-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Games Journalism! Wainwright/Florence/Tomb Raider/Eurogamer/Libel Threats/Doritos
- Thread starter papersleeves
- Start date
- Status
I did a huge post before. Just read
Yeah, I gotcha. I just wanted to be a part of it. T.T
daemissary
Member
The Mass Effect/IGN conflict of interest situation is definitely interesting...I honestly didn't even think of it when I was reading over their GOTY list but now it totally makes sense.
I think we can all agree though, the worst part of that entire situation was Chobot's voice work itself. She was so laughably bad that it kinda took me out of the experience which is really the only thing a voice actor can't do.
And I actually enjoyed Chobot the vast majority of the time back when she would appear on the IGN podcasts.
I think we can all agree though, the worst part of that entire situation was Chobot's voice work itself. She was so laughably bad that it kinda took me out of the experience which is really the only thing a voice actor can't do.
And I actually enjoyed Chobot the vast majority of the time back when she would appear on the IGN podcasts.
You mean like Kotaku linking to esuteru as a source when the story came from gaf?
http://kotaku.com/5966491/playstation-boss-trolls-nintendo-in-the-sweetest-way-possible
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=45111674&postcount=15065
That evidence is way less effective when you consider it is from a community Wiki (Giant Bomb), an interview from 2005 (IGN Interview), a tweet from 2012, and then an interview from 2008 (Console Monster). Don't know date from Maxim interview, because I'm at work. It is very possible her role and the way she views her work could change over the years.
This amuses me. Compare with someone who *I* actually regard as a respected female game journalist:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleks_Krotoski
Highlights:
These days she's looking more at the broader implications of the social aspects of interactivity, but still: That's quite a CV. And she hasn't licked a PSP once [citation needed].
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
By the gods. That detective work is unprecedented!
My point was based on: "Most well respected female game-journalist" - "famous for licking PSPs" within one paragraph. It says way too much about this industry.
1. IGN Babes interview. Says again too much.
2. She will clearly contradict herself(btw I don´t put too much emphasis on this opinion part. Its just funny how her opinion changed completly.).
She says
not
Huge difference.
Our non-writer is giving tips how to become a videogames journalist and writer based on her own experience as a videogames journalist and writer.
1. The question she has first to answer. This fucking industry etc. ....
2.The way she is completly contradicting herself.
But again, this is not so much the important parts.
Important is:
1. How do you become famous in the industry as a female.
2. Chobot doesn´t want to be seen as writer/ journalist after referring to herself as one. This looks like denialism to prevent damage.
It seems like a good time to see whether websites are actually living up their word after this entire debacle as the Metal Gear Rising preview event was such a situation where journlists were flown to the event, given lodgings in a hotel, and then asked to the play the game for 2-days.
Has any preview made mention of being given this treatment?
Has any preview made mention of being given this treatment?
Well, don't assume that everyone who played the game this week took that press junket. A lot of outlets have people in LA. And I'm out in LA for other reasons anyway (trip paid for by Kotaku), so I stopped by Wednesday night to play the game, for example.
This is from Giant Bomb. I (or you) can go and edit that right now and take out the respected part since it probably isn't actually true.
I'd break down the rest of the points but I'm not really sure what we're actually talking about. I don't actually disagree that there isn't a conflict of interest somewhere in the IGN/Mass Effect thing. And yeah, it is dumb that she "got her break" by licking a PSP, but a woman making it big by doing something sexual isn't something that is unique to game journalism.
If Kotaku or some other outlet sourced a story by cherry picking quotes from across 7 years they'd get ripped apart in this thread.
Which is fine, but you know some did accept that trip and if they did then they should make mention of it.
I would never do any story like that without trying multiple times to interview the subject and get her side of the story on the record.
And besides, this picking on Jessica Chobot is misguided and inappropriate. There are much bigger issues to worry about than what she wants to call herself. Posts where you guys try to "nail" her with old conflicting quotes are exactly why people say NeoGAF likes to go on witch hunts. What is the point? To embarrass someone because she contradicted herself a few times? Sheesh.
What amount of disclosure on the part of the venue you are distrustful of will assuage you?
I'm just saying because I've been on those junkets to play the game, and they're not quite the perk you seem to think they are.
Why are you so defensive?
The difference is usually minimal, but yeah, gamerankings is better.
Cerebral Assassin
Member
No-one is really picking on Chobot, they are just trying to show you that your assumptions made earlier in this thread are incorrect by using (her) prior statements as sources, perhaps the poster should have just made sarcastic comments on twitter & then rapidly backed away from them whilst pointing out the 3/4 good posts he had made earlier in the year.
Some sites already have a policy in place that states they always cover their own travel expenses. So the sites most likely to do this the "right" way would also be the sites least likely to mention this in their previews (since it's already part of their stated ethical practices). In the wake of this latest hubbub, some sites have reaffirmed those policies.
Though it might be a good idea to make it clear under what conditions a preview was done (whether preview code on a debug unit or at a hosted event). Some mention this transparently in the text of their actual preview (like Joystiq's recent MGR preview). Many sites have also recently gotten good about stating the circumstances of a review (version, whether at an event, whether servers were up, etc).
You mean like Kotaku linking to esuteru as a source when the story came from gaf?
http://kotaku.com/5966491/playstation-boss-trolls-nintendo-in-the-sweetest-way-possible
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=45111674&postcount=15065
ha. amusing.
It's just one guy, not the whole of neogaf.
To make it clear:
She said she isn´t a writer for IGN. She atleast was. And she is atleast a fulltime employee of IGN. Conflict of interest? Yes. Atleast not telling the full truth? Yes.
And is coming into this industry via male interest only a "game journalism" problem? No. Doesn´t make it any better.
McBradders
NeoGAF: my new HOME
What was the last game she reviewed? To my knowledge she is simply a face, much like Keighly, and not actively endorsing product or opinions. I may be wrong, I only ever watched her spots on the IGN videos on my Xbox.
If that is the case then the tree you are barking up is entirely the wrong one. There's raging to be had but it would be better for everyone involved if they were the correct targets.
Not sure if this has been pointed out yet.
But I was impressed with Eurogamer's latest preview of Bioshock Infinite. I felt it highlighted plenty of potential flaws as well as, well, potential. They also state that the event was paid-for by the publisher at the bottom of the article.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-12-07-bioshock-infinite-preview-back-on-track
But I was impressed with Eurogamer's latest preview of Bioshock Infinite. I felt it highlighted plenty of potential flaws as well as, well, potential. They also state that the event was paid-for by the publisher at the bottom of the article.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-12-07-bioshock-infinite-preview-back-on-track
Wrong starting point. It started with:
That caused the following reaction by Jason Schreier:
Lazy as I was, I responded with wiki:
Jason rightfully critized this, so I did a little bit research. I found a interview, where she was constantly stating that she is in fact a fulltime employee as a host and writer for IGN. Read it here.
So there you go. What this is about stands in Lime´s post.
Xisiqomelir
Member
I see a lot of younger GAFfers not "getting" why corporatism is "such a big deal". Here's the best explanation ever (amazingly, also featuring a hack and a certain corn chip):
It all started when he did the Doritos commercial. Here's the deal, folks: You do a commercial, you're off the artistic roll call...forever. End of story. Okay? You're another corporate fucking shill, you're another whore in the capitalist gang-bang, and if you do a commercial, there's a price on your head, everything you say is suspect, and every word that comes out of your mouth is now like a turd falling into my drink....urgh..glargh..HNGNGNHNG...*splshh*
It all started when he did the Doritos commercial. Here's the deal, folks: You do a commercial, you're off the artistic roll call...forever. End of story. Okay? You're another corporate fucking shill, you're another whore in the capitalist gang-bang, and if you do a commercial, there's a price on your head, everything you say is suspect, and every word that comes out of your mouth is now like a turd falling into my drink....urgh..glargh..HNGNGNHNG...*splshh*
The Nature Roy
Member
How about a piece on the (apparently) rampant save-game issues 'The Walking Dead,' to which Telltale has offered no solutions and promises no fixes or refunds?
It's interesting to read about the failures of developers who release critical and commercials bombs and are basically non-entities anyway, but how about an honest look at the issues with a Game of the Year?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=500822
McBradders
NeoGAF: my new HOME
What has that got to do with anything in this thread?
More inside baseball for you fine folks.
I reported and broke this story: http://kotaku.com/5966860/gabe-newell-living-room-pcs-will-compete-with-next+gen-consoles
Top of r/games is a Verge re-write of my story: http://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/14ihrx/gabe_newell_says_living_room_pcs_preloaded_with/
Top of r/gaming is a CNET re-write of my story: http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/14mbs4/gabe_newell_says_steam_box_is_a_go_valve_will/
Each of those top Reddit spots is worth hundreds of thousands of clicks, which equates to a lot of money. The people who aggregated my work are rewarded. Original reporting is punished.
While this is an unusual case because Reddit has a vendetta against my company, this sort of thing happens all the time. This is why sites that do nothing but aggregate other peoples' reporting still exist.
I reported and broke this story: http://kotaku.com/5966860/gabe-newell-living-room-pcs-will-compete-with-next+gen-consoles
Top of r/games is a Verge re-write of my story: http://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/14ihrx/gabe_newell_says_living_room_pcs_preloaded_with/
Top of r/gaming is a CNET re-write of my story: http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/14mbs4/gabe_newell_says_steam_box_is_a_go_valve_will/
Each of those top Reddit spots is worth hundreds of thousands of clicks, which equates to a lot of money. The people who aggregated my work are rewarded. Original reporting is punished.
While this is an unusual case because Reddit has a vendetta against my company, this sort of thing happens all the time. This is why sites that do nothing but aggregate other peoples' reporting still exist.
sort of ironic posting this complaint about news aggregation on a forum that operates as one for lots of people.
but it's certainly valid, especially as it benefits the biggest, most popular sites at the cost of smaller ones doing hard work. how do you think this should be sorted? should the verge not try and inform its readers of important stories because they didn't break it, not everyone has time to read every source. maybe something like penny arcade's the cut where it just links the the original article with a one sentence explanation?
but it's certainly valid, especially as it benefits the biggest, most popular sites at the cost of smaller ones doing hard work. how do you think this should be sorted? should the verge not try and inform its readers of important stories because they didn't break it, not everyone has time to read every source. maybe something like penny arcade's the cut where it just links the the original article with a one sentence explanation?
Says the man that works for Gawker. We reap what we sow.
First off, Jason, it's really cool that you've stuck with this thread both during and after Doritos/Wainwright-gate - even though some GAF'ers have been unnecessarily vitriolic towards you. It's easy for us to post here with the benefit of anonymity and zero personal/professional repercussions, however you have neither of those things.
But to address the part in bold: lets not pretend that isn't a two-way street. Your parent company has gone out of its way to expolit the (many) controversies of Reddit for as many clicks as possible. Some Gawker writers even go so far as to levy very childish insults towards to the site in a pretty cynical effort to bait even more clicks.
The point I'm trying to get at is, if you were part of a less controversial network, I'd agree with your assessment of original reporting getting punished, but lets not sit here and pretend that Gawker is an innocent party. With a quick search I could easily bring up half a dozen cases of some really nasty 'reporting' from some of your fellow editors and sister sites, but it would be a waste of time because you know exactly what I'm talking about.
So I definitely feel for your particular predicament, but please don't expect sympathy when you guys get shafted due to an entirely self-built reputation.
McBradders
NeoGAF: my new HOME
I don't think this in particular is stated enough inside this thread.
DJ Crimson
Banned
Kotaku of all places shouldn't whine about this. Seriously.
casinoman921
Member
Aggregation exists everywhere in journalism these days. Associated Press does it when they send out news briefs. Daily Mail is big on it and it pays off on their website. It's just something you have to accept when you're a journalist.
Squidofman
Member
Right, let's not pretend this is something new, or isolated to video games writing. The vast majority of the world's smaller newspapers and news sites, and even many of the bigger ones, are doing little but aggregating content from their parent company or outlets like AP and Reuters.
This is a problem with the entire internet, and extends far past just gaming news. This is part of what led to declines in print media across the world.
This is huge part of the reason Kotaku is as huge as it is. Gawker, especially Kotaku uses stories from other sites all the time. Before Andriasang went under, they got probably 3-5 stories from them a day. And Anoop got a lot of his stories lifted straight out of Famitsu.
What led to the death of Nintendo Power, and declines in newspapers could eventually lead to declines in blogs. The next step is forums taking over blogs, with random posters compiling the stuff that the blogs are compiling, much like NeoGAF and Reddit.
The problem is that online media has no way to reign in the flow of information, just like print media didn't. Anyone can post it, and it doesn't matter. Media has not figured out how to monetize what they do, and there's no real solution in sight. Internet "journalism" is what has cannibalized much of traditional print media, so complaining about Reddit strikes me as incredibly ironic.
Folks, the issue here isn't aggregation: everyone aggregates, from TMZ to the New York Times. Some outlets do it better than others -- and my preferred method is always just to post a link (or "blip") on Kotaku's sidebar so readers can just go read the original source -- but everybody does it. I have no problem with CNET and Verge aggregating my news.
The issue is that when a massive website like Reddit directs massive amounts of traffic to a website that aggregated someone else's story, it discourages original reporting. It steers people in the wrong direction. Why should the editor of a website pay a reporter to fly out to LA to interview people and write stories when the website will be just as rewarded by taking ten minutes to rewrite someone else's story, if they're lucky enough on Reddit? This is a serious problem that you'll see journalists complain about quite a bit. Reddit is particularly sloppy, often linking to images or screengrabs instead of original sources. And their massive audience has turned that into a serious problem for the media world.
The issue is that when a massive website like Reddit directs massive amounts of traffic to a website that aggregated someone else's story, it discourages original reporting. It steers people in the wrong direction. Why should the editor of a website pay a reporter to fly out to LA to interview people and write stories when the website will be just as rewarded by taking ten minutes to rewrite someone else's story, if they're lucky enough on Reddit? This is a serious problem that you'll see journalists complain about quite a bit. Reddit is particularly sloppy, often linking to images or screengrabs instead of original sources. And their massive audience has turned that into a serious problem for the media world.
Those companies get paid though. Most aggregation through Reddit is taken without pay.
Even ignoring the fact that Gawker and Kotaku are two autonomous websites run by entirely different teams of writers, do you really think it's okay for a website like Reddit -- a site whose members see themselves as defenders of free speech -- to ban another website because some of the people there don't like what that website's writers have published?
There are plenty of websites that I don't care for. There are some reporters I don't like. I would never ban them, or refuse to give them attribution if they broke a story that I needed to cover. Now I wouldn't expect your average volunteer Reddit moderator to maintain the same standards as a professional journalist, but the problem is that their audience has become so large that it's dangerous for them not to hold to some of those standards.
chickdigger802
Banned
I do hate how people here when they don't link to original source for articles.
28 Posts Later
Member
What relevance does this issue have to this discussion?
Reddit's entirely based around users upvoting content they like and downvoting [aka hiding] content they don't, regardless of the 'rules'. The site's a 'free speech defender' only when it, or something it likes, is threatened.
They would argue that users submitted the other sites content, and upvoted it, so that's clearly the site they wish to read [although is Kotaku still banned? I don't pay much attention to the politics of Reddit]. It's not Reddit's role to moderate the content you see [which is why they consider themselves 'free speech defenders' in the first place]. You can only attempt to educate your audience on the subject.
http://www.reddit.com/domain/kotaku.com/
Kotaku isn't banned on reddit itself. I don't know how different subreddits handle it.
Blogspam, and I think rewriting other people's content is just that, is a big problem on reddit and it sucks.
It sucks for any site that does an original story and there is a portion of reddit that hates it as much as you do Jason. I keep seeing "don't upvote blogspam" all the time.
But what is the solution? Stricter moderation results in less people reading your subreddit. Only the stupid subreddits that have low-content image macros are the ones that drive the traffic. Well moderated subreddits are only read by a minority.
Hicks should be required study in school.
That's actually something a lot of people don't take into consideration and something I wanted to post a while ago. It's quite dangerous.
It's not only the size of the audience but the power that comes with it. Even though reddit is all about user generated content they still have moderation in place which means they are the ones holding power of any sorts even if they don't necessarily would admit to that.
I think it would be nice if moderators on especially large sites paid more attention to this, but at the end of the day, this will still be a drop in the bucket. These are industry-wide issues and trends that are bigger than any set of moderators.
It reminds me of a few people recycling to help global warming. It's nice, but to accomplish anything you would have to change the entire industry from the top. These trends are too broad in my opinion to ever be effectively combated through good faith efforts. It's like trying to get blogs to link to print media and ask their readers to buy a newspaper. Best of luck to those who battle this I guess.
- Status