I'm glad people are beginning to just re-teach the basics of things like reading news and understanding sources. So many problems right now come from very simple lack of this kind of knowledge -- it's easily taught, too. Good work.
The truth does not fear investigation. When you get pushback about the truth of something, odds are that truth makes someone or some group of people look *really bad*
@@mr-dbs My favorite thing about gamergate is that in 2019, pretty much all the pro-gg people are doing exactly what they accused other people of doing back in the day.
@@Antiformed I kind of regret what I said. It's too flowery. And saying never is usually dumb. I think I would instead say, to George, to try to remain fearful. That fear should hopefully keep you straight.
As a journalism grad and editor myself, one of the biggest problems I believe our society faces today is the lack of interest and incentive from the majority of both the media and public in wanting to know and understand the truth. Some mainstream media outlets, RU-vidrs, and social media influencers frequently muddying the news (facts) with opinions or - even worse - with keyword trends, hot takes, agendas, etc. to get a constant flow of clicks certainly doesn't help solve this issue either. And as a result, we set out each day to confirm our existing views at whatever the cost, and the rise of social media - coupled with the speed at which we consume information today - has escalated confirmation bias to the point where people go as far to reject provable, objective facts to avoid having their viewpoint labeled as "wrong" whenever a discussion takes place or a topic is debated in-person or online. We treat being right or wrong like "wins" and "losses" and no one likes to lose at anything, much less so when beliefs can "lose" after being held for years or decades. But being wrong does not equate to losing and is actually a good thing. If we are wrong and understand why, then it always means we learned something new - and that benefits ourselves and everyone around us. Great video, George. Keep up the exceptional work.
Maybe assuming that the logical are a minority is part of the problem. The loudest voices preach the most nonsense. Your take was and interesting read... mostly true... just quite presumptuous
You and Noah Caldwell-Gervais are easily my favorite games writers. Miles ahead of everyone else. Every single video, I learn a lot and I'm left with many things to think about and discuss with others. Thank you for keeping up with this so passionately for so long.
Trained as a journalist, working now for a government watchdog group. George, you strike me as far too self-deprecating to accept it, but you've done a tremendous public service with this video. Thank you for making it, and making it to your high editorial standards, as always.
@Helios Sphere Actually I use the skills I acquired at college every day at my job, just not in the context I initially thought I would. And I'm right on track to pay off my loans. Far from being worthless, my degree is one of the things I'm proudest of. You've got to be creative about how you use it, since the traditional path into the industry is mostly gone by now. But if seeking truth and reporting is something which appeals to you, and you put in the work to develop your skills and contacts, you can still make a career out of it. If you ever wanted to be a journalist to make a lot of money, you were always in for a rude awakening and were probably not in it for the right reasons.
@Helios Sphere imagine thinking journalism is a worthless degree. Imagine thinking that people being trained to accurately determine what is the truth and what is not, is a bad thing. Stop pushing your agenda against the truth
@@duffman18 Mainstream journalists have given journalism schools a bad name. Especially games journalists. Most of the time they get their info and articles from reddit, which anyone can do.
re @30:00 they ignore the part where publications have editorial biases because, presumably, articles are vetted by those editors. Historically (read: several hundred years of print), these editors determine the publication's voice.
In my experience, it is generally accepted to see the journalists and editors as representatives of the publication, and everything they write in an article is in the publication's voice, unless otherwise denoted. This is important when you want to judge the reliability and biases of specific publications, especially when dealing with less experienced or anonymous writers. Bylines are important, but expecting a consistent voice for a publication can be too. That being said, applying this to differing opinions among different journalists writing reviews for a publication is... mostly uninteresting, frankly. Editors can't really define a publication's stance one whether a specific game does its action gameplay right or whether a puzzle is compelling?
i found the definition provided by the paper for "conspiracy theory" to be quite strange. the literal interpretation of the phrase is just "to contemplate or speculate that given people work together toward the same result or goal". to label this, or even re-lable the word to mean something else that infers "only crazy people would do that", seems to attack the idea that not readily apparent corruption can even exist. perhaps not, but it seems little good can come of doing so regardless
That ignores the common usage of the phrase "conspiracy theory". Conspiracy theories commonly refer to theories such as "the earth is flat", "Area 51 captured an alien and it's spacecraft", or "the moon landing was faked". Of course some conspiracy theories have been proven to be true and conspiracies exist, such as the Watergate scandal, but conspiracy theories as they're commonly understood have throughout history largely been outlandish and based on suspect evidence and reasoning. Those sorts of theories are more commonly thought of when the phrase "conspiracy theory" is used. You can't always look to a literal interpretation to properly understand language.
Flat-Earth is a psyop, and nobody still believes that Area 51 shit is true. Or at least, that hasn't been 'in vogue', conspiracy-wise, since my father's day. The moon landing conspiracy theory is completely harmless, it literally doesn't matter. Just some people who like to point out inconsistent details of the footage. Watergate also wasn't a conspiracy theory. I don't think you know what a conspiracy is.
In high school, I began to value sources and questioning media after listening to Rush Limbaugh say, "Don't blindly trust everything I say. Go out and find the sources for yourself." Truth is not something that can be easily passed around. It's something that takes time and effort to determine.
I actually respect Limbaugh. It takes a certain kind of strength to get whacked out on opiates and spew bullshit for decades. Crowder and Shapiro don't have that much stamina.
Indeed, for people who have some auditory processing problems, it's a bit distracting from the things being said and I've had to replay it several times to understand it.
I grew up in the 90's and had a class in Junior High called, "Current Affairs". It basically taught us how to read a newspaper. And this was during an election year "'96". So we got to learn what the margin of error in polls were and how sources are gathered and where to find them.
They don't want you to think critically. They are too busy telling everyone to dream and dream and obsess over dreams but not teaching them the critical thinking skills to achieve those dreams So they go out and try to get what they want in blunt and stupid ways, like 'reforming' places of business by making up deceitful bullshit about being discriminated against even if they weren't, because everyone always instantly sides with social justice whether any evidence exists or not to support it.
this isnt even just for game journalism. It's general journalism advice stuff too. And tbh, alot of the big boy journalists don't follow half of this advice... lol
"undue rejection of big boy journalists" you literally do not need to justify not liking something. i see people say this shit about Epic too, that the default state should be to trust things and any voice saying "don't trust it" must be bad. not trusting something isn't a feeling that you need to justify to anybody-- if you don't want to engage content you have every right not to no matter your reasons.
Well. What happens when the President of the United States demonizes any journalism that questions him or even just posts his own contradictions? Or when reactionaries think that press having some ideological points of view anti sexism and anti racism mostly, amounts to totalitarianism? Having news be based on ad revenue is shit.
Also: don't trust people who treat media literacy as something accessible only to a niche intelligent few, while everyone else is fated to remain mindless/ignorant/stupid because of inbuilt personal failings. That includes conspiracy theorists, and also the kind of posturers you sometimes see on mainstream social media who are trying to build an in-group. Basic media literacy is very easy to teach, everyone has the capacity for skepticism, but most people who stake their identity on being a skeptic believe in the most unshakable fictions.
Christopher Hitchens famously noticed that in UK they don’t teach Journalism in Oxford and Cambridge. Unlike US and Russia, ironically. Edit: He also noticed that personal relationships work against journalism work, and cited Orwell to this point.
I'm gonna miss the reviews and more opinionated stuff, but hey, if you wanna provide extremely high quality journalistic video essays every couple months, I'll keep smashing that like button.
I don't know, it seems like there is still a lot of people who trust ResetEra and previously NeoGAF for their scoops because those olaces are frequented by people in the industry. In fact, Schereier is only where he is right now, because he managed to amount a huge number of sources over time.
I can kind of get the vibe from this video that you were worried about whether or not it would be successful, so I just wanted to take a second, nameless, voiceless Internet Phantom that I am, whom you have never met, to say that I really appreciate it, and really enjoy it. Thanks.
Imagine interviewing Jason Schrier in a video about journalism and proper sourcing. It was literally only a week or so ago Kotaku published a completely false story about Mordhau, one of many stories in a pattern. And obviously issues of disclosure and corrections have come up a lot. Love most of your videos, but I feel like this one is missing some of these other vital issues in games journalism and there are better sources to look at.
I appreciate this video in more ways that you can imagine. I was always curious as to what basic journalism works like. You've provided me with quite a lot of information to mull over. Thank you
Hey George, I watched this years ago when it came out, but I'm actually coming back to it since I'm teaching a high school computer science class and I'm getting a project together on digital media literacy. I'm planning on incorporating some of those thoughts and insights into how I teach it, seriously great work!
George, you should do an episode about how the game industry do(esn't) preserve it's own history. I was watching other channel one of these days (or reading an article, I don't remember) about the remaster of Final Fantasy VIII and why Square Enix took this much time to make this remaster, simply because the source code of the game was lost. And then the video/text gone on how many famous games suffer similar problems: Silent Hill 2/3 remaster for the same reason, Earthbound wasn't realeased on the Virtual Console until recently because of legal issues, and there's a plenty of games that you're unable to play nowadays for similar reasons: P.T., Legend of Korra, Scott Pilgrim vs The World... I think it would be a great topic to talk about.
Yeah, the article/video also said that, but still there's things that never reach the market that should be preserved too. Source codes for a start. Have you played the Silent Hill 2/3 remaster? It sucks compared to the original ones, cause since the team behind the remaster had to do a lot of reverse engineering to update the software for modern consoles operating systems, many things were lost and the game have lots of little glitches, problems with load times and the fog/draw distance is different and inferior from the original game. Then there's the demos and test versions. The original builds of games like Duke Nukem Forever, Resident Evil 4, Starcraft Ghost, that were shown on E3 and that if the companys and teams behind the games have not preserved, are lost forever and became only videos on RU-vid. Then there's the legal issues. Nintendo always has been pretty aggressive toward the emulation community, they have many times taken down large famous emulation sites, even the ones more dedicated on preserving classic games than piracy. Even through this won't end emulation, surely turns harder the access to rarer games.
@@Thelder Tu é br né? Pra que eu tô falando em inglês com você hahah Talvez o problema da preservação dos jogos seja pela visão mais comercial da mídia em comparação a outras, ou então pelo constante avanço tecnológico inerente aos games. Pensando em quão recente a mídia é, os desenvolvedores/produtores não pensavam em criar uma obra próspera e longeva, e sim vender no natal para o máximo de crianças possíveis. Claro que era uma época imatura da mídia, mas até hoje vemos reflexo disso. A 4° e 5° geração de consoles possuí vários clássicos reciclados, relançados e remasterizados até hoje. Mas isso só vale para as franquias que deram mais lucro na época e sobreviveram, como Megaman ou Mario. Os jogos mais "aleatórios" da geração são difíceis de achar até em emulação, quem dirá oficialmente. O que leva ao segundo ponto: hardware. Se a indústria tivesse se erguido apenas no PC talvez tivessemos outro cenário, mas com a constante troca de consoles, não "retrocompatíveis" com o antecessor, vários jogos se perderam. Hoje em dia temos temos os jogos digitais para contornar esse problema, mas como você disse, muitos códigos se perderam, então vários jogos não serão acessíveis. Não muito tempo atrás eu estava procurando um jogo aleatório de N64 que marcou minha infância (Rocket: robot on wheels) e adivinha só? A única forma de jogar legalmente é pelo próprio N64. Um console de 1996 que obviamente não é mais vendido, assim como o jogo. Isso é algo que não acontece em nenhuma outra mídia. Um livro de 1920 pode ser lido da mesma forma hoje, já com os games há uma série de barreiras. Alguns jogos, como o Resident Evil 4, são relançados tantas vezes que qualquer um consegue jogar, enquanto os mais esquecidos... continuam esquecidos. O problema do hardware ainda me incomoda em outro sentido. O Wii por exemplo é um console único, então mesmo que se preserve os jogos nas futuras gerações, séria impossível jogar vários jogos devido a sua natureza, são jogos desenvolvidos para os recursos únicos do Wii. E quem garante que daqui a 10 anos será possível adquirir um? Enfim, é uma discussão bem longa e interessante, e eu particularmente nunca tinha pensado muito.
@@brunogalvao6333 Lol eu imaginei isso, mas mantive a conversa em inglês porque bem, se alguém mais entendesse é quisesse participar, seria bom. Esse é um assunto importante, e eu gostaria que a indústria levasse mais a sério. Sim, é verdade que videogames ainda são uma mídia nova, mas já demonstra sinais de maturidade. Jogos como a série Souls, The Stanley Parable, Undertale, Okami e Nier começam a experimentar conceitos artísticos. Jogos como GTA, Call of Duty e Resident Evil estão fazendo mais dinheiro que blockbusters de verão americano. Já é hora de começar a se levar a sério. Ninguém é perfeito, muitos dos primeiros filmes da história do cinema foram perdidos devido a ignorância da época ou a fatalidades que aconteceram ao longo dos anos. Isso também vale para a literatura, para música, para as artes plásticas. Mas ainda assim, acho que já era hora das empresas tomarem algum tipo de atitude para preservar sua história, e não falo só para que nós, jogadores e consumidores, tenhamos acesso, mas é como um todo, inclusive para fins acadêmicos.
I'm glad you put so much effort into videos like this and talking about why this stuff is important, but the reality of the matter is, most people don't care. They'll hear the first thing they want to hear and that will be the story and any alterations or updates are coverups from what "really happened" *sigh* When you post stuff about journalistic integrity, and when you've posted actual journalism it's such a fresh thing because most other people don't go through that effort. It's not limited to games either.
19:56 The selective editing when depicting the "regulated, respectible" UK and Canadian news versus the Australian example was incredibly obvious. As if human interest stories aren't shown on the former networks too.
Well if he is going to provide an example he is obviously going to need to use one that illiterates his point. No-one is saying that three clips lasting a few seconds could prove anything, but he is simply providing an example of what he is talking about to help communicate the point to us the audience.
@@dex6630 But its conveying a false argument that disintegrates under scrutiny, and is paved over with disingenuous editing. The Canadian and British Broadcasting Corperations are far from bastions of ethical, dispassionate demonstration of factual information. Look up people's complaints with their conduct, the character assassinations of dissidents. These organisations are threatened with defunding by the license fee payers for a reason.
@@BobExcalibur Well I think his point was that they have more of these qualities in comparison to US news, not that they are perfect because they are obviously not. I personally only have knowledge of the BBC which has its strengths and weaknesses. Recently the government has cut its funding by forcing it to sell of profitably parts such as BBC good food site. This seems to have been done to force the bbc to appoint more Conservative friendly editors. In general the bbc tends to be very pro establishment and gives lots of coverage to stuff like the Royal family. On the plus side, having a news source which is not funded by advertising but has a strict code of conduct for presenting balanced coverage and corporations / oligarchs don't get to have a veto over what gets covered. When you compare the bbc news to stuff like the daily mail it is clear the difference between an organisation that tries to be factual and balanced and one which is trying to be sensationalist and propagandist. In general though, the bbc is not at risk of being defunded by licence fee payers anytime soon, it's still extremely successful and the news aspect of it is only a small part of the overall services provided. People definitely complain about them a lot but stuff like their local and national radio stations, weather reports, sports coverage, nature docs, children's programming are all such an integrated part of people's lives I think when push came to shove people would want to keep it.
For some reason I can't view your most recent reply, I can only preview it in my inbox. Not sure if it's been deleted or something. Can you resubmit it?
As a Canadian I can tell you our news is not sensationalized. At least not in my city. Unless it's about trudeau, the media is so biased in favor of Trudeau it's ridiculous
I appreciate your honesty about the quality of RU-vid content. With the enthusiasm about new mediums, it seems that a lot of people overlook the loss in quality that comes with having to do everything yourself in an unspecialized manner.
One sentence makes this almost futile: "Ain't nobody got time for that". People just want cool headlines that make them either super pissed, validate some biased opinion they have or let them roll around in "Schadenfreude" (look it up, it's German). Nobody cares if the story is true as long as it's "plausible" to them and fills some emotional need.
Jason "Objectivity is a silly thing to strive for" Schreier, the best Game Journalist in the biz. Regardless, his Anthem expose was solid work. The ending seemed kind of abrupt tho, almost nonsequitor - Question conspiracy theories? That's way too mundane to take at face value. Is that supposed to be a loop back to the start mentioning "August 2014" teenagers becoming adults now? As in Gamergate? Did I drift off for a minute there and miss something?
You had me till you called Jason Schreier "The most trusted man in games journalism.". At that point I realised you were coming in with a bias. That's not a question, that's a compliment. Just felt like circle jerking. You don't really tackle why Games Journalists in particular are mistrusted. The dogpiling onto non-issues, the leaks of emails showing co-ordinated pushes for narratives, the bullying. You can solve your own questions much more easily if you actually started asking the real hard hitting questions and didn't just stroke your friends ego.
Interesting. But I really disagree. Expecting the average consumer to go through all of this is just too much. It defeats the point of having 'trusted news sources' not everyone should have the time to put every bit of information through journalistic rigor. That kind of defeats the point of journalism and put the onus of people consuming the product.
I didn't believe in most conspiracies and I generally trusted the media, even if it could be sloppy, sensational and biased. I felt like the news was trying to inform me. And if it entertained me, that was a nice bonus. Then a certain contentious issue came about a few years ago, and all the media decided they'd all publish dozens of hostile, slanted articles that didn't even try to understand their targets' point of view. Once I realized that multiple media organizations could coordinate upon a single narrative, it made me wonder what other tales were manufactured for public consumption. Conspiracy theories didn't seem so far-fetched once the media revealed that it could work as a singular malicious entity.
Or you could have just been wrong. I mean, this is literally no different from the reason everyone starts believing in conspiracy theories. "Everyone says the thing I want to believe is wrong. They must all be in on it!"
@@mightyNosewings When there was documented evidence of impropriety that media outlets deliberately ignored in favor of the 'harassment' angle, something didn't smell right. I was on the fence about the issue until the media blitz happened. Nothing reeks of 'media coordination' more than when a bunch of outlets all say the same thing at the same time. And wouldn't you know it, I was proven right when the GameJournoPros logs showed Ben Kuchera barging into the group demanding everyone go to bat for his BFF because the internet wasn't treating her right. And if you think "I'm right because everyone says so," I hope whatever religion you're a part of doesn't make you drink anything funny.
The tangent on conspiracy theories at the end was very strange..... once you learn a LITTLE about history you start to learn that there are some pretty big conspiracies.
Those tips in the first three minutes of the video are always what I do and I never went to journalism school. I guess most people NOT doing that explains a lot.
Fantastic video, I really loved the full dive into modern day journalism compared to how they did it in the old days. The interviews kept it from being stale.
So I watched this with the mindset of "I'm already skeptical about any and all news" but its Bunnyhop so why not. But then the video was just reaffirming my belief... So I need more sources on this. What a conundrum.
I love this channel so much. Every video is genuinely a solid contribution to society. This stuff is great content that goes well beyond just entertainment value. Huge props, hope you all the success in the world and as little stress as possible haha.
I disagree on the notion that RU-vid is a less truthful medium than large publications. Because while those publications might have more editors and fact-checkers, on youtube you wont get away with lies despite the absence of those. The average viewer does not watch only one gaming channel and if a lie is told then other channels that want to steal the lying channel viewers will call out them on it. Even comparably small scandals can force a creator to backpedal. And thats not even considering that we have a free forum to write in under every video. Feels like only a few publications still allow comments on articles. And those are often heavily moderated.
You are subscribed to actual Neo Nazis and Alt right channels who have been known repeatedly to lie for the advancement of far right ideology (especially BPS, Tim Pool, etc.,)
@@ColaNerd10 If they lie, point it out. I listen to them because they use arguments and logic rather than insult and shaming. And Tim Pool being Alt-Right? Really? He is the son of a mixed race couple and was a pretty big name on the left during the occupy wall street movement. Is this a case of "Everyone I dislike is a Nazi!"?
Chuck Wood RU-vid channel “Shaun” has many break down videos of many of BPS’ more egregious videos. As for Tim Pool, the occupy movement was long ago. Now he almost exclusively defends right/alt right talking points and left bashes constantly (this rationalwiki article is a pretty good summary rationalwiki.org/wiki/Tim_Pool) He was literally just invited to the White House a day or so ago
@@ColaNerd10 That link leads nowhere. I will check out this Shaun because I'm curious. But it would be better if you could actually spell out what he lied about rather than give a vague he-said-she-said.
@@ColaNerd10 OK. So i watched 10 minutes of the first of "Shauns" takedown videos of PBS on his channel (Do women destroy civilizations?) and its painfully obvious that he does not even want to tackle the main message of BPS video. His takedown can pretty much be summarized as "extraordinary claims demands extraordinary evidence!" Then he ignore the big narrative and try to break down small details in PBS videos that is not sufficiently backed up. Ignoring the fact that PBS video can stand on its own even without those nit-pics. Then he uses "Lies by statistics" a lot to make it seem like PBS lies about facts. Shaun give statistics from Syrian immigration in the US to prove that PBS lies (PBS claims that its mostly male immigration.) while it is obvious that PBS was referring to statistic from Europe that actually support these claims. I'm not the least impressed.
"Journalism is just a gun. It's only got one bullet in it, but if you aim right, that's all you need. Aim it right, and you can blow a kneecap off the world. " - Spider Jerusalem That's always been the kind of journalism I'm looking for. I don't want sites like Kotaku, Polygon or IGN who take money from publishers to run giant, site encompassing ads on games and still expect me to believe them about anything. They're just a mouthpiece, another marketing arm from the likes of EA and Activision. You can't trust them because they are in the pocket of the very people they're supposed to be critical of since humans don't bite the hand that feeds them. You can try to excuse by going "it's just a natural evolution from magazines that were funded and published by console manufacturers" but that's so lazy and dishonest. If you know of the code of ethics, say that you adhere to it and want journalism in gaming to improve you gotta put your money where your mouth is and follow through with it. Cut the blatant conflict of interest and get rid of ads from publishers and stop running sponsored content. Don't call yourself journalists when it's convenient to get press passes and free shit from publishers only to then go back to calling yourself bloggers when you are supposed to show journalistic integrity. This isn't a pick and choose buffet, you gotta take the bad with the good when you have the gall to call yourself a journalist. Grow a backbone and become someone that deserves respect. Only then will I actually give it to you.
I have read that Reuters requires a certain "credibility score" based on a number of factors, and that no gamejourno outlet has ever passed the required score (or even come close), due to things like you mentioned such as accepting favors or money from corporate sponsors whose products they review, not having journalistic degrees, etc
@@Antiformed It really is a battle of principle. Either you admit that you're nothing more than a glorified blogger at which point you can no longer accept press passes or you strap on your big boy pants and get some motherfucking ethics already.
Honestly, this was one of the most helpful breakdowns on how to do good research I've ever seen. Wish I'd learned that in school instead of being cast out into the internet to do research with no direction and how to format citations in MLA style.
George, this video is fantastic! I teach high school journalism and I'm absolutely going to show my students this video (at least parts of it; 50 plus minutes is a bit much in an hour long class).
Please at least be sure to mention that Schreier inserts his politics into his reporting and how that's a pitfall journalists have to AVOID in their own careers. Although most of your class will probably know who he is anyway...
You are painting a target on your back here, but you made your history and own biases clear and I respect the broader body of your work. Thanks for braving the net to post this. It's valid in the wider cultural sphere, not just gaming, and timeous as well.
Thanks for putting out another thoughtful and interesting video. I think part of the reason why I assume a news organization is the sum of it's individuals writer's biases is that I don't interact with the CEO or the management, just outward facing news of individuals paid and backed by an organization. It is much easier conceptually to lump them into one group. Side note: I believe libel and slander have lower burden of proof for private individuals.
In today's busy work who has time to go through all those steps? That's the real issue. People after a long day at work don't want to disect their news outlets for sources or bias.
Very good video George, the interviews from your Journalist peers gave a great cross section of insight from yourself as a YT journalist, Kotaku as a contemporary large outlet, and EGM Now as a (currently) more fledgling source who used to be on top (so to speak) in the age of printed games media.
I only discovered 4chan in like 2007 when they started trolling Scientology. Also 2007 is around when Le Fun arcade in Austin, TX shut down cause the Church of Scientology next door expanded into the space they had been renting out. I used to use their bathroom, cause Le Fun's only's bathroom was at the Chuch of Scientology where they had Dianetics books for you to read. I will never forgive them.
They weren't just "trolling Scientology", so much as trying to make their voices heard in regards to early RU-vid censorship. When Tom Cruise did that embarrassing interview that made their cult look like a big joke, Scientologists harassed RU-vid into removing all uploads of the interview. In Response, 4chan retaliated by trying to bring mainstream attention to what an obvious fake scam/joke Scientology was (South Park ended up doing that better though). Prior to those days, 4chan also caught criminals and stopped crimes, but nowadays you'd never see people mobilize to do something good like that.
@@Antiformed 4chan and Reddit are two sides of the same coin, gigantic communities filled with bored people who will excitedly cyberslueth events that they find interesting. The good thing about 4chan is that thru anonymity people can be honest in their posts without fear of reprisal. Bad thing is people of course can be very dishonest. Still I think the worst user on 4chan has nothing on the sociopaths who lurk behind Reddit's consumer friendly veil. And even worse is Twitter where a select group of influencers can easily form lynch mobs. Ah.. the internet is pretty terrible all things considered, I miss the genteel nature of old message boards.
He finally put something in there this time; one of the graphics appears behind his head at one point. I assume he just thinks it's a good thing to have in the event he needs to use it, but it would be distracting to have something there just for the sake of having something there.
Sean Barker Yeah I noticed that after I wrote the comment... Still, the constant bland green behind him just makes those sections less appealing to watch in my opinion. Don’t get me wrong, the actual content is still great, it’s just the visual aspect feels kind of lacking in those parts
At 43:08; Yeah. As a long time youtube consumer, I have a strong agree with this sentiment. It's not that we aren't aware, either, but it is how the whole thing has evolved.
Sites like Kotaku and Rock Paper Shotgun are just toxic. You can't even look at them for the reviews because they are a bunch of shills. And if Mr. Schreier is telling it isn't for the ad money then I'm interested to know what is causing it? Why are their reviews so off from reality most of the time? EDIT: BTW Great video George! If you ever consider to make an SubscribeStar acc...
Yeah, thanks for this. You did a great job breaking down exactly why old school media was just as bad or worse than modern media in gaming. It's just makes no sense when people say "journalism has gotten worse". No, it's actually much better now that people can be independent. Their corrupt affiliations made old news HEAVILY biased and completely screwed with integrity of articles and information. The main reason we hear more nuanced and in-depth stories about everything surrounded games is BECAUSE journalism has begun to separate itself from the larger publisher controlled atmosphere. Game journalism still has a massive jump forward to make before it'll be better respected, but people like Jim Sterling and Yong Yea and Bunnyhop, whether you or I agree with them all the time or not, absolutely have shown a massive improvement in journalism. We didn't even hear those kinds of perspectives and never had such strong voices in favor of the average people playing games and the developers who make them before then.
@@Xarkom89 I'm going to say that what he provides to the video can be evaluated independently of his work at Kotaku and in that sense his help is meaningful, but it does leave a bad taste in the mouth
I have only one advise. Do not click on their sites and articles. let this profession die as fast as possible so this industry becomes a much more friendly and less toxic place
@@super88cloud The people who call themselves gaming journalists working for Kotaku, Polygon, Vice, Waypoint and co are way more uninformed than a normal casual gamer. So this argumentation is pretty weak considering how many terrible and even more concerning false articles these people produce.
The magazines were the "toilet mobile games" of their day. You'd stay in there even longer, then finish reading in bed before falling asleep. Every bit as nostalgic as the full experience of renting videos after reading the back of the boxes for half an hour.
