Kotaku's Blacklisting........discussion

[Persistantthug]

I've read this, and I'm interested in hearing what the vaunted BEYOND3D guys have to say on the subject of outlets being Blacklisted.

Lets do it.

http://kotaku.com/a-price-of-games-journalism-1743526293

 

[Persistantthug]

Here's FORBES piece on it, and I'm still reading it myself:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkai...e-blacklisted-by-major-video-game-publishers/

 

[Persistantthug]

Here's 1 more......it's a con against Kotaku.
http://www.onlysp.com/kotaku-didnt-get-the-cold-shoulder-from-bethesda-ubisoft-they-earned-it/

 

[London Geezer]

Very sad state of affairs. Great that they've gone public with it.

 

[bunge]

I hope non-blacklisted journals clandestinely allow Kotaku reporters early access to games to undermine the attempts to control the voice of the free press.

 

[zed]

Gaming journalism exists thats news to me

 

[Clukos]

Is this something new in professional journalism? It isn't as far as i am aware. If you leak things, and publish things that are against the interest of publishers they have every right to blacklist you. I don't get why people make such a big deal out of it.

 

[Persistantthug]

Is this something new in professional journalism? It isn't as far as i am aware. If you leak things, and publish things that are against the interest of publishers they have every right to blacklist you. I don't get why people make such a big deal out of it.

Who BLACKLISTS Fox (faux) News?

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Kotaku exercised their prerogative to report on things Bethesda and Ubisoft rather they didn't. Bethesda and Ubisoft exercised their prerogative not to give Kotaku free software or media privileges. And that's what it is, media privilege. This isn't really new, Apple blacklisted Gizmodo after Gizmodo obtained and reported on the prototype iPhone 4.

We don't give in a world free of consequences and as a journalist or media site you have to weigh up the consequence of short term hits vs. long term relationships and those privileges.

This isn't a freedom of the press issue, nobody stopped Kotaku going to press.

 

[Grall]

Bethesda and Ubisoft rather they didn't. Bethesda and Ubisoft exercised their prerogative not to give Kotaku free software or media privileges.

Indeed they did, and they are assholes for doing so - at best. At worst, they're proto-fascists.

And that's what it is, media privilege.

Not really. Free press in a free society is an essential tool. It is not a privilege. Corporations bending the arm of the press like it's a free extension of their own marketing department just don't fucking get it. Same thing with Apple and the iPhone 4 by the way.

And corporate apologists accomplish nothing but shoot themselves in the foot. We will only remain free as long as we don't allow corporations to hijack our freedoms from us, only to dole them back to us in portions in the form of corporate-controlled privilege.

Here's 1 more......it's a con against Kotaku.

What a shitty editorial that was. Another corporate apologist, why should anyone listen to tripe like that, much less agree with it? It's not in anyone else's interests other than the corporations to follow in their jackbooted lead.

Luckily I have never even heard of that awful website before, so now I don't even have to not ever go back there again.

 

[Persistantthug]

Indeed they did, and they are assholes for doing so - at best. At worst, they're proto-fascists.


Not really. Free press in a free society is an essential tool. It is not a privilege. Corporations bending the arm of the press like it's a free extension of their own marketing department just don't fucking get it. Same thing with Apple and the iPhone 4 by the way.

And corporate apologists accomplish nothing but shoot themselves in the foot. We will only remain free as long as we don't allow corporations to hijack our freedoms from us, only to dole them back to us in portions in the form of corporate-controlled privilege.


What a shitty editorial that was. Another corporate apologist, why should anyone listen to tripe like that, much less agree with it? It's not in anyone else's interests other than the corporations to follow in their jackbooted lead.

Luckily I have never even heard of that awful website before, so now I don't even have to not ever go back there again.

I pretty much agree with all of your sentiment.
Also, I posted that awful website's article, because it was a different point of view that needed to be heard........cause you know........the spirit of journalism and all.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Not really. Free press in a free society is an essential tool. It is not a privilege. Corporations bending the arm of the press like it's a free extension of their own marketing department just don't fucking get it. Same thing with Apple and the iPhone 4 by the way.

It IS a privilege. In a free society no one is forced to do anything. You can't force a company to give you free software to review. Likewise you can't force someone to not report on something.

For example, A reporter isn't forced to protect or divulge the identity of trusted sources, but if he does there are consequences. If he divulges the secret of his source, he's unlikely to get future confidentially sourced news. Likewise if he doesn't divulge the source, he may find his access to early access from a corporation is restricted.

In all cases, it's a choice that an individual or group of individuals must make. While you are free to choose, nothing in life is truly free. There are consequences to every action no matter how benign in intent.

In a free society, no one can limit the free speech of the press or individuals.

In a free society, no one is forced to talk to the press, provide information to the press, provide product to the press...or anyone else, unless they want to.

You know, it's that whole thing with being a free society. Although no society is truly free, but that rapidly descends into RPSC territory with societal and governmental limitations on individual freedoms which exist to a greater or lesser extent with all governments.

It's a shitty thing that happened. But I'll defend Kotaku's right to report on it and I'll defend Bethesda's right to refuse them early access to free product.

Regards,
SB

 

[fehu]

Luckily I have never even heard of that awful website before, so now I don't even have to not ever go back there again.

If you don't know the gawker network, sorry but you have very little to say

 

[Persistantthug]

If you don't know the gawker network, sorry but you have very little to say

I think you got confused.

Grall was talking about this site......it's not a GAWKER site.

http://www.onlysp.com/kotaku-didnt-get-the-cold-shoulder-from-bethesda-ubisoft-they-earned-it/

 

[steveOrino]

A clickbait site lost its insider privileges and not a tear was shed. This site and its parent have been bleeding viewers for quite some time now, so its no surprise desperation causes "leaks" to piss the partners off every so often.

 

[ArcticCircle]

I think modern journalism works best when you're not buddy buddy with companies or individuals. I hope more game sites (as opposed to fan sites) would buy their own games, would investigate, rather then recycle PR crap and report real news about the issues that plaque games industry. More bans for game sites I say.

 

[Grall]

It IS a privilege. In a free society no one is forced to do anything. You can't force a company to give you free software to review. Likewise you can't force someone to not report on something.

I already said as much in my post, but that's not the point. It just goes to show that Beth and Ubi don't get what the press is about when they punish it for doing their job.

Because the role of the press is not to work on Beth's and Ubi's terms, and their terms only. So instead of taking responsibility for the leaks and say "stuff leaking to you, that was our bad", they act like petty children and take their toys and go home. In a scenario where they control the majority of the market, they would be in a position to largely strangle a news outlet, leave it at a corporation's mercy. This would have very dire consequences on freedom of the press, as you would not dare cross the hand that feeds you. Doing so could make you go under.

So this is not just childish and petty stuff, really. It's also very very dangerous. Beth and Ubi is trying to use their economic size to punish a disfavoured news source. That's fascist.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Not really. Free press in a free society is an essential tool. It is not a privilege. Corporations bending the arm of the press like it's a free extension of their own marketing department just don't fucking get it. Same thing with Apple and the iPhone 4 by the way.

You don't know what you're talking about. Freedom of the press is clearly defined as the right of the press to report news and opinion without restriction by Government. Even if you stretch this definition to include non-Governmental pressure it doesn't apply here because neither Bethesda or Ubisoft attempted to prevent the stories, nor took legal action over their publication.

Freedom of the press has never reserved the right to report without consequence. In both cases Kotaku obtained leaked information and decide to publish it for clicks. Do you get it it? It wasn't their information to publish. In Bethesda's case Kotaku literally published Bethesda's script for the game. They published Bethesda's property. Then expected Bethesda to continue to give them software and media access.

If somebody shits on your lawn, you don't invite them to your barbecue

It just goes to show that Beth and Ubi don't get what the press is about when they punish it for doing their job.

Publishing other people's property is not the job or the duty of the press. Journalism isn't just publishing a bunch of stuff people leak to you.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

So this is not just childish and petty stuff, really. It's also very very dangerous. Beth and Ubi is trying to use their economic size to punish a disfavoured news source. That's fascist.

If you allow your significant other to take nude photos and video's of yourself with the understanding that it will never be shared with anyone else, and then they go and post it on the internet. Would you be a fascist for denying them the right to ever see you nude again?

How about if a friend of theirs downloaded the photo's off their phone/camera and posted it? Would you be a fascist if you never wanted to see their friend again? Or again, deny your significant other permission to ever take a photo/video of you nude?

Both of those situations can have real world repercussion and potential harm for yourself. Such a relationship is no longer healthy. Not only due to the breach of privacy.

It's the same here. Whether Kotaku got the information from Bethesda or from an employee of Bethesda, they decided to post confidential information which can harm Bethesda.

Bethesa were entirely within their right to determine that their relationship with Kotaku was no longer healthy. Again, not only due to the breach of privacy.

Just as Kotaku were entirely within their right to publish the information. But they do so knowing there are consequences to shitting on people you have a relationship with, whether personal or business.

Companies know that there are benefits and dangers with sharing information with the Press.

Likewise, the press (the smart ones anyway) know that there are consequences if they don't treat the companies with respect. Sometimes that is warranted (exposing corruption, tax evasion or inhumane worker conditions, for example), but even when warranted they know they are likely severing any relationship they have between themselves and the flow of information from that corporation.

Kotaku knew this, and did it anyway. And expected to get away with it, which was stupid of them. Doing it for something major is worthwhile. Doing it for something as petty as they did was just stupid.

Regards,
SB

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Because the role of the press is not to work on Beth's and Ubi's terms, and their terms only.

So should Beth and Ubi and everyone else be forced to answer any questions from any journalists? If a journalist calls you and starts asking personal questions, do you have to answer, or are you free to put the phone down on them? Should publishers be forced to supply free review materials art cost to them? If you bake some cakes and a journalist phones you and asks for free samples for review, have you got to provide them?

Kotaku can still do their job. They'll have to buy the review materials instead of getting them for free, which costs more and delays reviews but which also adds credibility to their content where people know they haven't been bought (see Eurogamer's perks transparency introduced in light of some other gaming press Freebiegate). As for interviews and comments, unless the press hold powers beyond the secret services to interrogate, they'll just have to work like other journalists in managing relationships that encourage sharing of content. And they can publicly talk about this as they have (free speech) if they want in the hopes of managing to change their situation via popular pressure. But I don't see anything on the level of National Constitution or Human Rights violations here. The rights of both parties are being preserved - it's just a soured relationship.