Following C|Net, Gamespot, and Gerstmann-gate, gaming journalism- from major outlets that is- is in disarray. To boost their good name, EGM has outed several companies who have "pulled a C|Net" against them, so to speak.
Editor-in-chief Dan "Shoe" Hsu has, in his latest intro column of EGM, named names against three guilty parties of publisher- advertiser controversy. VGM Watch picked up on the story and exposed it to the internet, and of course, it’s gotten attention.
More info after the jump…
"Shoe" calls out Midway and their Mortal Kombat team, Sony and their Sports games division, and the grand-daddy, Ubisoft. Why? These companies have effectively blackballed EGM from any coverage or access to their products and games due to the magazines history of low scores given to the low quality titles produced. Only fair, no? Shoe defends his publication by stating that
EGM won’t treat these products or companies any differently
than any other they currently cover. Major props for the honesty. As VGM points out, this is life. These companies do in fact have every right to ban any outlet, websites included, from access because of poor reviews or coverage -they can and will- but it’s not right at all.
The site states that they are currently in the process of contacting the aforementioned companies for comment on the accusations, so we’ll update when that happens. Gaming journalism is a tough business, but it shouldn’t be this tough. There’s a simple answer to the problem though… don’t make crappy products for us to review, folks.~
[Update]: Dan Hsu was kind enough to print his editorial – in full- on his 1up blog.
It used to be game companies would pull advertising if they wanted to punish a magazine for unfavorable coverage. In more recent times, they’re pulling the coverage as well. It’s an interesting setup: Don’t let us see the games, and we can’t write anything bad about them. But don’t let us see the games, and we can’t write anything good about them, either.
Gamemakers have been taking issue with our reviews for as long as EGM’s been around (almost 19 years now). It goes with the territory: Be honest and tough with your critiques, and you’re going to piss just about everybody off at some point. But when I took over as editor-in-chief in 2001, I also wanted us to get more real with our previews. I was tired of the press-release rehashes our industry had become accustomed to, so I asked for more sincerity and opinions from our writers and editors. Naturally, you have to be fair — the products aren’t finished yet, after all — but judging from reader feedback, our opinionated previews have been a hit.
Except with some game publishers, of course. Less-than-totally-positive previews don’t sit well with those who are used to those press-release rehashes. Combine that with our candid reviews, and you can imagine the consequences that we have to face constantly.
For the time being, you’ll get little, late, or no coverage of the following products: anything Mortal Kombat (they didn’t like our reviews), anything from Sony’s sports department (ditto), and now, anything from Ubisoft (it seems our coverage of Assassin’s Creed was the last straw). So in case you’re wondering why you’re seeing so little of these games in our magazines and on our websites, now you know.
What do we do now? Nothing. We won’t treat these products or companies any differently, and we’ll just cover them to the best of our own abilities, with or without their support. Because, after all, we’re writing for you, the reader — not them.
