f13.net

GameJournos has had a week of these allegations (http://gamejournos.com/post/10296741501/vgchartz-week-day-five-an-open-letter-to-brett), with the main one being that certain games weren't to get negative reviews because of an ad deal:



Lots of allegations of not paying writers / content providers / editors as well. (http://gamejournos.com/post/10170679488/vgchartz-week-day-two-part-1-pax-2010)

I know that some will say, "gamz jornalizm", but it is really important that sites like GameJournos uncover these kind of behaviours and make them public.

Well, that site goes from the category of "site I've never even heard of" to "site I'll never visit".

Interesting article, though.

Unfortunately, the plebs who read the gaming news will never see this article, and probably wouldn't care much either.

Being paid not to criticize. Awesome. Restaurants should do the same!

Oh man that bastion of journalistic integrity VGChartz has an owner who dips his hand in the cookie jar? I for one am shocked.

VGChartz' sales charts (which the site gained initial notoriety and "prominence" for) were so hilariously inaccurate that they made SirBruce's chart look like fivethirtyeight.com's election predictions in comparison.

That being said, many of the writers and editors mentioned for this series on GameJournos don't seem like the biggest group of motivated people in the world either. Most of them didn't keep good records, and almost all of them involved with this drama were in college with heavy courseloads.

I've never heard of the site either. I think there are even more game sites than porn sites.

When I worked in IT journalism (in the print magazine days), I only had one clear attempt to corrupt me. A guy I'd interviewed rang up and basically offered to become some kind of sponsor or benefactor if I gave preference to his products. He phrased it in a way that his meaning was crystal clear, but could be denied when I declined. So I outright accused him of bribery and his defences went up so skilfully, I reckon he tried this all the time. Probably means he had some success at it.

Our magazine was valued for its integrity and we were readers ourselves, so we regularly pissed off the sales team by saying a major advertiser's products sucked, if they did. Likewise, if the major advertiser's products were awesome, we said so, and lived with the accusations of bias. That's the way to maintain an audience.

I did some beta testing before and got the same issue when  I brought up the point that the AI is acting a little stupid at times. I brought up some glaring examples and such, and all I got was a PM to stop doing so. I can't give the exact phrase they used, but they told me to 'refrain from doing so in the future'. If they don't want a negative feedback, why bother testing?

But suppose you're a journalist, taking the bribe, and still gave it a shit review it deserved, are you in legal trouble?

Not sure this would surprise anyone given the gamespot thing a few years back.

Welcome to advertising...it's the new journalism.

And it sucks balls. I'm having to deal with this crap in the iPhone games industry now. Alot of the reviewers ask indie devs for money to "expedite the review". Which is code for we won't review your game at all unless you pay us, but if you pay us we won't review it negatively.

Sounds like the software industry is mirroring the music industry (music execs paying DJ's to spin records and promote them).  It's mildly amusing. 

I think most gamers are more than aware that gaming mags are hype machines and little more. The population is aging, and this site is a good example of what people trust when it comes to straight gaming information.

Which is only compounded by the rise of Social Media.