The problem is if the reviewer actually likes the game they can't say so without being accused of being bought off. Basically only bad reviews are credible now. This bribery is pretty shameless.
-
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.
Ubisoft gave journalists a free Nexus 7 at a Watchdogs Preview event.
- Thread starter Hanmik
- Start date
Orniletter
Banned
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXtnKE-98Ik
Let´s not beat around the bush here, the publishers send all sorts of close-to-unrelated stuff to press people in order to buy their goodwill.
...and I don´t believe for a second that US "journalists" have higher standards than european ones.
One example I´ll always remember is Eurogamer of all sites didn´t let Microsoft´s insulting F2P sheningans in their full priced retail games slide....while the rest of the big outlets was silent....or in the case of IGN sponsored by them.
Not always, but often you can make a nice piece of interview from a preview event. Depends on how much you can play, you can then describe it - if readers know your style and taste, they'll find it interesting.
This is directly relevant to his field of work and how people who do that job are viewed. Why shouldn't he care?
Review events - especially destination ones or ones for online games - are a much murkier issue. Of course I'm going to be happy as hell flown to an exotic destination to play through a game.
Such ignorance
Why do you think Ubisoft is spending thousands of dollars on handing out free gifts?
...because of the goodness of their hearts?
..
Guess what, they are doing it to help promote the game, what do you think "promote" really means here? Positive coverage.
Some of you are so set in your ways to go against the grain on the internet forums that you take ridiculous positions on things just for the sake of being different, its called being a contrarian, look it up. Either that, or you have no clue what you are talking about. Maybe both.
Ubisoft wants positive coverage for their game, and handing out gifts to "journalists" is one way to get it. Because it will influence their opinions. Otherwise Ubisoft would not waste thousands of dollars on nothing. Its not rocket science, its not illegal. But it is indicative of how publishers treat gaming reviewers: as a extension of their marketing department.
The problem is are we supposed to believe you are just going to be unbiased? Even if you think you are and even if you are people aren't just going to believe it because you say it.
Didn't Ubisoft semi-secretly send a bunch of journalist to Italy to review Assassin's Creed 2? Did I just make that up? I seem to remember someone talking about how they got a tour of Florence and shit.
Anyway, this stuff sucks but thankfully it's pretty easy to see when a reviewer is full of shit, whether it's because of "briberies" or something else. You can't fake integrity. So find people whose reviews you know you can trust and ignore this bullshit.
Anyway, this stuff sucks but thankfully it's pretty easy to see when a reviewer is full of shit, whether it's because of "briberies" or something else. You can't fake integrity. So find people whose reviews you know you can trust and ignore this bullshit.
and then be refused at any future preview events and taken off the list for early access to games for previews and reviews.
Yeah..
I think it's gross that companies give out gifts like this (not necessarily that writers, who make very little money, accept them; I'd totally allow Ubisoft to give me a tablet which I then tossed onto eBay). However, I'm curious as to what people think the broad implications of these gifts are? Do you think a gift of a tablet will affect the coverage going forward from reputable Euro outlets like EDGE, Eurogamer and The Guardian? Are you concerned that it'll have an impact on what the fan sites do? Do you read these fan sites? If not, are you concerned about an inflated Metacritic score? Not dismissing any of these concerns, I'm just genuinely curious.
I think these things are heightened by score culture and the fact that a lot of people don't read, an thus don't give a shit about bylines. I've been to film events where very intelligent, articulate and reputable writers made off with gift baggies that had very expensive items in them. Do I think it impacted the tone of their coverage? Absolutely not, and in fact I've seen tens of thousands of written word(s) that prove otherwise. Do I think these gifts impacted the tone of coverage coming from rags like Ain't It Cool News? Oh yeah, absolutely.
The thing is, cinephiles know the difference, and reward good writing. I don't think that really happens yet in games outside of academia. Especially on forums like this, people lump most if not all of games writing together under the banner "games journalism." Very little of it is even journalism. So I think so much of the problem is reader-facing. Gifts will persist. Forever. And it's cool to be uncomfortable with them, but not necessarily outraged. Because you should search out writers you respect and trust instead of piling them all into the furnace. Give them clicks and share those pieces and it'll marginalize the shitheads and in turn marginalize the imagined importance of freebies.
I think these things are heightened by score culture and the fact that a lot of people don't read, an thus don't give a shit about bylines. I've been to film events where very intelligent, articulate and reputable writers made off with gift baggies that had very expensive items in them. Do I think it impacted the tone of their coverage? Absolutely not, and in fact I've seen tens of thousands of written word(s) that prove otherwise. Do I think these gifts impacted the tone of coverage coming from rags like Ain't It Cool News? Oh yeah, absolutely.
The thing is, cinephiles know the difference, and reward good writing. I don't think that really happens yet in games outside of academia. Especially on forums like this, people lump most if not all of games writing together under the banner "games journalism." Very little of it is even journalism. So I think so much of the problem is reader-facing. Gifts will persist. Forever. And it's cool to be uncomfortable with them, but not necessarily outraged. Because you should search out writers you respect and trust instead of piling them all into the furnace. Give them clicks and share those pieces and it'll marginalize the shitheads and in turn marginalize the imagined importance of freebies.
You missed the point brah'
One is direct compensation from your employer. The other is a bribe from a third party in conflict with the interests of your employer/clients/customer.
They're not equivalent in the least.
The Jackdog
Member
I keep saying this in this thread so sorry if I'm beating a dead horse.
This is from the NYU handbook on journalistic ethics:
Its not like, the journalistic commandments or bible or something. But its a decent source! Basically, accepting gifts does not NECESSARILY lead to bias reporting, but its a good idea not to do it. Its just not a good idea.
You have a responsibility as a journalist to your READERS, not yourself, to submit unbiased reporting. Gifts blur that line. I dont see how at least thats up for debate. If your a journalist and something you do could possibly jeopardize your reporting or how you are perceived to your readers, why do it?
The bottom line is, these are journalists, and the second we all start calling them by what they really are and demanding some actual quality journalism, we maaaybe see changes.
For now, lets just do what we should be doing. Calling these people bloggers.
This is from the NYU handbook on journalistic ethics:
Its not like, the journalistic commandments or bible or something. But its a decent source! Basically, accepting gifts does not NECESSARILY lead to bias reporting, but its a good idea not to do it. Its just not a good idea.
You have a responsibility as a journalist to your READERS, not yourself, to submit unbiased reporting. Gifts blur that line. I dont see how at least thats up for debate. If your a journalist and something you do could possibly jeopardize your reporting or how you are perceived to your readers, why do it?
The bottom line is, these are journalists, and the second we all start calling them by what they really are and demanding some actual quality journalism, we maaaybe see changes.
For now, lets just do what we should be doing. Calling these people bloggers.
Galactic Barret
Member
Well when you see constant comments suggesting that all game journalists are corrupt, like the below:
It certainly makes sense for him to come in and defend himself and his colleagues who do do good work, instead of just letting the above narrative continue to propagate itself.
I find it childish and unprofessional. Is it also childish for me to point it out? Perhaps, but I'm not the professional here, and GAF is directly tied to the industry in which he works. You don't see journalists at the BBC piping up on message boards every time someone criticizes their work. Why? Because it's trite and unprofessional.
That's the problem.
You think I am biased if I have an ad on my website, I'm sure I'm not. What to do...
HalcyonXcution
Neo Member
Honestly thats why I never trust mainstream journalist sites such as gt, gamespot, ign and what not. I do have a little more trust in the magazine area but if I want a game I do not care to check reviews, and if I do I look up gameplay or reviews by youtubers. If you go by meta-critic or a site that goes by 1-10 or 1-5 you have to realize its all opinions and the great game or bad game might have the opposite effects on you.
Trickster
Member
Let's say it results in a 0.1 higher on metacritic when all is said and done. 20k is pretty cheap for that kind of review bump.
Still shady as fuck and really shouldn't be allowed of course
If he wants to provide an alternate perspective, he should write an article about these practices within the industry without directly using it as a veiled attempt at vindication rather than prattling with GAF.
The funny thing here is the bigger outlets typically don't keep these things and some of them won't even allow the publisher to pay for travel or put them up. YouTube people on the other hand have no such ethics policies.
Depends on how much advertising, one ad doesn't mean I'm just going to assume your review is going to be inflated.
I disagree in this particular case. In his thread, Jason has been commenting in more or less the same capacity as other GAFers, agreeing with the general consensus that there are some major problems with his profession while offering what additional information he can.
Jimmyfenix
Member
Why are you offended by it ? Honest question Jason has a right to come on neogaf to discuss the matter does he not ?
FlammableD
Banned
You just described all reviews of everything.
: )
I love watching many youtubers, but they also often participate in various preview events and most big publishers are treating YT personalities like journalists.
Yeah, that just compounds how scummy this is. That they have the nerve to be pissed off when they're called out on it is astounding, as if becoming an extension of a game's marketing is to be accepted without question.
This is one reason why I visit GAF and other gaming communities and get impressions from a people unattached to the gaming journalism business.
Bluekaveli
Member
Let me guess, so they can't notice that downgrading on them screens?
Hopefully that means we'll get impressions about how well the second screen experience works on android devices compared to iOS.
(I'm assuming that games reviewers are primarily iOS users and the majority of those impressions would have been formed using apple devices. Also, that they'd give them back once they're done testing)
(I'm assuming that games reviewers are primarily iOS users and the majority of those impressions would have been formed using apple devices. Also, that they'd give them back once they're done testing)
Part of the reason I started coming to GAF is because industry people post here. It's interesting to get perspective from people who aren't solely fans. I have no interest in an echo chamber where everyone's coming from the same place.
Plus that would be a short mediocre article.
RedNumberFive
Banned
To be clear, I'm not offended by it, I just find it unprofessional and insecure. Video game journalism, like most mainstream journalism, is not held to the appreciable standard that I would prefer. But hey, that's just me. I'm not trying to coerce anybody to agree, I'm just voicing my own annoyance.
Galactic Barret
Member
In a thread about journalism and the implications of bribery and bjas, you're saying a journalist shouldn't address that?
Thats silly. This is GAF; we expect and appreciate an inside perspective. You may be the only person here yet that wants the 'insider' to shut up.
EdwardTivrusky
Member
I can kind of see what you mean but i've always been glad that Jason has turned up in these sometimes toxic threads and actually discusses things with people. I think more reasoned discussion is a good thing especially on an internet forum where tempers and hyperbole reign supreme.
Go subscription only then that way you're not beholden to the mighty advertising dollar
The Jackdog
Member
I agree and add...its really not held to ANY standard
Eh? How is it unprofessional? I've seen plenty of articles criticising GPs' wages, nurses' competency and the like, with doctors or nurses setting the record straight in the comments section. I've seen reports highlighting the failure of certain police officers and the subsequent pitchfork mob in the comments section, followed by actual police officers injecting some sense into the discussion. This isn't a discussion if you think that the opposing side has no right to voice their opinion, it just becomes a place to rant mindlessly, you're in the wrong place if you're looking for the latter.
dragonbane
Member
He is a gaffer. Him discussing job ethics is not the only thing he does here. He participates in this thread like everyone else and offers his perspective, which can only be a good thing. If anything, I find it incredibly brave of him to try to swim against the posters putting every single journalist in the same drawer. I certainly wouldn't and most journalists don't. In this particular case I very much welcome his presence though.
Publishers know how important it is to have a good meta-critic score - or at least they think that. No wonder they are trying everything to get the gaming yournalists "in a good mood".
Respect for the ones who immediately sell it somewhere and donate the earnings to charity.
People should just stop paying those game journalists and their "reviews" any attention. Make up your own minds, watch video game previews on youtube, ask people you know, use demos when available, get your information from forums (preferable fom the ones that are not biased) and then decide what whether you want to get a game or not. These days it's easier then ever. We've got youtube, twitch, forums, twitter, everyone is connected to each other.
Game journalism, or better their reviews, are obsolete. They're only good as news-distributors, but even then most of them get their news from GAF or other forums anyway, so...
Respect for the ones who immediately sell it somewhere and donate the earnings to charity.
People should just stop paying those game journalists and their "reviews" any attention. Make up your own minds, watch video game previews on youtube, ask people you know, use demos when available, get your information from forums (preferable fom the ones that are not biased) and then decide what whether you want to get a game or not. These days it's easier then ever. We've got youtube, twitch, forums, twitter, everyone is connected to each other.
Game journalism, or better their reviews, are obsolete. They're only good as news-distributors, but even then most of them get their news from GAF or other forums anyway, so...
RedNumberFive
Banned
As much as I like to shit on game journalism (and rightfully so), Jason deserves a pass. He has been doing some legitimately great journalism at Kotaku.
Maybe it wasn't necessary to attack hobby reviewers(youtube,blogs) like he did, however it's his job and he got alot of colleagues who are doing the job with 100% pride and dignity.
There are still alot of individuals who participate with these shady practices, both professional and hobby journalists.
It is a walk on thin ice though, some people already counted up the disadvantages of challenging the game industry....
Ok I see where your coming from. To be fair, I'm not saying it doesn't look a little shady when outsiders see things like this. Sometimes you just have to be involved in a particular industry to really understand how things like this are handled. I really don't mean to come off as "Super Defense Force" either. What I'm saying is this sort off thing extends to many industries and I've worked in a few of them myself.
Many high-end professional careers involve people receiving 'gifts' many of which are not even material in nature. Take for example paying hundreds of dollars to fly people to their events, including accommodation.
Now what if a particular company would like to fly another company's Executives First Class instead of Economy? Is that unethical?
What if they would like their guests to stay in 5 Star Hotels? It maybe the case that's how that particular company treats their own executives? Is that unethical?
Have you ever heard of BDM's and do you know how much money can be spent lavishing both existing and potential clients in certain industries?
To be honest a tablet would be considered a very small gift in some of these other jobs. Now people in this thread making comparisons to Government Officials accepting gifts who are essentially; voted in and being paid by the populous to serve them are required to meet all sorts of regulations in regards to 'gifts' for the sake of transparency and integrity. Its a totally different situation.
MichaelFassbender
Member
Pretty shameful tactics, although I can't say I'm surprised what with all I've seen over the years...
Game companies just keep following that line of bribery, I suppose.
Game companies just keep following that line of bribery, I suppose.
Not surprised in the least. The vast, vast majority of the video game journo profession is little more than an extension of publishers' marketing teams.
As for Jason, I can understand one wanting to defend their profession. No one wants to believe their profession is corrupt, incompetent, etc... as it implies you, too, are corrupt or incompetent. So it's human nature to defend it.
As for Jason, I can understand one wanting to defend their profession. No one wants to believe their profession is corrupt, incompetent, etc... as it implies you, too, are corrupt or incompetent. So it's human nature to defend it.
I don't believe that either. But I'm not surprised an American games writer would prefer to think that way.
HalcyonXcution
Neo Member
Ah you would think I watch people of that caliber but no. When I do look up reviews its regular people that bought the game, those are the voice I care more about. Those that go to outlets for stuff its for the preview of the game their opinion is worthless to me. Sorry but if you make a video on youtube of a game you bought and played then your opinion is worth something but if your like sites like ign were they care more about the clicks to there videos the words the say are meaningless.