Good post, man. I hadn't thought about it, but you're probably right. Do you think that happens because so much of gaming journalism has shallow roots into websites, as opposed to deep roots into traditional hard-to-get-into print media? The culture is more freeform, chaotic, unregulated?
Sorry for the delay, work is a bitch. I think that's probably a large part of it, but far from the only thing to blame. From a comment on the Destructoid article above:
I've been a (freelance) game journalist in my time, earning my stripes at the UK Official Playstation Magazine. Although in those rosy days, it was an oft-mentioned "myth" that there existed some people who were frankly whores to certain studios, we never came across it.
Of course, in the career journalism sense it was rather hard to hide up such bias - it would inevitably show up in your articles, and most likely your editor would pull you over the coals about it. In short, it's not something you'd do if you wanted a LONG career in gaming journalism.
Nowadays, I'm not so sure. The advent of online bloggers and bedroom journalists have grown exponentially, as well as the industry. I've no doubt it goes on now, and is probably more prevalent ....
It then goes on to highlight that this is indeed an important story. And he's probably right for the most part - part of the big downfall is the proliferation on online blogs and "enthusiast press" (hilariously, this term is only used in a good way in gaming - Mainly by Destructiod).
But I think it goes a lot further than that. Actually, I think it's almost the perfect fucking storm of environmental factors that could lead to poor journalism. It's a job a bunch of idiots revere, it's a job with minimal barrier to entry, the target market is generally made up of juvenile people (*cough* commenters), it's entirely ad-space dependent, and the market is utterly saturated. Also, there really aren't that many
interesting stories to cover. That's not to say that there aren't interesting stories involved in the video game industry, it's just that when you do see them, they're in Forbes or Wired.
The personalities involved in the industry are just as much to blame (as a whole) as the readers and the publishers. That's not to say that they're all "corrupt" it's just to say that very very few of them are all that professional.
Coming back to what you said, it certainly IS more unregulated, free form, and chaotic. But people seem to want it that way and they WANT fluff. I've read all the articles posted here, and despite the fact that Kotaku has gotten a lot of heat for not covering the story, I understand why they did so - no one is covering any new ground. At all. Like 6 articles echoing the same thing. Who the fuck cares if it's not seven articles at that point? And yet, Kotaku is getting heat and no one seems to be commenting that no one is saying nothing new. "Press should keep the marketing team at arms length"! Sure. How, why, and why isn't it that way already. There's a fucking article right there. But, and this is the main thing, I think people just like the shit storm. It somehow validates their interest in a very "light" industry. It gives them something to read apart from 8 other stories on Capcom's latest DLC scheme and what shitty games are coming out next week. And the journalists capitalize on that by putting the most minimal amount of work in - by rewriting what they've read and inputting what they think. Yet, even with this dirth of editorials, nothing new is coming out. And that's a sign of the poor state of health of the video game press.
It's an underdeveloped "industry" (the press) and it's one that focuses on some of the least consequential material ever. Yet, interestingly, if you compare it with the Technology press, the later blows the former out of the water. Why the fuck is that? Why are Anandtech, Tom's Hardware, and (many, certainly not all) tech sites and sources so much better at what they do? You know why I think it is? It's kind of a dick thought, but I think it's because the video game press has never HAD to be good at what they do. People just want a review over Halo 4 they can argue over and a couple of jokes they can LOL at in the comments. They don't want to hear WHY Hellgate London ended up like shit, although I'm sure there's a very informative and interesting story there, they just want to joke about it. And the people who DO want that kind of stuff get it....again, from WIRED.
Jim Sterling is seen as respectable in the industry. I just read his article posted above and backclicked to a video he claimed got him blacklisted from Konami for "Informing and Entertaining viewers". The video was shit - a rant about how Konami was going down hill. Sure, nothing wrong with that, right? I mean, these are the stories you're supposed to cover - trends - and Konami must be total assholes to black list him for that! Here's what he covered:
-They had a shitty, weird press conference where some didn't speak English so well.
-"Fuck Konami" while he shook his jowels in his plump fingers
-MGS HD collection released the same day as CoD
-MGS HD collection cannibalizes sales from MGS 3 on the 3DS
-3 Silent Hill games in one month! Sure, three different systems, but what the fuck?!!?!?!!?! LOL
-One of the Silent Hill games got delayed! LOL (You'd think that'd counter the above point)
-Some game I've never heard of wasn't promoted
He then went on to say that they "Don't stand a fetus' chance in hell" and ponders why they are in business. Seriously, what does
stand a fetus' chance in hell even fucking mean? You just strung some words together to appeal to
something or
someone and all it does is make me think that you're a dumbass and your regular audience probably is too. Like, it's not that it's offensive, it's just that it's weird and really not at all funny in context (there is no context, it's just not funny).
As to why they are in business, a quick Google search has told me that they're in business because they consistently turn profit. Like, during the period this article covers and since, their profit ratio has actually increased. Why the fuck couldn't Jim Sterling do that google search? More importantly, why couldn't his readers? In any other sector of press the comments would be filled with "Check your facts, they're making money" regardless of the fact that it's an op-ed.
More importantly, what is the purpose of the article? There doesn't seem like there was one. MGS and Silent Hill saturation and sales cannibalization would be a great topic for an article...if you were a concerned share holder or if there was some empirical data to go along with it or even speculative conclusions. But all he's doing is saying that they suck because they used to release big franchises farther apart. Like, that they suck, not that it's dangerous, but they (a company) sucks (for their product release schedule).
Oh, and he dropped maybe 37 "fucks" in the video.
Now, I love the f-bomb and don't think anything of it, but really? Are you that passionate about Konami's recent "blunders"?
And here's the thing: why the hell would I ever take this guy seriously? Like, he's one of the more well-known, ARGUABLY respected personalities in the industry and he's shit. How could I possibly watch that or read some of his other articles and then take his call to integrity seriously? He MAY have it, but his lack of effort (or talent?) and lack of professionalism counters it at every turn. Basically, all I'm getting is "We're a serious industry and we need to make sure that everyone takes it very seriously. Oh, and tune in tomorrow for my rant about how shoulder buttons fucking suck balls. LOL"
Honestly, how can you be surprised that a 21 year old girl might be tempted to take part in a tweeting contest or take publisher gifts a little too seriously when these are her role models and mentors?
Sorry, that was way longer than I intended