It's no secret that, in the age of the blog as a "news" source, scandal and sensationalism and top commodities while fact-checking and honesty in journalism is fast becoming a thing of the past. One need only look at the Gawker network of sewer websites, which enjoy massive page hits through no means other than trolling and baiting. KingOfOldSkool and I had an interesting conversation about the media's love of fanboy drama in the comments section of his recent post, and while we both disagree on whether the people demanding a new ME3 ending are entitled brats, it's pretty obvious to us both that this tabloid fluff and the outright confrontational attitudes of many games journalists are simply being used to fan the flames and keep us clicking. We've also seen this in rumors about the next Microsoft games console. However, I think the line has been crossed for me here, with a rumor about the PlayStation 4 which doesn't make clear that it's a rumor.

Next PlayStation to lock out used games - Report.

That's the actual headline. Not "Rumor Control: Next PlayStation to lock out used games," or anything to say that this is a rumor. It's being treated as something reliable, if not an outright fact. And what's their source? Here's a quote:

"Buckle up, Sony enthusiasts. A tipster has told Kotaku that the PlayStation 4 is named "Orbis," and that it will feature an anti-used game system, offer no backwards compatibility with PlayStation 3 titles, and ship in holiday 2013."

"A tipster has told Kotaku." That's their source. No independant fact-checking, no skepticism, not even logical deduction - the fact that 2012's PlayStation Vita has no such feature - came into the decision to put this on the news reel. GameSpot just took the word of Kotaku, the gaming equivalent of TMZ, as gospel, only mentioning in passing toward the end that it was a rumor at all. As one can expect, the comments section is mostly taking this at face value. Now I hold very little value in the opinions of most GameSpot users, with the obvious exception of the ones whose blogs I'm following (they do great stuff), but seeing what passes for integrity at GameSpot makes it 100% clear why people over at Giant Bomb are scared for the future.

The problem here isn't just GameSpot though. Across the web, gaming websites have taken to the dangerous tendency to just put anything on a page. Whether it's obviously false rumors or editorial middle fingers to large parts of the readership, it's clear that quality content has taken a back seat in this industry to tabloid sensationalism. It's a trend I find grossly troubling.

Obviously, this is a problem that's taken all forms of information media over the last 20+ years, coinciding with the rise of the blogosphere, and the 24-hour news networks before it. There's not enough news out there, so blowing things up, turning into hate machines of one type or another, and leaving standards of integrity at the door have become the norm all over. It's just easier to spew hatred and print juicy rumor than it is to produce quality content. However, it's more troubling in gaming because at the very there are alternatives in getting news from less sensationalist sources. There's no Associated Press for video games, no one interested primarily in reliability and integrity. It's all reduced to sensationalism, picking fights with the audience, and top 10 lists.

So where does that leave those of us who want something more than the chance to shriek at every rumor and bit of unfounded speculation? Those of us who'd like things to be presented without the need to turn news into entertainment or mean-spirited argument? Giant Bomb's own Patrick Klepeck tries his damnedest, but he's only one guy. I'm not really sure there's an answer, and that leaves me wondering whether gaming journalism has a future.

I hope it gets better, but it's looking unlikely.