I wouldn't call that accurate at all.
-
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
funkystudent
Member
Harsh but true.
She had her chance and she fucked up bigger then anyone fucked up before. She is damaged goods and she doesn't have the experience or reputation of a long time games jouno to continue getting work. I dont see why a site would hire her over ANYONE else unless they just did it to get attention.
She should look into getting work in other fields. Maybe in one where they dont use google to look her up.
Still this should be a lesson to anyone wanting to get into the games media. The internet is great but putting yourself out there can have consequences. Look at the shit reviewers have gone through because they gave a game a 8.8 instead of a 9 or something.
Reviewing games isnt all fun and games. The internet can throw DARK!!!
I do like that this thread has moved on from that guy from Kotaku defending Kotaku every 2nd post.
Back on topic...
It's stuff like this which is embarrassing when it comes from people who call themselves journalists:
http://kotaku.com/5973019/rumor-pre...let-you-download-someone-elses-games-for-free
http://www.gamespot.com/news/preowned-wii-u-consoles-allow-free-game-downloads-user-claims-6402018
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/01/04/report-the-big-advantage-of-buying-a-used-wii-u
All three major sites took a completely unverified NeoGAF post and ran it as "news."
There is no independent reporting.
There is no verification.
There is no comment from the supposed source.
There is no comment from Nintendo.
There is no information about the Wii U's digital purchase system and how it works.
Stuff like this is the epitome of lazy reporting (aka Copy-And-Paste). It makes the reporter look bad. It makes the site look bad. It makes the editor-in-chiefs look bad.
It's basically saying that each of these sites have no editorial standards when it comes to sourcing or verifying information. For all they know, the NeoGAF OP could have been trolling for shits and giggles (not saying the OP was, just an example).
My college journalism prof would have failed any student who tried to turn in something like this as a legitimate piece for the paper.
It's stuff like this which is embarrassing when it comes from people who call themselves journalists:
http://kotaku.com/5973019/rumor-pre...let-you-download-someone-elses-games-for-free
http://www.gamespot.com/news/preowned-wii-u-consoles-allow-free-game-downloads-user-claims-6402018
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/01/04/report-the-big-advantage-of-buying-a-used-wii-u
All three major sites took a completely unverified NeoGAF post and ran it as "news."
There is no independent reporting.
There is no verification.
There is no comment from the supposed source.
There is no comment from Nintendo.
There is no information about the Wii U's digital purchase system and how it works.
Stuff like this is the epitome of lazy reporting (aka Copy-And-Paste). It makes the reporter look bad. It makes the site look bad. It makes the editor-in-chiefs look bad.
It's basically saying that each of these sites have no editorial standards when it comes to sourcing or verifying information. For all they know, the NeoGAF OP could have been trolling for shits and giggles (not saying the OP was, just an example).
My college journalism prof would have failed any student who tried to turn in something like this as a legitimate piece for the paper.
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
Ah. The outrage was far more vague then. I gotcha.
faceless007
Member
One can point out instances of sexism as an independent observer even if the target of it doesn't care or feel victimized.
But at least on Kotaku it was more of an unconfirmed rumor than actual news so I'd really see the problem here. They said that DSN2K claimed to have downloaded the games and run it as a rumor, not something confirmed which is why they tried to contact Nintendo PR.
I also found Finnish Pelit-magazine's end of the Hitman review rather funny (the writer had a column on the doritos-gate earlier):
NNirvi (rough translation said:
But is it okay for sites like Go Nintendo or Nintendo Everything to run such a story? Hits are hits and that is the main concern for websites.
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
Yes. That's why I was pointing out how sexist it was to play paternal protector for the downtrodden.
faceless007
Member
So, to take your logic to its conclusion, if you saw a man treating a woman with genuine misogyny (pick whatever form you like) and the woman didn't seem to mind, you wouldn't criticize it at all because of how paternalistic it would be?
Because if so, you're basically saying men don't have any responsibility at all to fight sexism against women, and that it's solely the problem of women.
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
Are women somehow defenseless?
He knows when you're lying, Lauren.
AMAZING
And this thread has renewed my faith in the intelligence and diligence of gamers.
MCV has been a shill for publishers or anyone with a checkbook since it began. It needs to be closed for the good of the entire industry.
faceless007
Member
No. But they aren't the only ones who should fight genuine sexism either.
akidnamededdy
Banned
Exactly. I didn't have a problem with Jason Schreier's story, because it was wrong. I had a problem with it, because he didn't do proper research or interviews to post a story. The blog format and Gawker's payment system seems to encourage news vomit. Posting unverified stories to make money off of catchy headlines without making sure the information is accurate. It is easier to ask forgiveness from your audience since they don't remember who posted the shitty information. Everyone posts it, because it is a race for clicks.
Sites like Kotaku and Polygon who race for clicks bring down the quality of every site that aspires to source there news, and make sure there information is accurate. There is no commercial benefit to having integrity, because the people who read gaming sites don't value integrity.
Slapping "Rumor" on a story is enough to repost message board banter. Reading JohnTV's twitter post on an MGS is enough to write a story, even though your outlet didn't have ANYONE there to cover the event. You then misinterpret the information, and post wrong information.
It's okay to post wrong information, because you can fix it in five minutes and suffer little backlash. Sloppiness is almost implicitly encouraged by the way the editorial structure functions. Quotas for news stories are another issue.
Sites like this function as a text-based version of FOX NEWS or CNN, except with very little scope for what they are reporting. Even FOX NEWS feels they have some responsibility to be accurate in the news they post. I don't feel there is the same incentive for accuracy on television or in print that there is on the web.
Print has been pushed out, because people prefer interactive news, and don't mind sifting through shit to get to accurate information. Those that do mind view news as it almost always has been viewed. It is a distraction or entertainment. No one cares if it was just a "rumor."
faceless007
Member
If you're going to call names, you might want to get straight which posters actually did say that.
Not if you want to be respected as anything more than a forum poster or a random twitter user.
Well looks like she's bailed so we'll finish with a recap.
Despite saying multiple times she was sorry and that's she's learned from her mistakes, when pressured on details she still thinks Rab's article was libel, she still claims she never made any legal threats despite tweeting about her law module and Eurogamer's EiC categorically saying she did, she still thinks none of her articles were PR fluff and she still thinks that there's nothing wrong with having too cozy a relationship with game publishers and PR.
Sounds like the only thing she's sorry about is having all this stuff backfire on her.
Despite saying multiple times she was sorry and that's she's learned from her mistakes, when pressured on details she still thinks Rab's article was libel, she still claims she never made any legal threats despite tweeting about her law module and Eurogamer's EiC categorically saying she did, she still thinks none of her articles were PR fluff and she still thinks that there's nothing wrong with having too cozy a relationship with game publishers and PR.
Sounds like the only thing she's sorry about is having all this stuff backfire on her.
bernardobri
Steve, the dog with no powers that we let hang out with us all for some reason
Yep, pretty much this summarizes Lauren' participation on the topic so far. Not that I expected an absolute mea culpa, anyway.
She's not a lawyer. There was basically a very low chance of success for libel. Look up the defence of fair comment under English law.
Caught up with the last few pages. Unexpected, Wainwright's appearance, but the whole conversation didn't turn out as exciting as I'd hoped. In the end it seems her perspectives on the game journalism thing haven't changed much. She only seems to regret that she didn't respond initially in a way that didn't cause all the shit storm.
And lol at the "honey" debacle. You guys should read Old Man Murray's treatment of Roberta Williams.
And lol at the "honey" debacle. You guys should read Old Man Murray's treatment of Roberta Williams.
The SDA(Speed Demos Archives) is holding a charity marathon, where top gamers display amazing speedrunning skill over several days, donations go to cancer prevention. It's amazing and heartwarming to watch gamers around the world bunch together for a good cause.
Fucks given about Kotaku/IGN/et al? Zero. However, we get this kind of quality articles instead.
Fucks given about Kotaku/IGN/et al? Zero. However, we get this kind of quality articles instead.
Porn sells. Twitch Cancer events don't.
Checks for a Good Story
1. Sensationalist angle can be taken
2. No need to pay for travel
3. Corporate Synergy
Hidei Kayima makes twitter comments about Steam, Kotaku extrapolates it as some general mentality of Japanese culture, going as far as assuming that cloud gaming especifically refers to steam.
https://twitter.com/PG_kamiya/status/288686682197356544
This is a really bad piece in general, not only it jump to conclusions at an absurd pace, but it misrepresents the Japanese industry. Not to mention Platinum games has expresed interest in porting their stuff to PC using Steam and having their main producer visiting Valve.
https://twitter.com/PG_kamiya/status/288686682197356544
This is a really bad piece in general, not only it jump to conclusions at an absurd pace, but it misrepresents the Japanese industry. Not to mention Platinum games has expresed interest in porting their stuff to PC using Steam and having their main producer visiting Valve.
The Dutch Slayer
Member
hahahahah so "tech journalism" he
Story here:
http://gizmodo.com/5975230/i-have-t...dphones-because-the-company-gave-me-a-massage
Story here:
http://gizmodo.com/5975230/i-have-t...dphones-because-the-company-gave-me-a-massage
its a joke he knows its just for fun and all
If by "nailed it" you mean "wrote a story about Kotaku without reaching out to Kotaku for comment, therefore ignoring one of the basic principles of journalism" then sure!
Son of Cervantes
Member
Sort of like Richard Eisenbeis wrote a whole article based on one person's casual tweet, assumed a whole bunch of shit, and never bothered to reach out to the man for some clarification?
I think it's fitting. Did Kotaku reach Kamiya for comment?
Kotaku commented when they published the article.
someguyinahat
Member
Okay, so what's your comment?
Cerebral Assassin
Member
So you won't comment on Kotaku articles that weren't written by you(except for all the articles you have tried to advertise in this thread) but you will comment on an article commenting on said article?
I don't speak on behalf of Kotaku. But Stephen Totilo is pretty easy to reach, and when I see people complimenting Erik Kain for an article in which he failed to get multiple sides of a story, I can't help but wonder if you guys are actually interested in journalism, or you just want bloggers who echo the common consensus on NeoGAF and Reddit.
Cerebral Assassin
Member
Why are you commenting on an article that you didn't write, I thought you didn't do that?
Son of Cervantes
Member
Interesting to see that you hold Erik Kain to a higher journalistic standard than Richard Eisenbeis, and by extension, Kotaku...
Dr. Feel Good
Banned
I admired your initial openness in this thread in the beginning but I feel now your just coming off as someone who can't swallow the fact that people out there hate the company you work for. It's kind of pathetic.
What makes you think I hold Erik Kain to higher standards than anyone at Kotaku? Because I'm not publicly criticizing my own co-workers? Think for a second, will you?
BibiMaghoo
Member
You don't speak for kotaku.
But you do represent them on gaf.
Are your posts, 100% personal - non work- related opinions?
Because if they are, they tend to seem very much sided with your employer, which I guess is understandable.
But it makes it unclear who you're posting here as.
Cerebral Assassin
Member
How is that any different from the "article" that is still up on Kotaku? A simple google search would have shown the huge flaws in that article but no-one at Kotaku could be bothered to do so(or god forbid contacted Platinum). I seriously believe you are just trolling this thread now, as there is no reasonable way you can attack one writer whilst defending your co-workers(I include the editorial staff who clearly failed when they posted the original article).
The irony is overpowering.
Of course my posts are 100% personal. Does it seem like I'm spouting some corporate company line? I think I've been pretty candid in this thread, and I think I've been honest about both my mistakes and Kotaku's flaws. That said, hopefully you folks can understand why I have no interest in publicly criticizing any of my co-workers.
I don't recall defending the Kamiya article or commenting on it at all. I don't plan to.
But the difference is that many of you are criticizing the Kamiya article while simultaneously praising the Forbes article. That's what baffles me.
Cerebral Assassin
Member
I never claimed you commented on the Kamiya article (in fact I know you didn't), but as somebody who is in this thread for reasons other than advertising(you do realise that some of your posts in this thread are against this sites ToS, right?) I can comment on both articles.
Perhaps if you didn't want to talk about your co-workers work(even though you have happily done so in the past) you shouldn't have commented on the Kain article (as it is impossible to discuss that article due to it's subject matter, i.e your co-workers failing at their jobs).
Actually, it's pretty easy to say "hey, this Forbes blogger should have reached out to Kotaku for comment before writing about Kotaku" without giving my thoughts on the actual content of his article or our article. Which is what I did.
If you're going to demand better journalism - which you should! - then don't just ignore the tenets of journalism because you happen to agree with a writer's opinion. Unless you want all of games media to turn into Forbes-like content farms full of writers who just look at what NeoGAF or Reddit are talking about on any given day and then echo whatever opinion most people seem to agree with.
If you're going to demand better journalism - which you should! - then don't just ignore the tenets of journalism because you happen to agree with a writer's opinion. Unless you want all of games media to turn into Forbes-like content farms full of writers who just look at what NeoGAF or Reddit are talking about on any given day and then echo whatever opinion most people seem to agree with.
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
This thread keeps on delivering. Kotaku writer complaining about other site's content production.
Cerebral Assassin
Member
You are right it is easy to do that, unfortunately it is also a worthless comment as you will not respond to any reason why that would(in this case) not be necessary( He didn't need to find out how you come up with your terrible headlines as it makes no difference what method came up with it, he was more concerned with the end result which requires no further comment).
Oh, so you should only ignore them if you are being paid to ignore them, good to know.
Once again it is impossible to further discuss this due to you ignoring the original article.
Photolysis
Banned
If it weren't an aside at the end of an opinion piece covering a factual event, and actually happened to be an integral part of the article, I would.
Is it a journalism faux pas? Yes it is. On the other hand, the main thrust of the article, pointing out a serious problem in the industry is fairly well written and legitimate. And it shows far greater journalistic standards and ethics than the Kotaku article.
The funny thing is, when I think of Forbes, I remember the fact they (via Erik) did some quality reporting, when the industry as a whole was dismissing many valid complaints about ME3's ending, acting like a bunch of shills, and generally bitching.
I also think to call them content farms compared to the kind of crap we see quite often out of Kotaku and other sites in the industry - aside from it seeming extremely unprofessional given that you haven't provided anything to back that up - is hilariously ironic.
- Status