16. lipnja bivša izvjestiteljica s IGN-a Alanah Pearce napravila je valove putem interneta pokušavajući ilustrirati, iz svoje perspektive, zašto 10/10 recenzije Posljednje 2 dobio od svih glavnih prodajnih mjesta nisu plaćene recenzije. Izraz "položeno pravo" koristi se jer se tijekom 17-minutnog videozapisa u nekoliko navrata daju kontradiktorne izjave o bitnim točkama. Zatim postoje slučajevi u kojima je ili pogrešno informirana ili izravno laže.
For example, she levies the claim the leaks haven’t impacted the pre-orders of Posljednji od nas 2. Yet after the leaks, Amazon had a surplus of the sold-out collector’s editions for Posljednje 2. Additionally, Gamestop currently has collector’s editions available for purchase. As there has been no new printing, the new stock can only exist if people have terminated their pre-order.
Anegdotski, tisuće su rekli da otkazuju i svoje predbilježbe. Naravno Zadnji od nas 2 će imati uspješan tjedan pokretanja, ali s obzirom na reakcije na curenja, prodaja će pasti sa litice u drugom tjednu. Baš kao i oni s njima Resident Evil 3 Rimeke, Final Fantasy 7 Remake, i Gears 5, Potonji je zabilježio najznačajniji angažman u pokretanju tjedna i neke od najnižih prodaja u povijesti franšiza.
Thus it is reasonable to say she is not giving her full candid opinion. At the same time, she continues to work in the industry and on a podcast with Troy Baker, so there is an understandable reason why she would or rather could not. One can claim people are not blacklisted all they want, but when Sony is abusing DMCA’s to silence criticism, you are going to have a hard time convincing anyone Sony wouldn’t blacklist again.
Tijekom njezinog izlaganja, bilo je trenutaka kad je problem pogodio pravo u glavu. Da su jednostavna stvarnost recenzenti ideološki propagandisti (moje riječi, a ne njezine).
„Ovo je moja najveća kritika igranog novinarstva. Da li to mislim da u mnogim slučajevima pisci pišu stvari za svoje vršnjake, a ne za publiku. Iako to još uvijek znači da su iskreni, to ipak znači da sve ove recenzente kupujemo u „visokoj umjetnosti“, jer oni strasno zanimaju industriju igara i vrlo strasno govore priče u video igrama. To je njihova perspektiva.
Ali to također nije nužno perspektiva koju znate da će većina ljudi koji čitaju vašu recenziju dijeliti. I to je komplicirana tema, ali da Moja kritika broj jedan prema igrama medija je da mislim da puno novinara piše stvari za svoje sljedbenike na Twitteru koji također rade u industriji više nego oni koji čitaju web stranicu (stvarna igračima).”
One cannot say this, then turn around and argue if you want ethics in journalism, you cannot criticize those pushing ideological agendas. Ethics means abiding by a standard or code of conduct. When you’re writing for your peers and your ideological echo chamber, you are not following anything that can be considered an acceptable standard.
Ako želite otići i napisati svoj vlastiti blog ili za političko predstavljanje, to bi bila jedna stvar. Kada pišete o navodno uglednom prodajnom mjestu posvećenom davanju potrošača iskrenog mišljenja i dojma, tada je provođenje opisanog ponašanja daleko od etičkog.
Yet among the claims she made that draw the most significant objection I have is the claim outlets don’t take a bribe for favorable coverage. It is true, cash doesn’t go from the publisher to the writer, but when your site also runs advertisements for the very games you are reviewing, that is a conflict of interest. When you get goody boxes, that is a bribe. Though it is more commonly called a kickback.
Bribery in the industry beyond the aforementioned isn’t as clear cut as you’d think. Even Pearce briefly touches upon this issue, appearing as she does so to comprehend the inherent contradiction in her stance. Relevance is what drives journalism. The more relevant you are, the more people read your site, the more your advertisement is worth. This is the simple economics of advertisement; it gets more complicated with engagement rates, rate of returns, etc.. Still, on a basic level, if your site has more traffic, your advertisement is worth more money.
When a publisher gives you early access to content, when they give you exclusive previews, they are giving you relevance. Relevance translates into money. When you don’t have relevance, you have fewer views and make less money. If you don’t make enough money, you cannot sustain operations, and you go out of business.
If you start reporting that a company’s game sucks, they’re not going to advertise with you. They’re not going to give you exclusive access or interview time with the developers. If Pearce were telling the truth about the situation, then there would be no reason for all the outlets not to cover Sony’s DMCA abuse. There would be no reason for them not to talk about the leaks. Yet no outlet will give coverage to either topic.
It’s not a simple cold cut relationship, but it is based on working relations. At the same time, just because it’s not a cynical exchange of cash doesn’t mean bribery and manipulation aren’t occurring. It’s just not happening like an organized crime syndicate would do in a Hollywood movie. Then again outside cinema, even the mafia doesn’t operate purely on handing out bribes.
Famously the mafia has its roots in community. Often giving back to the community in the form of loans, aid, and handouts. They protect their own. So even if they don’t bribe you directly. You’re inclined as a result of your relationship with them and your community not to snitch or take your 15-minute break. Similarly, if you’re friends with the developers who publishers are paying for your advertisement while giving you relevance, you’re not going to be too inclined to talk about how their game is terrible.
That’s simply the dynamics of the industry. Pearce, for her part, admits there are a lot of shady practices that go on, but did not want to go into details. If you imagine it functioning as a cartel out of some Hollywood flick, you couldn’t be further from the truth. It is based on dealings, goodies, and game journo pros relations with publishers where they aim and work to fix the narrative. Making reality more entertaining than fiction.