|
On January 17 2013 05:34 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 05:31 Plansix wrote:On January 17 2013 05:22 dAPhREAk wrote:On January 17 2013 05:20 Plansix wrote:On January 17 2013 05:12 dAPhREAk wrote:On January 17 2013 05:10 Plansix wrote:On January 17 2013 04:57 dAPhREAk wrote:On January 17 2013 04:48 Romitelli wrote:On January 17 2013 04:43 dAPhREAk wrote:On January 17 2013 04:38 Romitelli wrote:
[quote]
To answer your NDA question, let's assume EG's signing of JD was a tripartite affair: EG, OZ and KESPA.
If EG managed to convice OZ and KESPA to sign a NDA (which is not a sure deal, considering they were at a pre-contractual phase and EG had a lot of interest in signing Jaedong), this would force both organizations to take the necessary steps in order to prevent a leak from their side.
However, the enforceability of a NDA is, at best, questionable when a lot of people are involved. Unless EG could muster irrefutable evidence that the leak came from someone at OZ or KESPA, no legal action could be effectively brought against them, rendering the NDA largely ineffective. After all, the leak could have always come from one of EG's own employees.
Therefore, a NDA is only effective when the deal only involves a small number of people (generally high-officers) from each party, and/or there's a reliable way of tracking and controlling the exchange of information during the negotiations. that is completely inaccurate on a legal basis. and you also assume the only way to insure the success of a NDA is with a stick--try a carrot. I'd be interested to know how this is inaccurate on a legal basis since, well, this is my job after all. so, your advice to clients is "if there are too many people, NDAs are worthless?" Yes, because they are. Or more importantly, the cost of enforcing one is normally higher than most companies are willing to pay to enforce it. Civil proceedings cost a lot of money and providing the exact amount of damage done by a breach of a NDA would be very time consuming. Attorney's cost money and most people don't want to pay for them. sigh. you can draft a NDA anyway you want. you dont have to make the enforcement mechanism be a lawsuit. How else would you enforce an NDA, unless you also employee the person who signed it? draft the NDA to include incentive payments that are conditioned on no leaks. leak = no payment. Thats not really enforcing the NDA, it is just agreeing to pay people if there are no leaks. When people say they are worthless, they mean that they are not practical to enforce legally, which is the true value of the terms of a contract. Also, what if there is a leak and its not the player's fault, do you still have to pay them? it insures the contract terms are performed.
You are splitting hairs here, because you don't need an NDA for someone you employee. You can just fire them if they leak information. NDAs are used for people that you don't have that ability and you don't employee. In those cases, NDAs are worthless because the cost of enforcing them is to high.
The Agreements for Judgment(which are filed with Courts and treated as orders)I prepare for my attorneys have term in them saying the other party cannot appeal the agreement and releases of liability. People still back out of those agreements after they are signed and appeal or file counter suite. No agreement is iron tight because it must be ruled on by a judge to be enforcable.
|
|
|
On January 17 2013 05:41 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 05:36 BlackPanther wrote:On January 17 2013 05:11 Linkirvana wrote:On January 17 2013 04:53 IdrA wrote:On January 17 2013 04:42 dr.fahrenheit wrote:On January 17 2013 04:29 IdrA wrote:On January 17 2013 04:08 Integra wrote:On January 17 2013 03:59 IdrA wrote:
whats the foundation for "if esports cant handle journalism it doesnt deserve to exist"
everyone just keeps repeating it because it sounds good. there's no actual reason to believe that. what if the scene were a lot more precarious than it is and losing viewership that comes with losing exclusivity on an announcement actually cost us a sponsor? or what about the lesser teams totalbiscuit referenced who are wholly dependent on every single view any announcement they have gets? the fact that its a growing industry with unstable money flow that's dependent on certain specific things that the media can influence does not delegitimize it as an industry. Let's put it this way, what kind of community do we want? OR rather, what obligations and rights do we want our community to have. The above things you just stated are great things and totally true, There is a downside to what Slasher is doing, as there is to practically everything. However your example can also be applied to the real world. Journalism in general costs our society allot of money, allot of business related could go much faster and smoother if the journalistic world just kept their mouth shut, but what society would that give us, just look at China. Journalism has always operated under certain costs but most people, in the western world at least, feel that that cost is justified cause we believe in things like free speech and such. I for one would like to believe that we actually can have free journalism and that our community is strong enough to give journalists like slasher the ability to exercise this right and that their free speech actually benefits this community as a whole and that the temporary setbacks which may happen actually are worth it. the cost is justified because we need freedom of information to prevent wrongdoing or to let the public know when it's happening. but how many articles do you see about organizations not paying players on time, or at all? or about all the shady shit going on in korea? or any of the other shit that freedom of the press would actually be useful for. no, instead you have people posting headlines that will be public information within a matter of days a bit early so they can siphon off a portion of the viewership to justify their own jobs. spend that time reporting on things that need to be reported on, or at least spend it productively on the existing headlines instead of dragging others down with your lazyness. If there is a market, interest, demand, there will always be people who will be more than happy to satisfy it (for money)... people grave for sensation, big announcments etc.; that seems to be what people want and (often times shitty) journalists will provide... I'm just saying it seems to me some guys are complaining that journalists serve a target group on the market which they would prefer have exclusively for their own.... idk... the larger point has been that slasher is riding a thin line between respected journalist and pandering to that audience that just wants to know whatever is happening a day early at the expense of quality and interesting stories. it's bad for the community for him to be providing the cheaper kind of information and it's going to cost him his ability to work as a quality journalist. I don't really get it. What do you guys expect from Slasher? All of a sudden he's a bad reporter doing cheap tricks just because what he's reporting on is hurting you guys? Reporter gets his hands on information, reporter reports this information. Doesn't seem like a strange move to me at all. The fact that it's sensitive information doesn't seem like a good enough reason for him to keep things quiet when he is in fact paid to report anything that gathers him viewers. If your business model relies on information being tight that cannot be kept tight then your business model seems kind of screwed. If information makes its way to a reporter, you cannot expect the reporter to keep quiet. If you lose business because of that then I feel like the burden's on you to fix things and not simply demand that the reporter only continues reporting on issues that are to your liking. There is a different impact that reporting in a major, non-sponsorship based industry has than one that works within the confines of sponsorships. Reporters and journalists working in tech industries or major sports leak things all the time but the company that has its information leaked doesn't care because it is building hype for their team or their product. In esports, the teams are the ones building the hype for their sponsors so they can get paid as advertising machines rather than for the sake of being a sports team. By leaking information that was suppose to be hyped up by the team, you are in effect damaging the relationship between the sponsors and teams because you dampen the effect the team will have on generating page views for sponsors. Slasher did exactly this and EG suffered because of it. He should know better than that. Reporters don't leak. Reporters report. Who leaked the information to Slasher ? That is who you should be crying out against. Either that, or at EG for leading their sponsors to believe that the information was secret, when it clearly was not.
Doesn't matter. Slasher was the one who dropped the news. He should have known better. EG is partially at fault for letting the information get through the cracks to slasher but slasher shouldn't have leaked it to the community.
|
Brunei Darussalam566 Posts
On January 17 2013 05:44 dAPhREAk wrote:
carrot, man, carrot.
A "carrot" does very little in this situation. Firstly, because it doesn't stop your own employees from leaking information. Secondly, because promising a bonus to your counterparty would also have little effect in preventing leaks if they're done by your counterparty's employees (unless they'd see their share of the bonus, which is highly unlikely). Finally, because it "ensures" nothing, and you'd still have to take it to courts if the information gets leaked regardless.
|
On January 17 2013 05:48 BlackPanther wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 05:41 Kaitlin wrote:On January 17 2013 05:36 BlackPanther wrote:On January 17 2013 05:11 Linkirvana wrote:On January 17 2013 04:53 IdrA wrote:On January 17 2013 04:42 dr.fahrenheit wrote:On January 17 2013 04:29 IdrA wrote:On January 17 2013 04:08 Integra wrote:On January 17 2013 03:59 IdrA wrote:
whats the foundation for "if esports cant handle journalism it doesnt deserve to exist"
everyone just keeps repeating it because it sounds good. there's no actual reason to believe that. what if the scene were a lot more precarious than it is and losing viewership that comes with losing exclusivity on an announcement actually cost us a sponsor? or what about the lesser teams totalbiscuit referenced who are wholly dependent on every single view any announcement they have gets? the fact that its a growing industry with unstable money flow that's dependent on certain specific things that the media can influence does not delegitimize it as an industry. Let's put it this way, what kind of community do we want? OR rather, what obligations and rights do we want our community to have. The above things you just stated are great things and totally true, There is a downside to what Slasher is doing, as there is to practically everything. However your example can also be applied to the real world. Journalism in general costs our society allot of money, allot of business related could go much faster and smoother if the journalistic world just kept their mouth shut, but what society would that give us, just look at China. Journalism has always operated under certain costs but most people, in the western world at least, feel that that cost is justified cause we believe in things like free speech and such. I for one would like to believe that we actually can have free journalism and that our community is strong enough to give journalists like slasher the ability to exercise this right and that their free speech actually benefits this community as a whole and that the temporary setbacks which may happen actually are worth it. the cost is justified because we need freedom of information to prevent wrongdoing or to let the public know when it's happening. but how many articles do you see about organizations not paying players on time, or at all? or about all the shady shit going on in korea? or any of the other shit that freedom of the press would actually be useful for. no, instead you have people posting headlines that will be public information within a matter of days a bit early so they can siphon off a portion of the viewership to justify their own jobs. spend that time reporting on things that need to be reported on, or at least spend it productively on the existing headlines instead of dragging others down with your lazyness. If there is a market, interest, demand, there will always be people who will be more than happy to satisfy it (for money)... people grave for sensation, big announcments etc.; that seems to be what people want and (often times shitty) journalists will provide... I'm just saying it seems to me some guys are complaining that journalists serve a target group on the market which they would prefer have exclusively for their own.... idk... the larger point has been that slasher is riding a thin line between respected journalist and pandering to that audience that just wants to know whatever is happening a day early at the expense of quality and interesting stories. it's bad for the community for him to be providing the cheaper kind of information and it's going to cost him his ability to work as a quality journalist. I don't really get it. What do you guys expect from Slasher? All of a sudden he's a bad reporter doing cheap tricks just because what he's reporting on is hurting you guys? Reporter gets his hands on information, reporter reports this information. Doesn't seem like a strange move to me at all. The fact that it's sensitive information doesn't seem like a good enough reason for him to keep things quiet when he is in fact paid to report anything that gathers him viewers. If your business model relies on information being tight that cannot be kept tight then your business model seems kind of screwed. If information makes its way to a reporter, you cannot expect the reporter to keep quiet. If you lose business because of that then I feel like the burden's on you to fix things and not simply demand that the reporter only continues reporting on issues that are to your liking. There is a different impact that reporting in a major, non-sponsorship based industry has than one that works within the confines of sponsorships. Reporters and journalists working in tech industries or major sports leak things all the time but the company that has its information leaked doesn't care because it is building hype for their team or their product. In esports, the teams are the ones building the hype for their sponsors so they can get paid as advertising machines rather than for the sake of being a sports team. By leaking information that was suppose to be hyped up by the team, you are in effect damaging the relationship between the sponsors and teams because you dampen the effect the team will have on generating page views for sponsors. Slasher did exactly this and EG suffered because of it. He should know better than that. Reporters don't leak. Reporters report. Who leaked the information to Slasher ? That is who you should be crying out against. Either that, or at EG for leading their sponsors to believe that the information was secret, when it clearly was not. Doesn't matter. Slasher was the one who dropped the news. He should have known better. EG is partially at fault for letting the information get through the cracks to slasher but slasher shouldn't have leaked it to the community.
You have to realize you are operating on a definition of journalism that isn't really accepted anywhere.
|
On January 17 2013 05:50 Romitelli wrote:A "carrot" does very little in this situation. Firstly, because it doesn't stop your own employees from leaking information. Secondly, because promising a bonus to your counterparty would also have little effect in preventing leaks if they're done by your counterparty's employees (unless they'd see their share of the bonus, which is highly unlikely). Finally, because it "ensures" nothing, and you'd still have to take it to courts if the information gets leaked regardless.
1. if you can't control your own house then NDAs are the least of your problems. regardless, i assume (insert team) can determine which of its employees are trustworthy enough to have certain information, and if there are none then upper management shouldn't give them confidential information.
2. same thing for the counterparty. if they want the incentive payment, they better be damn sure that they only provide the information to trusted employees.
3. you dont have to take it to court. if the condition isnt met, you dont pay. make sure your incentive payment is sufficient.
you guys have a really low opinion about the honesty of people. these arent isolated negotiations. if you screw someone over once, this is a small community and others will learn about the screw-up.
|
I, and i'm sure many others, want e-sports to grow and be profitable. The point to argue for us, here, as a community, should be what the impact and results of slasher's actions were and what we can do to improve future instances for the growth of e-sports. We can bicker and bitch about legality or logistics, of which many don't full understand, or we constructively argue about the outcome of past instances and what we want to see in the future. I don't know about other people but i don't give a flip if what slasher did is okay from a journalist's perspective. I just want to make sure that the actions don't hurt the growth of e-sports. Or if they did hurt e-sports, what can we do to prevent such events in the future.
From the VODs I couldn't deduct and answer from slasher to Alex Garfield's point of "what are you bringing to the table?" So i want to know, how will his actions benefit e-sports.
I'm sure most of you are here out of the love of e-sports and not to troll ........ so please let's get more constructive arguments than:
"Does EG really expect the “viewers” to side with the meat packing industry and demonize Upton Sinclair? I have news for you Alex Garfield, welcome to “the jungle.”"
|
EG is partially at fault for letting the information get through the cracks to slasher but slasher shouldn't have leaked it to the community.
I'm not defending Slasher as a person here, or even journalism. Maybe he shouldnt have reported, but i see him reporting more justified then teams blaming him for doing it. I don't want to know announcments in twitch chat before they are out officially.. but this is handled in a childish way i feel.
|
On January 17 2013 05:55 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 05:48 BlackPanther wrote:On January 17 2013 05:41 Kaitlin wrote:On January 17 2013 05:36 BlackPanther wrote:On January 17 2013 05:11 Linkirvana wrote:On January 17 2013 04:53 IdrA wrote:On January 17 2013 04:42 dr.fahrenheit wrote:On January 17 2013 04:29 IdrA wrote:On January 17 2013 04:08 Integra wrote:On January 17 2013 03:59 IdrA wrote:
whats the foundation for "if esports cant handle journalism it doesnt deserve to exist"
everyone just keeps repeating it because it sounds good. there's no actual reason to believe that. what if the scene were a lot more precarious than it is and losing viewership that comes with losing exclusivity on an announcement actually cost us a sponsor? or what about the lesser teams totalbiscuit referenced who are wholly dependent on every single view any announcement they have gets? the fact that its a growing industry with unstable money flow that's dependent on certain specific things that the media can influence does not delegitimize it as an industry. Let's put it this way, what kind of community do we want? OR rather, what obligations and rights do we want our community to have. The above things you just stated are great things and totally true, There is a downside to what Slasher is doing, as there is to practically everything. However your example can also be applied to the real world. Journalism in general costs our society allot of money, allot of business related could go much faster and smoother if the journalistic world just kept their mouth shut, but what society would that give us, just look at China. Journalism has always operated under certain costs but most people, in the western world at least, feel that that cost is justified cause we believe in things like free speech and such. I for one would like to believe that we actually can have free journalism and that our community is strong enough to give journalists like slasher the ability to exercise this right and that their free speech actually benefits this community as a whole and that the temporary setbacks which may happen actually are worth it. the cost is justified because we need freedom of information to prevent wrongdoing or to let the public know when it's happening. but how many articles do you see about organizations not paying players on time, or at all? or about all the shady shit going on in korea? or any of the other shit that freedom of the press would actually be useful for. no, instead you have people posting headlines that will be public information within a matter of days a bit early so they can siphon off a portion of the viewership to justify their own jobs. spend that time reporting on things that need to be reported on, or at least spend it productively on the existing headlines instead of dragging others down with your lazyness. If there is a market, interest, demand, there will always be people who will be more than happy to satisfy it (for money)... people grave for sensation, big announcments etc.; that seems to be what people want and (often times shitty) journalists will provide... I'm just saying it seems to me some guys are complaining that journalists serve a target group on the market which they would prefer have exclusively for their own.... idk... the larger point has been that slasher is riding a thin line between respected journalist and pandering to that audience that just wants to know whatever is happening a day early at the expense of quality and interesting stories. it's bad for the community for him to be providing the cheaper kind of information and it's going to cost him his ability to work as a quality journalist. I don't really get it. What do you guys expect from Slasher? All of a sudden he's a bad reporter doing cheap tricks just because what he's reporting on is hurting you guys? Reporter gets his hands on information, reporter reports this information. Doesn't seem like a strange move to me at all. The fact that it's sensitive information doesn't seem like a good enough reason for him to keep things quiet when he is in fact paid to report anything that gathers him viewers. If your business model relies on information being tight that cannot be kept tight then your business model seems kind of screwed. If information makes its way to a reporter, you cannot expect the reporter to keep quiet. If you lose business because of that then I feel like the burden's on you to fix things and not simply demand that the reporter only continues reporting on issues that are to your liking. There is a different impact that reporting in a major, non-sponsorship based industry has than one that works within the confines of sponsorships. Reporters and journalists working in tech industries or major sports leak things all the time but the company that has its information leaked doesn't care because it is building hype for their team or their product. In esports, the teams are the ones building the hype for their sponsors so they can get paid as advertising machines rather than for the sake of being a sports team. By leaking information that was suppose to be hyped up by the team, you are in effect damaging the relationship between the sponsors and teams because you dampen the effect the team will have on generating page views for sponsors. Slasher did exactly this and EG suffered because of it. He should know better than that. Reporters don't leak. Reporters report. Who leaked the information to Slasher ? That is who you should be crying out against. Either that, or at EG for leading their sponsors to believe that the information was secret, when it clearly was not. Doesn't matter. Slasher was the one who dropped the news. He should have known better. EG is partially at fault for letting the information get through the cracks to slasher but slasher shouldn't have leaked it to the community. You have to realize you are operating on a definition of journalism that isn't really accepted anywhere.
What does it matter what definition I am using, its irrelevant to the argument. Slasher "reported" the information and caused EG to lose sponsorship revenue. This type of "reporting" is going to kill esports.
|
On January 17 2013 05:48 BlackPanther wrote:
Doesn't matter. Slasher was the one who dropped the news. He should have known better. EG is partially at fault for letting the information get through the cracks to slasher but slasher shouldn't have leaked it to the community.
It is 100% EG's fault for letting loose the information. Slasher is just doing what any journalist or reporter would when a piece lands on their lap, that is their job.
|
On January 17 2013 05:56 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 05:50 Romitelli wrote:On January 17 2013 05:44 dAPhREAk wrote:
carrot, man, carrot. A "carrot" does very little in this situation. Firstly, because it doesn't stop your own employees from leaking information. Secondly, because promising a bonus to your counterparty would also have little effect in preventing leaks if they're done by your counterparty's employees (unless they'd see their share of the bonus, which is highly unlikely). Finally, because it "ensures" nothing, and you'd still have to take it to courts if the information gets leaked regardless. 1. if you can't control your own house then NDAs are the least of your problems. regardless, i assume (insert team) can determine which of its employees are trustworthy enough to have certain information, and if there are none then upper management shouldn't give them confidential information. 2. same thing for the counterparty. if they want the incentive payment, they better be damn sure that they only provide the information to trusted employees. 3. you dont have to take it to court. if the condition isnt met, you dont pay. make sure your incentive payment is sufficient. you guys have a really low opinion about the honesty of people. these arent isolated negotiations. if you screw someone over once, this is a small community and others will learn about the screw-up.
But what sparked the discussion was this comment by you:
"so, your advice to clients is "if there are too many people, NDAs are worthless?"
Which I agreed with and stated NDAs are very hard to enforce if broken, which is why they are worthless. I think we have moved on to a very different subject if you are talking about our faith in humanity.
|
Doesn't matter. Slasher was the one who dropped the news. He should have known better. EG is partially at fault for letting the information get through the cracks to slasher but slasher shouldn't have leaked it to the community.
You've got to be kidding me. "Known better"? It's his job to report news stories for Gamespot. What kind of a fucking statement is "he shouldn't have done his job"?
|
Brunei Darussalam566 Posts
On January 17 2013 05:56 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 05:50 Romitelli wrote:On January 17 2013 05:44 dAPhREAk wrote:
carrot, man, carrot. A "carrot" does very little in this situation. Firstly, because it doesn't stop your own employees from leaking information. Secondly, because promising a bonus to your counterparty would also have little effect in preventing leaks if they're done by your counterparty's employees (unless they'd see their share of the bonus, which is highly unlikely). Finally, because it "ensures" nothing, and you'd still have to take it to courts if the information gets leaked regardless. 1. if you can't control your own house then NDAs are the least of your problems. regardless, i assume (insert team) can determine which of its employees are trustworthy enough to have certain information, and if there are none then upper management shouldn't give them confidential information. 2. same thing for the counterparty. if they want the incentive payment, they better be damn sure that they only provide the information to trusted employees. 3. you dont have to take it to court. if the condition isnt met, you dont pay. make sure your incentive payment is sufficient. you guys have a really low opinion about the honesty of people. these arent isolated negotiations. if you screw someone over once, this is a small community and others will learn about the screw-up.
Even huge, solid and perennial companies have trouble controlling staff. We're not necessarily talking about honesty here; hell, I've heard about leaks that happened because of someone talking on a mobile in a taxi cab, working on a laptop during a flight, forwarding the wrong attachment, and so on. In my first post, I said that a NDA is ineffective if a lot of people are involved, and specifically mentioned involving only high-officers (as you're now suggesting).
And you'll always take it to court if you suffer damages from the breach of the NDA.
|
On January 17 2013 06:04 BlackPanther wrote:
What does it matter what definition I am using, its irrelevant to the argument. Slasher "reported" the information and caused EG to lose sponsorship revenue. This type of "reporting" is going to kill esports.
You are blaming the wrong person. It should say "EG "leaked" the information and caused EG to lose sponsorship revenue. This type of "leaking" is going to kill esports (and EG itself)."
|
On January 17 2013 06:04 BlackPanther wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 05:55 Mohdoo wrote:On January 17 2013 05:48 BlackPanther wrote:On January 17 2013 05:41 Kaitlin wrote:On January 17 2013 05:36 BlackPanther wrote:On January 17 2013 05:11 Linkirvana wrote:On January 17 2013 04:53 IdrA wrote:On January 17 2013 04:42 dr.fahrenheit wrote:On January 17 2013 04:29 IdrA wrote:On January 17 2013 04:08 Integra wrote:
[quote]
Let's put it this way, what kind of community do we want? OR rather, what obligations and rights do we want our community to have.
The above things you just stated are great things and totally true, There is a downside to what Slasher is doing, as there is to practically everything. However your example can also be applied to the real world. Journalism in general costs our society allot of money, allot of business related could go much faster and smoother if the journalistic world just kept their mouth shut, but what society would that give us, just look at China.
Journalism has always operated under certain costs but most people, in the western world at least, feel that that cost is justified cause we believe in things like free speech and such. I for one would like to believe that we actually can have free journalism and that our community is strong enough to give journalists like slasher the ability to exercise this right and that their free speech actually benefits this community as a whole and that the temporary setbacks which may happen actually are worth it. the cost is justified because we need freedom of information to prevent wrongdoing or to let the public know when it's happening. but how many articles do you see about organizations not paying players on time, or at all? or about all the shady shit going on in korea? or any of the other shit that freedom of the press would actually be useful for. no, instead you have people posting headlines that will be public information within a matter of days a bit early so they can siphon off a portion of the viewership to justify their own jobs. spend that time reporting on things that need to be reported on, or at least spend it productively on the existing headlines instead of dragging others down with your lazyness. If there is a market, interest, demand, there will always be people who will be more than happy to satisfy it (for money)... people grave for sensation, big announcments etc.; that seems to be what people want and (often times shitty) journalists will provide... I'm just saying it seems to me some guys are complaining that journalists serve a target group on the market which they would prefer have exclusively for their own.... idk... the larger point has been that slasher is riding a thin line between respected journalist and pandering to that audience that just wants to know whatever is happening a day early at the expense of quality and interesting stories. it's bad for the community for him to be providing the cheaper kind of information and it's going to cost him his ability to work as a quality journalist. I don't really get it. What do you guys expect from Slasher? All of a sudden he's a bad reporter doing cheap tricks just because what he's reporting on is hurting you guys? Reporter gets his hands on information, reporter reports this information. Doesn't seem like a strange move to me at all. The fact that it's sensitive information doesn't seem like a good enough reason for him to keep things quiet when he is in fact paid to report anything that gathers him viewers. If your business model relies on information being tight that cannot be kept tight then your business model seems kind of screwed. If information makes its way to a reporter, you cannot expect the reporter to keep quiet. If you lose business because of that then I feel like the burden's on you to fix things and not simply demand that the reporter only continues reporting on issues that are to your liking. There is a different impact that reporting in a major, non-sponsorship based industry has than one that works within the confines of sponsorships. Reporters and journalists working in tech industries or major sports leak things all the time but the company that has its information leaked doesn't care because it is building hype for their team or their product. In esports, the teams are the ones building the hype for their sponsors so they can get paid as advertising machines rather than for the sake of being a sports team. By leaking information that was suppose to be hyped up by the team, you are in effect damaging the relationship between the sponsors and teams because you dampen the effect the team will have on generating page views for sponsors. Slasher did exactly this and EG suffered because of it. He should know better than that. Reporters don't leak. Reporters report. Who leaked the information to Slasher ? That is who you should be crying out against. Either that, or at EG for leading their sponsors to believe that the information was secret, when it clearly was not. Doesn't matter. Slasher was the one who dropped the news. He should have known better. EG is partially at fault for letting the information get through the cracks to slasher but slasher shouldn't have leaked it to the community. You have to realize you are operating on a definition of journalism that isn't really accepted anywhere. What does it matter what definition I am using, its irrelevant to the argument. Slasher "reported" the information and caused EG to lose sponsorship revenue. This type of "reporting" is going to kill esports.
Eh, the reporting of it is not going to kill esports. Allowing leaks may kill a team. Slasher gathered information, and posted it. Quality of his work aside (which seemed to be a big talking point for some reason), he has every right to do that. People seem to be asking rather *should* he do this.
And of course he should. Just look at this shit storm that has been caused. I imagine he, and gamespot, are getting way more publicity and views on their site now as a direct result of this drama. This is the best kind of reporting for a person like Slasher. A report that causes controversy and divide. So he has every reason to keep doing it.
If you want this to stop, you need to stop the leaks. That is the only reasonable way.
|
On January 17 2013 06:07 Aulisemia wrote:Show nested quote +Doesn't matter. Slasher was the one who dropped the news. He should have known better. EG is partially at fault for letting the information get through the cracks to slasher but slasher shouldn't have leaked it to the community. You've got to be kidding me. "Known better"? It's his job to report news stories for Gamespot. What kind of a fucking statement is "he shouldn't have done his job"?
He shouldn't have done his fucking job then if its going to cause damage to the industry. He could have done his job far fucking better. MAINSTREAM JOURNALISM /= ESPORTS JOURNALISM. This is the point. Esports is NOT READY for mainstream type journalism at all.
|
On January 17 2013 06:04 BlackPanther wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 05:55 Mohdoo wrote:On January 17 2013 05:48 BlackPanther wrote:On January 17 2013 05:41 Kaitlin wrote:On January 17 2013 05:36 BlackPanther wrote:On January 17 2013 05:11 Linkirvana wrote:On January 17 2013 04:53 IdrA wrote:On January 17 2013 04:42 dr.fahrenheit wrote:On January 17 2013 04:29 IdrA wrote:On January 17 2013 04:08 Integra wrote:
[quote]
Let's put it this way, what kind of community do we want? OR rather, what obligations and rights do we want our community to have.
The above things you just stated are great things and totally true, There is a downside to what Slasher is doing, as there is to practically everything. However your example can also be applied to the real world. Journalism in general costs our society allot of money, allot of business related could go much faster and smoother if the journalistic world just kept their mouth shut, but what society would that give us, just look at China.
Journalism has always operated under certain costs but most people, in the western world at least, feel that that cost is justified cause we believe in things like free speech and such. I for one would like to believe that we actually can have free journalism and that our community is strong enough to give journalists like slasher the ability to exercise this right and that their free speech actually benefits this community as a whole and that the temporary setbacks which may happen actually are worth it. the cost is justified because we need freedom of information to prevent wrongdoing or to let the public know when it's happening. but how many articles do you see about organizations not paying players on time, or at all? or about all the shady shit going on in korea? or any of the other shit that freedom of the press would actually be useful for. no, instead you have people posting headlines that will be public information within a matter of days a bit early so they can siphon off a portion of the viewership to justify their own jobs. spend that time reporting on things that need to be reported on, or at least spend it productively on the existing headlines instead of dragging others down with your lazyness. If there is a market, interest, demand, there will always be people who will be more than happy to satisfy it (for money)... people grave for sensation, big announcments etc.; that seems to be what people want and (often times shitty) journalists will provide... I'm just saying it seems to me some guys are complaining that journalists serve a target group on the market which they would prefer have exclusively for their own.... idk... the larger point has been that slasher is riding a thin line between respected journalist and pandering to that audience that just wants to know whatever is happening a day early at the expense of quality and interesting stories. it's bad for the community for him to be providing the cheaper kind of information and it's going to cost him his ability to work as a quality journalist. I don't really get it. What do you guys expect from Slasher? All of a sudden he's a bad reporter doing cheap tricks just because what he's reporting on is hurting you guys? Reporter gets his hands on information, reporter reports this information. Doesn't seem like a strange move to me at all. The fact that it's sensitive information doesn't seem like a good enough reason for him to keep things quiet when he is in fact paid to report anything that gathers him viewers. If your business model relies on information being tight that cannot be kept tight then your business model seems kind of screwed. If information makes its way to a reporter, you cannot expect the reporter to keep quiet. If you lose business because of that then I feel like the burden's on you to fix things and not simply demand that the reporter only continues reporting on issues that are to your liking. There is a different impact that reporting in a major, non-sponsorship based industry has than one that works within the confines of sponsorships. Reporters and journalists working in tech industries or major sports leak things all the time but the company that has its information leaked doesn't care because it is building hype for their team or their product. In esports, the teams are the ones building the hype for their sponsors so they can get paid as advertising machines rather than for the sake of being a sports team. By leaking information that was suppose to be hyped up by the team, you are in effect damaging the relationship between the sponsors and teams because you dampen the effect the team will have on generating page views for sponsors. Slasher did exactly this and EG suffered because of it. He should know better than that. Reporters don't leak. Reporters report. Who leaked the information to Slasher ? That is who you should be crying out against. Either that, or at EG for leading their sponsors to believe that the information was secret, when it clearly was not. Doesn't matter. Slasher was the one who dropped the news. He should have known better. EG is partially at fault for letting the information get through the cracks to slasher but slasher shouldn't have leaked it to the community. You have to realize you are operating on a definition of journalism that isn't really accepted anywhere. What does it matter what definition I am using, its irrelevant to the argument. Slasher "reported" the information and caused EG to lose sponsorship revenue. This type of "reporting" is going to kill esports.
Nah. However, eSports being run by people who have no concept of how the real world works, let alone what journalism is might.
|
On January 17 2013 06:08 Peacecrafts wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 06:04 BlackPanther wrote:
What does it matter what definition I am using, its irrelevant to the argument. Slasher "reported" the information and caused EG to lose sponsorship revenue. This type of "reporting" is going to kill esports. You are blaming the wrong person. It should say "EG "leaked" the information and caused EG to lose sponsorship revenue. This type of "leaking" is going to kill esports (and EG itself)."
I agree that EG is partially to blame. They should have kept their mouths better sealed.
|
On January 17 2013 06:11 BlackPanther wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 06:07 Aulisemia wrote:Doesn't matter. Slasher was the one who dropped the news. He should have known better. EG is partially at fault for letting the information get through the cracks to slasher but slasher shouldn't have leaked it to the community. You've got to be kidding me. "Known better"? It's his job to report news stories for Gamespot. What kind of a fucking statement is "he shouldn't have done his job"? He shouldn't have done his fucking job then if its going to cause damage to the industry. He could have done his job far fucking better. MAINSTREAM JOURNALISM /= ESPORTS JOURNALISM. This is the point. Esports is NOT READY for mainstream type journalism at all.
It's not preventable. No matter what, someone will report on it. It's too great an opportunity. You are arguing in favor of journalists not reporting on something, not just slasher. It's going to happen no matter what, so organizations need to handle it better.
|
On January 17 2013 06:11 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 06:04 BlackPanther wrote:On January 17 2013 05:55 Mohdoo wrote:On January 17 2013 05:48 BlackPanther wrote:On January 17 2013 05:41 Kaitlin wrote:On January 17 2013 05:36 BlackPanther wrote:On January 17 2013 05:11 Linkirvana wrote:On January 17 2013 04:53 IdrA wrote:On January 17 2013 04:42 dr.fahrenheit wrote:On January 17 2013 04:29 IdrA wrote:
[quote]
the cost is justified because we need freedom of information to prevent wrongdoing or to let the public know when it's happening. but how many articles do you see about organizations not paying players on time, or at all? or about all the shady shit going on in korea? or any of the other shit that freedom of the press would actually be useful for.
no, instead you have people posting headlines that will be public information within a matter of days a bit early so they can siphon off a portion of the viewership to justify their own jobs. spend that time reporting on things that need to be reported on, or at least spend it productively on the existing headlines instead of dragging others down with your lazyness. If there is a market, interest, demand, there will always be people who will be more than happy to satisfy it (for money)... people grave for sensation, big announcments etc.; that seems to be what people want and (often times shitty) journalists will provide... I'm just saying it seems to me some guys are complaining that journalists serve a target group on the market which they would prefer have exclusively for their own.... idk... the larger point has been that slasher is riding a thin line between respected journalist and pandering to that audience that just wants to know whatever is happening a day early at the expense of quality and interesting stories. it's bad for the community for him to be providing the cheaper kind of information and it's going to cost him his ability to work as a quality journalist. I don't really get it. What do you guys expect from Slasher? All of a sudden he's a bad reporter doing cheap tricks just because what he's reporting on is hurting you guys? Reporter gets his hands on information, reporter reports this information. Doesn't seem like a strange move to me at all. The fact that it's sensitive information doesn't seem like a good enough reason for him to keep things quiet when he is in fact paid to report anything that gathers him viewers. If your business model relies on information being tight that cannot be kept tight then your business model seems kind of screwed. If information makes its way to a reporter, you cannot expect the reporter to keep quiet. If you lose business because of that then I feel like the burden's on you to fix things and not simply demand that the reporter only continues reporting on issues that are to your liking. There is a different impact that reporting in a major, non-sponsorship based industry has than one that works within the confines of sponsorships. Reporters and journalists working in tech industries or major sports leak things all the time but the company that has its information leaked doesn't care because it is building hype for their team or their product. In esports, the teams are the ones building the hype for their sponsors so they can get paid as advertising machines rather than for the sake of being a sports team. By leaking information that was suppose to be hyped up by the team, you are in effect damaging the relationship between the sponsors and teams because you dampen the effect the team will have on generating page views for sponsors. Slasher did exactly this and EG suffered because of it. He should know better than that. Reporters don't leak. Reporters report. Who leaked the information to Slasher ? That is who you should be crying out against. Either that, or at EG for leading their sponsors to believe that the information was secret, when it clearly was not. Doesn't matter. Slasher was the one who dropped the news. He should have known better. EG is partially at fault for letting the information get through the cracks to slasher but slasher shouldn't have leaked it to the community. You have to realize you are operating on a definition of journalism that isn't really accepted anywhere. What does it matter what definition I am using, its irrelevant to the argument. Slasher "reported" the information and caused EG to lose sponsorship revenue. This type of "reporting" is going to kill esports. Nah. However, eSports being run by people who have no concept of how the real world works, let alone what journalism is might.
Ok then. Propose to me a better solution for esports? How in fuck hell are teams suppose to get revenue other than through sponsorship. Tell me? Subscriptions? People get fickle about 5 dollar PPV for 100s of hours of content so that won't work. T-shirt sales? Maybe a bake sale. Tell me please.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
