Yup. OP is one of the worst fanboys in this forum. I wish Patrick and the OP get to meet some day.
-
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.
VG247 editor Patrick Garratt interesting track record
- Thread starter Oersted
- Start date
Yup. OP is one of the worst fanboys in this forum. I wish Patrick and the OP get to meet some day.
meh. Seems this is very knee jerk reaction to story on MS. Only real story is the one where he made up going to it or whatever and that is a weak one at best.
Think its funny people think journalists cannot be "biased" in the first place. Like this is sooo wrong when its not. Its like calling out a sport journalists because he has a favorite team. Its just silly. Or a tech writer because they like apple more than MS.
If you really want to hear biased game journalists go listen to the old 1up yours podcast. Luke and shane us to go at it like sony/xbot fanboys. Its what made the show fun to watch and at the end of the day no one got upset about the way they feel about the console.
first post nailed it... lol
Think its funny people think journalists cannot be "biased" in the first place. Like this is sooo wrong when its not. Its like calling out a sport journalists because he has a favorite team. Its just silly. Or a tech writer because they like apple more than MS.
If you really want to hear biased game journalists go listen to the old 1up yours podcast. Luke and shane us to go at it like sony/xbot fanboys. Its what made the show fun to watch and at the end of the day no one got upset about the way they feel about the console.
first post nailed it... lol
It's funny. The opening post reads like a Fox news article complaining about the bias of the liberal media.
GeneralManager
Member
la flama blanca
Banned
vikingvessel
Member
Did you laugh as hard at the OP including he was totally miss-representing japanese culture in the list of infractions. You made some very valid points, but come on, let's call a stretch a stretch.
Defending VG247?
I have not seen that, I stated that shitty gaming bloggers / "journos" are par for the course and the bias displayed by Garratt could possibly be at odds with the OP's own preferences and the real reason for this thread ...... not poor standards.
Along the thread people have pointed out that the OP is biased against Sony and quite vocal about it and the main crux of his points / arguments against Garratt where in relation to Sony and how he portrayed it in relation to others.
Your post reflects very little if not nothing that anyone has said here.
BruceLeeRoy
Banned
Nice work OP, that was a highly entertaining read. I love detective gaf.
Palette Swap
Member
This all still begs the question: why do people feel it's more important to discuss OP's posting history/bias rather than the subject at hand? Because honestly, coming late to this thread, half of it seems to be a mix of debating OP's credibility and motives to make this thread and rationalizations like "they're all biased anyway, why didn't you talk about this guy or that guy?"
Meanwhile, the same people apparently don't feel as outraged about a journo making figures up or attending a fictious conference.
Taking a step back, this all looks like thread shitting for the sake of it.
That's a bit of a leap there. The made up numbers thing wasn't even in the initial OP, was it? Even so, no one is likely to defend games media. I came into this thread specifically because I was ready for some juicy games-media dirt, but instead it was about perceived bias. Feh.
When you get down to if, you're going to accuse someone of something when it seems your guilty of doing similar, people are going to comment. In this case, it leads to whether there's really something there, of if this is just because of increased sensitivity and cherry-picking.
Nevertheless, if that, or any talk of the rest of the media is "thread shitting" then what's left to discuss? Just more "Ah ha, gotcha" posts?
When you get down to if, you're going to accuse someone of something when it seems your guilty of doing similar, people are going to comment. In this case, it leads to whether there's really something there, of if this is just because of increased sensitivity and cherry-picking.
Nevertheless, if that, or any talk of the rest of the media is "thread shitting" then what's left to discuss? Just more "Ah ha, gotcha" posts?
BRocknRolla
Member
I'd imagine if you dug through any number of gaming journalists' backgrounds you'd find all kinds of things to construe as contradiction and bias. Sounds like this article challenged your own conceptions and you set off looking for evidence to discredit the writer.
Instead, consider this approach; take everything with a grain of salt. Rather than witch hunts, conspiracy theories, and leading crusades, just consider that an article which preemptively calls the next Xbox troubled without any actual evidence probably shouldn't be taken as anything more than junk journalism and click-bait fluff. Then again, that just seems like common sense. You'll certainly be seeing a whole lot of this sort of thing from both sides in the coming months. Good luck with the crusade.
Instead, consider this approach; take everything with a grain of salt. Rather than witch hunts, conspiracy theories, and leading crusades, just consider that an article which preemptively calls the next Xbox troubled without any actual evidence probably shouldn't be taken as anything more than junk journalism and click-bait fluff. Then again, that just seems like common sense. You'll certainly be seeing a whole lot of this sort of thing from both sides in the coming months. Good luck with the crusade.
I feel I have described my point of view and reasons for asking the questions that I have, answered when people have stated opinions like you have.
In fact the post you quoted explains my point quite clearly.
1. As far as I am concerned and have stated multiple times all gaming "journos" are suspect , of bias, poor standards, being duplicitous and I regard to be nothing more than PR mouthpieces hiding under the guise of enthusiast press, in general.
2. The OP is right that this guy is very questionable.
3. The OP has every right to portray these points.
4. I have only questioned his motivations in performing this investigation, did Garratts Sony bias spur this thread or solely his shitty work? ....... Poor standards are the norm for the gaming press.
5. Others have pointed out that the OP has a history of having issues with Sony, some have called him a fanboy that attacks Sony.
6. People stating that by "attacking" / questioning the motives behind the thread is tantamount to defending VG247 is false or that by stating poor standards in general means Garratt should not be called out is also false.
In short, the credibility of Garratt being called into question is a valid one, questioning whether the real issue is not his journalistic standards but rather his slant towards a company the OP has issues with is also valid.
That's ultimately much more petty than the actual exposing of the journalist though, in fact it's extremely petty. So if the OP's motivations are exposed or whatever, fine. Does that really make the argument that the OP presented less valid? You said yourself it really doesn't.
Everyone has motivations or goals when it comes to presenting or discussing anything on NeoGaf. Attempting to point a finger at OP won't change anything about the videogame journalism landscape, actual proof of journalistic malarkey could.
Who said it would change it? ........ I didn't state otherwise.
I have iterated for the umpteenth that gaming journalism is bullshit and you won't change it with posts on gaf either, vote with your feet as these sites live on traffic.
Secondly if the OP is operating with an agenda then his intentions were not to fix gaming journo standards either, that's the point.
Also fanboys tend to have persecution complex and see bias everywhere. The OP's post history better puts into context why he/she sees bias in certain articles where there are none. A couple of negative articles on their favorite company and they are up in arms. Sure the journo may like one console over another. No different from Greg Miller or Aegies etc.. As long as they present themselves well and not as badly as the OP usually presents his/her fanboyism in forums it is bearable.
The problem is you can't leave that outside.
Making shit up like that speaks volumes about the journalist's (lol) professional integrity.
theviolenthero
Member
The reason your history comes into question is because your OP doesn't mention other articles he's done like the following:
ZombiU hands-on: the Dark Souls of zombie games
To all Dark Souls fans, you absolutely need to play this game. Its that simple.
http://www.vg247.com/2012/09/18/zombiu-hands-on-the-dark-souls-of-zombie-games/
Their's even a massive 375+ post thread about that article on Neogaf:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=491952&page=8
AND
This changes everything: Valve enters console race
Assuming Gabe can keep the price down, theres every chance you may never need to buy into Microsoft or Sony hardware again.
http://www.vg247.com/2013/01/09/this-changes-everything-valve-enters-console-race/
I found those two articles in less than 3 minutes.
Looking through other articles from him it just doesn't seem like he's a Sony fanboy like your OP made him out to be. He just seems like a typical games journalist who's overzealous/un-unprofessional about any news that comes out. This dude flat out makes bold claims with the hope of getting people to click ($) which is par for the course.
Gamer @ Heart
Member
Holy shit, i was quoted in the OP! I feel special.
Editorial are fine, but i agree his point is really hard to argue considering he couldnt even wait for any official news of the new xbox before writing that. It is premature beyond comprehension.
Editorial are fine, but i agree his point is really hard to argue considering he couldnt even wait for any official news of the new xbox before writing that. It is premature beyond comprehension.
theviolenthero
Member
The only "proof" the OP gave that he lied about that conference is a post on neogaf.
That's it. A single post on neogaf.
It seems like the motivation is fuel to try to focus conversation on one particular instance, style, individual, slant or bias and therein give the impression that is the only one worthy of discussion. Telling the truth alone isn't enough because it remains entirely possible that you're looking to manipulate the appearance of the situation. Like lighting a scene in a hollywood movie, the scene doesn't change but the way you light it or the angle you shoot it from can generate a vastly different impression in the audience, and yet the facts haven't changed.
So I think it's fair and appropriate to look at what we're taking away from this thread, both in terms of what we take from the OP itself and how the discussion has shaped itself.
I wouldn't begin to suggest that this guy is a worthwhile journalist but I feel there's the sense of a larger implication, largely generated through omission, that I cannot agree with.
So far he's done a better job at exposing a biased/flawed journalist than a lot of us in this thread, I don't give a shit what he says in other threads. Information or awareness is still information or awareness. The apathetic attitude towards videogame editorials is such a non entity or boring attitude to have. So videogame journalism is forever tainted, awesome.
We aren't instantly morphing it into something better! No point in even exposing the bad journalists that propagate the mediocrity. Never confront the fact of how bad it is I guess. It'd be nice if this industry and it's consumers wern't so apathetic.
Exposing it? Shit you would have to be newborn or naive to not know that already.
I operate from that opinion as standard.
This thread comes across as someone not liking Sony attention rather than a crusade for ethical and accountable gaming press.
The Rab Florence thread was a legitimate discussion and investigation into the issues within that area, this just does not have the same feel.
Well damn.
Maybe a thread title change is in order just like that VG247 thread.
Assuming everything is terrible is different than actually having concrete evidence that something is terrible, the fact you think assumptions or personal convictions hold the same weight as actual evidence is pretty odd.
I only visit NeoGaf and Giantbomb as far as videogame sites go, I detest the current journalistic approach to videogames like many here. When something is actually proven I don't just brush it off because I had previous convictions, I appreciate anyone that brings the mediocrity to light.
Whatever then, continue the witchhunt for potentially biased forum posters.
Glorified G
Member
ding! ding! ding! I know your just pointing out the obvious, but you summed it up pretty well.
Seriously, wtf?
Some people prefer one company over the other, it's dumb but that's how it is. Why would it be different in "games journalism" which mostly consist of gamers who can write a little?
ChosenPredator
Banned
I think the OP did a good job as well but it's even more interesting seeing certain people investigate the topic starter posting history now lol
The problem with the OP is: if you read a study on how "smoking is not so bad for you" that is funded or was made by the cigarette lobby, you damn well better find another source for proper perspective.
There have already been posts by other users who looked into the accused journos history and found hyperbolic statements across the board. If the OP is only looking at Sony news and cherry picking comments by the journo, of course he will come off as biased.
Also: is "He is bias" some kind of meme?
There have already been posts by other users who looked into the accused journos history and found hyperbolic statements across the board. If the OP is only looking at Sony news and cherry picking comments by the journo, of course he will come off as biased.
Also: is "He is bias" some kind of meme?
A Link to the Past
Banned
Amazing how a thread's quality drops when a person comes in and derails a thread's point by accusing the TC of bias - based not on anything that he said, but rather, on who the thread was about.
If someone does an expose on a Republican, the only people who accuse him or her of bias are insane conservatives. Chew on that a bit.
The circle-jerking seems to start.
" The owner of VG247 might be a fanboy, making things up and missrepresenting things, but hey, shot the messenger."
But for those who are genuinely interested: My only motivitation in this very case is the current state of videogame-journalism. Feel free to be part of the ongoing discussion.
For example:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=48410888
" The owner of VG247 might be a fanboy, making things up and missrepresenting things, but hey, shot the messenger."
But for those who are genuinely interested: My only motivitation in this very case is the current state of videogame-journalism. Feel free to be part of the ongoing discussion.
For example:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=48410888
Read the thread, been accused of what you are insinuating already and have answered that point.
I also did not accuse the OP of bias but rather inquired to his motives based upon the fact that one of the most common words in his OP was Sony, on that basis alone did it raise my attentions.
It was subsequent posters that raised his post history and flat out called him a fanboy, one with a Sony issue.
That only served to reinforce my original post, one I have had to defend from numerous posts like yours.
I also did not want to drop a controversial post and then split, I have stayed to defend my decision to make that point.
Witchhunt?
Really?
I did not search and put up his posting history or any of that kind of stuff, I don't care ......... but you can't make a thread about a shitty gaming journo and most of your argument is centred around articles and stuff that mostly seemed to be linked to Sony and then be found to have an issue with Sony and not have people ask questions.
Even if the OP has an anti-Sony bias, the thread+article combination that inspired the investigation was quite poor. And that is coming from someone that prefers Sony's games.
Also questioning the motivations of the OP of this thread is besides the point. I support the idea of calling out journalists.
The articles on ZombiU and Steambox should be incorporated to paint a bigger picture of the author though.
Maybe in the end it's all about the clicks and not a specific bias?
Also questioning the motivations of the OP of this thread is besides the point. I support the idea of calling out journalists.
The articles on ZombiU and Steambox should be incorporated to paint a bigger picture of the author though.
Maybe in the end it's all about the clicks and not a specific bias?
grimshawish
Banned
Some of the people in this thread. The OP looked at a post history. That is not fucking creepy. He published these with the aim of gaining public widespread readership.
REMEMBER CITADEL
Banned
Pointing out the OP's potential bias is all well and good, but it's poor defense. His alleged bias and Garratt's alleged bias do not cancel each other out. And one of them is posing as a journalist on a well-known website, which obviously makes him more susceptible to and deserving of public scrutiny. We all let our preferences get in the way from time to time, but we're not trying to make a career out of our writing.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
Good OP
did not know about that cvg thing. "translation error", ahahaha
did not know about that cvg thing. "translation error", ahahaha
Not exactly. Posted it in the videogamejournalism-thread because I knew there was an actual discussion possible. In a dedicated thread, I doubt it. I expected derailing. I expected that MS/Nin fans would agree, Sony fans would start argumentum ad stipes. Thats why I asked. People said yeah. ...Should have known better.
Ive lived through my video game years with the belief that gaming journalists are just gamers that happened to have been lucky enough to get paid to play games. Everyone having their own tastes and bias, being human and all it would be impossible not to. Ive listened more closely to a few who tend to match up with my tastes and can get a good read off of them if i would like a game or not. This has served me pretty well all this time not expecting each and every gaming journalist to be neutral robots.
If they are up on a pedestal of being flawless paragons of unbiased, neutral and uncorruptable virtue then that is because of the gaming community putting them in that position and giving them that influence and power. Its the same incredibly naive notion that game companies are your friends or buddies and needing to be defended. Its an industry based on subjectivity and opinions, mock those with a differing opinion and then move on to another source your in tune with. The world will always have its Limbaughs or Mahers.
If they are up on a pedestal of being flawless paragons of unbiased, neutral and uncorruptable virtue then that is because of the gaming community putting them in that position and giving them that influence and power. Its the same incredibly naive notion that game companies are your friends or buddies and needing to be defended. Its an industry based on subjectivity and opinions, mock those with a differing opinion and then move on to another source your in tune with. The world will always have its Limbaughs or Mahers.
yeah, i don't know what's the problem with the OP's posting history. so what if he has company preferences? its not like his posts are getting paid and published for the world wide web to read. he is just a part of this forum, much like you guys with your "preferred company" and your arguments that what you like is much better than what he likes.
it really doesn't matter unlike the "journalist" in the topic at hand. please don't tell me you're comparing the OP to that journalist.
it really doesn't matter unlike the "journalist" in the topic at hand. please don't tell me you're comparing the OP to that journalist.
I really think the notion that he is has an agenda is pretty farfetched,.
especially if you look at this..
http://www.vg247.com/2012/11/13/xbox-world-and-psm3-to-no-longer-be-published-says-future/
you can see that Patrick Garret used to be the editor of of XBOX world magazine..
especially if you look at this..
http://www.vg247.com/2012/11/13/xbox-world-and-psm3-to-no-longer-be-published-says-future/
you can see that Patrick Garret used to be the editor of of XBOX world magazine..
This. The Xbox fanboyism at american gaming sites is ridiculous - yet it doesn't get this kind of attention.
AdventureRacing
Member
I'm not sure you should be saying stuff like this when a quick look at your own post history shows you with just as much bias. The whole reason you're in here defending this journalist is because of your own bias.
How can you lambast a regular poster for being biased and then just let off the journalist when it's their job not to be influenced like that? I don't care if a poster is biased, we all are and that's fair enough. Journalists should be held to a different standard to forum posters for obvious reasons.
Just fyi calling people out on their personal biases is a waste of time and is pretty much only done by people because they are on the opposite side of the fence. It stifles discussion and is ultimately pointless. If you disagree with someones argument you should explain why instead of just calling them out as biased.
This on the other hand is quite interesting. The fact that he used to write for an xbox magazine in 2003 doesn't necessarily mean what the OP is saying is wrong though.
I have no doubt this is true. Is it the OP's job to go around and do this for every single gaming site in existence? He noticed something in this one instance and pointed it out. If you've noticed it somewhere else you can do the same, i don't see an issue.
Lots of sites misreported that Vita sale story, I remember it well 'cause I tweeted a few people about the discrepancy at the time. I think Ben Parfitt was responsible for the first 'Vita sold tons more than rumoured' tweet that set it all off, but it got rather compounded after that. The original source of the misinformation was never quite clear, but it's quite possible Garret was just reporting that misinformation rather than making it up off his own bat.
After a supernova, you get a black hole. Far superior analogy.
the question is: who am I biased toward? Mull over that a bit.