indigo-cyclops
Member
This has been running all day during football.
This Walmart spot is the equivalent of what put this discussion in motion.
Ahh yes, the gamer stereotype. Shameful.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Games Journalism! Wainwright/Florence/Tomb Raider/Eurogamer/Libel Threats/Doritos
- Thread starter papersleeves
- Start date
- Status
Ahh yes, the gamer stereotype. Shameful.
This has been running all day during football.
This Walmart spot is the equivalent of what put this discussion in motion.
mmm this is why I've been watching RedZone all day. No commercials.
jim-jam bongs
Member
teehee
right, and to that I say how am I to make a decision without full disclosure? and where do you draw the line? if you have a relationship which extends beyond the strictly professional with someone who stands to gain from buttering you up then I have every right to know about it whether they pay the check or not.
SpinningBirdKick
Banned
*waves hand*
"These are not the corrupt game journalists / commentators that you're looking for."
"..."
"Muhahaha!"
Personally, I have no problem with sites taking trips, accepting free meals or drinks, or even whores as long as I know/trust that those things are not going to influence their opinions.
There are definitely people in the gaming press who I believe to be incorruptible. The problem, obviously, is that the vast majority are in that grey area, or worst, like Wainwright, clearly in the pocket of publishers and working as double agents - if you will.
Again, it's up to us to selectively choose who we do and do not believe in via our clicks. It's the reason I cringe every time I see a thread on the first page linking to an IGN article. I've come to the conclusion that they are partnered up with every single company that advertises on their site. Give us access, and we'll make sure your product is featured on our pages. I have a problem with that and chose not to visit their site or view their previews with anything other than moon rock size grains of salt.
Your IGN's and Game Informer's are so big that they really do not need the enthusiast gamer's attention to continue to be profitable and keep everyone (advertisers & readers) happy. So they can conduct themselves in that way and no one is any wiser.
It's these smaller outlets that believe that they too have to playball (which admittedly they do) with publishers in this way or else......
Situations like this are going to continue to happen and the speculation is going to pop-up as long as sites are willing to accept publishers and retailers money to stay in business. It just is.
jim-jam bongs
Member
look I do respect your perspective here, I guess I just think we deserve to have all the facts so that we can make a more informed decision. plus, if someone discloses everything I'm more likely to trust that they can't be bought, so it's a win-win situation for both the writer and the reader. if they don't, why don't they? innocent until proven guilty, sure, but if you have nothing to hide then you should hide nothing.
That's a bit like saying you have no problem with people smoking cigarettes as long as you know/trust that they aren't going to get addicted to them.
Jake Tower
Banned
Needs to be edited to have Doritos Pope at the end.This has been running all day during football.
This Walmart spot is the equivalent of what put this discussion in motion.
Edit:
This is pretty much the battleground that will keep this subject going for the rest of time. Writers will swear that no amount of promotional tat will influence their response to a game. The game-buying public will say 'it's a subconscious level of influence, bro'. It's unquantifiable.
jim-jam bongs
Member
But disclosing that information would make them look bad. It would also make them less likely to participate in unscrupulous behavior if writers had to disclose things like "During the review process, we were only allowed to talk about certain elements of the game. We were flown to Hawaii for free and only had 12 hours to play the game at an event that was catered free of charge by the publisher we are covering."
How do you disclose this and expect people to not look at your review or preview with extreme skepticism?
No, it is, you're right.
I just think at this point that there's enough work out there for us as "clickers" to be able to already determine who not to trust as credible.
Would I ever take anything that Greg Miller has to say about a WWF product seriously? Of course not. He's appeared in weekly countdowns with character revels involving personalities from the WWF. It's in his, and his employers, best interest to continue to pump up any and all things wrestling because they have that relationship.
Shit like that is what I think the Kotaku guys are saying that they are not apart of.
But on that same note, at times their site is covered in Best Buy ads for products that they're previewing un-boxing videos for.
Where do you draw the line?
So again, it's up us to make the decision whether or not that that is something that is going to effect our browsing habits online.
I think that if a reporter is afraid to tell readers something that he/she has done as part of reviewing a game or writing a story, he/she should probably not be doing those things in the first place.
I am all for full disclosure. There is a point where talking too much about circumstances can distract from a story, but I don't think it'd do any harm for reviewers to detail exactly how much they've played, how they got the game, whether they played it at a review event, who paid for travel to that review event, etc.
Well if you're paying attention, perhaps you also noticed that at one point our site was covered in ads for Medal of Honor: Warfighter, which Kirk slammed in a review. I can't emphasize enough how little Gawker Media's advertising department has to do with editorial.
Have you guys seen this?
http://doubledouble.posterous.com/perhaps-i-am-being-rude-about-hiphopgamer
http://doubledouble.posterous.com/perhaps-i-am-being-rude-about-hiphopgamer
Another article from Friday...
The Florence Effect: Fanning the Flames of Change in Games Journalism
http://www.incgamers.com/2012/11/th...ing-the-flames-of-change-in-games-journalism/
The Florence Effect: Fanning the Flames of Change in Games Journalism
http://www.incgamers.com/2012/11/th...ing-the-flames-of-change-in-games-journalism/
hiphopgamer ‏@hiphopgamer
@renegade_lemur @TheKevinDent it's not a battle I'm a destroy this guy in a debate. he's disgusted by the fact that i'm black and successful
That was quick.
Metalmurphy
Member
Playing the race card already? lol
Such a beautiful quote.
This is what separates professionals from fan YouTube channels. Such a good article.
Risible
Member
When the first shot someone fires is the race card you know they have no other cards to play.
Looking over the article Wario64 posted, a lot of what the author posted seemed to be suspicions and not hard proof and easily countered by hiphopgamer. Instead his first retort is the race card? Doesn't bode well for what lies ahead for him.
Part 2 is a better piece to read.
Bullshit- it's quantifiable. Shawn Elliot and others have posted plenty about research showing that the subconsious influence you're talking about is real.
The two camps are not 'PR has no effect' and 'Nuh-uh, subconscious influence bro!' The two camps are 'stick your head in the sand and ignore scientific research that shows influence' or 'I acknowledge said research rather than ignorantly ignoring it.'
Saying both sides (influence vs. no influence) both might be right and are equally valid is the same type of false equivalency used by creationists in the 'debate' regarding the teaching of evolution in public schools.
IrishNinja
Member
this was a great article, and nailed a lot've the shit that bothered me - guys like n'gai undermining the issue, then moving the goalpost comfortably away as fast as possible ("the story is now about media on media" yeah, okay)
I'm listening to their podcast on the issue, too. Just seems to offer basic commentary so far, but it's good to hear some off-the-cuff discussion rather than just carefully vetted posts. That's not to say the posts by the media here haven't been appreciated, but it's good to hear the enthusiasm in their speech and not just assume it.
It's hard to take that guy seriously. Off in a tangent, but "hiphopgamer" was one of the tools who grabbed a grip of expensive gift bags (intended to be one for each invite) from Michael Pachters E3 2012 party, which peeved off the party organizer.
There's a hilarious twitter conversation (screen grabs) at the bottom:
http://yuki-pedia.com/writer/its-my-party-and-ill-sling-mud-if-i-want-to
If they are taking free trips they should disclose it. They should disclose the free meals and parties as well.
There is a reason the companies shell out the money, it works.
He's also the guy who bought most of his followers on twitter lol.
Reflects rather poorly on everyone involved, eh?
Twitter arguments are the height of idiocy.
Jake Tower
Banned
You really should have done an exposé on Microsoft asspads at E3 2007.
EternalGamer
Banned
It is the new Jerry Springer show.
Squidofman
Member
If this has moved onto questioning hiphopgamer, as though his entire existence as a "personality" isn't questionable, it's about time to call this thread in.
HyperCubed4
Member
Pfft. She's probably distancing herself from this whole scenario. She probably knows she's wrong, but won't admit it because she knows she looks foolish. Maybe it's just me, but she's seems to be acting really childish.
Wait, she posted in this thread earlier, right? Just in case you're reading this, Lauren, maybe you should say something on the matter instead of looking like a horrible person.
I'm just dumbfounded. So essentially we're finding out that practically NO ONE in games journalism has a shred of credibility left. I can't say I'm surprised, but it's sad that it's slipped so far down the slope.
It paints an interesting picture when you reflect on some journo's past comments, though. Like when you hear that "X publisher isn't really open and forthcoming with us", I'm almost beginning to think we should read this as "X publisher's PR team doesn't treat us like anything more than work associates and won't pay us off for praise". Y'know, like they're SUPPOSED TO. And of course, it almost seems that because there's no buddy-buddy with those PR men, journos then take it to the total opposite end of the spectrum.
It paints an interesting picture when you reflect on some journo's past comments, though. Like when you hear that "X publisher isn't really open and forthcoming with us", I'm almost beginning to think we should read this as "X publisher's PR team doesn't treat us like anything more than work associates and won't pay us off for praise". Y'know, like they're SUPPOSED TO. And of course, it almost seems that because there's no buddy-buddy with those PR men, journos then take it to the total opposite end of the spectrum.
faceless007
Member
It seems to me that there's a pretty obvious question to ask to any self-described journalist who doesn't see the problem with getting swag, gifts, trips, etc. and being cozy with PR people or disclosing such things to their readers: Every other field of professional journalism -- entertainment, politics, sports, etc. -- has publications that have explicit ethics codes that heavily restrict if not outright prohibit the things they're allowed to accept from the people and companies they cover. Many of their reporters are often far more experienced, have many more years on the job, have higher reputations to maintain, and have higher standards to live up to than anyone working in video games journalism. And yet, even those publications insist that having formalized ethics codes is necessary for even their seasoned reporters, and that they can't simply trust that all their writers are completely free of bias and subconscious persuasion.
So to games journalists who don't see what the fuss is about, do you guys think you're more objective, more rational, more trustworthy, and more knowledgeable about the meaning of journalistic credibility, than the reporters at the New York Times or any other major newspaper?
Because if you continue to deny that there's a problem, that's the message you're sending.
So to games journalists who don't see what the fuss is about, do you guys think you're more objective, more rational, more trustworthy, and more knowledgeable about the meaning of journalistic credibility, than the reporters at the New York Times or any other major newspaper?
Because if you continue to deny that there's a problem, that's the message you're sending.
I agree, just being silent doesn't really help her situation. I don't think there's anything she could say that would lower peoples' opinion of her anyway.
Busy crafting a pseudonym--Clara Wincropft.
My lessons from all of this:
1) Give more of a shit about whose work I read. Be more discerning with my time.
2) I'm done with the hourly updates from the big blog sites. The majority of what they "report" is PR BS.
3) I have newfound respect for the Giant Bomb crew and how they do what they do. They've made a convert of a former skeptic.
4) Save day-one/week-one purchases for the truly exceptional releases.
5) Support more indie and small studio games. Again, be more discerning with my time.
6) As long as the majority of game journalists continue to be suckers, I refuse to be one.
1) Give more of a shit about whose work I read. Be more discerning with my time.
2) I'm done with the hourly updates from the big blog sites. The majority of what they "report" is PR BS.
3) I have newfound respect for the Giant Bomb crew and how they do what they do. They've made a convert of a former skeptic.
4) Save day-one/week-one purchases for the truly exceptional releases.
5) Support more indie and small studio games. Again, be more discerning with my time.
6) As long as the majority of game journalists continue to be suckers, I refuse to be one.
She DID??? What'd she say?
I don't think we can say if anything is untouchable anymore. Indie studios are becoming just as ruthless on the PR scene, and while Giant Bomb was formed I the aftermath of Gerstmann-gate, money doesn't have to change hands for there to be an impropriety.
I dunno... it's just hard to trust anything anymore, considering there doesn't seem to be a rock bottom to this controversy yet.
She didn't.
No.
In the short term, the best we can hope for is that the consumers of game journalism become more discerning in what they read or watch. This should (and already has) lead to more and more people calling out the sites whenever they try to feed us a PR line without proper disclosure, or hire a gaming 'personality' to do a critic's job, and so on. Sure, "it's just video games", but it's also a multi-billion dollar industry that hires tens of thousands of people; it deserves accurate and fair coverage like any other entertainment medium.
If this hobby of ours is ever going to outgrow the stigma of the pasty-skinned basement dweller, then the people who cover it are going to have to step up and act like they're catering to more than just said mouth breathers. Many of them are not going to do this on their own; they'll need a push in the right direction. If that makes us the bad guys, then fine; we're the assholes who keep pushing them to do better. I'm sure we can live with that.
If this hobby of ours is ever going to outgrow the stigma of the pasty-skinned basement dweller, then the people who cover it are going to have to step up and act like they're catering to more than just said mouth breathers. Many of them are not going to do this on their own; they'll need a push in the right direction. If that makes us the bad guys, then fine; we're the assholes who keep pushing them to do better. I'm sure we can live with that.
Hey, I wasn't saying that it's existence was unquantifiable, just that it won't be enough for the writers who solemnly believe in their own infallibility.
More Fun To Compute
Member
Noooooooo.
I thought that Hiphopgamer was a real grass roots game journalism messiah.
I thought that Hiphopgamer was a real grass roots game journalism messiah.
- Status