Gamespot Fires Senior Editor for Game Review...

[Aoie_Emesai]

Originally Posted by WanderingKnight

There's been a huge community backlash at GameSpot. Furthermore, some actual response from GameSpot, but unfortunately not clarifying enough. There's also an interesting article from Gamer 2.0 discussing the role of advertisement and game websites.

In case the main page gets updated, here's the link to that individual entry, plus their nice way of paying homage to the whole event.

The gamer 2.0 simply was what I was looking for ^^ and simply confirmed what I thought that gotten him fired. It was market value.

[steelbound]

From here - "For over a decade, Gamespot and the many members of its editorial team have produced thousands of unbiased reviews that have been a valuable resource for the gaming community. At CNET Networks, we stand behind the editorial content that our teams produce on a daily basis."

... and how many biased reviews were there?

Were there thousands of unbiased reviews because these companies didn't bribe Gamespot with enough advertising money?

This just made reading game review sites that much easier since I'll cross Gamespot off the list of sites that I'll visit when I want to learn something about a videogame.

[User65554]

Wow. I haven't used Gamespot that much, as I don't really read reviews for games, unless I either really liked or really hated it, and wanted to see what the other people thought of it, but I do sometimes read reviews when I'm skeptical about some aspect of a game and want to learn more before parting with my money, but even then I just skim through them, and usually read more than one, as there are never any reviews free from any form of bias.
But this is really a new low. It's not unheard of, but seriously, firing someone due to sponsor's complaints over one article? It seems a bit too much.

[Aoie_Emesai]

Originally Posted by VK-Pitt

Wow. I haven't used Gamespot that much, as I don't really read reviews for games, unless I either really liked or really hated it, and wanted to see what the other people thought of it, but I do sometimes read reviews when I'm skeptical about some aspect of a game and want to learn more before parting with my money, but even then I just skim through them, and usually read more than one, as there are never any reviews free from any form of bias.
But this is really a new low. It's not unheard of, but seriously, firing someone due to sponsor's complaints over one article? It seems a bit too much.

It really does, but the market value of the advertisement of that game was really high. And of course of the review of the game was the 6 out of 10, and it's also a front page advertisement. I would say that's pretty harsh for the company trying to promote their game when the reviews on it say it's a less than average game.

Also about that link you gave us, Wandering_Knight about users opinion of the game and nearly all of them gave a 1 out of 10. That was the worst from of neglectful behavior i've seen in a while. From the reviews I read, It wasn't a good game, but it's not that bad, not to simply deserve a 1 star. I guess it's the user's outlash and rebellion on the recent event.

[User65554]

Originally Posted by Aoie_Emesai

It really does, but the market value of the advertisement of that game was really high. And of course of the review of the game was the 6 out of 10, and it's also a front page advertisement. I would say that's pretty harsh for the company trying to promote their game when the reviews on it say it's a less than average game.

I realise how much money this is generating, but it still seems quite harsh. 6/10 isn't really worth this.

Also about that link you gave us, Wandering_Knight about users opinion of the game and nearly all of them gave a 1 out of 10. That was the worst from of neglectful behavior i've seen in a while. From the reviews I read, It wasn't a good game, but it's not that bad, not to simply deserve a 1 star. I guess it's the user's outlash and rebellion on the recent event.

While it may twist the facts, I don't blame them. This is actually quite a ridiculas situation. Fair play.

[kadenza]

Originally Posted by Fome

Gamespot used to be one of the best sites. Less ads, and they had passionate gamers like Greg Kasavin writing reviews and doing videos. After he left, it all just sank.

i agree with u there, greg was the imo the best reviewer at gamespot, passionate, articulate and objective. Many of the other reviewers work paled in comparison to his imo, these days i tend to check out Gametrailers for any reviews though reviews in general arnt all theyre cracked up to be imo, too often many of the games that i remember fondly and thoroughly enjoyed were rated poorly while other big brand games were given so much hype and high ratings when in reality they wernt anytihng special at all.

[Xellos-_^]

why are people surprise this is happening?

[Papaya]

Kotaku has some recent updates on the issue.
http://kotaku.com/gaming/breaking/cn...ion-329831.php
http://kotaku.com/gaming/gamespot-on...sal-329822.php

Mass resignations possible!
Could this be the end of Gamespot? :O

[[DOT].L]

Gamespot editors speak about firing.

Bascially, the staff agrees that the management FUCKED UP. Big time.

[Slice of Life]

Originally Posted by Kyomi

But the controversial point is, If someone sponsor your company to advertise should you, as the sponsored company's worker, be forced to say you like the product? Or at least lie in saying you don't dislike it?

There is an old principle of journalism ethics, the principle of separation of advertising and editorial. Which basically says that the editorial department does their job without interference of the advertising department and vice versa. So at least by the journalist profession's own rules the answer is a clear "no". The reality looks very different of course, and things like car, travel, or computer/gaming magazines are often pure advertisement platforms. But that doesn't change the fact that everybody pays at least lip service to that principle.

[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by Slice of Life

There is an old principle of journalism ethics, the principle of separation of advertising and editorial. Which basically says that the editorial department does their job without interference of the advertising department and vice versa.

In theory, you are supposed to maintain "Chinese walls" between editorial and advertising.

In practise, you need to know who butters your bread.

It's a very, very, very fine line. Publications need to stay afloat. Journalists need to eat.