Feuer! Sperrfeuer! Los!
- May 3, 2020
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:I really don't get this sort of idea. So, unless it's something customers "need to know" or is something deemed important by people who have nothing but utter contempt for Kotaku, a website should make sure to march in lock step with what publishers and their marketing departments want. Apparently, what customers wanted, going by the generated clicks Kotaku received, is irrelevant, because Kotaku should be a loyal servant of the publisher unless something "important" comes along.
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."Except people asked Kotaku about it, and they answered. Oh, and apparently they should be exceedingly happy and polite and caring to the people who refuse to acknowledge their existence, lest people start acting as though writing about the situation is throwing a ***** fit.
"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.