Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Report this Comment
Use this form to report the selected comment to the moderators. Reporting should generally be used only if the comment breaks forum rules.

10. Re: Op Ed Nov 1, 2012, 15:24 Beamer
Bhruic wrote on Nov 1, 2012, 15:18:
Beamer wrote on Nov 1, 2012, 14:10:
But who is the money coming from?

Regardless, this acts like it's something new. It's always been ads driving game journalism. Always. This isn't from pageclicks, 10 years ago it was just paper ads.

Ads, of course. But as you say, that's the case with most forms of journalism. The author was trying to imply that the game companies themselves were directly financing the reviewers' sites, which obviously isn't true.

Moreover, the author is actually missing the point. The complaint wasn't about sites, it was about individuals. I'm pretty sure that in "mainstream" journalism if someone were a food critic, say, having them accepting gifts of food from eateries would be considered inducing bias as well.

Yeah, much like how many movie critics refuse to take anything other than viewings from film companies (others will take paid trips.)
But that's not the issue so much here. Someone gets a free PS3. Big deal. In the grand scheme the individual is meaningless. It's the system that is a problem.

Damn near every dollar a game review entity receives comes from a game production company, be it a studio or a publisher. There really is no other revenue stream. So who cares about one PS3 when the entire organization is funded by the game company? Every paycheck comes from them.
Music for the discerning:
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.


Blue's News logo