Topic: Games Journalism: Quote me accurately and I'll sue!

[MASB]

 I'm mostly posting this topic so people at the NWR forums will have a chance to read the article for themselves and can form their own opinion.


Background: Eurogamer's Rab Florence wrote a column about Geoff Keighley and other games journalists who have become so friendly with games PR that they're almost indistinguishable. When quoting, he used accurate quotes, some of the journalists threatened legal action under the UK's laughable libel laws (though even under those laws, I don't see how there can be a case), Eurogamer amends the article and when that doesn't satisfy the sycophants, they take it down. And Florence will no longer write for them as a result (his own decision).


I'm sure the state of games 'journalism' isn't news to anyone who bothers to read articles/reviews on most gaming websites, but when calling the BS out for what it is can lead to all this controversy, it shows how out of hand and dishonest it has truly become. (The bolded in the article are from the journalists known to have threatened action)

There is an image doing the rounds on the internet this week. It is an image of Geoff Keighley, a Canadian games journalist, sitting dead-eyed beside a garish Halo 4 poster and a table of Mountain Dew and Doritos. It is a tragic, vulgar image. But I think that it is the most important image in games journalism today. I think we should all find it and study it. It is important.

 Geoff Keighley is often described as an industry leader. A games expert. He is one of the most prominent games journalists in the world. And there he sits, right there, beside a table of snacks. He will be sitting there forever, in our minds. That's what he is now. And in a sense, it is what he always was. As Executive Producer of the mindless, horrifying spectacle that is the Spike TV Video Game Awards he oversees the delivery of a televisual table full of junk, an entire festival of cultural Doritos.

 How many games journalists are sitting beside that table?

 Recently, the Games Media Awards rolled around again, and games journos turned up to a thing to party with their friends in games PR. Games PR people and games journos voted for their favourite friends, and friends gave awards to friends, and everyone had a good night out. Eurogamer won an award. Kieron Gillen was named an industry legend (and if anyone is a legend in games writing, he is) but he deserves a better platform for recognition than those GMAs. The GMAs shouldn't exist. By rights, that room should be full of people who feel uncomfortable in each other's company. PR people should be looking at games journos and thinking, "That person makes my job very challenging." Why are they all best buddies? What the hell is going on?

Whenever you criticise the GMAs, as I've done in the past, you face the accusation of being "bitter". I've removed myself from those accusations somewhat by consistently making it clear that I'm not a games journalist. I'm a writer who regularly writes about games, that's all. And I've been happy for people who have been nominated for GMAs in the past, because I've known how much they wanted to be accepted by that circle. There is nothing wrong with wanting to belong, or wanting to be recognised by your peers. But it's important to ask yourself who your peers are, and exactly what it is you feel a need to belong to.

Just today, as I sat down to write this piece, I saw that there were games journalists winning PS3s on Twitter. There was a competition at those GMAs - tweet about our game and win a PS3. One of those stupid, crass things. And some games journos took part. All piling in, opening a sharing bag of Doritos, tweeting the hashtag as instructed. And today the winners were announced. Then a whole big argument happened, and other people who claim to be journalists claimed to see nothing wrong with what those so-called journalists had done. I think the winners are now giving away their PS3s, but it's too late. It's too late. Let me show you an example.

One games journalist, Lauren Wainwright, tweeted: "Urm... Trion were giving away PS3s to journalists at the GMAs. Not sure why that's a bad thing?"

 Now, a few tweets earlier, she also tweeted this: "Lara header, two TR pix in the gallery and a very subtle TR background. #obsessed @tombraider pic.twitter.com/VOWDSavZ"

 And instantly I am suspicious. I am suspicious of this journalist's apparent love for Tomb Raider. I am asking myself whether she's in the pocket of the Tomb Raider PR team. I'm sure she isn't, but the doubt is there. After all, she sees nothing wrong with journalists promoting a game to win a PS3, right?

 Another journalist, one of the winners of the PS3 competition, tweeted this at disgusted RPS writer John Walker: "It was a hashtag, not an advert. Get off the pedestal." Now, this was Dave Cook, a guy I've met before. A good guy, as far as I could tell. But I don't believe for one second that Dave doesn't understand that in this time of social media madness a hashtag is just as powerful as an advert. Either he's on the defensive or he doesn't get what being a journalist is actually about.

I want to make a confession. I stalk games journalists. It's something I've always done. I keep an eye on people. I have a mental list of games journos who are the very worst of the bunch. The ones who are at every PR launch event, the ones who tweet about all the freebies they get. I am fascinated by them. I won't name them here, because it's a horrible thing to do, but I'm sure some of you will know who they are. I'm fascinated by these creatures because they are living one of the most strange existences - they are playing at being a thing that they don't understand. And if they don't understand it, how can they love it? And if they don't love it, why are they playing at being it?
 This club, this weird club of pals and buddies that make up a fair proportion of games media, needs to be broken up somehow. They have a powerful bond, though - held together by the pressures of playing to the same audience. Games publishers and games press sources are all trying to keep you happy, and it's much easier to do that if they work together. Publishers are well aware that some of you go crazy if a new AAA title gets a crappy review score on a website, and they use that knowledge to keep the boat from rocking. Everyone has a nice easy ride if the review scores stay decent and the content of the games are never challenged. Websites get their exclusives. Ad revenue keeps rolling in. The information is controlled. Everyone stays friendly. It's a steady flow of Mountain Dew pouring from the hills of the money men, down through the fingers of the weary journos, down into your mouths. At some point you will have to stop drinking that stuff and demand something better.

 Standards are important. They are hard to live up to, sure, but that's the point of them. The trouble with games journalism is that there are no standards. We expect to see Geoff Keighley sitting beside a table of s***. We expect to see the flurry of excitement when the GMAs get announced, instead of a chuckle and a roll of the eyes. We expect to see our games journos failing to get what journalistic integrity means. The brilliant writers, like John Walker for example, don't get the credit they deserve simply because they don't play the game. Indeed, John Walker gets told to get off his pedestal because he has high standards and is pointing out a worrying problem.

 Geoff Keighley, meanwhile, is sitting beside a table of snacks. A table of delicious Doritos and refreshing Mountain Dew. He is, as you'll see on Wikipedia, "only one of two journalists, the other being 60 Minutes correspondent Mike Wallace, profiled in the Harvard Business School press book 'Geeks and Geezers' by noted leadership expert Warren Bennis." Geoff Keighley is important. He is a leader in his field. He once said, "There's such a lack of investigative journalism. I wish I had more time to do more, sort of, investigation." And yet there he sits, glassy-eyed, beside a table heaving with sickly Doritos and Mountain Dew.

 It's an important image. Study it.

[TJ Spyke]

Sounds like this guy is just bitter because he is a nobody who is not known by anyone.

[azeke]

Read it at neogaf.

Disgusted.

Added eurogamer to my url blocking list.

Made mental note to laugh at and disown this Lauren character if her material will crop up at forums in the future.

Also, what a horrible first post.

[TJ Spyke]

MASB does indeed have a horrible post. And why block Eurogamer? They are a good source.

The writer of the article comes off as bitter that no one gives a **** who he is and he is just some nobody. He is upset because game writers get stuff from publishers? Same thing happens with movie critics, who get tons of free swag from movie studios. As do TV critics. This does not affect most of their opinions. And even a AAA game will get poor reviews if the game sucks. Maybe if Rab Flarence had an once of talent, people would know who he is and he might get exclusives as well. Instead, he sounds like the kid who never gets picked to do anything and then spends his time saying that the other kids all suck.

[azeke]

MASB does indeed have a horrible post.

First post after original in a thread.

As in -- yours.

And you keep it at it.

[lolmonade]

That wasnt an article, it was a blog post.  It should have been pulled because of how scattershot it was, not because it ruffled feathers.

If games journalism has an integrity problem, then it's mostly because too much of the writing reads as poorly as this does.

[TJ Spyke]

MASB does indeed have a horrible post.

First post after original in a thread.

As in -- yours.

And you keep it at it.

Because I speak the truth and call out the shitty blog writer? And I am not the one blocking a good site just because this pathetic writer writes for it. Eurogamer is a good site, and will be better off without him.

[KDR_11k]

That's some extreme reactions, did it strike a nerve?

It kinda leaves me indifferent though compared to how our various intelligence agencies are getting torn down bit by bit as their failure to deal with the Nazi terrorists is being investigated and it more and more looks like they're full of Nazis themselves.

[S-U-P-E-R]

Games journalism is a weird business, and in some outlets, your job is actually safer if you mindlessly shill rather than tell it straight.  It's an environment where getting traffic is largely dependent on getting support from game company PR (early copies of games, exclusives!!, whatever), and, well, ugh. It's not like game journos can just hit the street with a press pass and a notepad and get the scoop on their own.

MASB does indeed have a horrible post.

Not really. And you are not in a position to criticize posting, lol.

[Hey Einstein!]

I don't think Rab Florence comes across badly in his piece. It's hardly an expose but it got me interested. I like the way he describes himself: "I'm not a games journalist. I'm a writer who regularly writes about games, that's all."
So hardly the type to get upset because he doesn't get the same PR perks as the people he derides. Let's face it, he makes it clear that he wouldn't consider the praise of games journalists something people should aspire to.The people who I think come out of this very badly are:

TJ who reads to me as very angry and dismissive. I think it's unnecessary and I think you should google people before you dismiss them out of hand. Have a look at Florence's comedy before you write him off completely.

and Lauren Wainwright. But more Lauren Wainwright to be fair to TJ (who just wrote somethign I didn't agreed with on a forum)
Check out Erik Kain's piece on this whole thing for Frobes (which I think is much better then Florence's original piece btw):

I haven't copied over the comments section but Kain keeps up a good dialog with the commentors and it's well worth a look if you are interested.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/10/25/video-game-journalist-robert-florence-leaves-eurogamer-after-libel-complaints/


The subject of gaming journalism is always ripe for a good controversy.Are game journalists too deeply connected to the industry they purportedly cover?Do the tentacles of the PR machine wrap too tightly around the journalists who ought to be writing critically about the games and companies they are covering?Or does the simple fact that we form relationships with the people in the industry we cover, and that we are inevitably fans of many of the games we write about, make this particular industry an enormously and surprisingly difficult one to write frankly about?For instance, I am a dedicated fanboy of From Software’s Dark Souls.The fan in me made it very hard to give their PC port a 6/10 in my official review. It hurts to critique the things we love, even if we all know how lousy Yes Men are.What other consumable media creates this kind of attachment?I may like a certain film director, but I feel no attachment to a movie they make if it ends up being bad. So why do I find myself rooting for certain developers whose games I enjoy? And in what ways does that compromise my own integrity when it comes to critiquing those games? (On the flipside, only in video games do fans turn so angrily on creators when they feel let down.)It all gets very muddy very quickly, simply taking this one piece of the puzzle into account.But the issue goes much deeper.Thanks to the curious events at Eurogamer these past 24 hours, the gaming press’s integrity is once again under a microscope. I’ll get to that, but first, let’s dissect the broader problem.Playing To The CrowdLargely, I would argue, the mistrust between gaming journalism and its readership is one of perception. This isn’t to understate the problem – perception is still a deeply important thing; after all, what we see often reflects some deeper truth.Gaming journalism finds itself in tricky predicament: it relies, quite sensibly, on the advertising dollars of the gaming industry itself. Unlike more mainstream news outlets which can pull in advertising dollars from a wide range of companies, the gaming press inhabits a very specific niche.There is no way around this. It is a reality of gaming journalism that nobody will be able to change. And it leaves a bad taste in many peoples’ mouths, and that haunting question: if your website is funded by the very same companies you’re supposed to review, is there a conflict of interest that could compromise the integrity of the information you’re giving us?Even if a gaming site and its writers are absolutely 100% above board and honest all the time, the presence of those ads leaves those questions hanging. And as I said, there’s nothing to be done about this.There are other problems, however, that might be more easily resolved, such as the relationship between individual journalists and their quarry.

The Curious Incident of the Journalist in the SpotlightEurogamer’s Robert Florence brought up some of these issues in a recent article at the UK website.Games journalists, Florence argues, have been swept up in the tide of PR and hype that they ought to be critiquing themselves.“I want to make a confession,” writes Florence. “I stalk games journalists. It’s something I’ve always done. I keep an eye on people. I have a mental list of games journos who are the very worst of the bunch. The ones who are at every PR launch event, the ones who tweet about all the freebies they get. I am fascinated by them. I won’t name them here, because it’s a horrible thing to do, but I’m sure some of you will know who they are.”The thing is, Florence did name names.In a now-amended version of the article, Florence quoted two other journalists and detailed their participation in an event in which journalists could receive free PS3′s for using a particular hashtag to promote a game.Here’s the content Eurogamer cut from the original article:One games journalist, Lauren Wainwright, tweeted: “Urm… Trion were giving away PS3s to journalists at the GMAs. Not sure why that’s a bad thing?”Now, a few tweets earlier, she also tweeted this: “Lara header, two TR pix in the gallery and a very subtle TR background. #obsessed @tombraider pic.twitter.com/VOWDSavZ”And instantly I am suspicious. I am suspicious of this journalist’s apparent love for Tomb Raider. I am asking myself whether she’s in the pocket of the Tomb Raider PR team. I’m sure she isn’t, but the doubt is there. After all, she sees nothing wrong with journalists promoting a game to win a PS3, right?Another journalist, one of the winners of the PS3 competition, tweeted this at disgusted RPS writer John Walker: “It was a hashtag, not an advert. Get off the pedestal.” Now, this was Dave Cook, a guy I’ve met before. A good guy, as far as I could tell. But I don’t believe for one second that Dave doesn’t understand that in this time of social media madness a hashtag is just as powerful as an advert. Either he’s on the defensive or he doesn’t get what being a journalist is actually about.These paragraphs were cut from the piece after Eurogamer received a complaint from journalist Lauren Wainwright and her employer Intent Media, the owner of MCV.Eurogamer also apologized “for any distress caused to Ms Wainwright by the references to her. The article otherwise remains as originally published.”While it has been speculated that this complaint included threat of legal action, MCV denies this claim.However, with UK libel laws being what they are, even in the absence of such a threat the press can feel threatened, choosing to err on the side of caution rather than fight a potentially expensive legal battle.
As Florence himself tweeted, after announcing his departure from Eurogamer following the amending of his article, “don’t blame Eurogamer for this. The threat of legal action brings unbelievable pressure. I am clear on who the bad guys are in this.”
The bad guys in this are first and foremost the libel laws in the UK which have long been notorious for clamping down on the freedom of the press in that country.
But participating in those laws and in the culture of stifled-dissent they create is hardly admirable.
Worse, for the complaining parties, the act of attempting to shut down free speech whether through legal action or simple complaint will almost certainly make Florence’s original article much more famous than it would have been otherwise.
“When a journalist feels they have been misrepresented,” writes Rock Paper Shotgun’s John Walker, “even if this so-called misrepresentation has arisen from their having been directly quoted, the response should not be to demand it be removed. The response is to offer to write a response column, or to publish a response in any of the public outlets to which they have access. To do anything else is to be an enemy of journalism, deliberately stifling discussion, and going out of one’s way to ensure further discussion is feared.
“What will happen now is all manner of places will host the original version of the article, it will be far more widely circulated and discussed, and the reputations of those who have tried to silence criticism could be far more damaged than if they had just ignored it, let alone acknowledged they could do better.”
Furthermore, Lauren Wainwright may indeed have exactly the deeper conflict of interest that Florence only hinted at and suggested by using her tweet merely as an example.
Her resume, for instance, lists Square Enix as a company she has freelanced for.
Square Enix being the publisher of Tomb Raider, one of the games at the heart of this particular controversy, and a game that Wainwright has written about previously at MCV.
Edit: Square Enix has now been removed from her employment section.
You Say Libel I Say Tomato
This incident may shine a light on some of the problems with gaming journalism. But I think it shines a brighter light on the problems with journalism in the UK more broadly.
Imagine if every time Jon Stewart mercilessly mocked journalists on Fox, CNN, and MSNBC he could face a potential lawsuit – even for simply quoting them directly. This is obviously a horrific, dystopian scenario, and yet here we are with libel laws in Great Britain that create exactly this environment.
Inasmuch as it sheds any light on gaming journalism here in the United States, I think we can glean from this and from the early shockwaves of Florence’s departure from Eurogamer, that there is a problem. And it’s a thorny one.
The problem is deep and multi-faceted and hinges on a lack of trust bolstered by the perception of gaming journalists and their subjects inhabiting too close and too cozy a space with one another. And there is little that can be done about it other than for said journalists to do their level best to maintain distance from their subjects and integrity in their criticism.
This isn’t easy to do, by the way.
Even as someone who has never attended a press conference at a gaming convention, much less a developer or PR party, and deals very little with PR outside of efforts to gain access to interviews and review copies of games, it’s easy to see how quickly one could form a relationship – even just a friendly working relationship – with people who could be negatively impacted by harsh criticism of their products.
This only deepens when you start interviewing people, talking with them about their craft, and begin to understand and perhaps even become infected by their enthusiasm.
And of course, this is without any dependence whatsoever on video game advertising at this publication.
As of now, it appears some complaint or threat, whether legal or otherwise, was made to Eurogamer by Intent and Wainwright which resulted in the editing of direct quotes from an article under the presumption that they were in some way libelous or cruel. In the United States this happening is barely conceivable.
Two Stories for the Price of One
And so the real story, I think, is two-fold.
Perhaps it is a little bit less about Florence’s original subject – the quality and sincerity of the gaming press – and more about freedom of speech and the freedom of journalists to quote one another without fear of reprisal.
In other words, it is a story unique to the UK.
But it’s also a story that invariably raises important questions about the gaming industry and the press tasked with covering it:
What lines ought journalists cross, what relationships ought to be formed, and how can we unblur all these lines?
Is participating in an event to receive a free PS3 from a game company ethically dubious? What about free goodies at conventions, or access to information, demos, and early releases or exclusives?
What about all those advance review copies which are essentially a necessary part of what gaming critics do?
Where does journalism end and unwitting advertising begin? I actually ask myself this question a lot, because a lot of the time I write very positive and hopeful things about gaming – because I love video games, and deep down I obviously want as many of them to succeed as possible.
These are hard questions and they don’t have simple answers, but they’re important questions to ask.
Details of this affair are still emerging, and there is little agreement and no transparency over what actually transpired behind closed doors. I’ve reached out to both MCV and Eurogamer. I’ve attempted to view Lauren Wainwright’s original tweets, but her Tomb-Raider adorned Twitter page has been locked away.
I’ve contacted just about every party involved in this mess and will update this post with any responses I receive.
If you have any other information on this whole mess, please let me know. Also please refrain from any distasteful comments about any of the parties involved. It only takes a few bad apples to turn a conversation about free speech and journalism into one about misogyny.
For more crazy freedom of the press in the UK fun, check out this story from Forbes’ Kashmir Hill.
Update: From what I can gather about the UK’s libel laws, the big difference between the US and the UK is that the burden of proof falls on the defendant rather than the plaintiff. So obviously true statements will not stand up in court as libel, but it can be a huge task to prove your innocence. Also, in the UK it is easier to get an injunction on the press, forcing stories or names of individuals in those stories to be kept secret. Obviously when you get into the actual process of determining what’s what, this can create a real impediment to free speech.
In the US the 2010 SPEECH Act makes US journalists immune to foreign libel suits that do not conform to US free speech laws. This was done largely as a response to the UK laws.

[Hey Einstein!]

Also interesting: Dave Cook, quoted in the Rab Florence piece left this in the original article comments:


Hi guys, Dave Cook here, I have to clarify that at the time I didn't see the hashtag thing as an issue, but earlier on when it was called into question I saw what people were driving at.[/size]I also earlier today pledged my PS3 to the Sick Kids Save Point charity, which means it's going to a children's hospital instead. I amn't keeping it.https://twitter.com/davescook/status/261063958327357441Thanks all,Dave[/size]

[KDR_11k]

RPS points out that the "bribes" are usually just some cheap trinkets that wouldn't really sway anyone: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/10/26/the-flare-path-blows-the-whistle/

[azeke]

RPS points out that the "bribes" are usually just some cheap trinkets that wouldn't really sway anyone: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/10/26/the-flare-path-blows-the-whistle/

I point out that RPS and Eurogamer are one and the same company.

PS not gonna read it of course, since as i said i blocked them.

[Phil]

On my personal blog I always seem to take potshots at gamers, the industry, and journalism, but I think I'm getting away from that. I'm more interested now on good instances of gamers, the industry, and journalism -- if that makes any lick of sense -- rather than bad. This obviously is not one of them. :/

[Louieturkey]

I always wondered why CoD MW games got great reviews every year even though they were the same game again.  Maybe Activision has better swag for jouralists than other companies.

That's probably why everyone hates Nintendo. They don't give the good swag.

[ShyGuy]

Wait, Germany's intelligence agencies are full of NAZIS?? What is this, the 1930s?

[KDR_11k]

I always wondered why CoD MW games got great reviews every year even though they were the same game again.  Maybe Activision has better swag for jouralists than other companies.

That's probably why everyone hates Nintendo. They don't give the good swag.

The vast majority of gamers (the casual segment of the hardcore market) likes those CoD games. They come with three different games (SP, MP, coop) so most people will find at least one thing they like. Also a review site that gives too many reviews people disagree with will lose readers (what good is reading a review if its conclusion does not apply to you?) and besides, the CoD games aren't THAT bad yet. They're certainly the thing that 90% of the AAA market is aping.

Wait, Germany's intelligence agencies are full of NAZIS?? What is this, the 1930s?

Many of the higher up bureaucrats are conservative in the sense that they'd like their autocrats (before the 30s it was the Emperor, now it's the dictator) back and they weren't removed thoroughly enough to remove all the Nazis. The military is suspected of having a lot of neonazis as well but that may be because neonazis are generally attracted to the military. Especially the ex-communist East is now full of neonazis. They may partially be simply formed by racism, they hate all other races and nations so they take up the Nazi ideas. The investigations were triggered by the discovery of some neonazi serial killers/terrorists that none of the damn intelligence agencies bothered to deal with and many of the responsible investigators are turning out to be neonazis themselves, they informed the other nazis of police actions and such. Of course then there was the attempt to ban the Neonazi party but that failed because it turned out most of the party was just undercover agents trying to infiltrate the party. Makes you wonder if it was really their job that made them join the party.

[Hey Einstein!]

[size=78%]Many of the higher up bureaucrats are conservative in the sense that they'd like their autocrats (before the 30s it was the Emperor, now it's the dictator) back and they weren't removed thoroughly enough to remove all the Nazis. The military is suspected of having a lot of neonazis as well but that may be because neonazis are generally attracted to the military. Especially the ex-communist East is now full of neonazis. They may partially be simply formed by racism, they hate all other races and nations so they take up the Nazi ideas. The investigations were triggered by the discovery of some neonazi serial killers/terrorists that none of the damn intelligence agencies bothered to deal with and many of the responsible investigators are turning out to be neonazis themselves, they informed the other nazis of police actions and such. Of course then there was the attempt to ban the Neonazi party but that failed because it turned out most of the party was just undercover agents trying to infiltrate the party. Makes you wonder if it was really their job that made them join the party.[/size]

My giddy aunt! That's more convoluted then A Scanner Darkly!


Hey, has anybody else seen this post by Rab Florence on John Walkers blog? It's funny, the reason I come to NWR is to cut through the PR nonsense and read what people who love Nintendo games but are happy to criticize Nintendo as a company have to say about things that interest me.


http://botherer.org/2012/10/26/guest-post-robert-florence-on-the-last-few-days/#more-3116


Okay. I feel I have to say something about all this mess. It’s difficult to know what to say, and how to say it, because there are good people I don’t want to put under any more pressure. I’ll be brief.
[/color]First of all, I think it’s important to explain how my Eurogamer piece came to be. On Wednesday morning I sat down to write a column about that fascinating image of Geoff Keighley beside a table of snacks. When I opened up Twitter I saw that there were some games writers having an argument. Another games scene drama. This time it was about games journalists tweeting promotional hashtags to win prizes – something I think is wrong. I saw a parallel between games writers’ casual acceptance that they can happily take a role in these silly PR stunts and Keighley’s weird buffet. That was why those particular games writers, Dave Cook and Lauren Wainwright, were referenced in my column. On another day, it could have been another two games writers, another drama. But on Wednesday, unfortunately for many of us, Lauren Wainwright had made a public tweet about those gifted PS3s.
[/color]I want to clarify here that at no point in my column did I suggest that either Dave Cook or Lauren Wainwright were corrupt. Their public tweets were purely evidence that games writers rarely question what their relationship with PR should be. In Lauren’s case I made the point that her suggestion that it’s fine for a games writer to tweet a promotional hashtag for personal gain could make everything she tweets and writes suspect. I was saying – “Folks, be careful what you say. You might make yourself look bad.” There was nothing libellous in that column.
[/color]Yesterday, Eurogamer removed a section of my column. Tom Bramwell, my editor, is a good man. Believe me when I tell you that the 24 hours that followed the publication of my column were horrendous for Tom. In all my time writing for Eurogamer, Tom Bramwell has never asked me to change a word. Even when I wrote about Eurogamer’s acceptance of Booth Babes at the Eurogamer Expo, Tom Bramwell had my back. When Tom emailed me telling me that the column was going to be amended, that it HAD to be amended, you can believe that it wasn’t a decision he took lightly. I can’t share everything about my exchanges with Tom, but I ask that you don’t see him as a villain in this. His attempts to defend my position were, if anything, heroic.
[/color]
[/color]I have to talk about Lauren Wainwright. Her first reaction after the column went out was to claim the piece was libellous. Lauren is clearly a writer with many friends in the games press and in games PR. I think it is shameful, and very telling, that none of them talked her out of a course of action that could only end horribly for everyone involved. The internet is a savage thing, and these friends let her fling herself into its jaws. I feel for Lauren in a way, because I don’t think she’s corrupt. I said as much in my piece. I think that she’s behaved how she’s been conditioned to behave by her fellow writers and by her PR friends. I think she did one of the worst things one writer can do to another, but I don’t think she’s “on the take”. And her actions since, supported by people who know better, have made her a focal point for a piece that was never about her. She has faced the ugly side of these internet dramas, where people dig into your past and highlight all your mistakes. She’s faced nasty comments based on her sex and her looks, because that’s what some corners of the internet do to women.
[/color]And it has to stop.
[/color]Because here’s the thing. This story – my column, Lauren’s reaction, Eurogamer’s edit, my stepping down, the whole aftermath – is not about writers. It’s about PR. It’s about these marketing people who have a stranglehold over most of the industry, and control the narrative of the whole scene. They’ve even controlled the narrative of this disaster.
[/color]Do you think Lauren acted entirely alone in pressuring Eurogamer to change my piece? Do you think she has that power? I don’t. Who do you think MIGHT have that power?
[/color]Today, I saw another games writer (a former PR) brutally attacking me for not stepping in to do something to stop what was happening to Lauren. How could I step in and do anything? I’m not even comfortable writing this, in case I get someone I respect into trouble. The threat of legal action, even a carefully worded threat, makes you second guess everything you write. That’s the power of the thing. What I want to ask is this – why were other parties involved in this mess happy for Lauren to take all the heat? Why were her friends happy to let her take the heat? Is it the job of the guy who just had to quit his job and has been threatened with legal action to work out how to stop all that from happening?
[/color]I am furious. I am furious because yesterday the games PR and marketing men flung a few people under a bus, and today they’re probably sipping drinks at the Golden Joystick awards. I am furious that some people think we should all just “move on” from this, allowing the PR people to get back to their narrative. I am furious that some are saying that it’s “just games”. It’s not games. It’s writing. And writing matters. Writing always matters.
[/color]But I am also heartened by the response of many people out there. I’ve had messages of support from the writers I respect, and from many fellow gamers. I want to thank everybody for their kindness, because it has been a pretty awful week. Awful, partly, because I’ve discovered that the games press is controlled by PR to a greater extent than I had ever dreamed – and I’m a pessimist.
[/color]Those who have been angry about all this – don’t investigate the people, investigate the system. Please write about games. Don’t go to any parties. Don’t go on the trips. Don’t care about exclusives. Just write passionately about games. You can contribute hugely to the scene without ever once speaking to a PR person. Cut them out of the equation.
[/color]I felt like giving up writing about games yesterday. Today I just want to get back to it.
[/color]So please, let this be an end to it. And please let this be a start to something better.

[oohhboy]

Rab Florence is stating something very obvious that the "Gaming press" has been loath to confront. The relationship between PR and the press in gaming is backwards to what a normal review process is like. For most gaming sites the publishers, the Ads and the good reviews are the only source of revenue compared to normal press where it is a source, not THE source. A site can choice to smash a bad game, but risk losing the means to survive, so are forced to sell their credibility willfully or otherwise.

The relationship is toxic and short term. There will be a point if not now but later where this issue has to be confronted. The sale of IGN is some of the first sign of this happening. Nobody takes IGN seriously anymore, not that I ever have, but when even FOX sees it as dead weight you have some serious systemic issues.

Go have a read of the Forbes article on this, it goes in depth as to the pressures and the ease a reviewer can be swayed.

[UncleBob]

All of this brings ties into the other thread about Penny Arcade and their Kickstarter fundraiser.  Now, the major difference here is that Penny Arcade is still a part of the mass industrial machine empire, as they need the big companies like EA, Activision, Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo's support (PAX, for example, would hurt if they didn't show up) - but events like this just tie into the direct reason why Penny Arcade wanted the ability to go without paid advertisers.

That's the thing that hurts the gaming media.  We're so niche that the only folks who want to seriously advertise on gaming sites are publishers (well, and the occasional soft-core porn dating sites).  And that's if you're a big name.  If you're a small fan site, you're never going to make enough from ads to quit your day job.

[NWR_insanolord]

As someone who's been to PAX, I don't think it would be a significant loss if none of the big companies showed up. The show floor is easily the least interesting thing at the show.

[UncleBob]

I assume (though could be wrong) that the big companies pay a pretty penny for floor space.

My guess is that they pretty much fund PAX.

[NWR_insanolord]

I think 70,000 people paying $50 a pop probably goes a long way toward it.

[UncleBob]

I'd actually be surprised if $3.5 Million covered the cost of renting the convention center for a week.

[NWR_insanolord]

Maybe not, but i think it'd be a pretty good chunk of it at least. Most of the people working at the convention are volunteers, an a lot of stuff is donated for things like the free play rooms, so there isn't that much more beyond trying the space.