EPTJournalism and Relationships - Page 4
| Blogs > Liquid`Nazgul |
|
sashamunguia
Mexico423 Posts
| ||
|
Arcanne
United States1519 Posts
| ||
|
Telcontar
United Kingdom16710 Posts
On January 17 2013 22:41 Chill wrote: But how is this something that needs to be discussed publicly at all? If I'm not trustworthy you would make a thread "Chill is not trustworthy". You wouldn't make a thread "untrustworthy people in Esports". More than likely the thread would be a private conversation with your staff. That's what I don't get about this entire situation. If Slasher is fine with what he's doing but people feel he isn't trustworthy, then then need to privately inform their organization and change their own actions dealing with him, not start a campaign against articles. That is what puzzles me as well, though you can say Nazgul is just adding his own views to what is already a wet floor, covered in split milk. I suppose EG, or maybe just Alex Garfield, was personally affronted by what Slasher did, but surely he is intelligent and experienced enough to know Slasher was within his 'journalistic rights' to do what he did? There was absolutely no need to go public with all this unless it was just to vent, and gain some sympathy for him and his organisation, as well as to try and turn the community against Slasher. That would be a low move, but I wouldn't put it past EG or Alex Garfield. Heck, that would make more sense to me than someone like him actually thinking Slasher's decision was morally or ethically indefensible. It's funny that someone like Alex Garfield, who talks so often about what needs to be done for esports to be a legit industry, has no problem taking a personal vendetta public just to win the popular vote. I don't claim I know what the industry needs, but I can tell you what it can do without; these darn episodes of drama that's no good, or of use to anyone. | ||
|
ShotgunMike
Sweden241 Posts
Any journalist can choose whether they want to try to comply with the two points above, thus making them "trustworthy" to the organization, or if they want to take another (perhaps easier) road and publish things that they might know that the organization might not like or produce low-quality results. In the discussion on Inside the game, Rob wanted to convey the message that he does write high-quality articles from time to time. The problem is that he also release information that might not be what the organizations want to have released in this way and he compose low-quality articles (tweets and whatnot). This makes him not trustworthy and thus the organizations will look for better partners when they want to release information/news to the public. Edit: So in short, I don't think that "embargo's" or trade agreements are the way to go. Personal connections between trusted journalists and the organizations will be the solution. People that show themselves as not trustworthy will be stuck publishing shitty news and not have access to the leaders of organizations and players after a while. There will be some sort of "natural selection" as soon as the scene stabilizes. There will always be a place for both the news-leakers that only want to get the easy, short term, posts and for the serious journalists that makes good pieces. There is no way to remove one or the other. | ||
Zealously
East Gorteau22261 Posts
| ||
|
PlainShane
United States62 Posts
| ||
|
oneill12
Romania1222 Posts
| ||
|
Holgerius
Sweden16951 Posts
 | ||
|
S_SienZ
1878 Posts
On January 18 2013 00:27 Holgerius wrote: Wait, what have I missed now? What has Slasher done? Leaked transfers before official announcements by respective teams. | ||
|
Noobity
United States871 Posts
On January 17 2013 20:22 Martijn wrote: Well wait a minute. I'm completely with you on saying that there should be trust and when you give information to Slasher, he needs to be responsible with that information. But that wasn't the case here ever. Slasher was given information from third parties and reported on it. If these teams had told Slasher themselves and gave a date on when it was ok to report on it, it'd be completely different. Please correct me if I'm wrong! Nazgul seems to be arguing a position where, regardless where the information comes from, Slasher should only report on the information which is convenient to us and when it's convenient to us or we simply won't maintain a relationship with him and shut him out. Does this not set off alarm bells with anyone here? That's not what I gathered from this post. I saw it more with Nazgul saying that Slasher is more than welcome to continue to post news like he has, and that Nazgul has no ethical qualm with Slasher doing it. However, he believes that this will make it difficult for him to continue working with Slasher in a more official capacity. Slasher wants business information, and it's his job to report that information. However if he's going to post the news that he gets from other sources when it's more convenient for him and less convenient for liquid (or completely inconvenient at that) then it's harder for the business relationship to continue working as it has. Nazgul is not really arguing from a particular position as far as I can see, he's more just stating basic business practices. Say your job is town crier for a small town, and you are the only person with a watch. If you make a deal with a loudspeaker company to make your announcement in 100 heartbeats that it is noon, and that loudspeaker company tells a journalist this information, who spreads that information by word of mouth, then your job is not necessarily negated, but it's far less impactful. You may be friends with that journalist on the side, and accept and like him as a person, but it's not likely that you're going to tell him about daylight savings time in advance which you may have otherwise, he's going to have to find that out from the loudspeaker company again. That metaphor was way confusing I think, but fits... maybe? | ||
|
cYaN
Norway3322 Posts
| ||
|
NKB
United Kingdom608 Posts
| ||
|
dr.fahrenheit
Austria101 Posts
On January 17 2013 19:33 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: I don't hate Slasher, and I don't think what he did is unethical. It is a fair argument to say journalists should not withhold stories because reporting is their duty. I see a lot of arguments out there, but surprisingly I don't see many resembling my thoughts on the situation. I figured it would be good to put my thoughts out there. I've talked to Slasher about these things yesterday and he is both understanding as well as receptive to the arguments provided. My view is not about the ethics or the morality of the situation, I don't believe these need to be part of the discussion. I have my own reasons for minding Slasher leaking our announcements to the public, not necessarily in line with what was said on Lo3. I am not upset over this, I am not stressed over it, and I certainly don't hate Slasher. Unfortunately, I internally deal with things on a regular basis that are much more stressful and impactful to my organization. Still, I find it an interesting case to talk about and believe I can add something to the discussion at hand. My argument is based around relationship management. I see many people looking at other sports for the ethical justification of journalists leaking information. I agree with you there. I want to take a look at other sports as well. If you are an investigating journalist in another sport you will often find yourself being friends with a player. This player can provide you with information on his teammates, management, sponsors, club, atmosphere, and more. For as long as the journalist does not screw over his source he may benefit from this relationship. If he does screw him, the relationship is over and he has lost his connection. Slasher on the one hand wants to use Liquid for information supply, as well as work with us officially on interviews and other content. Yet, on the other hand he will look for leaks outside of my organization that will impact me negatively upon releasing the information. I view this as poor relationship management. I don't think it works like that anywhere, neither here nor in other sports. I enjoy Slasher's company, and I don't mind sitting down with him for a beer outside of all of this, but in the end it comes down to being capable of separating my business relationships from a personal like or dislike for his character. If he does these things, that again are ethically entirely acceptable, then our business relation will be in a poor condition. If he picks which one he wants to be doing, I will blame him for neither, but trying to do both makes it very difficult. I would agree with that if Slasher was the only journalist "in esports". But he isn't and if there are information leaks that will impact you or your company negatively someone will find and publish them. Why shouldn't it be Slasher who profits from such a leak, a guy you admittedly like, instead of someone else? The information will get out anyway, the only thing Slasher maybe (not nesessarily) should have the courtesy of doing is to warn you that the information is out there. | ||
|
GodneyOfWar
19 Posts
| ||
|
Cyrak
Canada536 Posts
It is understandable that a site like TL that has had a virtual monopoly on english language Starcraft coverage for over a decade would react adversely to competition even if said competition is only tangential to what they do. The idea of a coordinated or unilateral freezing out of the press is also not a new idea. It is, however, an idea whose success is dependent on things outside the control of TL. Mainly, it depends on whether or not there is a real demand for the type of coverage that Slasher provides. There will always be leaks and as the scene becomes larger and more intertwined they will become increasingly inevitable. A lack of demand for news typically signifies a lack of interest. If e-sports grows and becomes more popular news coverage of the type Slasher provides will become indispensable and will eventually reach more eyeballs (and most importantly different eyeballs) than the community based fansites. Either accept that as reality and learn to deal with it or hope that the scene remains a small, tight knit group of fanatics who you can peddle to your sponsors. As an aside, I really hope that most of the posters in this thread don't vote in elections. | ||
|
Martijn
Netherlands1219 Posts
On January 18 2013 00:32 Noobity wrote: That's not what I gathered from this post. I saw it more with Nazgul saying that Slasher is more than welcome to continue to post news like he has, and that Nazgul has no ethical qualm with Slasher doing it. However, he believes that this will make it difficult for him to continue working with Slasher in a more official capacity. Slasher wants business information, and it's his job to report that information. However if he's going to post the news that he gets from other sources when it's more convenient for him and less convenient for liquid (or completely inconvenient at that) then it's harder for the business relationship to continue working as it has. Nazgul is not really arguing from a particular position as far as I can see, he's more just stating basic business practices. Say your job is town crier for a small town, and you are the only person with a watch. If you make a deal with a loudspeaker company to make your announcement in 100 heartbeats that it is noon, and that loudspeaker company tells a journalist this information, who spreads that information by word of mouth, then your job is not necessarily negated, but it's far less impactful. You may be friends with that journalist on the side, and accept and like him as a person, but it's not likely that you're going to tell him about daylight savings time in advance which you may have otherwise, he's going to have to find that out from the loudspeaker company again. That metaphor was way confusing I think, but fits... maybe? You lost me with the metaphor to be honest, but I get the point. Argument being I believe that, regardless of where the information comes from, the team should have control over it or else they should feel free to punish the person reporting on it. Which I simply can't agree on. Yeah, obviously TL or EG or team X could make Slashers or any reporters job a lot harder if they wanted to. Aside from the Kafkaesque environment that turns esports in, that's certainly bad business for the team as well though Even if we take ethics and morality out of the discussion (which I think is pretty ridiculous because of the potential consequences), yeah a team can blackball a reporter, but the team benefits from that talent and exposure from that reporter. Arguing it's ok to cut a reporter off because you're unhappy with them doing their job is arguing it's ok to hurt both your team and the reporter because of personal conflicts. | ||
|
Grettin
42381 Posts
On January 18 2013 00:28 S_SienZ wrote: Leaked transfers before official announcements by respective teams. I hate the word "leaked", because Slasher didn't actually LEAK it. He reports it forward, so someone else does the actual leaking. | ||
|
Cyrak
Canada536 Posts
On January 18 2013 00:32 Noobity wrote: That's not what I gathered from this post. I saw it more with Nazgul saying that Slasher is more than welcome to continue to post news like he has, and that Nazgul has no ethical qualm with Slasher doing it. However, he believes that this will make it difficult for him to continue working with Slasher in a more official capacity. Slasher wants business information, and it's his job to report that information. However if he's going to post the news that he gets from other sources when it's more convenient for him and less convenient for liquid (or completely inconvenient at that) then it's harder for the business relationship to continue working as it has. Nazgul is not really arguing from a particular position as far as I can see, he's more just stating basic business practices. Say your job is town crier for a small town, and you are the only person with a watch. If you make a deal with a loudspeaker company to make your announcement in 100 heartbeats that it is noon, and that loudspeaker company tells a journalist this information, who spreads that information by word of mouth, then your job is not necessarily negated, but it's far less impactful. You may be friends with that journalist on the side, and accept and like him as a person, but it's not likely that you're going to tell him about daylight savings time in advance which you may have otherwise, he's going to have to find that out from the loudspeaker company again. That metaphor was way confusing I think, but fits... maybe? Nonsensical analogy aside, why would you accept Nazgul's premise at face value? If an organization works alongside the press in an "official capacity" why would they do so if it weren't already in their best interests? He is portraying it as if he's doing Slasher a favor. Maybe he is, but I would err towards cynicism here. The utility of working with Slasher shouldn't be affected by his breaking news that TL is trying to keep secret. The fact that he breaks news that he learns about independently doesn't mean that he can't be trusted to abide by embargoes that he agrees to. What he is saying boils down to one of two things: 1. He is willing to bite off his nose to spite his face and forego whatever utility he gained from working officially with Slasher in order to exact some retribution. 2. He wants to make an example of Slasher in particular and would continue to work with other more compliant journalists. Number 2 makes more sense. If this option is actually workable, however, it would speak volumes about the quality of "journalism" in e-sports and would perfectly reinforce the points made in the pc-gamer OPED that the esports community and its media infrastructure simply don't understand journalism. | ||
|
cmgillett
United States335 Posts
| ||
|
Cyrak
Canada536 Posts
On January 18 2013 01:08 cmgillett wrote: Could someone provide some context to what we're actually referring to? Is it Slasher releasing news that Snute was joining? Or something else? http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/01/16/editorial-does-esports-understand-journalism/ | ||
| ||
