Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Adverjournalism - The Role of Ad Dollars in Media 91

Gamer 2.0 writes "The Gamer 2.0 site has a look into the role of advertising in gaming journalism, with a few reflections especially topical given the Jeff Gerstmann controversy. From the article: 'It should come as no surprise that just about every gaming forum on the internet is ablaze right now following the news of GameSpot's termination of long-time editor, Jeff Gerstmann. This article, however, is not an exposé or look into what really happened at GameSpot this week. Rather, consider this a look at the direction of gaming journalism, advertising, and how this all plays a role in the content you read.'" There have been a few more developments in the situation since Thursday night, with rumours, scuttlebutt, analysis, and cynicism reigning on every message board from here to C|Net. There has even been a spontaneous act of solidarity from elsewhere in the games journalism field.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Adverjournalism - The Role of Ad Dollars in Media

Comments Filter:
  • I don't get it... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 02, 2007 @01:17AM (#21549679)
    This is news? to who?

    I've long known that all the top 'review' sites are just paid shills. Every single game is rated 'game of the year' even when its a total piece of crap that barely runs.

    You can't trust any reviews other than SOME user reviews since many of those are astroturfed as well..

    The same is true for any sort of review. hardware, software, games, cars, books, movies, music...

    Nobody should be suprised that its the product companys who have the real power in the review process.

    cap:filthier
  • Shocking (Score:3, Insightful)

    by spiffyman ( 949476 ) on Sunday December 02, 2007 @01:45AM (#21549773) Homepage
    Press outlets struggle with maintaining integrity and advertising dollars. Film at 11.

    Seriously, why are people acting like the gaming press is any different from the "real" press? From the New York Times [nypress.com] to my local "free" weekly, this kind of stuff happens all the time. Gaming journalism is no different than regular journalism. It's just that it's more blatant in gaming media because their stock in trade is reviews.
  • by houstonbofh ( 602064 ) on Sunday December 02, 2007 @02:05AM (#21549869)
    Yeah this is no big surprise. Nor are the pieces with no new information surfing the outrage. However, there are good review sites out there and there is an easy test for them. Read the latest 10 reviews. If at least 2 aren't trashing the object of the review as junk, there just might be a bias somewhere. This is for games, tech, TVs, cars, food or whatever. If everything you see is fantastic, I don't want your opinion.
  • by CrazyJim1 ( 809850 ) on Sunday December 02, 2007 @02:07AM (#21549877) Journal
    After a while of playing clone after clone after clone, you somehow get sick of games in general unless they're groundbreaking. Clones sell though because there will always be people new to playing video game, while you... the game reviewer become sick of the same ol same ol. Yes, payola is bad. But if you were an honest game reviewer, you could easily lapse into,"Man, this game is just like Un Squadron, which is just a better version of Gradius, which is just a better version of River Raid." And if I was a serious game reviewer, I'd probably write a tree of games, just so I could place any new game down on a new node, but inheriting the properties of the parent games. At least that's just my first thought. What does it take to be a real game reviewer if your goal isn't to get paid?
  • by vitaflo ( 20507 ) on Sunday December 02, 2007 @02:10AM (#21549883) Homepage
    As someone who was a game journalist for 5 years and knows many who still are in the field (working for most of the big game sites and magazines), I can say without a doubt this is not a rampant problem.

    From TFA:

    when any publication gets to a certain size and generates a certain amount of money in advertising revenue, the question of journalistic integrity becomes an issue. And let me be the first to come out and say that what happened to Jeff Gerstmann happens all the time.


    This is patently false. These things do not happen "all the time". Of course there are pressures from advertisers when they do not like a review or a score, no doubt, but this does not affect the review or score of the game. Most publications have a strict separation between advertising and editorial and this is intentional. In fact, I would say the larger the publication, the less likely this is to happen. Most smaller publications are more apt to take any advertising they can get, because they get so little.

    I keep seeing people say "they know" editors are paid off for positive press, but nobody ever backs it up with proof. And there's a reason for this, it so rarely happens there usually is no proof to be had. Just read the article for example, it takes one horrible event (which should have never happened), and extrapolates it across the entire industry with nothing to back it up other than conjecture. One bad decision by the management at CNet/Gamespot does not mean the entire industry is corrupt, because it's not. Take off the tin foil hat.
  • Re:Shocking (Score:3, Insightful)

    by spiffyman ( 949476 ) on Sunday December 02, 2007 @02:11AM (#21549893) Homepage

    The problem is that this isn't the case. Their stock in trade is game advertisement space.
    I see your point, but by the same reasoning we can say that the traditional press traffics in advertisement space (not necessarily for games) and that such outlets serve the advertisers and not the news-consuming demographic.

    I know this criticism has been leveled against the MSM for a long time, and perhaps it gets at the truth. But the crucial point, hinted at by both the fine article and my reply, is that there is a symbiotic relationship. Without the news-consuming demographic, the advertisers won't come. Without the advertisers, the news-consuming demographic doesn't get its fix.

    All that said, there are some entities that seem to get it more right than others. Many established newspapers, for example, have managed to retain a lot of their journalistic integrity. They're still trying to get the advertising-dollars part right, of course, but at least they've got the moral high ground, more or less. Most of the 24-hour cable news outlets, on the other hand...
  • Re:Shocking (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Omnifarious ( 11933 ) * <eric-slash@omnif ... g minus language> on Sunday December 02, 2007 @02:57AM (#21550055) Homepage Journal

    I feel that way about all advertising supported media. But gaming magazines and online media are so bad that I wouldn't even think of going to them for an honest review. I go to them to find user posted information about a game, like a walkthrough for some particularly difficult area or something along those lines.

    Computer gaming related media is, IMHO, a laughingstock. I don't know why they even bother to have reviews. About the only site I might trust is Penny Arcade.

    I've stopped watching TV and rarely read newspapers, listen to the radio because I know most of it's there to serve the advertisers, and any value I might derive from it is purely to entice me to buy into the fantasy that the medium has some vague sort of integrity.

    I will watch TV shows I buy on DVD if many people I know think very highly of them.

    I actually suggest a similar course of action for most people. Most information out there nowadays is memetically infectious trash. People should practice some sort of general hygiene and careful selection of sources.

    It disappoints me that so much media on the web is advertiser supported. I buy a Slashdot subscription in part in an attempt to encourage the site to keep a relatively high level of journalistic integrity.

  • by Penguinisto ( 415985 ) on Sunday December 02, 2007 @03:06AM (#21550079) Journal

    Anything positive about Micro$oft is obviously bought and paid for by a M$ shill. Now Apple however...

    No, not "anything" positive, just a nice, healthy chunk of it. Take the recent Zune story [yahoo.com] we played with on /. this morning for instance... it was quickly disassembled and found to be pure marketing bullshit - with not even five minutes' checking. Any decent reporter could've done the same thing, and should have.

    A real tech reporter would've done this checking and would have tempered the story with at least those caveats (that is, no, the Zune isn't the hottest selling portable music player overall, just the hottest selling 'year-old-model-in-this-narrow-category' item). Yet our intrepid "Tech Diva" was too enraptured by the Zune to do even the most cursory checks.

    But MSFT aside, my big complaint is that basic cynicism in tech journalism ("rule #1 - if a vendor posts a press release, it's liable to be bullshit") is about as rare as virginity in a porn flick these days.

    /P

  • by Fantastic Lad ( 198284 ) on Sunday December 02, 2007 @09:11AM (#21551233)
    Greed is a disease. The west has embraced greed. The west will die.

    It's that simple, and it's exactly what is going on right now; every world event, large and small points to it. Most of us will get to see the whole system fall big-time in this life. Cool, huh?

    The Romans had to wait around for a thousand years before their greed-rotted system fell apart. I guess it was that their empire just ran slower. Goods and information moved at the speed of boots and horses instead of cars and trucks. The speed of greed.

    How are you manage when the money stops flowing? Have you built your support networks yet? Have you learned how to share your toys? Figure it out, because flashy game reviews aren't going to keep you warm at night. Neither is your 'Whee', for that matter.


    -FL

  • by Tim C ( 15259 ) on Sunday December 02, 2007 @09:51AM (#21551353)

    Even The Register is starting to show cracks of laziness (and occasionally outright fanboyism) in their articles nowadays.
    I guess it's a matter of personal perspective, but I stopped reading El Reg several years ago when the rampant pro-Linux, anti-MS bias just got too much for me. I'm not great fan of MS or their products, but damn the Register were blaming MS for absolutely everything they could, no matter how tenuous the link, and defended Linux and open source no matter how damning the evidence. Objective? Not in my experience.
  • by Penguinisto ( 415985 ) on Sunday December 02, 2007 @07:15PM (#21555079) Journal
    No, it isn't that I've "already made up" my mind, I'm just relaying what I've seen. Your semi-elitist dismissal aside, you've provided no rebuttal at all aside from anecdotal evidence. If you're so certain that this isn't a problem, then please, show us examples. That's all you have to do.

    I've provided a very simple means to check against this (and actively encourage anyone in the IT or games biz --respectively-- to use it). You've provided little more than "tin foil hat" and "you have no idea what you're talking about" coupled with a variation of 'because I say so' as evidence.

    I'm afraid that you'll have to do far better than that, unless you're simply trolling.

    /P

An authority is a person who can tell you more about something than you really care to know.

Working...