Updates On Fired GameSpot Editor A.K.A. GerstGate
On Friday, Asterick reported on the termination of GameSpot editor Jeff Gerstmann, allegedly for a poor review of Kane and Lynch: Dead Men, a game which was heavily advertised on the site prior to the firing. Since then, GameSpot's parent company CNET has denied that any pressure from advertisers affected the decision to terminate Gerstmann, telling Kotaku:
GameSpot takes its editorial integrity extremely seriously. For over a decade, GameSpot and the many members of its editorial team have produced thousands of unbiased reviews that have been a valuable resource for the gaming community. At CNET Networks, we stand behind the editorial content that our teams produce on a daily basis.
Well then, I guess that's that! Except no, not quite yet. Over at Vallywag, an anonymous (but "credible") commenter by the handle of gamespot has left a series of notes purporting an insider's view into the situation. Read more, plus comments from one of Jeff's GameSpot colleagues, after the break.
In one of the comments, he or she brings up the issue of increased advertiser pressure on editorial staff:
Our last executive editor, Greg Kasavin, left to go to EA, and he was replaced by a suit, Josh Larson, who had no editorial experience and was only involved on the business side of things. Over the last year there has been an increasing amount of pressure to allow the advertising teams to have more of a say in the editorial process; we've started having to give our sales team heads-ups when a game is getting a low score, for instance, so that they can let the advertisers know that before a review goes up. Other publishers have started giving us notes involving when our reviews can go up; if a game's getting a 9 or above, it can go up early; if not, it'll have to wait until after the game is on the shelves.
Even if this commenter is just a decent fake, his or her words reflect the fears of public frustrated and suspicious by the cozy relationship that many major game news companies and game publishers often seem to enjoy. This entire situation exacerbates those suspicions, and legitimate journalists suffer as a result. The popular videogame forum NeoGAF has even decided to filter any discussion of CNET websites from its message board for the rest of the year.
Of course, apart from his status as a martyr or symbol of a potentially corrupt system, Jeff Gerstmann was also some guy who liked videogames, and for now doesn't have a job. Long time colleague, Ryan Davis, also of GameSpot, shared some recollections (he was in a rap-ska band?) and thoughts about Jeff on his personal blog:
I'm not afraid to say that it absolutely breaks my heart. ... Jeff was a rare constant, and this marks the end of an era for both GameSpot and myself, a fact that doesn't seem to be getting any less upsetting for me.
Hopefully the truth (whatever it is) will come to light, and these companies will find a way to make money that doesn't interfere with honest reporting. Best of luck to Jeff in all his future endeavors.
CNET Comments on GameSpot Controversy [Kotaku]
GameSpot Editor (?) On Fired Reviewer [Vallywag]
What To Say [Ryan Davis]
Dawdle
Posted to Hot Stuff, Video Games on 1 December 2007
· Comments (7)
Other stuff like this: editors, fired, gamespot, journalistic integrity
this is all so sad. I hope more writing comes out on the topic, and therefore more discussion of what's really going on, comes to light. Nice writeup.
Maybe advertisers need to vet their games through reviewers so the games would not be given crap reviews at the time when the game is gold for mastering.
Reviewers could be the focus group that would say "hey! Kane and Lynch is actually a good game and deserves a 9.0" instead of rushing through and only getting a 6.0
I'll be keeping a close eye on this story. I use game reviews heavily when it comes to the purchase of a game, and if I find that a site is being influenced by gaming companies, then I have no use for them.
Before this hit, I always assumed that gaming websites were unbiased. I hope they all aren't like that.
I've been using Gamespot heavily for advice on buying games, and Gerstmann's reviews always had the information I wanted to know. This whole situation has now made me highly suspicious of the site's direction. Additionally, while we have yet to get really concrete info, many of the blog posts and comments from Gamespot staff seem to indicate that it is aas bad as it sounds.
Gamespot's been in a decline now for quite some time. I think it was only a matter of time until something like this happened. I thought things would get better when Greg Kasavin left but I guess not. I'll still use the site for news and reviews and such, but now I'll take it with an even larger grain of salt than I did before. And that bit CNET put in there about "unbiased reviews" is complete bull; every year Madden and the five other football games (and basketball, soccer, hockey, etc) come out and they're the exact same game as last year, with minimal updates that do little if anything to change the core gameplay, and they get average-high review scores. Meanwhile, they bash every RPG and strategy game, every survival horror game that doesn't completely revolutionize its respective genre. Not to mention their raging boner for FPSs. And while I didn't necessarily agree with all (or even most) of Jeff Gerstman's reviews, I still thought he was one of the better reviewers for the site.
....secretly, I kinda dig a good scandal ;P
This is why I love Penny Arcade. They are honest and give an accurate viewpoint.
They also don't advertise anything unless they have played it (or seen it if it is an early stage product). Becuase they take it seriously and are actual gamers, I take what they say seriously (although I don't always agree)