Kotaku - Someone Doesn't Like Us

I'm in my iPad so forgive my short, terse reply.

I was just surprised by these responses. The Kotaku article is a brilliant piece extolling the anachronistic, ignorant practices of the biggest publishers, or systems completely out-of-touch wth how journalism works, how t needs to work, and how it helps them as a company.

I like Kotaku, but after their article, I absolutely love their approach. I had thought this, especially in a community of rpg folks would be universally lauded for their commitment to integrity, while others outlets have become corporate shills (see: Spot, Game).

I say this as a 42-year-old rpg'er who worked for newspapers for 20 years, btw.

Kudos, Kotaku.
 
Joined
Dec 15, 2013
Messages
11
scottmbruner said:
I'm in my iPad so forgive my short, terse reply.

I was just surprised by these responses. The Kotaku article is a brilliant piece extolling the anachronistic, ignorant practices of the biggest publishers, or systems completely out-of-touch wth how journalism works, how t needs to work, and how it helps them as a company.

I like Kotaku, but after their article, I absolutely love their approach. I had thought this, especially in a community of rpg folks would be universally lauded for their commitment to integrity, while others outlets have become corporate shills (see: Spot, Game).

I say this as a 42-year-old rpg'er who worked for newspapers for 20 years, btw.

Kudos, Kotaku.
Click to expand...

You have come to the wrong place than. Watch is full of EA and Bethesda lickers. I wasn't sure about it before, but after this topic I am sure now.
And it is disgusting.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 3, 2014
Messages
3,819
Caddy said:
Well no it isn't fact, it's your opinion. Journalism isn't gaming journalism. They're different. Normal jourealism requires a passion for… Journalism. Gaming journalism requires a passion for gaming. I'm not criticizing Siskel and Ebert and Roper… Etc for their opinion. Gaming reviews require a certain amount of passion. I think I recall an article in n the New York Times, a certain journalist who decided to write about a new popular game. He treated it as an actual journalist and it became an article pretty much no gamer would ever have an interest in reading. Good he's writing for the masses and not really doing a review. But hey its not gaming journalism! Do you really think Richard Hammond, James May and lol Jeremy Clarkson are considered journalists? No but they're a huge part of automotive journalism. No wait there's no such thing.
Click to expand...

You are mostly agreeing with what I said, just rephrasing it... There are differente types of journalism, but entertainment journalism, which would include gaming, movies, TV shows, lifestyle journalism and even automotive journalism aren't the same as The New York Times, for example. And as such, they can be considered journalism (and they are), but they don't have to adhere to the ethical norms that the others should (and most of the time they don't, but try harder to hide). Yes, gaming journalism, like movie journalism, requires a passion and that is the opposite of reaching for impartiality. That said, as far as this Kotaku affair goes it does not matter if gaming journalism is real journalism (in that case the kind of editorial published by Kotaku is just ridiculously childish and they should be ignored) or if they are beyond the label of journalism (and, in that extreme case, they can't ask to be treated as journalists - if I had an entertainment blog ou Youtube channel I wouldn't feel entitled to any special treatment companies reserve to the press.)
 
Joined
Jul 14, 2012
Messages
368
Location
Midian
RPGWatch does not have any journalists. It just have people who spent time on posting stuff about games in their spare time. Idiotically enough, once in a while we even get some level of satisfaction from it :)

When I go to Gamescom I can watch the "journalists" in action. Sometimes when I have an appointment, it is shared with others. Almost all of them come unprepared. Don't have a single question and are more interested in any goodies that are handed over than in what is being said an shown.
I'm sure there are some actual journalists at Gamescom, who take what they do seriously, but really, most of them don't.

I am not a journalist. I am just someone who can put words on the front page. I am biased and when I care enough I occasionally throw in my personal opinion on a subject, which isn't happening that often really.
For the most part I couldn't care less if any outlet would boycott RPGWatch. I also don't care if we are sent keys or not (I wouldn't know who to give the keys to anyway).

I do find this article, where someone is making clear that not receiving a key for free is the reason they would not have reviewed the game, a strange position. That was the trigger to make this post actually as I really don't care if Kotaku is blacklisted by someone or not.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
11,223
Myrthos said:
I am not a journalist. I am just someone who can put words on the front page. I am biased and when I care enough I occasionally throw in my personal opinion on a subject, which isn't happening that often really.
For the most part I couldn't care less if any outlet would boycott RPGWatch. I also don't care if we are sent keys or not (I wouldn't know who to give the keys to anyway).
Click to expand...
Lol, this is the truth. I seen more than one of your topics asking for who wants a key to try a game and report back :D

If you had reliable people to write about these games more and more people would be offering trial keys.
 
Joined
Oct 3, 2014
Messages
3,819
Myrthos said:
more interested in any goodies that are handed over than in what is being said an shown.
Click to expand...
If I knew that, I'd become a journalist ages ago! I missed my profession. :(

Caddy said:
Why Kotaku Was Right To Go Public When They Were Blacklisted By Two Big Video Game Publishers
Click to expand...

Actually this is better IMO (and it's the third comic today from them, someone will say that I'm advertising, but am not, honestly!):
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/art...15028-It-s-about-ethics-in-games-jouarughargh
1005557.png


Oooh. This one hurts. I like to rag on Kotaku as much as the next guy, but credit where it's due: Being blacklisted by a big publisher generally means you're doing something right. The news has been met with, well… interesting responses from the two flavours of people who like to talk about ye olde videogame journalism ethics. Let me break down the three main salient points.

1: According to Kotaku, the outlet was blacklisted by Bethesda for reporting that Fallout 4 was in active development, and by Ubisoft for reporting that Assassin's Creed: Syndicate was in development.

From what I understand, both news pieces were the result of developer leaks and Kotaku hadn't signed an NDA in either case.

2: Blacklisting means Kotaku won't receive review copies, creator interviews, screen shots and assets, etc.

A blow to Kotaku's ability to generate clicks and what I'd call a petty and short-sighted move from a publisher, but honestly, not that big of a deal. Bethesda and Ubisoft are under no obligation to share information about their games with a particular outlet. I think since this material often ends up just being repurposed as PR guff anyway, I'm not particularly bothered about one less site giving me an EARLY LOOK at this month's Assassin's Creed abortion.

3: Blacklisting ALSO means that Bethesda and Ubisoft won't respond to any of Kotaku's inquiries or requests for comment.

This is where things get kind of interesting. Whatever your feelings about Kotaku, its editorial style or its parent company, Gakwer (pro tip: Fuck Gawker), it's true that Kotaku is also one of the few gaming sites with the connections, sources and clout to produce actual investigative journalism as opposed to traditional enthusiast press-release regurgitation. Yes, yes, I know. They also run some stupid opinion columns that read like missives from some awful parallel dimension where everything is wrong, but they also break genuine news stories. Part of releasing a competent and ethical news story is giving the subject space to comment or respond, Bethesda and Ubisoft deliberately stonewalling requests for comment isn't illegal, but it is a deliberate attempt to interfere with genuine journalism and it is, to use the technical term, shady as fuck..

I know a lot of people are just going to respond with "Fuck Kotaku," citing the site's tendency towards politically charged editorials as some huge breach of ethics. There's also going to be a ton of people unironically using the term "SJW" (tip: ignore these people, they're idiots), but the fact of the matter is, Kotaku has been blacklisted for refusing to play ball with two of the biggest publishers in the business and in this industry, we need more of that, not less.

So good job, Kotaku.

You're still shit though.
Click to expand...
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
scottmbruner said:
I'm in my iPad so forgive my short, terse reply.

I was just surprised by these responses. The Kotaku article is a brilliant piece extolling the anachronistic, ignorant practices of the biggest publishers, or systems completely out-of-touch wth how journalism works, how t needs to work, and how it helps them as a company.

I like Kotaku, but after their article, I absolutely love their approach. I had thought this, especially in a community of rpg folks would be universally lauded for their commitment to integrity, while others outlets have become corporate shills (see: Spot, Game).

I say this as a 42-year-old rpg'er who worked for newspapers for 20 years, btw.

Kudos, Kotaku.
Click to expand...

I also find it curious that, given the prevailing attitude on the Watch of suspicion of the integrity of mainstream game reviews, people seem blasé when a journalist spells out one of the major mechanisms of undue influence.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
12,085
Caddy said:
And rpgwatch forums are littered with middle aged adults acting like 10 year olds. It's like vomit telling poop it stinks.
Click to expand...
Ahh. I notice that you don't address the elders here.

Pibbur who doesn't think he's middle aged anymore.
 
Yup, we are WAY past that embarrassing stage of growing up :)
 
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
4,721
I think this doesn't cause much uproar here, because it is Kotaku. They feed on these kind of scandals and it is well known fact that they like to stir the pot. So big suprise that they get bitten every once and awhile.

Ofcourse we can always discuss endlessly about good journalism or good business practise, but at the end of day, I'm not surpised that benthesa doesn't want to deal with Kotaku. After all Kotaku posted all kinds of leaked material about Fallout 4 just to get more traffic to their own site.

That being said, exposing these kind of blackmail practises is a good thing, but i'm not seeing them as helpless victims here. :)
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,469
I don't know much about Kotaku, but it seems to me that some of the specific details about the rotten shenanigans behind the scenes are quite significant. It's the general problem that interests me, rather than any sense of outrage on Kotaku's behalf.

He reports, for example, that when AAA games receive a less than stellar score at a mainstream site, there will be angry phone calls, and threats to withdraw advertising, access to shows and previews, or total blacklisting. If that is true, and I have no difficulty believing such corporate tactics, that seems worth knowing. It's evidence that mainstream reviews are indeed of questionable credibility.

I often hear people referring to "paid reviews" from mainstream sites, which, generally, I think is probably not the case. But this more subtle form of persuasion I find much more plausible.
 
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
12,085
Dez said:
I think this doesn't cause much uproar here, because it is Kotaku. They feed on these kind of scandals and it is well known fact that they like to stir the pot. So big suprise that they get bitten every once and awhile.

Ofcourse we can always discuss endlessly about good journalism or good business practise, but at the end of day, I'm not surpised that benthesa doesn't want to deal with Kotaku. After all Kotaku posted all kinds of leaked material about Fallout 4 just to get more traffic to their own site.

That being said, exposing these kind of blackmail practises is a good thing, but i'm not seeing them as helpless victims here. :)
Click to expand...

Good old Ben Soft…

To quote Erik on Forbes:

"So as you read this, as you discuss Kotaku, I hope you can look beyond your dislike for any of the personalities involved. You may not like Kotaku, you may not like Totilo, you may not like me. None of that matters. All that matters is that we understand what each of our roles in this is. A journalist’s job is to tell the truth to their readers, even if that upsets the powers that be. A company can retaliate for this, too. That’s their right. But just because it’s their right, doesn’t make it the right thing to do.

After all, while Bethesda is quite literally retaliating against Kotaku for posting leaked information about Fallout 4, Kotaku is not, in turn, punishing Bethesda with a bad review of that game. Their review is actually quite positive, giving the game a big green YES. They could have been petty and retaliated in the same way, but they chose not to. That matters."
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
2,257
Location
Calgary, Alberta
So they don't get free keys to review games...I care why?

They are a tabloid sight for gaming...of course certain individuals find them appealing, but I would like to think the majority here do not. If they want to review a game so bad get them to buy it if they can't get a review copy. I'm sure they will write a totally unbiased piece... unfortunately some will call it the most realistic as well.
 
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Messages
5,749
rune_74 said:
So they don't get free keys to review games…I care why?

They are a tabloid sight for gaming…of course certain individuals find them appealing, but I would like to think the majority here do not. If they want to review a game so bad get them to buy it if they can't get a review copy. I'm sure they will write a totally unbiased piece… unfortunately some will call it the most realistic as well.
Click to expand...

They don't care about getting free games. They care about getting a review copy before release date.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
2,257
Location
Calgary, Alberta
And those are usually pre-release versions, usually loaded with bugs. How can anyone give a valid review on a different version of the product? Pure bullshit all around.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
15,682
Location
Studio City, CA
Caddy said:
They don't care about getting free games. They care about getting a review copy before release date.
Click to expand...

So what? They will just have to wait if a company doesn't want them to review, they are under no obligation to provide that to them.
 
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Messages
5,749
rune_74 said:
So what? They will just have to wait if a company doesn't want them to review, they are under no obligation to provide that to them.
Click to expand...

Reading the article helps with questions that have already been answered. Although I guess it would help if Myrthos actually posted a link to the actual article, which he still hasn't.

The major reason the article came about in the first place wasn't for them to wine about the blackout, but because their own readers (READ: BETHESDA FANS who read Kotaku) were asking questions about why they weren't subject to Fallout 4 embargoes, and why they didn't have a review on day one. Bethesda Fans are asking this. People who want to buy Bethesda games. People who give Bethesda their money. Gamers and RPG fans that play Elder Scrolls and Fallout series. People who have tattoos in the Dragon Alphabet (guilty). Yes no one needs to be explained that it's not an obligation for them, but they're shooting themselves in the foot.

This is news because big companies are punishing media outlets who tell the truth. We get it, some of you don't care about that, and are fine with media outlets that are favored in order to boost their scores. If that's what people want, then great, this isn't news to you. Some people do care about truth in journalism. As mentioned before, how strange it is that scorning reviews based on the idea that they've been influenced by big brother companies is a major theme on RPGWatch, yet here we have some validation on it, and there's a 180 degree shift.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
2,257
Location
Calgary, Alberta
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom