From the Pulpit: Are Embargoes Really Necessary?
Do embargoes protect the press or make for lazy journalism?
9/19/2008 6:41 PM | 9 Comments | Page 3 of 4
John Keefer
Status: Reading da Crispy content and playin' games.
And in turn, it has become easy for journalists to sit back and wait for that information. If they don't want to wait, they jump through marketing hoops and make promises to the publisher in order to get it.
For games journalism to gain more credibility, journalists need to play by their own rules. Do more informative pieces, do humorous pieces or biting satire, do more critical pieces, seriously explore avenues other than PR representatives for information. Journalism isn't about always making nice with everyone. Journalism is about providing accurate information to the reader even when it isn't readily available, unless there is an overriding public concern. In many cases, infringements on the free exchange of information about games between journalists and our readers are not backed by any legitimate overriding concern.
Granted, not all publishers impose limitations. Many understand that the journalist has a job to do and that, in the end, what is written is just an opinion, and as long as that opinion is based on facts and not erroneous information, the writer and publication are free of scrutiny. However, there needs to be a divergence from the cozy two-step that some marketing departments do insist on dancing with the press by threatening to pull ads or blacklist a writer or publication if a story paints an unfavorable picture. If any "journalists" willingly do dance to that tune, they need to look in the mirror and examine who they are really working for and why.
The sad part of this whole equation is that the existing system, coupled with many gamers' insatiable desire to read whatever information is first available on their favorite big games, leaves those trying to establish some type of journalistic credibility in the dust. As I said before, the first review, the first preview and the first details on any big game (or scandal, for that matter) will generate the most amount of traffic or subscriptions. Traffic leads to profitability and more clout in the industry. But the first review of an unfinished product, a rushed story, or hastily compiled feature, is hardly ever the best. This catch-22 leaves writers and editors with the dilemma: Is it better to be accurate or first? The correct answer for any true journalist has to be that a story must be accurate. Quality must be the deciding factor.
