Rayman Leaked as Super Smash Bros. 4 DLC Character? - Update: Fake

[Link_to_Future]

Have a nice day.

Nice tone.

But seriously. Not mentioning an article that you had written [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/138698-Super-Smash-Bros-4-Doesnt-Have-Any-Paid-DLC-Planned] is sort of in bad taste here. I'm not trying to be on the "you f'd up" side of this argument but there was a certain degree of misrepresentation based on the words you had previously written in the original article.

Look, I don't care about 100% accuracy here. But I at least care about consistency. Especially when someone is talking about details they have previously reported on.

Also, Steve, I was on your side initially. But thanks to your tone in dealing with "critics", I'm sort of on the fence. The critiques may have been a bit excessive, but the combination of the knee jerks of the masses and the flinch of the site has made me doubt the integrity of all parties on this thread.

Awesome. Go team....

 

[Ryan Hughes]

I'm sorry it didn't live up to your impeccable standards. Have a nice day.

Dude, it is not our impeccable standard, it is the base standard to which all people with an audience should conform. I actually consider the SPJ's list to be only a starting point, as it -last I read it- did not contain language that encouraged investigation into behind-the-scenes collusion of anonymous sources.

Though, 4chan does not even qualify -legally speaking, because there are legal standards for this- as even one anonymous source. Because you should know that it is the journalist that decides to grant anonymity to the source, not the source that works in blind anonymity. Yeah, you might think it "newsworthy" whatever that might mean, but you disseminated false information and are now being defiant about it. That makes you a moral moron. These standards are not optional. They are not even remotely difficult to comprehend, as they are two pages of bullet points. I follow them to the letter and then some, and I am not wrong to demand that everyone else do the same at all times.

What would have happened if this was just a marketing ploy from Ubisoft? a tactic to promote Rayman ahead of a hypothetical new release? In fact, we cannot say for certain that they didn't bankroll this whole thing, as unlikely as that may be. Press manipulation is chapter one of the modern Public Relations and Marketing handbook, and I assume you, they have already mastered it in Washington and other capital cities around the world, and it is only a matter of time before private companies start picking up on those tactics. If that was the case, not only would you have disseminated false information, but also bee manipulated into marketing for a company that recently has shown nothing but contempt for its customers.

So, way to go, you have violated trust and integrity, in your own small way, and are now likely blaming everyone but yourself.

 

[Absolutionis]

Many of the articles on the front page are already echoes of Reddit's /r/Games

Sometimes it's better to get the news out early rather than accurately. Quantity over quality.

At least it gives people something to talk about.

 

[StriderShinryu]

I'm sorry it didn't live up to your impeccable standards. Have a nice day.

Dude, it is not our impeccable standard, it is the base standard to which all people with an audience should conform. I actually consider the SPJ's list to be only a starting point, as it -last I read it- did not contain language that encouraged investigation into behind-the-scenes collusion of anonymous sources.

Pretty much this. Sorry, but I'd imagine almost everyone expects a higher standard than "I saw it on 4chan and they were right about something once!" That's not "impeccable standards," be the tone sarcastic or not, that's just common sense and what should be expected of a news reporter. But thanks, I did have a pretty good day.

 

[Link_to_Future]

Many of the articles on the front page are already echoes of Reddit's /r/Games

Sometimes it's better to get the news out early rather than accurately. Quantity over quality.

At least it gives people something to talk about.

I'm sure glad I'm on /r/ right now! Yay quantity!!

But actually, it's all about clicks. I get that. We want to have the most traffic possible to keep the ad revenue high.

I just wish it was a little less transparent.

 

[JayRPG]

To the people complaining, I'll just throw this out there:

If this wasn't reported here, I wouldn't have seen it at all, and I also wouldn't have seen the update with the video which was actually a fairly interesting watch.

There have been FAR less news worthy things reported on the escapist well before this, this was borderline not news, because despite all the bitching about 4chan/reddit sources... a lot of stuff, video game or otherwise, gets leaked by anonymous sources like 4chan before anywhere else; This one didn't pan out, it's not something to spit the dummy over.

 

[Soxafloppin]

Wow, this thread cut me deep.

It brought back memories of the Sonic and Tails rumours from Smash Bros melee.

Weeks of trying to beat 20-odd of those brutally difficult wire people as a child, to play as my favourite video game characters....eventually doing it, and just...nothing, just nothing.

.Sorry im done with this thread

 

[StriderShinryu]

To the people complaining, I'll just throw this out there:

If this wasn't reported here, I wouldn't have seen it at all, and I also wouldn't have seen the update with the video which was actually a fairly interesting watch.

There have been FAR less news worthy things reported on the escapist well before this, this was borderline not news, because despite all the bitching about 4chan/reddit sources... a lot of stuff, video game or otherwise, gets leaked by anonymous sources like 4chan before anywhere else; This one didn't pan out, it's not something to spit the dummy over.

I can certainly understand that tips can come from anonymous sources, but it's the job of a reporter to go beyond just finding a tip somewhere online and throwing it into an article as if it's truth. This was also the second case in just a week where this authors work can, at best, be deemed questionable. You may not agree, but I feel that this should be given some attention both by the writer themselves as well as by editorial staff who are letting this content reach the site in this format.

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

In short, preventing the dissemination of false information is the absolute ethical priority. To do this, always use multiple sources when dealing in anonymity. And no, calling it a "report" or a "rumor" does not excuse you, if anything it just makes it even worse. BTW, Kotaku didn't even report on this at all. *Slow Clap*

I'm sorry, but I really don't see anything done wrong here. Unless the original article was heavily edited Steven Bogos, he specifically said to take it with a grain of salt and that it was a rumor. I don't see him saying anything in the article that is untrue, and as many people have said it is a very convincing fake. Not to mention that he updated the article to reflect that once it came out.

I know that this journalistic ethics crusade is really important to some people, but short of straight up not reporting on any unverified leaks (Which leaks are going to be) I don't see much else he could have done. He was skeptical, he said what points of validity the source had going for it, he was simply wrong in his judgment of it.

EDIT:

I can certainly understand that tips can come from anonymous sources, but it's the job of a reporter to go beyond just finding a tip somewhere online and throwing it into an article as if it's truth. This was also the second case in just a week where this authors work can, at best, be deemed questionable. You may not agree, but I feel that this should be given some attention both by the writer themselves as well as by editorial staff who are letting this content reach the site in this format.

He did. He gave you the source, he told you what basis there was to believe it was genuine, and he never once stated it as truth. The article's littered with statements like "seemingly" and "take this with a grain of salt"

 

[Ryan Hughes]

I'm sorry, but I really don't see anything done wrong here. Unless the original article was heavily edited Steven Bogos, he specifically said to take it with a grain of salt and that it was a rumor. I don't see him saying anything in the article that is untrue, and as many people have said it is a very convincing fake. Not to mention that he updated the article to reflect that once it came out.

I know that this journalistic ethics crusade is really important to some people, but short of straight up not reporting on any unverified leaks (Which leaks are going to be) I don't see much else he could have done. He was skeptical, he said what points of validity the source had going for it, he was simply wrong in his judgment of it.

First up: No, I am not part of Gamer Gate. I am and always have been neutral because honestly it got toxic fast, so any reliable information was quickly lost. The information was false. The Escapist disseminated that information. Thus, they disseminated false information. That logic is airtight, and it matters not one bit if they said it was a rumor or to take it with a grain of salt.

Second, it is not me arbitrarily saying this, I gave the SPJ's ethic guidelines for a reason, because they -when put together- have centuries upon centuries of experience in journalism. It doesn't even matter that you cannot see anything wrong with it, there is something wrong with it and your feelings are entirely irrelevant, because your feelings and what you may or may not see are steamrolled by an entire community of people that know exactly what they are talking about.

But as an exercise, let's go over it more in-depth, shall we?

Journalists should:

? Take responsibility for the accuracy of their work. Verify information before releasing it. Use original sources whenever possible.

? Remember that neither speed nor format excuses inaccuracy.

The piece is in clear violation of the first tenet, and the second is designed to address things like "Rumor" or "Report" columns. just like this article. Originally, those types of columns were designed to mine sources from the public. That is, a journalist would report on a rumor for which they had only one source, hoping to get another source to come forward if they had run out of other options. Even this is a violation of ethics, as it makes it nearly impossible to verify your sources independently even if a second comes forward. Now, let's discuss what constitutes a "source." In nearly every situation, the source is granted anonymity by the journalist, that way the journalist can know if they are in behind the scenes collusion or have a conflict-of-interest in the matter at hand. So, you should know basic information about your source such as their name, where they live, and how they came across the information at hand. This is why not even neoGAF is not a legal or ethical "source," even though it is often treated like one by idiots, and this goes triple for the likes of 4chan and reddit. This is why it is always necessary to have multiple sources when dealing in anonymity. Those that do not are a laughingstock for responsible journalists.

? Consider sources? motives before promising anonymity. Reserve anonymity for sources who may face danger, retribution or other harm, and have information that cannot be obtained elsewhere. Explain why anonymity was granted.

? Avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information unless traditional, open methods will not yield information vital to the public.

? Consider the long-term implications of the extended reach and permanence of publication. Provide updated and more complete information as appropriate.

Here we see that the motives of a source play a key role. Press Manipulation is -as I said above- basically chapter one of the modern PR and Marketing handbook. It is common practice for governments and ruling political parties, and it is only a matter of time before these tactics are converted for use in the games industry. Thankfully, the industry leaders are collectively about as bright as a brain-damaged Bonobo, but who knows when they will catch on. For all anyone knows, this could have been bankrolled by Ubisoft to promote an upcoming Rayman announcement. This is why you know your sources, and make sure they are not in collusion to deceive you or use your voice to unfairly gain attention behind your back. To consider the reach: Many people speak English as a second language. Enough to get the gist of the article, but no enough to understand the nuance between "Rumor," and "Report," and certainly not enough to understand idioms like "grain of salt."

Responsible journalists from all media, including nontraditional providers of news to a broad audience, should strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Responsible journalists think ethically before acting, and make every effort to get the story right the first time. Integrity is the foundation of a journalist?s credibility, and above all, responsible journalists must be accurate.

I could not say it better. This also means people that call themselves "bloggers" or anything else are not excused. Do you have an audience? Then, you should be bound by this.

--Aggressively gather and update information as the story unfolds and work to avoid error. Deliberate distortion and reporting unconfirmed rumors are never permissible.

--Journalists, not sources, are responsible for the accuracy of stories. Verify information from sources before publishing. Information taken from other news sources should be independently verified.

And I could go on and on and on. But that would be unnecessary.

http://spj.org/pdf/ethics-code-mark-through-draft-1.pdf

http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

*snip*

While a lot of these principles definitely apply to games journalism, I don't think it's exactly useful to have the same set of rules and guidelines applying over all facets of journalism. Games journalism is a whole different beast than political journalism. One keeps you informed about the world, and breaches in ethics can seriously misguide people's opinions on important and significant issues. The other might make you waste $60 and find a new website.

Likewise, spreading around rumors about someone's life or a sensitive subject is a whole different issue from potential dlc contents. One is a high risk issue, whereas the other is most definitely not.

But looking at the excerpts you've selected, let's see which ones Steven Bogos is guilty of violating

- Take responsibility for the accuracy of their work. Verify information before releasing it. Use original sources whenever possible.

Sort of, he didn't just present this information without qualification, he made an effort to justify to the reader why it was correct, but he didn't claim that it was.

- Remember that neither speed nor format excuses inaccuracy.

Not really much I can say about this. I completely agree that this is an irritating issue. It's become exacerbated by internet news media to the point I don't trust a story until I've investigated it myself, regardless of the source.

That being said, this is something that happens everywhere. At least I can handle it when it's up front about the fact that it's a rumor.

- Consider sources? motives before promising anonymity. Reserve anonymity for sources who may face danger, retribution or other harm, and have information that cannot be obtained elsewhere. Explain why anonymity was granted.

The source wasn't anonymous (looking at the video as the source), so this doesn't apply.

- Avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information unless traditional, open methods will not yield information vital to the public.

Watching a video isn't an undercover or surreptitious method of gathering information. This also sounds like it's more inline with investigative reporting where someone is digging for information as opposed to reporting on information that has been made public by someone.

- Consider the long-term implications of the extended reach and permanence of publication. Provide updated and more complete information as appropriate.

As I mentioned earlier, the long term implications are pretty tame.

Responsible journalists from all media, including nontraditional providers of news to a broad audience, should strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Responsible journalists think ethically before acting, and make every effort to get the story right the first time. Integrity is the foundation of a journalist?s credibility, and above all, responsible journalists must be accurate.

I'm really on the fence whether this one is even an issue. What he reported was that there was a video released that suggested that Rayman was going to be released as a character in future DLC. The headline might suggest differently (And I will say that almost everywhere online aside from legitimate news sites I've found headlines to be ridiculously misleading), but after reading an article it's pretty clear that he's reporting a potential source of information as opposed to claiming its validity.

-Aggressively gather and update information as the story unfolds and work to avoid error. Deliberate distortion and reporting unconfirmed rumors are never permissible.

He did the first one. I assume what you're referring to with this one is the unconfirmed rumors aspect. In that case, journalistic ethics would say that you flat out do not report leaks. Because the second they are confirmed, they're not leaks anymore, they're announcements that the dev has made.

While I'd hardly say that this was confirmed, especially since it turned out to be untrue, there was solid justification to believe this might be true. Justification that Steven Bogos provided.

-Journalists, not sources, are responsible for the accuracy of stories. Verify information from sources before publishing. Information taken from other news sources should be independently verified.

Not sure exactly how he could have verified this. As I mentioned earlier, leaks generally aren't information that gets verified. As long as you are clear about the skeptical nature of the information, and the information is of a low impact nature I don't care nearly enough to get up in arms about it.

Really, most of what I'm saying boils down to Games journalism just doesn't matter that much. And I don't say this trying to be dismissive of anyone's job. I'm glad it exists, I'm a consumer of it. It's just that trying to hold it to the same candle as political journalism is pointless. There is not nearly the same degree of responsibility with what you report on. Nobody's lives are ruined, nobody gets hurt.

That's not even to say that there is no need for ethics in game journalism. I like being able to have some trust for the place I get my news from. And the Escapist generally gets that. One of the reasons being a point you mentioned from the document. Even if they get their information wrong, they almost always update it to correct it.

They could have taken the approach of just not reporting on any unverified stories whatsoever. If you wanted that, why even bother clicking this article? What sort of chance is there that a "leaked" story is going to be 100% verified?

Captcha:
Depressingly, the answer to the question: "What is your quest?" is not "I seek the grail"

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Tee hee hee. "Journalism"

 

[ThunderCavalier]

Rayman would be fun to have, but adding too many third party characters would, I dunno, just seem a bit silly.

 

[Maze1125]

*snip*

You are wrong and you are completely misinterpreting that code.
Not a single point you quoted there was violated. The only thing that comes close is "Deliberate distortion and reporting unconfirmed rumors are never permissible." Which is quite clearly meaning "reporting unconfirmed rumors as though they were true".

There is absolutely nothing wrong with reporting on something that is suspected to be true so long as you are clear as to the source, are clear that it is not confirmed and then update the article once the truth has become clear. All three of which were done in this article.

You are, for some reason, trying to make an issue where there is none.

 

[Ryan Hughes]

- Consider sources? motives before promising anonymity. Reserve anonymity for sources who may face danger, retribution or other harm, and have information that cannot be obtained elsewhere. Explain why anonymity was granted.

The source wasn't anonymous (looking at the video as the source), so this doesn't apply.

-Aggressively gather and update information as the story unfolds and work to avoid error. Deliberate distortion and reporting unconfirmed rumors are never permissible.

He did the first one. I assume what you're referring to with this one is the unconfirmed rumors aspect. In that case, journalistic ethics would say that you flat out do not report leaks. Because the second they are confirmed, they're not leaks anymore, they're announcements that the dev has made.

While I'd hardly say that this was confirmed, especially since it turned out to be untrue, there was solid justification to believe this might be true. Justification that Steven Bogos provided.

-Journalists, not sources, are responsible for the accuracy of stories. Verify information from sources before publishing. Information taken from other news sources should be independently verified.

Not sure exactly how he could have verified this. As I mentioned earlier, leaks generally aren't information that gets verified. As long as you are clear about the skeptical nature of the information, and the information is of a low impact nature I don't care nearly enough to get up in arms about it.

Really, most of what I'm saying boils down to Games journalism just doesn't matter that much. And I don't say this trying to be dismissive of anyone's job. I'm glad it exists, I'm a consumer of it. It's just that trying to hold it to the same candle as political journalism is pointless. There is not nearly the same degree of responsibility with what you report on. Nobody's lives are ruined, nobody gets hurt.

That's not even to say that there is no need for ethics in game journalism. I like being able to have some trust for the place I get my news from. And the Escapist generally gets that. One of the reasons being a point you mentioned from the document. Even if they get their information wrong, they almost always update it to correct it.

They could have taken the approach of just not reporting on any unverified stories whatsoever. If you wanted that, why even bother clicking this article? What sort of chance is there that a "leaked" story is going to be 100% verified?

Captcha:
Depressingly, the answer to the question: "What is your quest?" is not "I seek the grail"

The original article did not have that first paragraph, the "update" portion, and was anonymous. Look, this is how you should go about reporting non-officially confirmed material: 1)Have two or more sources. The more the better, obviously, but you must choose to grant them anonymity. 2)Investigate them for conflicts of interest. 3)Investigate for possible collusion of sources or if they are acting as some kind of unofficial mouthpiece of any party. Once you have done those three basic things, then you can report even if it remains unconfirmed. If you are wrong, remove the article in question and print a full retraction with an apology.

As for the rest, ethical standards by their very nature must be universal. Otherwise, they simply become hypocrisy. That which I apply to you I must also apply to myself. This is a basic logical pillar without which morality and ethics cannot function. I am so mad about this because I actually had to spend 7 hours or more this last Christmas eve-eve trying to calm down my community after a similar leak, this one from neoGAF. Needless to say, that is not how I wanted to spend the day, especially considering my dad's health, because this might have been the last Christmastime I got to spend with him. I held myself to these standards, and I demand that others do the same. If you want, you can read my post over on reddit -written a few weeks after the fact- where I talk about that incident, though I regurgitate basically the same point. http://www.reddit.com/r/Suikoden/comments/2qt3td/suikoden_6_rumors/cnbklmc

EDIT: Sorry, but you seem to misunderstand their definition of "dissemination." Literally, this means speaking the information at all in any way other than a full denial, once the actual truth had been learned. If you speak it, you disseminate it, regardless of anything else written beside it.

You are wrong and you are completely misinterpreting that code.
Not a single point you quoted there was violated. The only thing that comes close is "Deliberate distortion and reporting unconfirmed rumors are never permissible." Which is quite clearly meaning "reporting unconfirmed rumors as though they were true".

There is absolutely nothing wrong with reporting on something that is suspected to be true so long as you are clear as to the source, are clear that it is not confirmed and then update the article once the truth has become clear. All three of which were done in this article.

You are, for some reason, trying to make an issue where there is none.

LOL. I am barely going to dignify that with a response except to say that if they wanted it to say what you claim, then they would have made it say that. . .

 

[Evonisia]

What a shame, having Rayman in Smash Bros would have made me consider the thought of possibly buying it. Because Rayman is the bomb, man.

Though somebody already mentioned that the little statue thing would look awful. Now I want Nintendo to introduce the Zero Punctuation characters to Smash just to see their statue.

 

[Ryan Hughes]

Homo homini lupus est, indeed. Recently, I began reading a book that simply terrifies me, and is quite pertinent to what I said here in this now somewhat dead thread. Though, perhaps it is best to share anyway. I'll link to the amazon preview here:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0074VTHH0/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B0074VTHH0&linkCode=as2&tag=greyblog-20&linkId=W53OWVL5UCRVUYPP#reader_B0074VTHH0