BlackListed
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well for one Deepfreeze counts journalistic blacklist as an ethical violation because it is a site about journalistic ethics not business ethics. And if Deepfreeze would view Kotaku being blacklisted as good or bad(it's made no stance,and likely won't as it exists to just catalog journalistic malpractice) matters little in me using it to show the ''quality'' of work Kotaku's writers are known for.Silvanus said:
Your second point seems to lead the conversation away from the journalists itself into discussing Deepfreeze.it minutia,for which I am sure there is a thread. Deepfreeze catalogs bad practices and then gives it's own opinion on what sort of criteria of ethical breach it would constitute as. It is perfectly fine if you disagree with that opinion, however do you disagree with all of the things Deepfreeze has documented as ethical breaches?
How much of it do you think the Kotaku journalists are innocent off? A quarter?A half?All of it? Because a lot of entries are pretty clear cut ethical violations,and as such me linking Deepfreeze to show them was merely convenience.
I could individually use separate entries from those deepfreeze pages to prove my point instead, if you want to take the lengthy route.
Clickbait all the way down.dirtysteve said:
We keep the discussion on wheels now so we don't have to keep taking them off and putting them back on when disgruntled people decide to break the law and call in bomb threats.Tono Makt said:
/thread the comic has a fucking punchline nowCFriis87 said:Bethesda and Ubisoft are being infantile? I was under the distinct impression that this was about a bunch of videogame bloggers whining over no longer getting free shit like pre-release review copies and other swag.
I think a big reason for this is that sites which obtain the game from the companies usually get it a few days before release, and can get the first reviews out a couple hours before launch.Guilion said:
Kotaku now has to operate like Yahtzee and thousands of non-journalists / popular youtubers, and send out their review of the game a few days after launch. This will no doubt cut into their revenue, since their style of attention-grabbing isn't going to work when 3-dozen reviews of the game are already out, and they can't just race a review out the door in the way they've become accustomed to.
Meanwhile, on Youtube, George Weidman (aka: Super Bunnyhop) did investigative journalism on Konami of a quality level that should have Kotaku openly weeping and lamenting "We're not worthy!" all while being completely frozen out of official channels.
That's why I don't buy Rydell & Carter's assertion that it's important that Kotaku still have open access to Bethesda and Ubisoft just in case sometime down the line, they recapture their interest in doing consumer-focused investigative journalism.
Of course, George Weidman has actual qualifications in journalism, something there's a serious lack of at Kotaku.
That's why I don't buy Rydell & Carter's assertion that it's important that Kotaku still have open access to Bethesda and Ubisoft just in case sometime down the line, they recapture their interest in doing consumer-focused investigative journalism.
Of course, George Weidman has actual qualifications in journalism, something there's a serious lack of at Kotaku.
Well, fuck Kotaku, but also fuck Bethesda, and doubly fuck Ubisoft. Now I'm out of fucks to give for the moment. 
Anyway, I do agree, shady and nasty business practice. Unfortunately, it is also in the ballpark of what we came to expect from Ubisoft, and (somewhat less so with) Bethesda.
Anyway, I do agree, shady and nasty business practice. Unfortunately, it is also in the ballpark of what we came to expect from Ubisoft, and (somewhat less so with) Bethesda.
Oh please. Kotaku didn't investigate anything. A voice actor went to them with information they received in confidentiality that the publisher didn't want released YET because it was spoilers and Kotaku staff in pursuit of greed ran it. Calling this crap "investigative journalism" is an insult to the term.Keavy said:
Get the facts straight. These weren't some dark secrets that Bethesda and Ubisoft wanted to keep hidden that Kotaku staff dug for. This was script information that the devs wanted to surprise their customers with that was handed to them and the Kotaku staff salivated over releasing it. To add, as it stands the only "blacklist" that they have is that they don't get review copies anymore.
Kotaku is stretching the terms "investigative journalism" and "blacklist" to stupid levels to try to garner support for their stupid choices. The sad part is you're falling for it.
Then again, if this is what passes for "investigative journalism" in gaming media it's no wonder that Lizzy's Star Citizen article was labled "bad journalism" by these same people.
You do realise that there's a difference between exposing employer abuse and amplifying leaked information while under NDA, right? Only one of these things is actually investigative journalism.Keavy said:
And its been explained already in this very thread how and why there is a difference from a company blacklisting kotaku (which is to say, revoking privileges) and kotaku writers colluding to blacklist a person.
These are two entirely different industries that you are talking about, and conflating the the different types of blacklisting both use will only lead to confusion.
Well, I don't like Kotaku as a site.
I really don't like blacklisting or boycotts against journalists.
for arguments sake, I'm gonna call them journalists for now despite the whole quantum blogger/journalist thing.
I can't think of a way to force a company to engage with a site that I wouldn't dislike seeing put into practice too.
I do like the comic though.
So there's that.
One thing I've found myself wondering about is how many people who complained about target refusing to stock gta and how many people who defended the right of target to choose who they do business with will now be on the opposite sides of the same argument...
Of course, there will be semantic arguments as to why the situation is different, but it still seems to boil down to the same thing.
One group is ceasing to do business with another.
I really don't like blacklisting or boycotts against journalists.
for arguments sake, I'm gonna call them journalists for now despite the whole quantum blogger/journalist thing.
I can't think of a way to force a company to engage with a site that I wouldn't dislike seeing put into practice too.
I do like the comic though.
So there's that.
One thing I've found myself wondering about is how many people who complained about target refusing to stock gta and how many people who defended the right of target to choose who they do business with will now be on the opposite sides of the same argument...
Of course, there will be semantic arguments as to why the situation is different, but it still seems to boil down to the same thing.
One group is ceasing to do business with another.
I have to agree with that last point. We do need more of this. Specifically blacklisting the terrible publications that ACT like Loltaku. Mayhaps Polygon gets chopped next? PCGamer? Ahh, the bloody fields of possibility are endless!
Ahh, this wind, this feeling, these my friends are the winds of vindication and salvation
The undead have risen and set the bonfires anew. PRAISE THE SUN!!!
With them on their backs, we shall begin a downhill charge, like falling blossoms!
(insert more topical morale lines here)
After treating so many this past month for wounds inflicted by gunshots and mines, to see something like this fills my heart with (non-stage-musical) glee!
Ahh, this wind, this feeling, these my friends are the winds of vindication and salvation
The undead have risen and set the bonfires anew. PRAISE THE SUN!!!
With them on their backs, we shall begin a downhill charge, like falling blossoms!
(insert more topical morale lines here)
After treating so many this past month for wounds inflicted by gunshots and mines, to see something like this fills my heart with (non-stage-musical) glee!
You know, for everyone who does keep bringing that up, you have to look at the silver lining of this. A MAJOR 'big box' retailer disallowing a game? In the current AAA climate this is a great thing! Because these retailers and Gamestop use their positions to force small bits of content to be cut and made 'chain-exclusive' as pre-order bonuses!IceForce said:
The more large retailers that give a game the chop, the more we as gamers should promote it, as that means it now has less exclusive content! Showing studios they will attain the same sales without catering to the pre-order crowd is a good first step in reclaiming these bits for ourselves.
And don't forget they steal credit of others' when they do find such a thing!IndicateCheckTurn said:
Remember TB breaking the whole thing about paid YT reviewers? Then they didn't give credit to anyone involved in that!
They should thank their lucky stars they have a parent company invested enough in their agenda push to fool investors with shameless botting, or they'd have been dead long ago.
Fuck Kotaku.
I'm sorry, maybe a more nuanced post is in order-
Folks here have already summed things up rather nicely:
Kotaku made the decision to publish information about games in development that was damaging to Bethesda and Ubisoft. Said information was not something one would deem to be "Important" or something the public "Needed to know," nor was it something that could affect consumers in a negative way, as usually is befitting of journalism that seeks "truth." It is instead meant to generate clicks at cost to the developers and their marketing departments.
Kotaku is perfectly within their "rights" to do this.
As a result of this behavior, Bethesda and Ubisoft decide to remove both their hands and the feed upon them.
Bethesda and Ubisoft are perfectly within their rights to do this.
Kotaku then throws a ***** fit about being punished for going after clicks...by going after more clicks.
In short,
Fuck. Kotaku.
I'm sorry, maybe a more nuanced post is in order-
Folks here have already summed things up rather nicely:
Kotaku made the decision to publish information about games in development that was damaging to Bethesda and Ubisoft. Said information was not something one would deem to be "Important" or something the public "Needed to know," nor was it something that could affect consumers in a negative way, as usually is befitting of journalism that seeks "truth." It is instead meant to generate clicks at cost to the developers and their marketing departments.
Kotaku is perfectly within their "rights" to do this.
As a result of this behavior, Bethesda and Ubisoft decide to remove both their hands and the feed upon them.
Bethesda and Ubisoft are perfectly within their rights to do this.
Kotaku then throws a ***** fit about being punished for going after clicks...by going after more clicks.
In short,
Fuck. Kotaku.
Was leaked information, including scripts, something you would consider to be "truth" or part of a journalist's (but only when they're denied something they want, otherwise they're simply "bloggers") apparent higher calling?LifeCharacter said:
And what's with this push to equate not being a jackass with being a corporate servant? I'm sorry, but you can (and most outlets somehow manage to) be a place with some modicum of integrity yet still be critical of companies...without leaking shit you're well aware is far from necessary and only serves the outlet's interests.
They're not reporting on slave labor at EA or some shit. They're willfully finding and leaking major information about products that may not even finish being made and certainly aren't in any state to be shown.
It was done for clicks. Which they are, as I said, within their rights to do. But-
"I prefer to marshal our reporting to tell readers things they'll otherwise never know or that they need to know sooner- the underpowered nature of upcoming hardware, the plight of fired game developers, the reason a high-profile game was released in rough shape."
"My focus is telling the truth about games for readers, whether that?s the external truth that reporters discover or that more internal subjective truth about how a critic feels about a game."
- They're playing the victim and talking up their bullshit like they're some sort of bastion of journalistic integrity when they're just the gaming equivalent of a gossip rag with little regard for the developers they're sponging clicks off of.
Devs who are entirely within their rights to stop sending an outlet like this the means to garner more revenue.
"A Price of Games Journalism" my aching ass.
They were bitten after slapping a dog too many times. Boo-fucking-hoo.
This article is an attempt to repeat the shit they did to Sony back in '08, which they even link to. It's to drum up support and make the mean 'ol publishers Kotaku has fucked over bend their knees and provide whatever Kotaku wants.
It's transparent. But, hey, by all means. Defend them. They deserve it.
The blacklisting cited in deepfreeze is actual blacklisting. People with the power to hire Allistair Pinsof for work conspired on the Game Journo Pros mailing list to not do so. Bethesda and Ubisoft severing their working relationship with Kotaku is not blacklisting. There is no collusion to freeze them out of the entire industry or even a portion of it. There is simply two companies individually deciding that they are not going to work with Kotaku. Do you understand now?Silvanus said:
I find it odd despite everyone calling Kotaku shit, constantly watching them make up things in stories, shit on consumers, publishers and forum users people still believe Kotaku as to this being the EXACT reason as them to being supposedly blacklisted, it couldn't be they may have been blacklisted for the fact they insult developers that have too many boobs or no enough boobs for their liking, that they will happily insult developers regarding dismissed abuse cases or rape claims or even just rumors, or shit on the consumers for liking things the writers do not..
They claim to be upholding journalistic standards yet are still toeing the line same line that every other gaming site is doing in regards to kneeling before AAA publishers to give glowing reviews while having a staff where basically every single writer has broken ethical standards
If Kotaku were blacklisted there is a massive pile of shit they could have been kicked for before even getting to the reasons they would like people to believe.
They claim to be upholding journalistic standards yet are still toeing the line same line that every other gaming site is doing in regards to kneeling before AAA publishers to give glowing reviews while having a staff where basically every single writer has broken ethical standards
If Kotaku were blacklisted there is a massive pile of shit they could have been kicked for before even getting to the reasons they would like people to believe.