Something went wrong. Try again later

headsci

This user has not updated recently.

20 0 11 0
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

headsci's forum posts

Avatar image for headsci
headsci

20

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

With Deathloop's perfect review scores, there have been rumors of payola. I didn't believe those rumors at first, but then today I noticed that Giant Bomb, Gamespot & Metacritic all have heavy ads for Deathloop. Since we now know that Red Ventures gets a cut for everything bought through ads on their sites, I wonder now if there's any validity to the payola rumors. Seems like they may be so, no? What are some other's thoughts on this?

Also, why is the Quick Look for Deathloop on Giant Bomb titled "Quick Look: Deathloop" yet on Youtube the same video is titled "Deathloop is excellent! Here's what it's all about"?

Avatar image for headsci
headsci

20

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@swthompson said:

None of Giant Bomb's new content makes me think they're chasing trends. I don't even know how anyone comes to that conclusion.

They did do something about Onlyfans. Kind of the epitome of chasing a trend.

Avatar image for headsci
headsci

20

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By headsci

Mike Rougeau is leaving Gamespot and shares some departing thoughts on Red Ventures, contractors and Giant Bomb.

https://twitter.com/RogueCheddar/status/1433883867383885824

Today is my last day at GameSpot and in this field (and industry) in general. Therefore I will tweet some thoughts.

I enjoyed most of my time at GameSpot. But working in media for over a decade has overall been exhausting and soul-crushing and thankless.

Yes there are fun perks. But no amount of press trips, early access, and cool interviews can offset the toxicity of fandoms, the long hours, the marathon conventions, the house of cards that is various seo and social algorithms, and the endless acquisitions, re-orgs, and layoffs

The entire journalism industry is now totally dependent on a series of ever-shifting algorithms re-written weekly behind closed doors by a handful of giant tech companies that do not have anyone's best interest at heart. My entire job for years has been a game of whack-a-mole

What do we have to do to surface at the top of Google results? How do we need to format features so that Facebook serves them in more feeds? The answers change constantly and no one ever actually knows. Everything annoying about the "clickbait" you hate stems directly from this

Freelancing is harder than ever these days thanks to idiotic laws like California's AB5, which was meant to stop Uber and Lyft from exploiting workers, but from which those companies won exemptions because they spent a lot of money and voters are dumb

Meanwhile, every stable job I've ever had in this industry ended or became needlessly miserable because of short-sighted leadership, needless corporate shuffling, or entire teams of humans being traded from one company to another like Pokemon cards

GameSpot under CBS was good--we had issues like any website owned by a giant corporation but it usually felt like we were on a positive trajectory overall. GameSpot under Red Ventures has been not good. We have utterly stagnated since the acquisition last year.

Most of Giant Bomb's founders leaving a while back was big news, but GS losing 15-20 team members in the past eight months was too gradual for anyone to really notice. And that's not counting the initial layoffs. By the way, none of those positions were ever backfilled.

My biggest point of contention over the past year+ hasn't been the all-consuming shift to monetization via commerce (since ads no longer make money), or even the toxic fandoms whose entitlement ballooned during the pandemic. It's the way contractors are treated in this industry

I was once shouted down by an exec in a town hall meeting for suggesting that the practice of "testing" individuals by forcing them to work as full-time contractors for up to two years before considering them for a staff position was maybe not great. And this was PRE Red Ventures

When people are treated like boxes in a spreadsheet instead of, you know, people, watching their co-workers drop like flies, the team shrinking and shrinking while still being expected to remain competitive in a fast-moving industry and continuously grow, well

I write all this because I leave behind many people who I genuinely love at GameSpot, including my direct boss, who hired me four years ago and who remains great, and the team I had under me, who are passionate and smart and work harder than is healthy and deserve much better

GameSpot was easily the best and most stable job in my whole career--until it wasn't. But I have hope that things can improve. Please support journalists and websites that do good work, pay for things when you can, call out bullshit when you see it, and don't be an asshole.

Posting this here since I feel it lines up with the NY Times article. Curious what others think about this.

Avatar image for headsci
headsci

20

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By headsci

@peezmachine: Probably correct, but there is a chance that GB isn't already advertising through "contractors". Who's to say that Albummer isn't trying to reverse psych sell the "bad" albums, Voidburger isn't selling the Super Mario movie, GrubbSnax isn't all strategic product news and who knows what's to come. I say this all jokingly; only time will tell.

Avatar image for headsci
headsci

20

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5  Edited By headsci
@plinko said:

but it's also not a big departure from previous ownership.

I don't know, seems like a much more insidious departure. Reading their game plan is smartly strategic, but they should probably get rid of subscriptions and just go full ads on ads. Subs are just free money for them though, so that won't happen.

Avatar image for headsci
headsci

20

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@kcin said:

What is described in the article has, so far, not been reflected in the new GB shows at all. I agree that it feels like OP is reaching in order to use this article to justify their sub cancellation as not only a matter of differing taste, but of ethics as well.

You are correct, but I am genuinely curious how others are comfortable paying money to be advertised to and sold off. If this was all for free, no problem, but paying just seems like it's for suckers and one of the reasons why big business and gentrification exist.

Avatar image for headsci
headsci

20

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Someone earlier had created a topic about the recent NY Times article about Red Venture and for some reason that topic had been deleted before I had the chance to read & respond.

After reading the article, I found it very eye opening and am curious what other's thoughts here may be. A couple sections of the article that stood out to me:

...

Red Ventures has built a culture that blends warm enthusiasm, progressive social values and the ruthless performance metrics of the direct marketing business.

The company found itself in the publishing business almost by accident, and is now leading a shift in that industry toward what is sometimes called “intent-based media” — a term for specialist sites that attract people who are already looking to spend money in a particular area (travel, tech, health) and guide them to their purchases, while taking a cut.

It’s a step away from the traditional advertising business toward directly selling you stuff. Red Ventures, for instance, plans to steer readers of Healthline to doctors or drugs found on another site it recently acquired, HealthGrades, which rates and refers doctors. Red Ventures will take a healthy commission on each referral.

...

The arrival of Red Ventures’ executives hasn’t always gone over well among the journalists who find themselves working under Mr. Elias. Journalists, like members of a medieval guild (the guild hall is Twitter), tend to be more connected to the folkways of their profession than to any corporate culture, and some roll their eyes at Red Ventures’ rah-rah retreats, which feature fireworks and song. More troublingly, some reporters at The Points Guy, which also covers the travel industry in general (it has been a comprehensive source for information on where vaccinated Americans can travel), have complained that the new owners have eroded the already rickety wall between the site’s service journalism and the credit card sales that fund it.

Red Ventures is “all about profit maximization,” said JT Genter, who left the site more than a year ago. He and other Points Guy writers said they hadn’t been pushed to publish stories they found dubious — indeed, the site has occasionally offered carefully critical coverage of Chase and American Express, its dominant business partners. But he noted that Points Guy journalists are required to attend regular business meetings detailing how much money the site makes from credit card sales, which some take as a tacit suggestion to put their thumbs on the scale.

Mr. Elias said Red Ventures has a “nonnegotiable line” concerning the editorial independence of its sites, adding that he has given his cell number to CNET employees and instructed them to call him if they ever face pressure from the business side.

“I told them, ‘There’s a red line,’ and they’re like, ‘OK, we’ll see,’” he said.

...

“Brand and trust are at the core of everything that we do,” said Courtney Jeffus, the president of the company’s financial services division, which includes Bankrate. “If you lose brand trust, then you don’t have a business.”

There’s quite a bit of good news in the rescue of old media brands by Red Ventures and similar companies — CNET plans to hire 150 new employees this year, for instance. A deeper concern may be what it will mean to transform the internet’s independent arbiters into nothing more than the gaping maw of the sales funnel.

...

After reading the article, the new game plan for GB makes much more sense. I'm curious, is the overall GB community here comfortable with all this? I personally am not and feel more justified in having cancelled my sub.

I also just now opted out of the sale of my information through the link at the bottom of GB's homepage. Also curious, how many others have opted out of Red Ventures selling their information?

What's the overall consensus here knowing this information?

Avatar image for headsci
headsci

20

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8  Edited By headsci
@heelbill said:

Like when, if ever, are we going to get a weird cold open in studio again? That's the part that makes me sad, and along with the lack of QLs, is why I cancelled my sub today.

I hope they find success though.

Canceled my sub today also. This site is no longer fun. Very sad. :-(

Just to add, a music show on GB would be nice if they celebrated an album/band instead of talking shit. Being purely negative is just plain ugly and there’s already too much ugly in this world.

Avatar image for headsci
headsci

20

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

The last two days have been very sad for me. Looks like it’s time to accept that the bomb exploded. :-(