Today, Joystick Division posted a lengthy research article on the tale of two companies both owned by the same person. Well come to find out, that person is Richard Kain and he is involved with more companies and partnerships than you can fit on a cocktail napkin. The question becomes, when does owning a company that benefits from providing PR services to developers cross over into a conflict of interest when the same person owns a company acting as a news and review of the same developers' games?
Is this wrong? It has been pretty commonplace, but I've never agreed with it. Am I just a goody-two-shoes?
Read my summary and the whole report [link] if you've got the stomach and then weigh in on it.
No matter what Fox News says (and I'm a conservative), there's no such thing as "unbiased" reporting. A reporter's views come out regardless and in an often nondescript and innocuous manner. Too often, it's dancing a fine line. The company you work for expects, and often demands, that you "spin" things in a certain way. After all, they are a BUSINESS -- as Marshall McLuhan said, "the medium is the massage." And if you want that advertising to continue for your precious fan site, you better damn well have your staff all support the hype your advertister(s) are pedaling.
Even so, journalists, aside from their PR and advertising counterparts, have a responsibility to deliver fair, honest and unbiased reviews of the games and the industry they report on, unless, of course, they are doing an Op-Ed/Editorial that's clearly labeled as such and not served up as "news."
As Medeor states in his article, "All companies want to get the word out about how great their products are, and if they can stack the scales in their favor a bit without looking too obvious, then they will."
Unfortunately, many fan sites, including this one, are susceptible to a company's "hype infection," and being, in essence bought (with advertising business, free gifts/trips which are actually referred to as "promotions" and most companies actually have whole promotion departments to "pay off" ersatz "journalists" for their "support"), to promote the half-truths and outright lies.
One only has to look at the prerelease reporting for FunCom's Age of Conan to see these sad and embarrassing truths.
I do thing, though, that most people who report on the MMO games and the MMO industry and their staffs work hard to try and provide accurate information but it's a constant requirement for them all to recognize threats to their credibility and avoid being drawn to the dark side by the temptation and bias they face from external (and sometimes internal) sources, often on a daily basis.
Medeor goes on to say, "Certain people would want to throw stones at anyone out there misleading customers, but we might run out of stones. I have my own conclusions about what I think of the situation, but I really believe that in the day of the internet, the truth comes out at some point and you better behave that way."
So sad. I interpret that as "if you can't say something nice in your conclusions about the ethics or professionalism of these reporters and the companies they work for then it's better to say nothing at all" -- an ostrich with it's head in the sand.
So sad. I interpret that as "if you can't say something nice in your conclusions about the ethics or professionalism of these reporters and the companies they work for then it's better to say nothing at all" -- an ostrich with it's head in the sand.
I don't see that at all. Medeor was simply allowing our readership to judge the story on its own merit without his comments getting in the way.
On top of that, I believe our Age of Conan reporting was accurate to the extent that we were simply reporting on what we were seeing. And what we were seeing was good, for the most part. We never saw anything that was broken in our pre-NDA reporting, or at least anything that wasn't a common bug in any MMOG. After the NDA was lifted, we encountered the same bugs as everyone else, but continued our play sessions and had a fairly enjoyable experience.
The release from level 1-40 was one of the most enjoyable experiences I had ever had in an MMOG (at least until I started playing WAR), and that was what I wrote my review on. Unfortunately, the time in the post-40 level range was agonizingly broken. I think it's safe to say that Funcom is working on fixing the problems. However, I don't believe for a moment that the pre-release hype for AoC was wrong. It was simply the fact that no one had seen the darker underbelly of AoC, and after everyone did - it was indeed a problem.
I don't think any of the sites were in the wrong for being excited about AoC. It was an intriguing game with an intriguing initial experience, and from what everyone had seen, it was set to be that way into the end-game. Unfortunately, we were wrong.
On top of that, I believe our Age of Conan reporting was accurate to the extent that we were simply reporting on what we were seeing. And what we were seeing was good, for the most part. We never saw anything that was broken in our pre-NDA reporting, or at least anything that wasn't a common bug in any MMOG. After the NDA was lifted, we encountered the same bugs as everyone else, but continued our play sessions and had a fairly enjoyable experience.
The release from level 1-40 was one of the most enjoyable experiences I had ever had in an MMOG (at least until I started playing WAR), and that was what I wrote my review on. Unfortunately, the time in the post-40 level range was agonizingly broken. I think it's safe to say that Funcom is working on fixing the problems. However, I don't believe for a moment that the pre-release hype for AoC was wrong. It was simply the fact that no one had seen the darker underbelly of AoC, and after everyone did - it was indeed a problem.
Having been in the same AoC guild as Cody during the earlier leveling experience I would say that everything he'd written about the game, including the review, was absolutely drawn from his first-hand experiences while playing it - there was no PR rep there pulling any strings one way or another in other words.
You have to keep in mind that press is rarely given an 'all access pass' to games prior to release. In some cases they'll even make the trips to the various trade shows, get shuffled into a room with 20 other journalists and get to watch someone else play a game rather than get any hands on time with it themselves. Again, this is something TTH has always been up-front about. I can't recall a single article that claimed "We played through the entire game and it ROCKS!" after a press event, but I can easily link dozens (hundreds?) of articles that might state "While we didn't get any hands-on time with the game ourselves ..." or something along those lines.
Quote:
Unfortunately, many fan sites, including this one, are susceptible to a company's "hype infection," and being, in essence bought (with advertising business, free gifts/trips which are actually referred to as "promotions" and most companies actually have whole promotion departments to "pay off" ersatz "journalists" for their "support"), to promote the half-truths and outright lies.
The article Medeor presented here is talking about a vastly different situation entirely. It's focused on a specific case where the PR firm and reporting outlet are owned by the same parent company - I'm not really sure how any kind of lines can be drawn between that type of industry leeches and a community-focused network like TTH.
Actually, I agree with you three, the OP, his editorial (at least the preponderance of his article) and the replies above in this thread.
But a fact of life is that if, as a "reporter," you are sold the hype (whatever your "price" is), and then, representing yourself as a reporter, you parrot that hype in you official capacity without labeling it as hype, you're part of the problem in this matter.
I suppose I'm sounding the herald of truth and ethics in all this and I'm sorry if I'm coming off as a Miss Goodie Twoshoes. I know in his article, Medeor's intent was to comment and, as he stated, not voice his opinions on one small facet of the dilemma facing journalists everyday. It just struck a nerve.
I also want to make clear that I include Cody and everyone at MMO fan sites who "report" (post articles as news) about the games we play and our MMO hobby.
I don't buy Ethec's view, in today's "Loading...," that "none of us [the Ten Ton Hammer staff] are what you'd call serious journalists. We like our games too much, so we pass on what we think is good and let the other guys - flame-fest forums and muckraking "mainstream" sites - do what they do best, make their traffic throwing the weak and infirm under the bus."
Ethec's comments and his whole point work fine for editorial pieces (he is, after all your top editor) but, in effect, what makes MY "skin crawl" (Ethec's term) is the REPORTING of news about something (whether you consider yourself a serious journalist or not) and passing it off as a factual news piece. Trivializing your role as journalists and then justifying your point by telling us we should not expect serious reporting makes me want to ask why you don't post a standard disclaimer below each of your "news" articles.
So here, again, is the crux from my original post in this thread:
"I do think, though, that most people who report on the MMO games and the MMO industry and their staffs work hard to try and provide accurate information but it's a constant requirement for them all to recognize threats to their credibility and avoid being drawn to the dark side by the temptation and bias they face from external (and sometimes internal) sources, often on a daily basis."
Actually, I agree with you three, the OP, his editorial (at least the preponderance of his article) and the replies above in this thread.
But a fact of life is that if, as a "reporter," you are sold the hype (whatever your "price" is), and then, representing yourself as a reporter, you parrot that hype in you official capacity without labeling it as hype, you're part of the problem in this matter.
I suppose I'm sounding the herald of truth and ethics in all this and I'm sorry if I'm coming off as a Miss Goodie Twoshoes. I know in his article, Medeor's intent was to comment and, as he stated, not voice his opinions on one small facet of the dilemma facing journalists everyday. It just struck a nerve.
I also want to make clear that I include Cody and everyone at MMO fan sites who "report" (post articles as news) about the games we play and our MMO hobby.
I don't buy Ethec's view, in today's "Loading...," that "none of us [the Ten Ton Hammer staff] are what you'd call serious journalists. We like our games too much, so we pass on what we think is good and let the other guys - flame-fest forums and muckraking "mainstream" sites - do what they do best, make their traffic throwing the weak and infirm under the bus."
Ethec's comments and his whole point work fine for editorial pieces (he is, after all your top editor) but, in effect, what makes MY "skin crawl" (Ethec's term) is the REPORTING of news about something (whether you consider yourself a serious journalist or not) and passing it off as a factual news piece. Trivializing your role as journalists and then justifying your point by telling us we should not expect serious reporting makes me want to ask why you don't post a standard disclaimer below each of your "news" articles.
So here, again, is the crux from my original post in this thread:
"I do think, though, that most people who report on the MMO games and the MMO industry and their staffs work hard to try and provide accurate information but it's a constant requirement for them all to recognize threats to their credibility and avoid being drawn to the dark side by the temptation and bias they face from external (and sometimes internal) sources, often on a daily basis."
It might be better to consider Ten Ton Hammer as more of a trade journal type of publication and not a CNN or BBC. I've worked with trade publications in the past (in the construction industry) and we do exactly the same thing that trade journals do. And I do mean exactly.
It is unfortunate that these practices prevail, but it is inevitable. Ethics are a fickle thing, prone to shifting and changing according to the size of the wallet and the depth of the greed. Ethics are as subjective as religion, politics or ice cream flavor preference.
I would love to see a truly 100% independent news network, dealing objectively with the issues at hand and having the muscle to be present in most homes. Then again, that is a utopic dream. I'm prone to having those in the afternoon.
It is unfortunate that these practices prevail, but it is inevitable. Ethics are a fickle thing, prone to shifting and changing according to the size of the wallet and the depth of the greed. Ethics are as subjective as religion, politics or ice cream flavor preference.
I would love to see a truly 100% independent news network, dealing objectively with the issues at hand and having the muscle to be present in most homes. Then again, that is a utopic dream. I'm prone to having those in the afternoon.
As long as the site is driven off of advertising, you won't ever find a 100% independent news network.
Frankly, Ten Ton Hammer is about as close as you can get to an "independent" site these days. Nobody owns us but ourselves.
As long as the site is driven off of advertising, you won't ever find a 100% independent news network.
Frankly, Ten Ton Hammer is about as close as you can get to an "independent" site these days. Nobody owns us but ourselves.
Well NBC, ABC, CBS and CBC have advertising but cannot get away with wearing huge knee pads for their advertisers while faining their "reporting" as factual news, either. Credibility is at issue.
Okay Cody, for the sake of argument, I'll buy what you've stated here. To a point.
But lets see a disclaimer statement on top of those articles (cloaked as news, not editorials), to be placed by our editors, when it should be made clear that readers cannot expect fair and unbiased reporting so that folks who want to avoid the hype and bias can avoid it entirely.
Where promotion and conflict of interest meet.
Linear Mode
