Be Excellent To Each Other

Can we talk about games journalism generally in here? If so, Rab Florence's article on Ergplonks today was a bit good!

What are you doing reading articles when you haven't even finished The Brothers Karamazov yet?!?

Is it printed on paper?

That achievement for 'Philosophy - 50G' is a bitch.

I'm actually reading A Clash of Kings... Gave up on that Russian malarky ages ago. Will try again one day.

If you've not been keeping up with the drahma on all of this - one of the people mentioned threatened to sue , they pulled part of the article and Rab has said that he has no choice but to leave

https://twitter.com/robertflorence









Good write up on whats happening here : http://botherer.org/2012/10/25/an-utter-disgrace/

If he's sure about every word then a libel threat brings no pressure at all.

I see it as a somewhat minor issue to take a stand and walk out from your (ppoorly paid) job over.

Games journalists have to attend these events to get a story to write about, and (mostly all) awards ceremonies are always used by the industry to get, or keep, people they favor onside. Not doing that means fewer reviews to write and less exposure and explaining to your boss "I didn't attend this as the whole thing stinks of corruption that I won't be a part of, here's some reviews of pizzas instead". We're savvy enough to be aware that the industry is more than likely a bent one (review embargos,10/10 scores, etc) and make our buying decisions accordingly: friends recommendations are better than 600 poorly written words and kids will have to ask their parents to fund the games anyway as their friends already have it. Complaining about others in the industry tweeting about a product to win a console that costs less than £200. Is that the low, low price of a better review? Less than 5 copies of a game? Even if it is, it's pretty much the sum of two thirds of four fifths of fuck all. It isn't the leader of a country fucking an underage hula dancer now, is it?

If some people want to take the corporate coin for whatever reasons, then fine, but taking such a high, public line on it and leaving your job over it is a bit far? It isn't not revealing a source, or exposing massive government corruption, it's about a fat italian plumber and a console that costs less than £200 in HMV.

Ultimately, it isn't a terribly important issue in a frivolous area. Once again, I blame twitter. I don't honestly think that #supershootemupV will sell a single further copy of the game as the people most likely to follow those journalists on twitter are other journalists and publishers PR people to keep in touch. I think it's been a bit of a self aggrandizing stand on a thin premis which twitter has expresed outrage at (once again) and hand wringingly worries about the 'corruption' of an industry already held to not have terribly high standards.

While I can see why he walked out (I think it was the editing of the piece that was the issue, not the information that had specifically been edited), I agree that the idea of a games journo tweeting about a game to win a prize isn't really that bad (at all).

More reading on that subject (from someone that very much disagrees with me): http://botherer.org/2012/10/24/games-jo ... orruption/

Also: bonus Stu-shelves!

I think the point is that if you can promote something for a freebie, then what does it say about the impartiality of your work?

Malc

Nothing at all, right?

If you're a games journalist then act like a journalist with impartiality and integrity. If you're a fan who just happens to write about games then carry on but drop the misleading self proclaimed title.

Is that cat statue there to deter Starmix from leading the other rats in a revolt against their sex slavery?

I dunno, imagine if there was a judge who before the competition started tweeted that he really liked one of the contestants. If you were one of the other contestants would you trust him to be impartial?

Malc

It's perfectly easy to do that AND make a tweet to enter a competition.

Yes, but to enter the competition, you have to advertise a product on twitter.

Malc

It's a storm in a teacup and blown out of all proportion. it's like the daily fucking mail. "Let's get upset over this!"burn the witch!" and now a freelance journalist has had to protect her tweets and is getting slagged off on various websites for something that is fuck all. It's both sameful and embarressing for all involved.

And don't do it for the one industry you work for. If you want to win a skiing holiday through Thomas Cook go ahead.

1) It's games journalism, not the Bloody fucking Sunday inquiry.
2) For a few seconds work, who wouldn't want a chance for a free ps3?
3) Stinks of a hatchet job.
4) She's being witchhunted

If she was a good judge, yes. Truth is, a judge might well know one or more people who have entered a competition - but, as the judge, she can't (or shouldn't) let it sway her decision (even though it will, she can't help that). Same as sports referees, etc.

If Stu wrote a review of Cannon Fodder 3 six months after CF2 came out, would you trust what he said? I would.

He wrote a review of a bean bag he was sent. For free.

He made it clear he got it for free. Also Stu isn't most games journalists. Any way most reviewers don't pay for the stuff they review.

Malc

Then most game's journo's are bad games journo's, then. But they're not bad because they tweet things.

Anyway, surely that's a separate issue? Tweeting to enter a contest isn't showing bias, IMO - more that people may think the journo is recommending the product and thinking that it's a good recommendation because, after all, they're a game's journo, when that's not the case.

Back to the incident in hand, if you are wearing 2 hats you should do your best to seperate them, and you should declare them both when they overlap.

I used to write up reports of clan matches (Q3) , and if I was ever involved with either of the clans, I would always declare that in the review I was doing, and still then go on to try and be as neutral as possible.

However, I don't think all people have that level of integrity.

It may not be all that important, but it's mostly for stuff like that, that I stopped buying computer magazines.

Malc

If you think there could be a suggestion of bias, casually unfollow and take anything written by that person with a pinch of salt. this would be the intelligent reasonable thing to do.

DON'T keep banging on about it on twitter forcing that person to make their account look private because

i) you'll look like a bullying twat
ii) you'll look like a vindictive twat
iii) You're not fighting for a higher cause here.
iv) Who are you trying to impress?

twitter at its worst, again.

Is the bias thing really the issue, though?

Furthermore - what were the actual tweets?

Didn't this same games journalist [who has turned her tweets private and whom took offence at the original article] threaten legal action against the author like a bullying vindictive twat? Threatened action and bullying tactics that saw the author forced to leave his job.

WoS has got the original article up.

I meant the competition ones. Good read though, ta.

Link for others: http://wosland.podgamer.com/a-table-of-cowards/

What would a games journalist be needing another PS3 for?

That's why I never enter the Lottery - I already have some money.

http://www.laurenwainwright.com/?p=2790



Being an redhead girl seems to be a good start.

They were men in bird costumes that had a hit single 'The Birdie Song' in 1981.

To play games on while the other is updating.

Fuck's sake Mali! I respectfully disagree. This isn't about one person, but the entirety of games journalism. The point is you can't take ALL of it with a pinch of salt. Or you can I suppose, which is why it's pissing useless! And that's the point. We want games journalism to be worth a damn.

I'm with Botherer on this one, I'm afraid. The EG article was making some good points, based on the recent row about the GMAs, which have turned into/always been a circle-jerk. The EG piece calling out a couple of people was inferring that there could be issues of trust regarding the two people that were commented on, not that they actually were dodgy. It was an attempt to make readers question things a little more and perhaps for those in the industry to do the same with their public-facing actions.

The savvy thing for either to have done would have been to demand a right to reply on Eurogamer, not threaten legal action, which makes people question why such a threat was made when there's no libel in the original article. (Unfortunately, Lauren also stated "Just to clarify on Square Enix: I've done consultancy work for them. I've never reviewed the products", despite having reviewed Deus Ex, a Square Enix product.)

As for the guy quitting, his position was essentially untenable. He was employed to write op-eds for EG, and the editors cut his work under the threat of legal action, despite there really being no case. That's of course largely because the UK's libel laws are a big sack of shit rather than anything else. Overall, I just found the entire spat really depressing.

I wouldn't say it's anything to do with libel laws and more to do with one uninformed party screaming "libel" despite it not being libel and the other uninformed party shitting itself. Pretty lame really. Just ring a lawyer.

Wainwright's an idiot for getting litigious when she could have explained herself in a right of reply article (and made some money from it). Florence is still daft for committing seppuku over it.

Is Wainwright an American?

She's as English as they come.

I think her bosses at mcvuk were the ones to put the pressure on Eurogamer, though they claim they didn't threaten legal action, only asking nicely.

https://twitter.com/BenParfitt/status/2 ... 1593678848

@BenKuchera @Michael_French Intent at no stage threatened legal action

— Ben Parfitt (@BenParfitt) October 25, 2012

Rab of course says this:

I agree with Stu's new title for it. "A Table of Cowards."

Gotta love a kangaroo court.

Forbes article : http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/20 ... omplaints/

Churnalism at work.

It's interesting that people are focusing on Lauren when Dave Cook was also mentioned in the article and his name was also editing out. (Though he was visible in the comments, battling his side of it, etc), or that guy sat on the dorito table. These guys did worse things than her, as she only defending the ps3 getting.

Yeah, but she's a woman and deserving of Internet's scorn and derision. Did everyone see this particular foulness?

The latest timeline and summary by Stu :

http://wosland.podgamer.com/the-wainwright-profile/

I really don't understand how Mali can wave all this aside like it doesn't matter.

You can't have games journalists tweeting advertisements for games in return for prizes from games companies, off the back of what is already a pretty seedy affair in the form of the GMAs in the first place, or at least, not credible games journalists.

It's not about a witchhunt, it's about the whole rotten business of what passes for games journalism.

Latest from Rab on the whole situation : http://botherer.org/2012/10/26/guest-po ... -few-days/

An truly excellent piece of writing.

And it brings us full circle, it's not 'just games' and it's not about Lauren, it's far more important than that.

I do remember Amiga Power banging on about this back in the day, the way that magazine ABSOLUTELY WOULD NOT BE BOUGHT was a standard-bearer for an entire industry IMO, and they predicted the future with eerie prescience as well, some 17 years ago.

Stand in front of the mirror. Look into your own eyes. Say "It's about the integrity of games journalism" five times. And keep a straight face. The lass is getting a beat down and it is unedifying to prolong it any further. It's the worst of times.