What exactly do you want from games journalism?

More Twitter fights and hyperbole. Less talking about the game making/playing process.

I think games journalism is desperately lacking in elder statesmen. Due to it's relatively young age when compared to other mediums and fields be they sports, films or politics there are very few journalists who have been plying their trade for decades, who have seen so much and can offer even more. Most games journalist's are still in their twenties, they're barely older and sometimes younger than most of their readers. Jeff is probably one of the older guys in the business and he's still in his 30's. When the scandal erupted over the hires of Dan and Jason, he didn't involve himself in slinging wars on twitter, he composed himself, took some time and wrote a meaningful letter which couldn't be summarized in 140 characters. I would like to see more of that.

CHEAT CODES

I want less vicious, pathetic bile like the anti-gamer articles that Leigh Alexander and her mindless followers posted. That would be a start.

I'm thinking of doing a very careful TLDR here, but more briefly before I finish reading the thread: What I want is what I've been getting from Giantbomb since it's founding until very very recently.

The problem is that a lot of the gaming press veterans from as far back as the gaming magazine days have either left the industry entirely, moved to working into development/publishing/PR or have moved on to being writers or journalists for "more respected" types of news coverage. While I'm making a huge leap, I can't help but suspect that it really tells you something about the state of games media. If you search around, you can find a lot of insane stories about their relationships between developers, publishers and such from the 80's and 90's. (Publishers and corporations used to put INCREDIBLE pressure on magazines - in other words: bullying) I really don't blame most of them for not sticking around.

It seems like a lot of those who've worked in games media only see video game reporting as a stepping stone to get into other fields.

http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

Well I want the individuals titles and jobs to be clear to the viewer/reader.

I have not gone to J-school so I may be a bit off on this, but basically

e.g.

• If you are a reporter than you should report and follow the ethics of that role
• If you are a reviewer/critic than you should review and follow the ethics of that role
• If you are a personality/pundit/commentator/opinion writer than you should do those and follow the ethics of that role

Each role traditionally as I understand it has different standards for disclosure and attempted objectivity. e.g. A reporter theoretically should be the most unbiased and not render opinions on things especially in news articles. A reviewer should have appropriate distance from the creator and judge a work on its' own merits according to their own subjective opinion. A personality's job is to entertain and/or have insightful commentary, industry insider relationships are ok there and perhaps even beneficial.

Most problems I see in the Game Journalism industry seem to be when people try to be multiple things at the same time or don't realize that traditionally there are different roles and ethical standards that go along with them. Even if you are the very best at putting on your reporter face and taking it off, it sure looks bad to the public and undermines their trust in your reporting if you are out on twitter loudly broadcasting very strong opinions (even if justified). There' no off hours any more if you on twitter. Talking on twitter/tumblr what have you is basically shouting in a public space, if you are trying to cultivate and maintain an image of objectivity you need to be careful about what you say on there.

fwiw I think GB pretty much does the role juggling as well as anybody, the guys are very clearly primarily personalities at this point in their career and behave as such, yet when it's time to review they do hold themselves to a higher more appropriate standard for that role. But that's a role switching luxury and trust they have earned from years of doing it for gamespot.

The problem with a lot o these twitter/youtube personalities, is that many of these folks often haven't put in the time to earn that kind of trust with the public nor are they often very clear about what role they are occupying nor do they often follow said ethics of said role consistently.

Bottom line is as long as the site/show/publication is clear about what roles their people occupy (e.g. this gal is a reporter, this gal is a talking head commentator, this guy is a reviewer etc). and what the viewer/reader is going to get (and delivers on their promise consistently) it's fine.

If more outlets were more upfront about this kind of stuff, it would go a long way to rebuilding trust. One advantage newspaper had was the bylines and Sections were real clear to the reader. It Shouts "OPINION" or "CRITIC" or "NEWS" right at the reader. Websites don't always do that and they probably should.

Basically all I want out of game journalism as an industry is to even meet the standards of ESPN or Fox Sports, which isn't I don't think is a very high bar to reach. But right now, it doesn't seem very close to doing so.

That's why I spend my time here and not other places. Giant Bomb is pretty honest and straightforward about what you are getting here.

I want reviews of and news about videogames free of any agenda, extraneous politics, or personal bias. I also want to see a LOT less of these "journalists" outright bullying their audience when called out on these practices, because fuck that.

There's big money in the marketing arm of this industry and very few people with any credibility left reporting on it.

These last few weeks have been very instructive to anyone paying attention. Look around and see where actual open discussions are happening. As a person who grew up alongside the internet, I'm not surprised.

I also believe that personality driven video "infotainment" is where all of my future games media consumption will come from this point forward. That may make me part of the problem if I'm completely leaving big sites and blogs behind instead of staying to help change them, but I just don't have the patience nor the trust in them for anything to change. In fact, I'm even having a hard time finding the video content I want because I prefer shorter videos. I used to follow gaming news religiously until this year. I'm simply fed up with most sites and I'm not singling out the social issues related articles. For the first time in over a decade, I'm finding out about games long after they've been revealed on games media and I always say in my head, "How have I not heard about this game!?" and then I remember it's because I've substantially cut back on viewing gaming sites.

One issue I have is that I don't particularly like using YouTube as my site to view all things games. I'd prefer to have a single site for that with a community around it like Giant Bomb. (Which is why I still come here, even though I don't often participate in the community itself) I am very interested in seeing what Shane Satterfield ends up creating with his new web site, though. I believe I remember him saying it will also be personality driven video content, but that it will be very short and concise when possible. Then he most recently said that the community will be highly moderated and self-policed. I look forward to seeing it.

I'm honestly surprised this discussion is even being allowed on here.

I've no faith in gaming "journalism" left to lose. As far as I'm concerned, Giant Bomb are essentially YouTubers. I like watching them play games and listening to their game podcast, same as the Super Best Friends. Those podcasts are where I get all the gaming news. Everything else is unreliable at best and outright anti-gamer at worst.

I'm not sure if this has been covered already but no, that's not really the same thing. In the case of Stardock story, there were actual lawsuits filed. All this recent garbage has been pure gossip, which has been proved false, by the way.

To be fair, most comments have avoided directly mentioning current events and I think this is a good topic to discuss, but if it needs to happen, I'd rather have any posts that mention or discuss the ongoing events deleted rather than the entire topic.

I've seen a lot of people express concern over the relationship between gaming journalists/critics/whatever the right name is and the people/companies they write about, and it's a legitimate thought to have, but I think people are unaware of the big picture issues in the field of journalism (I mean all types of journalism here, not just in gaming) that encourage these relationships.

Notice how a lot of former gaming writers have joined the development/publishing side of the industry? Greg Kasavin, Mark MacDonald, Shane Bettenhausen- all of these former critics, along with several others, are now involved in making video games. The reason why you see this happening? Because journalism does not pay very well. According to the Pew Research Center, the average income for a journalist in 2013 was $35,000. That's not really a great salary for supporting a family. Naturally, journalists are going to be tempted to move on.

So what does this have to do with building relationships with people in the industry? Because that's a great way to get a job- getting to know people. Using connections and getting recommendations. Some journalists may be planning exactly that from the beginning- get a job as a gaming writer, build up a resume for a few years, get to know people who work for publishers, then use those connections to work their way in.

Telling journalists "don't form close relationships with people in the industry" is basically telling them to cut off one of their avenues for advancing their career. Unless you start paying journalists better, few writers will happily accept that.

It's just basic economics- the best talent in any field tend to end up in places that pay the most, because they can compete for those spots. The best football players are playing in NFL, and not the CFL, because the NFL pays better. The best businessmen tend to work for bigger companies and not small businesses, because bigger companies offer better salaries. Likewise, as long as gaming journalism is offering less money than the publishers/developers they cover, you are going to find it harder to convince talented writers to remain as journalists.

EDIT: I want to be clear, I'm not necessarily saying anything about these connections or relationships being ethical or that they don't influence anything- I'm just saying that this is what I believe to be the reality of the situation.

yup, both suits were ultimately dismissed I believe.

That incident was a matter of public record, certainly fair game for news.

In my view, there is one thing that leads to everything else which is good about games journalism: integrity.

When you file a DMCA take-down notice you are required to swear, "under penalty of perjury".

@tourgen: So, you want a story about an (alleged) DMCA takedown that ended up being revoked? Sounds like a boring story. When someone actually sues her, feel free to be outraged.

I think you guys are thinking about the wrong thing here. I don't think many care about or want coverage and investigation w/r/t details of hearsay and rumor. There are, however, things that are public record that the gaming press refuses (refused?) to cover because they tangentially relate to a crusade unjustly perpetuated by a group of internet trolls against a colleague and friend. They won't talk about it because "professionalism," but they are happy to drag in lower forms of sensationalist tripe when it suits them.

As the original post said, things that happened in the last week should be fair discussion. If a figure in an industry is accused of something and those accusations are totally baseless, yet those accusations result in a series of events, actions, and disclosures that generate a lot of discussion then those repercussions and responses deserve to be talked about and accounted for, and they can be addressed in a way that does not acknowledge the splenetic accusations that started the whole mess. After all, more has been written about less, like the article linked to above with commentary ect.

As far as the Brad Wardell thing is considered, you guys are correct in that a lawsuit was filed, but one thing we're not discussing according to Wardell is the harassment, death threats and leaking of personal information such as his address and phone number that he received as a result of a lawsuit that was eventually dropped with the employee in question apologizing. That's because no one reported on it. In fact, the apology itself was used as another means of attacking him by instead of giving attention to the lawsuit being dropped, a few sites instead discussed the nature of being a women in modern working environments and how X, Y and Z could pressure them into dropping a what may well be a legitimate lawsuit.

In fact, he's receiving the harassment right now for mocking the sites that ran those stories. He also had retweeted something about an indie developer tweeting his address and pictures of his home.

(Honestly, I'm regretting this post now because I feel these examples that hover around current events will likely get the entire topic deleted, so that's the last post for me on anything like this)

What outrage? No rage. False DMCA is a federal crime. In the shallow pond of game blogging that's news.

I'm glad to hear that, as filing a DMCA should be a pretty big thing.

But to Milkman, what specific recent garbage are you talking about, and where was it proven false? If you're talking about the Fine Young Captitalists game jam, I've seen evidence that shows that she did try to ruin their fundraising campaign. She repeatedly insulted them, accused them of being a scam, and celebrated when their website was unavailable. If you're talking about the harassment claim, whether it happened or not and what happened can't be proven at all. It's everything that happened after with Phil Fish, and with the accuser prostrating himself before the indie game community that is the controversy.

As I said on the last page:

I agree that the allegation itself isn't news worthy. I also agree that the stardock allegation itself wouldn't be newsworthy. They're both issues of he said / she said. What makes them both news worthy is what happened next.

The stardock guy admitted to being unprofessional, and accused her of destroying property that resulted in a massive problem for the entire company. That makes it news.

Phil Fish publicly and viciously verbally attacked another developer for making a sexual harassment claim--after the developer expressed concern that he might become a pariah before the information was shared--and the result is that the accuser apologized profusely for his claim without retracting it, and ended up promoting a game made by his alleged harasser. That makes it news.

Absolutely none of that is gossip. If you think so, I'd be happy to see the evidence you've seen which has convinced you otherwise.

@spaceinsomniac: Well, as far as Fine Young Capitalists go, you can read their own explanation of what happened here. The allegations that she doxxed or sabotaged the game jam are not true. Yeah, she was critical of them and it lead to a whole mess but the idea that she purposely destroyed anything is false.

And I'm not sure how unfounded sexual harassment claims and Twitter arguments are anything but gossip. I wish the tweets were still accessible but the guy seemed to be coming forward with the claims pretty much as a joke. He was not presenting himself as a victim at all.

@milkman: yeah they were doxxed not by her but by Maya Kramer (the associate they speak of). As they have written, Zoe was the most prominent of the choir against them, and her twitter followers ended up crashing their site. She was not just critical, you can read her tweets, and see how she was rejoicing the fact they crashed their site. And as TYFC said, it ended up costing them 10k $

Wozniak did not present himself as a victim but you know very well it was no joke; he presented his worries before posting about the harrasment and nobody denied it happening, they just insulted him till he ended up cancelling the tweet incriminated (but he never retracred his statement). The tweets can easily be found with a quick search

I know it's quite off-topic; but please let's not present what happened as something false

@cagliostro88: Yeah, I didn't deny all of that happened. But the story going for a long time was that she doxxed the site, which isn't true. To be honest, I'm not informed enough on what Fine Young Capitalists policies were that upset people so I can't say whether or not I agree with her response but either way, my opinion of what happened really isn't important.

As for Wozniak, if you can find the full archive of his tweets, feel free to point me in the direction. I don't have anyway to prove it but there was a reply from someone saying "don't forget you're the victim here" and his reply was something to the effect of "victim? no, I just think it's funny."

Still, back to the topic at hand, I'm still not sure what "story" game journalists should be going with here.

Can we get back on the topic of what you as a gamer may practically want from "games journalism"?

Or do some people really just want this thread to get locked because they can't pass up any opportunity to get embroiled further into the Zoe Quinn, ex-boyfriend, TFYCs, and everything else bullshit? Come on.

What GB members personally desire in gaming news writing and entertainment seems like a decent topic that doesn't deserve to be derailed any more than it already has been.

@brodehouse: Yeah, I've seen the tweets. That's also not a full snapshot of what happened. But forget it. This has nothing to do with the topic. I'm sorry I brought it up. My original point was that people said that game journalists should be writing about this story and I stand by my statement that this is no way a story any journalist could feel good reporting on. It's all hearsay. Whether or not you think Phil Fish is a dick is not a story.

Less contempt for your audience.

It will only get worse.

Capitalism is the solution here folks.

Go to the sites you like, don't visit the ones you don't like.

Buy the games you like, don't buy the games you don't like.

Give the time of day to those on social network sites that you like, ignore those you don't like.

Vote with your actions. If everyone did this, the people on both sides who are causing all this outrage and harassment will naturally be ignored.

I understand the desire to directly attack those who you perceive to be wronging you, but know that this makes it worse. It continues the cycle.

With problems like this, let the market decide, and engage that way. It is a lot less stressful, and obtains the best results .

I don't feel like they have contempt for me. Maybe because I can understand I can enjoy problematic things and at the same time recognize they're problematic. Might be because I can understand a critique of a media isn't an attack on my person. Could be because I don't refuse to see there's issues and then get angry/annoyed when people bring them up. Why do you identify yourself as being part of the toxic parts of our subculture that are making death/rape/etc threats?

No sensible person, no one in this thread "identifies themselves as part of the toxic part of our subculture". The toxic part is a vocal minority that is pushed to be representative of the entirety of the gaming community by "games journalists" that don't want anything other than have free reign to change anything they want to what benefits them the most.

I just stood up and did the pledge of allegiance after reading this.

@LunarJetman: then don't give those journalists what they want by lavishing attention on them. Ignore them, and they will go away. People are not inherently stupid as individuals. They wont buy into something they fundamentally disagree with. In groups however, they reduce their standards. It is up to you, as an individual, to not get caught up in bitter and childish arguments. If you do not respect what these people write, don't give them the clicks and let them fade away.

EDIT - I think there is a huge difference between having a conversation that involves a difference of opinion, and wanting to punish someone because of a difference of opinion. The world can do without the second part.

Ehh... after reading what the gaming community puts out on the internet - especially after the past couple of weeks - can you blame them for their contempt?

@defaultprophet: That's some contempt coming from you. But I understand, treating your opposition like children who don't understand, or evil people who don't want good, is a great defense tactic.

@andorski: Yes. Because the "gaming community" is the reason these guys have jobs at all. And they not only hold no respect for people who follow and enjoy their content, but treat them like imbeciles at best or malevolent assholes at worst.

What we're seeing is an influx of people who don't play games, care nothing for them, but see a space they can exploit easily and destroy for their own gains. It's tragic.

I will no longer respond to comments about this, because that's not what this thread is about, just reiterating my opinion.

Well that's who games journalists/devs/etc are talking about when they show contempt for "gamers".

See above

Yes, we can.

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1s70jhl

A gamer is just that: someone who games. You can't take the very real, very worrying undercurrent of anonymous harassment and misogyny and saddle ALL gamers with it. It's an insult. I'm insulted by it, and I probably agree with a lot of the motivating sentiment behind it. And take my word for it, ridiculing the core demographic in all of these shenanigans is a sure fire way to make them even angrier. The hateful bigots and trolls among them will redouble their efforts to send death and rape threats, and those who mean well but are ignorant of social justice movements will only be turned off by this ill-woven narrative.

Journalists are supposed to be proponents of free speech and ethical practice. How is dismissing thousands of gamers as 'misogynerds' going to help ANYTHING? It's just a way to shut down debate and claim the moral high ground.

...

This iconoclastic, doomsday rhetoric will only serve to copper-fasten the boundaries that have been thrown up between 'misogynerds' and 'social justice warriors,' two utterly fatuous labels. Journalists, instead of dividing up your audience and stoking the flames of conflict, you should be bringing people together. It's disingenuous to stereotype gamers just as it is disingenuous for gamers to attack women. Whoever sent out death threats to a woman just because they disagree with her should be arrested and jailed, not used as a springboard for an intellectually dishonest whitewash.

Yep. I'm being painted as horrible person because journalists are attacking horrible people that are also gamers. Now who's playing the victim?

I'll repeat myself:

Why do you identify yourself as being part of the toxic parts of our subculture that are making death/rape/etc threats?

No, you're being painted as someone who is hatefully generalizing people, because you're hatefully generalizing people. Not talking about you specifically, but certainly the articles that created this conversation.

[edit] And if you would like to continue this discussion, let's do so here. We're getting off topic.

Yep. And Fox News constantly attacking criminals who are black and Hispanic is in no way Fox News attempting to push a narrative that blacks and Hispanics are criminals and dangerous. Any black or Hispanic that gets upset by Fox News' biased and racially motivated journalism is just playing the victim. Right?

It wouldn't matter if they "meant me" or not when they're attempting to make people who watch anime or sexually permissive content into sexists and misogynists. It wouldn't matter if they "meant me" when they're judging their audience by their race. You're okay with being told that "you're one of the good ones", I'm not.

Personally, I can't. There are parts of the gaming community that are terrible. People I would never want to associate with, online or in person.

The problem arises when someone speaks against these people but generalizes anyone who has ever touched a video game. I use to think it was implied that phrases like "toxic gaming community" were specifically directed those who sent death threats on Twitter, sexist slurs on Facebook, and other internet troll-y things. My assumption was wrong. It's a shame, because gamers should have that mindset I have. Yes, we play games and have this sort of community that has been built throughout the internet. But we are individuals first and foremost. My views that I state on gaming sites, the money I spend on games, and the pageviews I give to websites aren't part of an overall collective that should be viewed as a single entity. I am me, you are you, and everyone else are themselves.

The thing is, just like Fox News those commentators can be ignored at face value and what fuels those Rush Limpballs, Bill O'Rillys, & Sean Hanadas(I don't care enough about them to spell check there name) is the look they are attacking me so I must be right!!! And what counter to these "points/issues/causes" good, bad, or indifferent go up in smoke mainly do to marking themselves as invalid with school yard bully attacks or threats.... Look at how mad those talking heads at Fox get when a Cornell West shows up with facts or Jon Stewart rebuttals them with humor and truth.... they can't handle it, the smoke comes out their ears and those Fox "News" host lose it & Fox ultimatly is shown for the @$$hats they are because of fact and truth.... If a Journalist makes claims about a group or genre that you feel are false, then hit them with the facts if you feel its bad......

Jeff and the bomb crew always say the anime is for jerks and stupid,etc..... but just because I'm a fan of anime doesn't give me a right to defend my "precious" by acting stupid and becoming that jerk to rebuttal their opinion.......

Are you being serious right now.

@defaultprophet said:

The system break man, child, and women into figures,

Two columns for who is and who ain't gamers

Amen brother.

I think this is a worthwhile discussion to have but it's reached the point where there's so much noise coming from both sides. There's people making valid points on both sides and people being bullies on both sides (talking about in general not this thread) and it's gotten to the point where I'm sick of it. I've gone from wanting to talk about it to basically being of the opinion that fighting about video game journalism is such a waste of time that I can't be bothered.

Ultimately what I want from gaming journalism is essentially what Giant Bomb has being doing this whole time. General stupidity and fun, more serious articles and opinions when there's something worth writing about, then back to general stupidity and fun.

Once this nonsense dies down, maybe we can get back to this conversation but right now...ugh. Maybe I should just stay off Twitter.