Let's talk about games journalism

2 min read

Deviation Actions

koobismo's avatar
By
Published:
14.9K Views
A lot has been said about the quality of games journalism, about the problems plaguing the review system and the relationship between the games industry and those supposed to keep it honest. The problem with this discussion, however, is that it doesn’t resemble a discussion at all… Things are being said, accusations made, statements dispensed, and yet there’s very little actual conversation to be had. Worrisome tendencies are shrugged off by industry insiders, while many gamers – frustrated with the lack of answers (as I am myself quite often) – bring out the big guns, accusing each and every review they disagree with as being “paid off” or otherwise influenced by big-name publishers.

A friend of mine, Phil Hornshaw, deputy editor of GameFront.com and Koobismo.com's contributor (who I've became acquainted to thanks to an interview about Marauder Shields and ME3's ending), wants to get the conversation rolling. Phil wants to give us a sneak peek of how games journalism really works and offer his views on the problems and positives currently attached to being a games journalism professional. Although he can’t – and won’t – speak for all the journalists out there, he has his own perspective, has a lot to say, and is open to actually listening to those who find games journalism just a bit on the fishy side.

Check out the first episode of his new series, “Inside Games Journalism”, and be sure to throw him a question or two (or five, or six). As Phil told me – no need to softball him, he’s open to discuss everything, from recent controversies to the tools of his trade.

As Phil says in the video: “Journalism can’t exist if readers don’t trust journalists. (…) Journalism is supposed to be about openness and truth. And there’s no reason why games journalism shouldn’t be just as open as anything else.“

You can check out the video here:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=viM1_9…

© 2013 - 2024 koobismo
Comments34
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
XEBES's avatar
A comment I left on the Youtube video:

"How GJ works is irrelevant to what it is. Do people seriously need to understand how newspaper article writers do their jobs in order to fully appreciate articles written by them? Transparent journalism, in its rawest form, is something that can be appreciated, for better or worse, and understood with logic and reasoning alone.

If journalists are confusing and dividing their consumer demographics, perhaps the misunderstanding isn't the result of people's ignorance, now is it?"

This comment, I think, should shed some light, a single necessary ray of light, towards resolving the issue deteriorating the relationships between journalists and the people they impact. And that, yes, I wholeheartedly agree with this DA journal entry. The only resolution can come from an open forum.