• 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.
  • Hi Guest. We've rebooted and consolidated our Communities section, so be sure to check it out and subscribe to some threads. Thanks!

Games Journalism! Wainwright/Florence/Tomb Raider/Eurogamer/Libel Threats/Doritos

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rufus

Member
Sep 8, 2006
7,634
0
0
Nasty thing to say.

I've made it quite clear that I take these issues seriously, and I think I've addressed everyone in this thread with a great deal of respect.
You've said that you take them seriously, but you've also joked about it in a way that makes you seem dismissive of the concern. I can't say it more plainly than this.
 

conman

Member
Aug 12, 2007
4,591
0
0
Morality arguments aside, if you're a journalist, and you tweet a hashtag for a game you're at an event for to win a PS3, you look really, really silly. I'm really glad this was sniffed out and GAF is talking about it. This thread is about bringing up facts so that people can form their own opinions. I absolutely love that. If people look at that list and go "I'm not sure I can trust these people anymore", that's ultimately a good thing in my opinion. However, this is why I also brought up my experience working in ad sales. If this is a thread about bringing up facts, I'm going to bring up the fact that no advertising dollars have ever affected a review on any one of the sites I represent. If you still look at a site and get iffy about a review because of all the advertising, more power to you. I just wanted to throw out more facts.
There's a continued misunderstanding going on here between those working in the industry and those readers (former readers, now) who are bothered by the dismissive attitude and total silence from journalists. It's like we're speaking different languages. I don't know how often we can say this: we're not talking about blatant bribes or this-for-that exchanges of coverage for gifts. We're talking about a culture of too-close interaction between PR and journalists. They're so close that they don't even recognize it. Worse, they don't even want to talk about it. Instead, they just turn the discussion back around on us readers as if we're somehow to blame.

It's a shitty thing to do. And over these past few days, I've lost enormous respect for writers whom I've respected for years.

So, nothing will change. Kotaku, IGN, GameSpot, GameInformer and the likes will always have a fresh supply of young people that won't bother with nothing else besides the "what's the most awesome video game that will release this month." That's the same audience PR people want to target, so, nothing will change. No party has the incentive to change the established system as they have nothing to win with that change (and perhaps they would even lose).
Unfortunately, this looks to be the case. Very few people in the press want to talk about this. I know now whose work I trust, and it's very few people indeed. I thought many of the writers whose work I read regularly could be trusted to be intelligent, sensitive, and critical voices in the midst of this. If there ever was a moment when games journalists could stand up for what they do and truly try to change the culture, now would be it. But they're all sticking their heads in the sand and calling us a bunch of paranoid idiots.

Nice move. Classy. If a few folks on GAF were unreasonably hostile to games journalism before, then there will be even more now. Well done, journalists.
 

Oxx

Member
Oct 9, 2005
12,534
0
0
Do you think a lot of Kotaku readers are that interested in this story? I think a lot of GAF posters are, because a lot of GAF posters are fascinated by this sort of inside baseball stuff, but I think that makes up a rather small chunk of our audience, to be honest.
Telling your audience exactly what they want to hear. No more, no less. James Gournalism.
 

CzarTim

Member
Jul 9, 2008
10,023
0
0
Do you think a lot of Kotaku readers are that interested in this story? I think a lot of GAF posters are, because a lot of GAF posters are fascinated by this sort of inside baseball stuff, but I think that makes up a rather small chunk of our audience, to be honest.
A site as large as Kotaku has to have a good portion of an audience at least interested in being informed by the state of the industry in the same way they are interested in a bad development cycle of an X-Men game no one played.
 

spirity

Member
Aug 4, 2007
4,184
0
0
If you've got any questions about any of this - or about my personal stances and experiences - feel free to let me know!
You said you donated swag.

1) Who do you donate swag to
2) What sort of swag were you getting. Was it all gaming related, or did you get tickets to shows and sports events?
 

DCharlie

And even i am moderately surprised
Jun 7, 2004
23,294
25
1,480
www.dcharlie.com
Do you think a lot of Kotaku readers are that interested in this story? I think a lot of GAF posters are, because a lot of GAF posters are fascinated by this sort of inside baseball stuff, but I think that makes up a rather small chunk of our audience, to be honest.
let me be the arsehole here then :

if you don't think your readers care about the story, does that not give rise to the idea that -if- you had a cosy relationship with PR (not saying you do) that your readers wouldn't care? I mean - if you aren't hitting the enthusiast gamers who would care about the seperation then addressing that angle surely is moot right?

I dunno - again - a few of these arguments seem to raise even more questions -from a GAF perspective- (important distinction here!). It's not just you in this thread saying the same thing : it's a mix of "not really journalists" , "our readers don't care about the story" and "you'll just have to trust us" - the net-net comes out to : "we won't report, we might not look at how we work, and there's no point changing/looking because our audience don't care" - again, i think a lot of you are inviting even more suspicion. This is -regardless- of whether you are covering the story or not - it's more from a "GAF perception" perspective.

As you say - i doubt your core readership care or have even noticed the story.
 

Jackpot

Banned
Nov 8, 2011
11,466
0
0
Do you think a lot of Kotaku readers are that interested in this story?
Here are all the stories Kotaku has dedicated to gaming journalism despite your readership not being interested in them as you claim:

http://kotaku.com/games-journalism/

Look, there's your "famous" Brian Crecente covering the controversy over Squeenix PR leaning on 1UP!

http://kotaku.com/183126/square-asks-for-embargo-on-published-game?tag=games-journalism

And I take it you're dropping the "my tweets are just jokes despite being identical to the passive-aggressive snark from all the PR guys" defense as you've decided to selectively avoid all the responses to your post about it.
 
Mar 8, 2012
3,036
0
0
We published this tremendous story about Silicon Knights (which I'm sure did not please too many PR folks): http://kotaku.com/5955223/what-went-wrong-with-silicon-knights-x+men-destiny

We were first to break news on G4 canceling its gaming shows: http://kotaku.com/5955278/crisis-at-g4-studios-gaming-shows-will-be-cancelled-source-says
I loved the SK piece and read the G4 one, but those aren't ones you should be pointing to in this situation. They take literally no courage to post; those things don't exist anymore and therefore toothless to retaliate.

Just for fun, when was the last time a Silicon Knights game was advertised on Kotaku? The last time G4 sponsored an ad?
 

Marcel

Member
Feb 16, 2012
11,276
3
0
I disagree with the premise that things need to "change" at Kotaku. We are constantly striving to improve ourselves, of course, but even just yesterday we had some phenomenal reporting on our website.

We published this tremendous story about Silicon Knights (which I'm sure did not please too many PR folks): http://kotaku.com/5955223/what-went-wrong-with-silicon-knights-x+men-destiny

We were first to break news on G4 canceling its gaming shows: http://kotaku.com/5955278/crisis-at-g4-studios-gaming-shows-will-be-cancelled-source-says

We posted this fascinating essay on the idea of mystery in gaming: http://kotaku.com/5955326/we-are-explorers-in-search-of-mystery-in-videogames

I put together a piece on the current state of SC2 that I think is very interesting: http://kotaku.com/5954973/as-fans-say-starcraft-is-dying-blizzard-plans-some-big-changes

And that was all in a single day. The conversation about whether we should be covering this Wainwright story is a separate issue, but it's disingenuous to say that all we do is concentrate on "what's the most awesome video game that will release this month."
Give your organization some more credit. Aren't you guys the first to break stories about people dying in cyber cafes? Living in cyber cafes? Sleeping in cyber cafes? The best Hostess snack cake? The latest in the world of culled-from-DeviantArt cosplay images? You know, the good stuff.
 

GillianSeed79

Member
Jan 8, 2009
8,636
0
0
I'm not going to pile on Schrier since he's actually participating in the discussion, but there's one thing that should and could be easily fixed and that's swag. You are not the first journalist to mention over the last several years that your office gets sent these elaborate press kits and CE's. The typical response is that you don't care about the swag and you either give it away or trash it. That's great, but why does it still get sent in the first place? Could you not have your bosses simply write an email to the publicists that you work with that under no circumstances will you accept anything other than a review code copy of a game? Make it clear that if you do get a press kit, you will not even accept the game within and if you are not sent a simple review copy you will wait until a retail release before reviewing. Wouldn't it save PR money and eliminate any impression of influence?

I'm sure people will disagree that you should be even getting free games, but I look at it like a movie studio giving critics free screenings before release. The swag shouldn't even be sent in the first place though.
 

jschreier

Member
Jan 6, 2011
4,045
0
0
www.twitter.com
You've said that you take them seriously, but you've also joked about it in a way that makes you seem dismissive of the concern. I can't say it more plainly than this.
Do my posts in this thread seem dismissive of the concern?

I really am sorry if you guys feel like my tweets to Barack Obama or N'Gai or whoever seemed dismissive and not just silly. That was by no means the intent. I just don't think there's a lot of room for serious arguments and conversations on a platform where you're limited to 140 characters a post, as I said earlier.
 

Makonero

Member
Apr 13, 2012
8,095
1
0
I think that is the big elephant in the room with every outlet. No one wants to speak out against the system or they will get the same treatment as the writer of the EuroGamer piece got. PR will hate you for pointing at "the man behind the curtain" and other writers will hate you for making them look bad.
We need a hero. We're holding out for a hero 'til the end of the night!
 

CzarTim

Member
Jul 9, 2008
10,023
0
0
Do my posts in this thread seem dismissive of the concern?

I really am sorry if you guys feel like my tweets to Barack Obama or N'Gai or whoever seemed dismissive and not just silly. That was by no means the intent. I just don't think there's a lot of room for serious arguments and conversations on a platform where you're limited to 140 characters a post, as I said earlier.
If only there was a place for you to write a longer piece with your opinion...
 

TommyT

Member
Apr 20, 2007
7,514
0
0
TX
Really? Tweet 1 is either mocking the idea that shilling for free consoles (the original thing Rab was writing about) is wrong, or that it is so unimportant you are sarcastically asking Obama to comment on it.

Tweet 2 is a reductio ad absurdum mocking those who claim reviewers are being influenced by colluding with PR.

Tweet 3 is you joining in on Ngai's smug circlejerk (along with a second Kotaku contributor I might add).

You don't see how anyone could interpet any of those tweets as showing disdain for your audience, much less all of them together? 'cause they're sure as hell not showing disdain for all the PR flacks you're tweeting to.

Let's add that on top of your repeated weaksauce excuses for not mentioning this issue on Kotaku, despite having plenty of time and motivation to join in here and on twitter, and writing about similar issues in the past. Paints a pretty picture, doesn't it?
Thanks for making me have to Google some Latin.
 

Dennis

Banned
Jul 7, 2009
46,557
1
0
Do you think a lot of Kotaku readers are that interested in this story? I think a lot of GAF posters are, because a lot of GAF posters are fascinated by this sort of inside baseball stuff, but I think that makes up a rather small chunk of our audience, to be honest.
Yes, I think a lot of Kotaku readers would be interested in this story.

And anyway, isn't it good journalism to give the readers stories they didn't even know they would be interested in?
 

inky

Member
Dec 20, 2010
23,493
0
0
(*< - - - - - -
steamcommunity.com
Do my posts in this thread seem dismissive of the concern?

I really am sorry if you guys feel like my tweets to Barack Obama or N'Gai or whoever seemed dismissive and not just silly. That was by no means the intent. I just don't think there's a lot of room for serious arguments and conversations on a platform where you're limited to 140 characters a post, as I said earlier.
Your posts and your tweets just make it sound like you are speaking through both sides of your mouth depending on your audience, that's all. With one side you pretend to be serious in a forum that's pretty riled up about it, with the other side you are joking around about it, and high fiving your friends that feel this side (the gaming forum) are just a bunch of conspiracy theorists and want nothing to do with the seriousness of the topic.

So that's how this side sees you. Not talking about me anyway, I frankly couldn't care less what you or those guys have to say, no offense intended.
 

sflufan

Banned
May 5, 2007
6,841
0
0
Do you think a lot of Kotaku readers are that interested in this story? I think a lot of GAF posters are, because a lot of GAF posters are fascinated by this sort of inside baseball stuff, but I think that makes up a rather small chunk of our audience, to be honest.

This is perhaps the most nauseating, infuriating excuse that you could possibly have given and was perhaps best left unsaid.

On the front page of today's New York Times, there's an article on the fairly lucrative paychecks received by dairy industry executives as a result of dairy industry consolidation. Now tell me, how many readers of the NYT well and truly have even a passing interest in this issue? It's probably somewhere in the high double digits.

Despite the what could very well be an overwhelming lack of interest in this story, the editors of the NYT saw fit to go with it because they saw a value OTHER THAN GENERAL INTEREST in its publication. Isn't that the objective of journalism? To inform no matter how seemingly irrelevant the issue?

Your excuse rings so hollow that it's almost deafening.
 

Jackpot

Banned
Nov 8, 2011
11,466
0
0
Wait just a mother-lovin' second, you're this Jason Schrier

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=465809

the Jason Schrier that fell for a crudely edited pic?

the Jason Schrier that demanded evidence that it was fake rather than evidence that it was real?

the Jason Schrier that had his own article criticising people for doing the same thing quoted at him?

the Jason Schrier that got someone banned from another messageboard for pointing out your mistake on Kotaku and then gloated about it afterwards?

the Jason Schrier that then retreated to Twitter to badmouth GAF (I'm surr they were just more of your zany jokes)?

the Jason Schrier that eventually had to issue a grovelling apology to GAF?

Daym, we really do forget these incidents. That thread should have been enough to write you off as a games critic forever.
 

jschreier

Member
Jan 6, 2011
4,045
0
0
www.twitter.com
I loved the SK piece and read the G4 one, but those aren't ones you should be pointing to in this situation. They take literally literal courage to post; those things don't exist anymore and therefore toothless to retaliate.

Just for fun, when was the last time a Silicon Knights game was advertised on Kotaku? The last time G4 sponsored an ad?
Haha, I have no idea! I honestly don't pay much attention to our ads. Except when we had Frappuccino ads over the summer that really made me want a Frappuccino.

And I see your point, but what I'm saying is that I'm proud of the stories we write and report every week, and that I think we continue to get better and better every day. We continue to strive to tell interesting stories that break away from the standard press release rewrite cycle. And if you read Kotaku with any regularity you must know that we've run a number of stories that have not quite left publishers pleased.
 

Amir0x

Banned
Oct 27, 2004
103,738
3
0
34
Nowhere, PA
Do you think a lot of Kotaku readers are that interested in this story? I think a lot of GAF posters are, because a lot of GAF posters are fascinated by this sort of inside baseball stuff, but I think that makes up a rather small chunk of our audience, to be honest.

This is perhaps the most nauseating, infuriating excuse that you could possibly have given and was perhaps best left unsaid.

On the front page of today's New York Times, there's an article on the fairly lucrative paychecks received by dairy industry executives as a result of dairy industry consolidation. Now tell me, how many readers of the NYT well and truly have even a passing interest in this issue? It's probably somewhere in the high double digits.

Despite the what could very well be an overwhelming lack of interest in this story, the editors of the NYT saw fit to go with it because they saw a value OTHER THAN GENERAL INTEREST in its publication. Isn't that the objective of journalism? To inform no matter how seemingly irrelevant the issue?

Your excuse rings so hollow that it's almost deafening.
sniz-ap

Very well done, sflufan, and you have my complete agreement.
 

Kinyou

Member
Sep 12, 2009
48,208
2
765
Do you think a lot of Kotaku readers are that interested in this story? I think a lot of GAF posters are, because a lot of GAF posters are fascinated by this sort of inside baseball stuff, but I think that makes up a rather small chunk of our audience, to be honest.
I don't know how many views the average Kotaku news story gets, but this thread has already over 315.000 views by only 4000 posts. Seems to me like a lot of non-members checked this thread out.
 

Filthy Slug

Crowd screaming like hounds at the heat of the chase/ All the colors of the rainbow flood my face
Feb 13, 2012
4,529
0
0
Do you think a lot of Kotaku readers are that interested in this story? I think a lot of GAF posters are, because a lot of GAF posters are fascinated by this sort of inside baseball stuff, but I think that makes up a rather small chunk of our audience, to be honest.
How harmful would it be to devote a fraction of the manpower your site has--say you, for example--to publishing a write-up on events that you've already followed and spent so much time dwelling on? Maybe you'll awaken something in your audience and maybe people will thank you for it. Instead of passing the shit that's happening off as shit that happens in all facets of industry and instead of sitting around with other condescending (and unfunny) journos twatting about on twitter, you could add some possible insight into the situation and inform an otherwise uninformed audience.
 

notworksafe

Member
Jun 17, 2008
16,480
5
835
Do you think a lot of Kotaku readers are that interested in this story? I think a lot of GAF posters are, because a lot of GAF posters are fascinated by this sort of inside baseball stuff, but I think that makes up a rather small chunk of our audience, to be honest.
And this is why you aren't a journalist, but a hack that exists to regurgitate press releases and and post advertising videos for publishers.
 

Jackpot

Banned
Nov 8, 2011
11,466
0
0
Haha, I have no idea! I honestly don't pay much attention to our ads. Except when we had Frappuccino ads over the summer that really made me want a Frappuccino.

And I see your point, but what I'm saying is that I'm proud of the stories we write and report every week, and that I think we continue to get better and better every day. We continue to strive to tell interesting stories that break away from the standard press release rewrite cycle. And if you read Kotaku with any regularity you must know that we've run a number of stories that have not quite left publishers pleased.
Why are you being so selective in your responses? Manos alt account?

Do you think a lot of Kotaku readers are that interested in this story?
Here are all the stories Kotaku has dedicated to gaming journalism despite your readership not being interested in them as you claim:

http://kotaku.com/games-journalism/

Look, there's your "famous" Brian Crecente covering the controversy over Squeenix PR leaning on 1UP!

http://kotaku.com/183126/square-asks-for-embargo-on-published-game?tag=games-journalism

And I take it you're dropping the "my tweets are just jokes despite being identical to the passive-aggressive snark from all the PR guys" defense as you've decided to selectively avoid all the responses to your post about it.
You claimed Kotaku readers wouldn't be interested in the story despite the site having a list of these stories. Are you making it up as you go along?
 

King_Moc

Member
Sep 19, 2010
11,647
0
600
England
Yes, I think a lot of Kotaku readers would be interested in this story.

And anyway, isn't it good journalism to give the readers stories they didn't even know they would be interested in?
Yeah, but it seems they only like to be referred to as 'journalists' when it suits them.
 

antikythera

Banned
Apr 23, 2012
214
0
0
Audiences can incentivize change.
Yes, but these website audiences are the masses. You can't change the clicking habits of the masses - you can only change how you get games news. Ignore these sites, or if you insist on looking at them, always be skeptical. Begging for change is naive because if these websites stopped going to events or accepting exclusives they would stop getting the coverage their audience wants, and their audience (the masses) would go elsewhere. There are a hundred other Kotakus and Wainwrights that would happily fill that spot.
 

electristan

Member
Sep 11, 2008
779
0
0
Norway
I disagree with the premise that things need to "change" at Kotaku. We are constantly striving to improve ourselves, of course, but even just yesterday we had some phenomenal reporting on our website.

We published this tremendous story about Silicon Knights (which I'm sure did not please too many PR folks): http://kotaku.com/5955223/what-went-wrong-with-silicon-knights-x+men-destiny

We were first to break news on G4 canceling its gaming shows: http://kotaku.com/5955278/crisis-at-g4-studios-gaming-shows-will-be-cancelled-source-says

We posted this fascinating essay on the idea of mystery in gaming: http://kotaku.com/5955326/we-are-explorers-in-search-of-mystery-in-videogames

I put together a piece on the current state of SC2 that I think is very interesting: http://kotaku.com/5954973/as-fans-say-starcraft-is-dying-blizzard-plans-some-big-changes

And that was all in a single day. The conversation about whether we should be covering this Wainwright story is a separate issue, but it's disingenuous to say that all we do is concentrate on "what's the most awesome video game that will release this month."
My issue at least is not with the output from sites like yours when it comes to articles like the ones you mentioned. They are often very good.

The issue is more when a review goes up, all the adds on the site are for said game, and you know that the reviewer has been wined and dined for months at various events, given free meals, gifts, and other perks.

the company doing all this didn't know he/she was going to be reviewing the game but it was done to many and they were hoping to nudge the review in a positive way.

Someone said earlier that the reason some press-kits are so lavish is that the dev team is proud of there work and want to show it off in the best light possible. we all know that its the PR teams that send those out and that many people love collecting exclusive things either for them selves or to be sold later.

all this adds up, and to readers who know all this its starting to look a little shady and when the press is asked about it and answer with "there is no real issue, just a few bad eggs" but wont do anything else to show that this is indeed true it just makes things worse.
 

BeauRoger

Unconfirmed Member
Dec 19, 2010
1,247
0
0
Do you think a lot of Kotaku readers are that interested in this story? I think a lot of GAF posters are, because a lot of GAF posters are fascinated by this sort of inside baseball stuff, but I think that makes up a rather small chunk of our audience, to be honest.

This is perhaps the most nauseating, infuriating excuse that you could possibly have given and was perhaps best left unsaid.

On the front page of today's New York Times, there's an article on the fairly lucrative paychecks received by dairy industry executives as a result of dairy industry consolidation. Now tell me, how many readers of the NYT well and truly have even a passing interest in this issue? It's probably somewhere in the high double digits.

Despite the what could very well be an overwhelming lack of interest in this story, the editors of the NYT saw fit to go with it because they saw a value OTHER THAN GENERAL INTEREST in its publication. Isn't that the objective of journalism? To inform no matter how seemingly irrelevant the issue?

Your excuse rings so hollow that it's almost deafening.
Exactly. My money is on jschreier ignoring this post. A clear slip up on his part to let it get to this point.
 

jschreier

Member
Jan 6, 2011
4,045
0
0
www.twitter.com
Here are all the stories Kotaku has dedicated to gaming journalism despite your readership not being interested in them as you claim:

http://kotaku.com/games-journalism/

Look, there's your "famous" Brian Crecente covering the controversy over Squeenix PR leaning on 1UP!

http://kotaku.com/183126/square-asks-for-embargo-on-published-game?tag=games-journalism

And I take it you're dropping the "my tweets are just jokes despite being identical to the passive-aggressive snark from all the PR guys" defense as you've decided to selectively avoid all the responses to your post about it.
Brian Crecente has not worked at Kotaku since December of 2011.

You'll also notice that there have not been stories at http://kotaku.com/games-journalism/ (except for something about a survey) in years. Looks like the last one was 2009. It's just not something that we cover very much.
 

TommyT

Member
Apr 20, 2007
7,514
0
0
TX
Do you think a lot of Kotaku readers are that interested in this story? I think a lot of GAF posters are, because a lot of GAF posters are fascinated by this sort of inside baseball stuff, but I think that makes up a rather small chunk of our audience, to be honest.

This is perhaps the most nauseating, infuriating excuse that you could possibly have given and was perhaps best left unsaid.

On the front page of today's New York Times, there's an article on the fairly lucrative paychecks received by dairy industry executives as a result of dairy industry consolidation. Now tell me, how many readers of the NYT well and truly have even a passing interest in this issue? It's probably somewhere in the high double digits.

Despite the what could very well be an overwhelming lack of interest in this story, the editors of the NYT saw fit to go with it because they saw a value OTHER THAN GENERAL INTEREST in its publication. Isn't that the objective of journalism? To inform no matter how seemingly irrelevant the issue?

Your excuse rings so hollow that it's almost deafening.
Clearly a tekno alt as there is lack of quoting! Pretty good though.

Here's some more that applies to the situation of enthusiast press accurately examining themselves:

Nemo iudex in causa sua
Damn it, I don't want to learn on the weekend!
 

JDSN

Banned
Sep 13, 2006
23,949
0
0
Wait just a mother-lovin' second, you're this Jason Schrier

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=465809

the Jason Schrier that fell for a crudely edited pic?

the Jason Schrier that demanded evidence that it was fake rather than evidence that it was real?

the Jason Schrier that had his own article criticising people for doing the same thing quoted at him?

the Jason Schrier that got someone banned from another messageboard for pointing out your mistake on Kotaku and then gloated about it afterwards?

the Jason Schrier that then retreated to Twitter to badmouth GAF (I'm surr they were just more of your zany jokes)?

the Jason Schrier that eventually had to issue a grovelling apology to GAF?

Daym, we really do forget these incidents. That thread should have been enough to write you off as a games critic forever.
Wow, he even got an user banned for posting something he was trying to bury, comparing him to Wainwright was more appropiate than I thought.
 

spirity

Member
Aug 4, 2007
4,184
0
0
Exactly. My money is on jschreier ignoring this post. A clear slip up on his part to let it get to this point.
He keeps ignoring my questions about the swag he gets. Coupled with the nonsense about Kotaku readers "wouldn't be interested in the story", I've got a pretty good read on the guy.
 

conman

Member
Aug 12, 2007
4,591
0
0
You'll also notice that there have not been stories at http://kotaku.com/games-journalism/ (except for something about a survey) in years. Looks like the last one was 2009. It's just not something that we cover very much.
Interesting. That's right around the time I stopped reading Kotaku.

Not saying that I'm so desperate for a constant stream of self-reflective pieces on journalism. Just pointing out that I stopped reading the site right around the time the site stopped taking its job seriously. And it's an interesting coincidence that that's also around the time you stopped covering journalism in particular. Huh.
 

pa22word

Member
Oct 24, 2010
11,062
0
0
I think it's hilarious to say that this wouldn't generate any interest in the gaming community these sites are reporting information to when this topic has over 350k views.

Please, Kotaku, Gamespot, Polygon, and whatever other gaming website filled with 'journalists' are refusing to report this under the guise it wouldn't draw attention: what is your average page view? Simple question. If it's +/- 350k then you have no reason to not air the story, as it is gaining enough traction to have people interested in it.

Honestly, the fact people in this thread have better informed the community on this situation than 'gaming journalists' have through all the major gaming hubs speaks measures to how far gone gaming journalism really is.
 

Coxy

Member
Feb 27, 2010
6,541
0
0
Ireland
are you guys stupid? jeff green put those there as a joke, he's actually holding ground on the issue and arguing intelligently about it on the cast and making some great points even when the other guys on the cast are kinda feeling awkward about it
 
Status
Not open for further replies.