-
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.
Penny Arcade 11/30/2007 Jeff Gerstmann fired from Gamespot, allegedly for K&L review
- Thread starter mosaic
- Start date
- Status
StopMakingSense
Member
Spire said:
That's what I expect, as well.
Vyse The Legend
Member
Spire said:
Pretty much. They're going to say it has been blown way out of proportions and that they haven't commented out of respect for Jeff's privacy.
Hmm, I don't know about all that: I think they will either put Jeff out to dry or stand by him and expose what management and maybe even certain shady publishers have been up to. Otherwise why would they advertise the fact if they are just rehashing PR-speak? This is exactly the kind of things podcasts are for. Since it's not in printed form there is more room to discuss.
/sits back in chair to get ready for the fireworks
/sits back in chair to get ready for the fireworks
JumpJeff84
Member
What's the deal with this Buzz Out Loud podcast anyway? From what I can tell it's an official CNET technology show, am I right?
Anyone regularly listen to this show? I'd like to hear some GAF opinions about what they're usually like before I listen to this Gamespot episode...
Anyone regularly listen to this show? I'd like to hear some GAF opinions about what they're usually like before I listen to this Gamespot episode...
Vyse The Legend
Member
AstroLad said:
I'd eat my hat if they even remotely did anything like that, but they won't, so hat am saved.
Whoompthereitis said:
I've never listened to it either, but I'm just going to go by reports and play-by-play in this thread (which I'm guessing there will be a lot of). I'm not going to start patronizing them just because they've gotten a lot of press for alleged shady practices, especially if they choose to go the "let's crucify Jeff" route.
StopMakingSense
Member
Shamrock said:
Oh yeah, I totally agree. SHould be interesting to see what they do choose to say about it, considering.
Opus Angelorum
Member
StopMakingSense said:
I think what they don't say will be the most revealing part.
I think we all know what that will contain, and it would suggest the podcast will be nothing but damage control.
Vrolokus said:
Whether or not a media outlet can be truly objective isn't totally a matter of where it gets its advertising dollars, though it can affect the journalistic process under certain business models, or at least appear to have a negative impact in the eyes of savvy citizens.
From a businessman's perspective, said advertising departments are outright foolish if they don't conduct market research in an attempt to diversify what advertising they use to fund operations. The importance of this is being magnified by the Gerstmann situation. When you put all (or most) of your eggs in one basket in the advertising world, you set yourself up for potentially disastrous situations. Pulled advertising isn't some new scourge of the media world. I saw it on quite a few occasions because of unfavorable reporting, and that's when smart businesses enact contingency plans to minimize losses.
When it comes to maintaining editorial integrity, what ultimately matters is whether the folks at the top can maintain a consistent barrier between the advertising and editorial departments. With respect to Gamespot specifically, any barrier between editorial and advertising could well have been compromised by the appointment of a marketing professional to head of editorial. But appearances can be deceiving, so anyone with the mindset of a journalist has to have doubt rooted in their thought process until verifiable facts can be obtained.
In my editorial experience, the only way this can be done is through complete transparency and autonomy. Reputable publications tend to pride themselves -- and rightly so -- on their editorial process. Objectivity is more than a rough concept in hard journalism; it's a highly respected credo. It's a gold standard that is increasingly not met these days, but it's something noble to always strive for in any respectable journalist's mind.
It seems apparent most of the larger gaming sites get the vast majority of their advertising revenue from gaming-related ads. In the wake of this scandal -- whether there's much truth to it or not -- I have to think those in power watching the situation will rethink their foolish advertising models to some extent.
If this situation has resulted in anything positive, it's alerted more people to media corruption. It's not a new problem, it's just that some have had their eyes opened to the fact that even something as relatively trivial as gaming media is subject to this vile problem.
We'll likely never see the whole story of this circus, as it's not really the type of situation that lends itself to transparency. Businesses these days are more weary than ever of litigation, so you're obviously going to see hesitancy on their part to discuss the situation.
I guess we're actually going to see what CNet has to say during what will no doubt be a carefully choreographed podcast, but at the same time I don't think the majority of folks posting in this thread will believe much of what anyone at CNet has to say, particularly if they allude to the possibility that Gerstmann was in fact released for entirely ethical reasons.
The company as a whole -- not to mention an entirely innocent developer -- has already been lyynched by this forum. It truly is sad, at the very least with respect to IO, but I guess I expected more from the mod team here. So, in a roundabout way, I guess my eyes have been opened to something new as well.
And as for more traditional media outlets covering this? They are going to keep it relegated to where it belongs -- the blogosphere -- until (read: if) verifiable facts can ever be attained.
hclflow said:
Man that would be nice, however something tells me that they will never cut out what is so obviously the heart of their ad revenue.
Regardless, we know they are watching this closely (as is at least one of GameSpot's frequent advertisers btw), lets hope that improvements can be made. Just because other publications aren't directly burned in this doesn't mean they haven't been playing with fire.
twinturbo2
butthurt Heat fan
Any word on where Jeff is going to land next? I doubt that he'll be unemployed for long...
The thing is, Cnet DIDN'T can him for just his tone--it was his tone for a heavily advertised game. If he slammed Dynasty Warriors XXVI then management wouldn't care. But it is because it was tied to an IP that generates sales revenue.
Hence, it's not an editorial reason, but a sales/marketing-driven reason. Saying it's was "tone" is garbage, and they better own up to that. Plus, it's pretty pathetic for Cnet to buckle when a game company threatens to pull ads. Those threats come all the time--for them to act on it shows the new management's incompetence and lack of understanding of the industry.
Hence, it's not an editorial reason, but a sales/marketing-driven reason. Saying it's was "tone" is garbage, and they better own up to that. Plus, it's pretty pathetic for Cnet to buckle when a game company threatens to pull ads. Those threats come all the time--for them to act on it shows the new management's incompetence and lack of understanding of the industry.
Vyse The Legend
Member
bishoptl said:
Sandlot, you say?
"This is the kind of thing that decides whether we want to work here or not"
"They need to make extra sure that they reassure us as well as y'all"
Quote from the podcast, they admit that it sounds rather fishy, but they seem to say they will quit if this is the case. Their bosses are saying its not true but they still think something is up. They also want the video review back up, and don't think Jeff was overly harsh in the video review.
"They need to make extra sure that they reassure us as well as y'all"
Quote from the podcast, they admit that it sounds rather fishy, but they seem to say they will quit if this is the case. Their bosses are saying its not true but they still think something is up. They also want the video review back up, and don't think Jeff was overly harsh in the video review.
Vyse The Legend
Member
CNet is saying it wasn't because of the advertising. It's light damage control, as expected.
:lol @ them blaming Gamespot for fueling the fire. It is CNet's corporate that told them not to talk about it.
:lol @ them blaming Gamespot for fueling the fire. It is CNet's corporate that told them not to talk about it.
Dot50Cal said:
Well that certainly beats a canned statement of lack of knowledge/importance of confidentiality/affirmation of integrity. As I said when this all broke, I do think it's all going to come down to plausible deniability. With Gerstmann keeping quiet, all the entities will lean heavily on that hallowed technique.
Rapidshare for those still boycotting:
http://rapidshare.com/files/74103541/cnet_buzzoutloud_120307.mp3.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/74103541/cnet_buzzoutloud_120307.mp3.html
In the Buzz Out Loud podcast they keep referring to "GameSpot" as if the firing is separate from their executive teams that they share.
Is someone out there more knowledgeable than I about their structure able to say if there was anyone under the GameSpot division higher than Jeff that could have done this firing? Everything we've heard has indicated that it would have had to come down from CNet Management and wouldn't have been something that would have soley existed in the GameSpot division?
Also they point out in the podcast that he was Editorial Director, that they didn't have an Editor in Chief. If you don't have an EIC, is the ED basically acting as EIC?
Again, my own ignorance of the publisher internal structure makes me ask those that have more experience to share their insight on such things.
Thanks!
Is someone out there more knowledgeable than I about their structure able to say if there was anyone under the GameSpot division higher than Jeff that could have done this firing? Everything we've heard has indicated that it would have had to come down from CNet Management and wouldn't have been something that would have soley existed in the GameSpot division?
Also they point out in the podcast that he was Editorial Director, that they didn't have an Editor in Chief. If you don't have an EIC, is the ED basically acting as EIC?
Again, my own ignorance of the publisher internal structure makes me ask those that have more experience to share their insight on such things.
Thanks!
Gary Whitta
Member
From "firm sources"...
CNET/Gamespot will be commenting formally on Gerstmann-gate sometime tomorrow morning...
CNET/Gamespot will be commenting formally on Gerstmann-gate sometime tomorrow morning...
Opus Angelorum
Member
Blaming Gamespot was rather naive, and to be honest it sounded like they had been sweet talked in the prior meeting. They didn't sound particularly convinced.
Unfortunately it seems the only truth we will find from this is through Jeff, and I doubt he will ever talk about it during his working life.
You're right, only CNet themselves could make the decision.
They claimed to never comment on individuals, their response should be very interesting.
Unfortunately it seems the only truth we will find from this is through Jeff, and I doubt he will ever talk about it during his working life.
nightowl said:
You're right, only CNet themselves could make the decision.
Gary Whitta said:
They claimed to never comment on individuals, their response should be very interesting.
Gary Whitta said:
Hopefully its a mea culpa followed by targeted management "restructuring" and a promise of full autonomy for their editorial divisions going forward. Followed up by non-announced decision to not use game-related advertising for a reasonable amount of time.
Yeah, I'm a dreamer
Opus Angelorum
Member
nightowl said:
Hopefully its a mea culpa followed by targeted management "restructuring" and a promise of full autonomy for their editorial divisions going forward. Followed up by non-announced decision to not use game-related advertising for a reasonable amount of time.
Yeah, I'm a dreamer aren't I?
It's as well you added that last sentence, I was about to commence laughing.
There will be no mea culpa is my impression.
A mandatory meeting was held today and all in the room were told not to say one more word to the press.
My sources, who will continue to remain multiple and nameless, tell me no new information was given.
To paraphrase what was said: the situation was handled poorly, they didn't expect editorial to be so angry, and management had been unhappy with the direction of the site for the last year or so (specifically saying the executives' vision differed from the way the site was being run).
It's that last part that concerns me. Vision?
A mandatory meeting was held today and all in the room were told not to say one more word to the press.
My sources, who will continue to remain multiple and nameless, tell me no new information was given.
To paraphrase what was said: the situation was handled poorly, they didn't expect editorial to be so angry, and management had been unhappy with the direction of the site for the last year or so (specifically saying the executives' vision differed from the way the site was being run).
It's that last part that concerns me. Vision?
Earthstrike
Member
Are links to gamespot banned on Neogaf now? I think they should be for great justice.
Gary Whitta
Member
They are, and there's an entire sticky thread about it.Earthstrike said:
Opus Angelorum
Member
mosaic said:
Wow.
mosaic said:
WOW.
mosaic said:
That's exactly what they're going to fall back on: Gerstmann didn't fit into management's "plan" for the site, declining quality of work product, unprofessional approach, etc. Of course none of this having anything whatsoever to do with ad sales. Unless Gerstmann or someone else can has any other proof, they'll just be happy to take absence of evidence as evidence of absence, regardless of how many people actually buy it.
nestea said:
Like others have said I'm sure, if the editorial staff feels that they are being strong-armed in some way, or that they can't give an honest review of a particular game, then the good people will probably leave as soon as another opportunity makes itself available.
nightowl said:
Yep
Opus Angelorum
Member
nestea said:
Indeed.
To say the situation was 'handled poorly' is an understatement.
If the situation has been like this for the past year or so, I'd say it's a perfect time for the rest of the team to pack their bags.
Gary Whitta
Member
And how I wonder will the exec who handled the situation so poorly, and wasn't able to predict the aftershocks that should have been so easy to foresee, be reprimanded? My guess is his nice fat commission checks and end-of-year bonuses will remain unaffected. It's good to be the king.mosaic said:
Opus Angelorum
Member
Gary Whitta said:
The irony is laughable.
dirtmonkey37
flinging feces ---->
Is anyone in the Bay Area attending the protest that will take place this Saturday (Dec 8 - Dec 10)?
It has its own little blurb in the SF Chronicle. If I see that some GAF members are participating, I'll jump right in as well.
Link: http://www.*************/pages/unio...6633&union_id=5044&msg_id=296103049#296103049
Here's an excerpt of the important information about the protest from the Gamespot forums:
It has its own little blurb in the SF Chronicle. If I see that some GAF members are participating, I'll jump right in as well.
Here's an excerpt of the important information about the protest from the Gamespot forums:
Gary Whitta
Member
link?dirtmonkey37 said:
Opus Angelorum
Member
dirtmonkey37
flinging feces ---->
I updated my post. Sorry about that.
So, who here is also from the Bay Area?
So, who here is also from the Bay Area?
dirtmonkey37
flinging feces ---->
Okay, so the protest is real.
The man in charge has five confirmed participants on Sunday and Monday along with four on Saturday. I am speaking to him by means of AIM.
This is his user name: Drewtwo9999
The man in charge has five confirmed participants on Sunday and Monday along with four on Saturday. I am speaking to him by means of AIM.
This is his user name: Drewtwo9999
The Buzz Out Loud segment seemed honest but worrying. CNET has failed to even satisfy the doubts of their own employees, that is very alarming. As for CNET making a formal announcement tomorrow, does anyone honestly expect them to say anything beyond what their PR rep was saying over the weekend? Any official, PR approved statement from a company whose integrity is in serious question is rather pointless.
- Status