NovaXpress Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Here is a very enlightening article from the Online Journalism Review on the reality of those video game reviews we read. The total lack of ethics and respect for the reader may astonish some, but as a former rock music writer, I can say that all forms of entertainment journalism are equally suspect. If the writers don't please their subjects (bands, video game publishers, etc.) then they wont get access for interviews, won't get their stories printed, and worst of all won't get to party with them! http://www.ojr.org/ojr/ethics/1049994303.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snider-man Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 As a journalist, I can tell you all forms of "news" - entertainment, world events, local news, etc. - is clouded by both the opinions of the reporter and the amount of dollars being poured in by the advertiser. I've seen articles killed because the advertiser said so. I've seen reviews tainted becasue of free stuff the writer recieved or because he/she had an axe to grind, etc. The only "pure" reporting left is sports reporting, and that's only because they're solely describing an event already witnessed by thousands of others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Monkey Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 The only "pure" reporting left is sports reporting, and that's only because they're solely describing an event already witnessed by thousands of others. You haven't listened to any sports radio, have you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaySeaver Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Or read Dan Shaughnessey? (There's tons of other terrible sports reporters who are just as ignorant and petty, but he reports on my favorite team and I have to avert my eyes when flipping through the paper) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeybastard Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 I rarely believe any reviews for anything. I think between the subtle payola and the writer's apathy for doing their job well, it's all bullsh*t. I read them out of curiousity but it's never the determining factor for me. A little side bar to this... When I was in Rat Bastard, we only received 1 bad review from the local press on a show with 2 Skinee Js and The Amazing Royal Crowns. Normally I wouldn't care but this one was ridiculous. The reviewer claimed that nobody showed up to see the opening band (which was us) and that we just stood on stage not moving. He also mentioned that the crowd (crowd? I thought no one was there?) didn't like us. The funny part is, I have a video tape of the show which proves the exact opposite. There was over a thousand people (in a place with a capacity for 1200), there is very loud cheering at the end of songs and we didn't stay still at all. To this day, I don't think that guy was even at the show but the reader would never know that. Bastard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MegaManFan Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Here is a very enlightening article from the Online Journalism Review on the reality of those video game reviews we read. The total lack of ethics and respect for the reader may astonish some, but as a former rock music writer, I can say that all forms of entertainment journalism are equally suspect. If the writers don't please their subjects (bands, video game publishers, etc.) then they wont get access for interviews, won't get their stories printed, and worst of all won't get to party with them! http://www.ojr.org/ojr/ethics/1049994303.php I happen to be an entertainment journalist (see the RapReviews URL in my signature) with a degree from ISU; so while I take your point in general please don't denigrate ALL OF US as a whole. I happen to consider myself very ethical. I don't solicit ads from record labels for one, because I don't want whether they do or don't pay me to influence the way I or anybody else on the site writes reviews - but there are plenty of other examples. I've even trashed albums that were the cover story of other magazines (such as The Diplomats, who were just on the front of The Source) because to me, garbage is garbage no matter how well promoted it is or how many people who were forcefed it like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaXpress Posted April 15, 2003 Author Share Posted April 15, 2003 Those of us who have worked in journalism understand these thing, but most of the readers are unaware of the process. Even if they don't trust the reporting, they're not sure why. As was said, the big lesson is: "There is no such thing as objective journalism." Ever. The only way to dela with this as a reader who seeks the truth is to know your sources. Find out how a journalist is biased and take that into account when you read their work. Use many sources and your own judgement in order to make the best decision. Now that you know just how much deception and bribery influences video game coverage, think about what goes into political reporting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ze_ro Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 If the writers don't please their subjects (bands, video game publishers, etc.) then they wont get access for interviews, won't get their stories printed, and worst of all won't get to party with them! Any Atari Jaguar fan will probably tell you that it also works the other way. If a company isn't paying much for advertising, and isn't giving you fun stuff (free swag, etc), then they get shitty attention. Atari got really shafted by the magazines because of this, and also because at the same time Sony and Sega were probably buying lap dances for the fools at EGM. I also don't believe anything I see on the TV about all this Iraq junk. I don't even trust the Canadian media, let alone the American media. But that's another thread altogether. The only "pure" reporting left is sports reporting, and that's only because they're solely describing an event already witnessed by thousands of others. Even that is rather suspect... Just watch Hockey Night In Canada, and it's obvious how they favor the Leafs over pretty much any team. I'm surprised Don Cherry wasn't howling for blood after the Roenick/Mogilny incident, despite the fact that it was a complete accident. They can't change the outcome of the game of course, but by choosing the highlights, you might think the game was a lot different than it actually was. --Zero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaXpress Posted April 15, 2003 Author Share Posted April 15, 2003 I would say that independent personal sites like Mega Man Fan's are a whole different animal. Such sites are a very positive element of the internet, serving the same function as 'zines. I no hip hop follower, but I assume a knowledgeable fan could see if the site was honest or not. Such sites are far preferable to the majors which are slathered with ads. Such sites cannot be compared to mainstream organizations like CNN, Fox, and even EGM. The bigger the organization, the more likely it is to have hidden influences. Even working on a small town personal ad-feeder such as the Omaha Reader was a naightmare of payoffs and personal motives. There really is no solution to this, just something to be aware of. Video game editors and writers want free swag and most are willing to B.S. their way into getting it. Even if the writers are honest, the editors get the final say. Even Bill Kunkel admitted that electronic Games was meant to be a cheerleader for the industry, not a critic. The lesson is: analyze and question your sources of information Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markimus of K. Posted April 16, 2003 Share Posted April 16, 2003 Even that is rather suspect... Just watch Hockey Night In Canada, and it's obvious how they favor the Leafs over pretty much any team. I'm surprised Don Cherry wasn't howling for blood after the Roenick/Mogilny incident, despite the fact that it was a complete accident. They can't change the outcome of the game of course, but by choosing the highlights, you might think the game was a lot different than it actually was. --Zero Ze_ro: I think your perception of the Mogilny/ Roenick incident is correct. It was an accident and was clearly shown as so, or so I thought. I thought Mogilny did a bit of a fall and took a long time to get up for just a simple stick-accross-the-chin in my opinion. So do not worry, us Toronto fans cab be objective too. Markimus of K. PS: at first I thought your avatar was wearing an Ilanders jersey, I'm sure that is not the case now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invader_dag Posted April 16, 2003 Share Posted April 16, 2003 I hate journalism of most any kind. It realyl is just based on social positions and such. And i`m not trying to dis you MMFan, you are the good kind, the uncorrupted. It makes me sick to watch the news any more, let alone read anything printed, including book, movie, and game reveiws Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ze_ro Posted April 16, 2003 Share Posted April 16, 2003 I thought Mogilny did a bit of a fall and took a long time to get up for just a simple stick-accross-the-chin in my opinion. So do not worry, us Toronto fans cab be objective too. Well, I wouldn't be surprised if Roenicks fall was a bit of a dive... I think Mogilny would have to have been holding his stick pretty hard to actually trip him, but whatever... I'm sure the stick-in-the-face was accidental. I would say that independent personal sites like Mega Man Fan's are a whole different animal. That's why I usually prefer to go to sites like GameFAQs for reviews... although you still have to be wary of fanboy's giving games all 10's, and jerks who hate the game for unrelated reasons (Seriously... why bother giving a review for a racing game when you hate racing? It doesn't make sense!)... luckily, there's usually there's enough reviews to cobble together a good idea of a game's quality. --Zero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisbid Posted April 16, 2003 Share Posted April 16, 2003 an unbiased opinion is an oxy-moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MegaManFan Posted April 16, 2003 Share Posted April 16, 2003 an unbiased opinion is an oxy-moron. No, that's army intelligence. Actually I freely admit that I'm biased when people ask, except that I consider my bias to be "rap music that doesn't suck" in general, which means I'm free to like all different GENRES within that - East coast, West coast, Dirty South, political, gangsta, gospel, et cetera. With video games I would take the same approach as a reviewer - being biased to like what's GOOD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paralistalon Posted April 16, 2003 Share Posted April 16, 2003 No one has mentioned EGM? (Electronics Gaming Monthly) No wonder you all think video game journalism has gone downhill. EGM is hands down the best console video game magazine on the market. (I say this after having followed many game magazines over the years. ) I guess it's all about finding a magazine that you click with. Although, from a purely non-fanboy point of view, you need to check out EGM. They are VERY adamant about not giving favorable reviews to appease companies. Anyway, the link you gave was about WEB BASED magazines. I don't trust internet game magazines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MegaManFan Posted April 16, 2003 Share Posted April 16, 2003 I've seen it get trashed in these forums before, but I also like Game Informer. I've seen them shamelessly trash on big name titles that other magazines would suck up for, like "Tao Feng" on X-Box. Pretty unbiased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtariDude Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 Let us face facts here. If you were a publisher and needed ad revenue to survive, how likely are you to bad mouth a product from one of your advertisers? Not likely because you are going to alienate the people that you need to survive. The only magazine that I am aware of that is the exception would be something like Consumer Reports magazine that does not except any advertising (at least they used to not advertising. I haven't read the magazine in years). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayhem Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 Anyway, the link you gave was about WEB BASED magazines. I don't trust internet game magazines. Goto http://www.ntsc-uk.com and read the reviews there and then tell me you don't trust internet based "magazines". The quality of writing from people (including myself) is better than most you're gonna see and we aren't swayed by promotions, and forced to score anything how it is. We do it because we LOVE games and we want to write for free Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oesii Posted April 20, 2003 Share Posted April 20, 2003 Dave over at www.videogamecritic.net posted this little gem over in his own forum: http://www.dream-tools.com/tools/messagevi...itic+165+index+ That really explains a lot and provides email evidence of threats and that payola crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shep Posted April 21, 2003 Share Posted April 21, 2003 No one has mentioned EGM? (Electronics Gaming Monthly) No wonder you all think video game journalism has gone downhill. EGM is hands down the best console video game magazine on the market. (I say this after having followed many game magazines over the years. ) I guess it's all about finding a magazine that you click with. Although, from a purely non-fanboy point of view, you need to check out EGM. They are VERY adamant about not giving favorable reviews to appease companies. Anyway, the link you gave was about WEB BASED magazines. I don't trust internet game magazines. ::Hopes hes being sarcastic:: ...Im not even going to begin to comment any furthur... anyways I stick with Gamepro! Also Im coming out with an Online Atari Zine (possibly DC to because I love DC as well), this zine will not be biased at all....maybe a little poking some fun at the Xbox, but all for clean good fun.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theaveng Posted April 21, 2003 Share Posted April 21, 2003 This is why I ask gamers, "What games are good?" rather than read reviews. I do read some reviews, but in general I find gamers are a much better source of recommendations. Fellow gamers are generally unbiased, and not influenced by money from advertising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian R. Posted April 21, 2003 Share Posted April 21, 2003 As a journalist, I can tell you all forms of "news" - entertainment, world events, local news, etc. - is clouded by both the opinions of the reporter and the amount of dollars being poured in by the advertiser. I don't know where you work or what you do, but I am a reporter for a daily metro newspaper and I can guarantee you that nothing I write is "clouded" by my opinions or advertisers. Sports "reporting" is hardly pure. And people don't expect it to be, as long as it's accurate. Most sports writers favor their hometown teams, and just about every sports writer I've known in my 10 years is a sports fan first, and a reporter second. And to note, video game magazines can hardly be included in the same category with daily newspapers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.