you keep pledging in hopes of getting more of the same, after you already got the creation that you wanted? Then yes, you are investing, because you are hoping for a materiel return on your investing money in them.

And if a company I put money towards on Patreon comes out with nothing, either I get charged nothing "content per pledge" or whatever they call it, or I stop paying for it.

If you use a pending pledge then you are not investing in them, since no money comes out of your pocket until the product is already released. However, pledge per month is investing in someone with the hope of getting continual content from them(without any guarantee you will get a ROI) However, expecting a website that wants to be considered a reporting website have to monitor who is investing and who isnt is a fairly hard thing to keep track of, I would imagine.

 

[John Rabbit]

If I might ask, how many writers in Kotaku have 4 year college degrees in Journalism? How many "game journalists" have even that.

If there a few, then that's fine, then i will admit my wrongdoing, but even then, Kotaku isnt a beacon of gaming journalism when a lot of the articles that get posted are reposts of thing and opinion pieces, especially when most of the writers were most likely bloggers before working for Kotaku.

equating a collegiate degree with job skill is your wrongdoing. plenty of people are highly-skilled in their careers without formal education. the web admin on my team who makes north of 80k/year never finished college and he's almost over-qualified for his position.

 

[JABEE]

You also get the feeling of being a backer. You get the special feeling that you helped get this game made! You give money to an individual person monthly for a period of time before and after creating a gaming idea. You pay for them to live when they're not even making a product or when they still don't have an idea to present.

This is different than purchasing tickets to see Kanye West. Kanye was going to have a concert whether you bought a ticket or not.

Kickstarter and Patreon don't sell people only the products. They sell people the feeling that they helped bring something into this world. They sell the feeling of being a backer a part of a community.

It makes you too close to the people that you are covering. This should be something the press strive to eliminate. There's no reason to embrace the closeness. It's not just reviews, as Hamilton says, it's also news/previews.

 

[JackDT]

To clarify, Patreon has two funding models. One is money per month and is often used by youtubers who put out a ton of videos. One of 'patronage per content release' which charges you when something is done.

 

[unbias]

To clarify, Patreon has two funding models. One is money per month and is often used by youtubers who put out a ton of videos. One of 'patronage per content release' which charges you when something is done.

And if a company I put money towards on Patreon comes out with nothing, either I get charged nothing "content per pledge" or whatever they call it, or I stop paying for it.

If you use a pending pledge then you are not investing in them, since no money comes out of your pocket until the product is already released. However, pledge per month is investing in someone with the hope of getting continual content from them(without any guarantee you will get a ROI). However, expecting a website that wants to be considered a reporting website, to monitor who is investing and who isnt is a fairly hard thing to keep track of, I would imagine.

 

[AkuMifune]

A degree in journalism is not what leads to journalism. Producing journalism is what leads to journalism. Given that Kotaku regularly breaks news and takes deep journalistic dives into all sorts of topics, I don't think it matters how many of us have degrees or how many of our articles have opinions in them.

I mean, true. But no one would say being a doctor is just about getting out there and performing surgery.

Maybe it's not needed (and this is not aimed at Kotaku) but if it were required we might not have these issues as much. A big part of my Journalism studies were spent on ethics.

Which I now use for squat anyway.

 

[Jarate]

A degree in journalism is not what leads to journalism. Producing journalism is what leads to journalism. Given that Kotaku regularly breaks news and takes deep journalistic dives into all sorts of topics, I don't think it matters how many of us have degrees or how many of our articles have opinions in them.

Sure, if you don't have a degree in journalism, it doesn't stop you from being a journalist, but it sure as hell would help people become much better journalists.

This is why we have the issue of integrity in this field, it's because bloggers who write well are given jobs to do journalism. And while you might be one of the examples of people who can succeed and write good pieces without a degree, the sheer fact that no one on your site has any type of clout when it comes to journalism speaks volume about the state of modern day "games journalism"

equating a collegiate degree with job skill is your wrongdoing. plenty of people are highly-skilled in their careers without formal education. the web admin on my team who makes north of 80k/year never finished college and he's almost over-qualified for his position.

In this case, while it's not necessary for this person, it might be necessary for others involved to go through a college. The issue is that no one in the field has any type of degree, and wouldn't know about things possibly like, journalistic integrity" because they never went to school for it.

Think about it like this. You have 2 groups of people who make art. One group is filled with people who have been posting art online for years as a hobby, the other group is one who has went to school for art. Who would you trust more to deliver a really good product?

 

[BennyBlanco]

A degree in journalism is not what leads to journalism. Producing journalism is what leads to journalism. Given that Kotaku regularly breaks news and takes deep journalistic dives into all sorts of topics, I don't think it matters how many of us have degrees or how many of our articles have opinions in them.

While this may be true you'd have to scroll through a whole lot of bullshit blogger type articles to find that stuff. I personally have nothing against kotaku and think you guys made the right move with the patreon stuff, but calling it a blogger style site isn't innacurate. I mean, look at the front page right now. You have deals on SSDs with affiliate links. An article with a bunch of GIFs. An article about lindsay lohan. Again, nothing wrong with any of that but to call it a blogger site that doesn't take itself so seriously is just calling a spade a spade.

 

[Doublesith]

If I might ask, how many writers in Kotaku have 4 year college degrees in Journalism? How many "game journalists" have even that.

Stephen Totilo, Kotaku's editor-in-chief has a masters' degree from Columbia University's graduate school of journalism.

 

[unbias]

I mean, true. But no one would say being a doctor is just about getting out there and performing surgery.

Maybe it's not needed (and this is not aimed at Kotaku) but if it were required we might not have these issues as much. A big part of my Journalism studies were spent on ethics.

Which I now use for squat anyway.

I dunno, I'd say an economist(economics degree of some sort) who makes money with their own money is a better critique of economic business journalism then say, someone who went to college for 4 years on journalism. Journalism isnt as clear cut as something like a Doctor.

 

[LTWood12]

The righteous indignation with which others in the media are responding to Kotaku's policy is mind-boggling.

 

[Curufinwe]

The righteous indignation with which others in the media are responding to Kotaku's policy is mind-boggling.

Got some links? I haven't seen it yet.

 

[AkuMifune]

I dunno, I'd say an economist(economics degree of some sort) who makes money with their own money is a better critique of economic business journalism then say, someone who went to college for 4 years on journalism. Journalism isnt as clear cut as something like a Doctor.

I know. I generally agree. But I also think some people (some) would take it more seriously if they at least thought of it as journalism (and all that entails, like ethics and fact-checking) and not just writing about games and getting free stuff. Again not on Kotaku, I think they're better than some, but just about this issue in general which swings by from time to time usually resulting from someone acting unprofessionally.

 

[LTWood12]

Got some links? I haven't seen it yet.

https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/504723816921448449

 

[Jarate]

I dunno, I'd say an economist(economics degree of some sort) who makes money with their own money is a better critique of economic business journalism then say, someone who went to college for 4 years on journalism. Journalism isnt as clear cut as something like a Doctor.

Economics journalism is somewhat diffferent in this case, because the people who are listening are trying to actively make money off of said news.

If in the case of reporting a business related issue with regards to how it will lose you money, i'd trust an economist, but in the case of an issue of a business causing some type of ecological issue, i'd trust a journalist.

But in this case, it's irrelevant, because game journalists doesnt cover something which actively seeks to make the person richer. Maybe in some cases, they are better equipped then a journalist, but in most cases they are not.

 

[unbias]

I know. I generally agree. But I also think some people (some) would take it more seriously if they at least thought of it as journalism (and all that entails, like ethics and fact-checking) and not just writing about games and getting free stuff. Again not on Kotaku, I think they're better than some, but just about this issue in general which swings by from time to time usually resulting from someone acting unprofessionally.

Well ya, part of the problem is video games are "not a big deal" so you can get away with a lot more. I mean, you see this in music and movies as well, it is really hard to get some consistently good "journalism" or reporting. I think gameindustry.biz is doing a good job of getting the industry there, though, some people at Kotaku, and few others here and there. Part of the problem, also, is games got truely huge and mainstream around the same time social media starting becoming a juggernaut, so you also have the lack of a strong mainstream journalism base for the game industry. The entertainment industries in general though really does struggle, because even though the money involved is very serious, the actual products are less so, so I think it muddies the waters.

Economics journalism is somewhat diffferent in this case, because the people who are listening are trying to actively make money off of said news.

If in the case of reporting a business related issue with regards to how it will lose you money, i'd trust an economist, but in the case of an issue of a business causing some type of ecological issue, i'd trust a journalist.

But in this case, it's irrelevant, because game journalists doesnt cover something which actively seeks to make the person richer. Maybe in some cases, they are better equipped then a journalist, but in most cases they are not.

I dunno, I'd say even in the political or business sphere you have to pay attention to who the person is, that is speaking to know if there is any under-pinning of a conflict of interest. There are plenty of business people who believe creating ecological issues are not only moral hazards but financial ones, as well, and are very harsh on corporations.

I will say I think it is easier for journalists to be more objective, as long as the follow a strict code of ethics, but I dont think that part is dictated on what industry your degree came from.

 

[Dugna]

Got some links? I haven't seen it yet.

Kotaku's statement, tons of people complaining about how they can't support people on patreon now. Even stuff like devs saying this stuff like this. is what people are getting mad about.

 

[Curufinwe]

https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/504723816921448449

Thanks.

Figures Navarro would appoint himself to police Kotaku's integrity policies for them.

 

[unbias]

I honestly dont understand why Jason and others are taking the twitter bait. IF people are using twitter to "debate" a stance, they are not looking for a discussion, they are looking to rally a cause, otherwise they would e-mail you or talk to you via forums or pick up a phone. Twitter is a cowardly way to make a point to avoid any true blow back of an uninformed or undeveloped opinion.

 

[Empty]

The righteous indignation with which others in the media are responding to Kotaku's policy is mind-boggling.

i think it's understandable that if one site sets a standard then you have to react as it creates the expectation that everyone should follow, if you don't agree then obviously you're going to express that loudly.

but i think kotaku is a very different site to say giant bomb. you go to giant bomb because it's about relationships between people around games and the stuff that comes out of them. clear lines don't make much sense there. you know what you're getting, you can take it or leave it or take it with caveats. kotaku actually breaks stories regularly and is a serious news site, it makes way more sense to me that they try very hard to be transparent and avoid any appearance of conflicts, blurred lines etc, as otherwise the concerns undermine the actual reporting.

 

[Jarate]

I honestly dont understand why Jason and others are taking the twitter bait. IF people are using twitter to "debate" a stance, they are not looking for a discussion, they are looking to rally a cause, otherwise they would e-mail you are talk to you via forums or pick up a phone. Twitter is a cowardly way to make a point to avoid any true blow back of a uninformed or undeveloped opinion.

because in modern times, when there's an issue between two people, the best way to approach said issue is not to have a private conversation, but to rally as many rabid fanboys/fangirls to your cause and publicly call them out on it so your echo chamber tells you how awesome you are.

It's like being a feudal warlord, but just in 140 words or less!

 

[LordJim]

i think it's understandable that if one site sets a standard

Joystiq already ad such policies and they are nigh universal for most mainstream media outlets.

 

[LTWood12]

i think it's understandable that if one site sets a standard then you have to react as it creates the expectation that everyone should follow, if you don't agree then obviously you're going to express that loudly.

but i think kotaku is a very different site to say giant bomb. you go to giant bomb because it's about relationships between people around games and the stuff that comes out of them. clear lines don't make much sense there. you know what you're getting, you can take it or leave it or take it with caveats. kotaku actually breaks stories regularly and is a serious news site, it makes way more sense to me that they try very hard to be transparent and avoid any appearance of conflicts, blurred lines etc.

Certainly. Alex is at least having a rational discussion about it. Casey on the other hand is advocating ignoring valid criticism because it came at the same time as some bullshit criticism.

And I'm getting real sick of being lumped in with the minority pieces of shit that do this horrible stuff. Stop saying that's the 'gaming community.' Jesus Christ.

 

[RedNumberFive]

Kotaku's statement, tons of people complaining about how they can't support people on patreon now. Even stuff like devs saying this stuff like this. is what people are getting mad about.

Exactly what I expected.

 

[Averon]

Certainly. Alex is at least having a rational discussion about it. Casey on the other hand is advocating ignoring valid criticism because it came at the same time as some bullshit criticism.

And I'm getting real sick of being lumped in with the minority pieces of shit that do this horrible stuff. Stop saying that's the 'gaming community.' Jesus Christ.

If they can rationalize that the concerns about ethics are from a bunch of trolls, they can justify ignoring it and continuing the status quo. The tactic is quite blatant and dishonest.

 

[unbias]

Kotaku's statement, tons of people complaining about how they can't support people on patreon now. Even stuff like devs saying this stuff like this. is what people are getting mad about.

Cliffy B is a perpetual twitter shit poster, how he got so famous as a personality is beyond me. Rod Fergusson is and was the much cooler of the two. But unfortunately the guys you WANT to want the spotlight rarely do.