|
Please make sure to read the statement from Naniwa that is linked in the full article before commenting. |
On December 09 2011 20:43 turdburgler wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2011 19:52 EZSkull wrote:On December 09 2011 18:57 Full.tilt wrote:On December 09 2011 12:49 Piledriver wrote:On December 09 2011 11:49 Spicy_Curry wrote:On December 09 2011 11:43 aMies wrote:On December 09 2011 11:37 Hydroxyl wrote:On December 09 2011 11:26 RudePlague wrote:
The anonymous source thing is borderline slander, it offers no information and is at best just gossip spreading.
"Some guy said Naniwa is a p.o.s."
I counter with "I heard from an anonymous source that ESFI is in the pocket of coL and is staffed by terrible writers with no morals who should be ashamed to call themselves journalists."
I hope the community really goes to town on them for this as it's not good enough and we shouldn't accept it regardless of what we think about Naniwa.
Considering ESFI has Complexity ads on every page of their website I'm not surprised to see them releasing such "unbiased" articles featuring "secret informations"... Before this statement goes any further, we are in no way associated with ESFI's operations. According to an anonymous source you are lying. HMM i dont know who to believe now. Maybe you should get an editor like most journalism oriented business'? User was temp banned for this post. Do you actually read any newspapers or sites outside of e-sports ones? Seriously? Reputed journals and newspapers use anonymous sources ALL THE TIME, especially to protect the identity of the source. I mean NaNiwa is such a successful player that if some other player came out and said his feelings openly about NaNiwa, the community would roast that source alive. They do, although usually it's not to make a cowardly personal attack. It has happened. People have used sources to get information on someone and they print the information they get. For example, let's say the Yankees release Jeter from his contract. The New York finds a source, who doesn't want to be named because they know Jeter personally. Lets say that source says Jeter has been hurting the moral in the locker room because of his recent change in attitude. It's happened, that kind of stuff has been printed before. so your argument is that anon sources are ok because mainstream media does it? phone hacking is ok because mainstream media does it? the list goes on. "other people do it" has never been a good enough argument. if people who are knowledgable about the insider dealings but are aware that they shouldnt be speaking, are speaking then esfiworld should inform the relevent people. the chances are they are under contract to not disclose inside complexity information. so either they are breaching contract or they are breaching nani's trust. i dont see why they are put on a pedestal and protected as if they are the good guys.
It's OK because it gives people information in a story without hurting the person giving the information. I don't see what's wrong with using a source, as long as they are credible, and putting them down as anonymous. Journalists can use this tactic, it protects the source, but still gets the information out there as part of the story they are writing. I don't see anything wrong with that other then people not liking it because it's against a player they like. Oh well.
|
On December 09 2011 20:18 ggahSoO wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2011 19:52 EZSkull wrote:On December 09 2011 18:57 Full.tilt wrote:On December 09 2011 12:49 Piledriver wrote:On December 09 2011 11:49 Spicy_Curry wrote:On December 09 2011 11:43 aMies wrote:On December 09 2011 11:37 Hydroxyl wrote:On December 09 2011 11:26 RudePlague wrote:
The anonymous source thing is borderline slander, it offers no information and is at best just gossip spreading.
"Some guy said Naniwa is a p.o.s."
I counter with "I heard from an anonymous source that ESFI is in the pocket of coL and is staffed by terrible writers with no morals who should be ashamed to call themselves journalists."
I hope the community really goes to town on them for this as it's not good enough and we shouldn't accept it regardless of what we think about Naniwa.
Considering ESFI has Complexity ads on every page of their website I'm not surprised to see them releasing such "unbiased" articles featuring "secret informations"... Before this statement goes any further, we are in no way associated with ESFI's operations. According to an anonymous source you are lying. HMM i dont know who to believe now. Maybe you should get an editor like most journalism oriented business'? User was temp banned for this post. Do you actually read any newspapers or sites outside of e-sports ones? Seriously? Reputed journals and newspapers use anonymous sources ALL THE TIME, especially to protect the identity of the source. I mean NaNiwa is such a successful player that if some other player came out and said his feelings openly about NaNiwa, the community would roast that source alive. They do, although usually it's not to make a cowardly personal attack. It has happened. People have used sources to get information on someone and they print the information they get. For example, let's say the Yankees release Jeter from his contract. The New York finds a source, who doesn't want to be named because they know Jeter personally. Lets say that source says Jeter has been hurting the moral in the locker room because of his recent change in attitude. It's happened, that kind of stuff has been printed before. But that's not what the source in the ESFI article said. The source simply commented negatively on Nani's behavior and personality, which is fine, but then made a personal attack and said that he had mental problems and should get checked out by a shrink. If you honestly see quotes like the second part in reputable newspapers, please show me. Saying Jeter is hurting the moral in the locker room is nothing compared to saying someone needs to see a shrink. That's a downright attack.
The second portion of the quote was wrong and shouldn't have been used. But the rest of the quote up until the last part, should and was used correctly. You are correct. I'm more or less commenting on the fact that people are arguing that you can't use an anonymous source.
|
On December 10 2011 07:26 EZSkull wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2011 20:18 ggahSoO wrote:On December 09 2011 19:52 EZSkull wrote:On December 09 2011 18:57 Full.tilt wrote:On December 09 2011 12:49 Piledriver wrote:On December 09 2011 11:49 Spicy_Curry wrote:On December 09 2011 11:43 aMies wrote:On December 09 2011 11:37 Hydroxyl wrote:On December 09 2011 11:26 RudePlague wrote:
The anonymous source thing is borderline slander, it offers no information and is at best just gossip spreading.
"Some guy said Naniwa is a p.o.s."
I counter with "I heard from an anonymous source that ESFI is in the pocket of coL and is staffed by terrible writers with no morals who should be ashamed to call themselves journalists."
I hope the community really goes to town on them for this as it's not good enough and we shouldn't accept it regardless of what we think about Naniwa.
Considering ESFI has Complexity ads on every page of their website I'm not surprised to see them releasing such "unbiased" articles featuring "secret informations"... Before this statement goes any further, we are in no way associated with ESFI's operations. According to an anonymous source you are lying. HMM i dont know who to believe now. Maybe you should get an editor like most journalism oriented business'? User was temp banned for this post. Do you actually read any newspapers or sites outside of e-sports ones? Seriously? Reputed journals and newspapers use anonymous sources ALL THE TIME, especially to protect the identity of the source. I mean NaNiwa is such a successful player that if some other player came out and said his feelings openly about NaNiwa, the community would roast that source alive. They do, although usually it's not to make a cowardly personal attack. It has happened. People have used sources to get information on someone and they print the information they get. For example, let's say the Yankees release Jeter from his contract. The New York finds a source, who doesn't want to be named because they know Jeter personally. Lets say that source says Jeter has been hurting the moral in the locker room because of his recent change in attitude. It's happened, that kind of stuff has been printed before. But that's not what the source in the ESFI article said. The source simply commented negatively on Nani's behavior and personality, which is fine, but then made a personal attack and said that he had mental problems and should get checked out by a shrink. If you honestly see quotes like the second part in reputable newspapers, please show me. Saying Jeter is hurting the moral in the locker room is nothing compared to saying someone needs to see a shrink. That's a downright attack. The second portion of the quote was wrong and shouldn't have been used. But the rest of the quote up until the last part, should and was used correctly. You are correct. I'm more or less commenting on the fact that people are arguing that you can't use an anonymous source. I've seen it debated by journalists and professors more than once and the press ethical part seem to be pretty clear. The short version is usually something like this:
-You can use anonymous sources for publishing information but you better be sure it's correct if it's sensitive information because you are putting your credibility on the line.
-You generally don't use anonymous sources for publishing opinions.
|
On December 10 2011 07:07 -_- wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 07:04 aMies wrote:On December 10 2011 07:02 -_- wrote:So, I just went to complexity's site to see what their roster was. On the page where you can mouse over the players, each player had a quote attributed to them. Half of the quotes are famous maxims, but beneath them they put the players name. "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit" Ryan "Aristotle" Rushia I completely understand that the webmaster likely asked each player to "give a quote that resonates with you." They're certainly not trying to plagiarize Aristotle. But it just struck me as hilarious. Sort of like when you see the picture of Harry Potter saying "You shall not pass" --Dumbledore. http://www.complexitygaming.com/roster/ Yes, we do ask each player to provide a quote of their choice. This can be a famous quote that resonates with them, or it can be something in their own words. No disrespect was meant. I just went in assuming they were all player quotes and got a huge smile.
None taken at all.
|
On December 10 2011 07:47 Akta wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 07:26 EZSkull wrote:On December 09 2011 20:18 ggahSoO wrote:On December 09 2011 19:52 EZSkull wrote:On December 09 2011 18:57 Full.tilt wrote:On December 09 2011 12:49 Piledriver wrote:On December 09 2011 11:49 Spicy_Curry wrote:On December 09 2011 11:43 aMies wrote:On December 09 2011 11:37 Hydroxyl wrote:On December 09 2011 11:26 RudePlague wrote:
The anonymous source thing is borderline slander, it offers no information and is at best just gossip spreading.
"Some guy said Naniwa is a p.o.s."
I counter with "I heard from an anonymous source that ESFI is in the pocket of coL and is staffed by terrible writers with no morals who should be ashamed to call themselves journalists."
I hope the community really goes to town on them for this as it's not good enough and we shouldn't accept it regardless of what we think about Naniwa.
Considering ESFI has Complexity ads on every page of their website I'm not surprised to see them releasing such "unbiased" articles featuring "secret informations"... Before this statement goes any further, we are in no way associated with ESFI's operations. According to an anonymous source you are lying. HMM i dont know who to believe now. Maybe you should get an editor like most journalism oriented business'? User was temp banned for this post. Do you actually read any newspapers or sites outside of e-sports ones? Seriously? Reputed journals and newspapers use anonymous sources ALL THE TIME, especially to protect the identity of the source. I mean NaNiwa is such a successful player that if some other player came out and said his feelings openly about NaNiwa, the community would roast that source alive. They do, although usually it's not to make a cowardly personal attack. It has happened. People have used sources to get information on someone and they print the information they get. For example, let's say the Yankees release Jeter from his contract. The New York finds a source, who doesn't want to be named because they know Jeter personally. Lets say that source says Jeter has been hurting the moral in the locker room because of his recent change in attitude. It's happened, that kind of stuff has been printed before. But that's not what the source in the ESFI article said. The source simply commented negatively on Nani's behavior and personality, which is fine, but then made a personal attack and said that he had mental problems and should get checked out by a shrink. If you honestly see quotes like the second part in reputable newspapers, please show me. Saying Jeter is hurting the moral in the locker room is nothing compared to saying someone needs to see a shrink. That's a downright attack. The second portion of the quote was wrong and shouldn't have been used. But the rest of the quote up until the last part, should and was used correctly. You are correct. I'm more or less commenting on the fact that people are arguing that you can't use an anonymous source. I've seen it debated by journalists and professors more than once and the press ethical part seem to be pretty clear. The short version is usually something like this: -You can use anonymous sources for publishing information but you better be sure it's correct if it's sensitive information because you are putting your credibility on the line. -You generally don't use anonymous sources for publishing opinions.
Problem is, ethics vary from place to place. What one editor might not find wrong, another might and won't put it into print. I've had my professor tell me multiple times for stuff I've written that he wouldn't put stuff into print, but knows others would, it's a grey area.
|
Don't like it when people say players were 'sold' seems disrespectful as if they are an object. they should rather use the word 'hired' or 'employed' as starcraft is a job/sport
|
So... did we find out anything more on F Slasher?
|
On December 10 2011 08:10 Skiblet wrote:
Don't like it when people say players were 'sold' seems disrespectful as if they are an object. they should rather use the word 'hired' or 'employed' as starcraft is a job/sport
Honesly, I think that "sold" describe perfectly what happened considering complexity made it clear it was their decision alone.
|
I'd probably say this guy and demuslim are my favourite players. After reading his statement I can definetely understand his reason for joining QxG and I feel happy for him as well. All the best to the fella, seeing him lose so much weight in korea really did kickstart me getting into shape myself.
|
On December 10 2011 07:58 EZSkull wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 07:47 Akta wrote:On December 10 2011 07:26 EZSkull wrote:On December 09 2011 20:18 ggahSoO wrote:On December 09 2011 19:52 EZSkull wrote:On December 09 2011 18:57 Full.tilt wrote:On December 09 2011 12:49 Piledriver wrote:On December 09 2011 11:49 Spicy_Curry wrote:On December 09 2011 11:43 aMies wrote:On December 09 2011 11:37 Hydroxyl wrote:
[quote]
Considering ESFI has Complexity ads on every page of their website I'm not surprised to see them releasing such "unbiased" articles featuring "secret informations"... Before this statement goes any further, we are in no way associated with ESFI's operations. According to an anonymous source you are lying. HMM i dont know who to believe now. Maybe you should get an editor like most journalism oriented business'? User was temp banned for this post. Do you actually read any newspapers or sites outside of e-sports ones? Seriously? Reputed journals and newspapers use anonymous sources ALL THE TIME, especially to protect the identity of the source. I mean NaNiwa is such a successful player that if some other player came out and said his feelings openly about NaNiwa, the community would roast that source alive. They do, although usually it's not to make a cowardly personal attack. It has happened. People have used sources to get information on someone and they print the information they get. For example, let's say the Yankees release Jeter from his contract. The New York finds a source, who doesn't want to be named because they know Jeter personally. Lets say that source says Jeter has been hurting the moral in the locker room because of his recent change in attitude. It's happened, that kind of stuff has been printed before. But that's not what the source in the ESFI article said. The source simply commented negatively on Nani's behavior and personality, which is fine, but then made a personal attack and said that he had mental problems and should get checked out by a shrink. If you honestly see quotes like the second part in reputable newspapers, please show me. Saying Jeter is hurting the moral in the locker room is nothing compared to saying someone needs to see a shrink. That's a downright attack. The second portion of the quote was wrong and shouldn't have been used. But the rest of the quote up until the last part, should and was used correctly. You are correct. I'm more or less commenting on the fact that people are arguing that you can't use an anonymous source. I've seen it debated by journalists and professors more than once and the press ethical part seem to be pretty clear. The short version is usually something like this: -You can use anonymous sources for publishing information but you better be sure it's correct if it's sensitive information because you are putting your credibility on the line. -You generally don't use anonymous sources for publishing opinions. Problem is, ethics vary from place to place. What one editor might not find wrong, another might and won't put it into print. I've had my professor tell me multiple times for stuff I've written that he wouldn't put stuff into print, but knows others would, it's a grey area.
Well, if you use the newsrooms of Rupert Murdoch as a starting point for figuring out the ethics of journalism, then yeah, allowing an anonymous source describing the subject of your story needing mental help with no other backing than "we know him", may be a grey area. If however you would like to keep yourself better than being a lying, deceiving arm of PR with an everything goes approach, then well, it's really just black. But it's pretty simple really. You can't trust esfi-world. It's a site with an obvious agenda. End of story.
I'll just repost what I wrote on their site:
+ Show Spoiler +Yes, anonymous sources are used in journalism, but they're used (or supposed to be used) as a last resort in a situation where the source would face serious repercussions in her private or professional life if she were to appear by name and no other sources willing to talk 'on the record' are available. Furthermore, it is supposed to be used only in situations in which the gravity of the situation calls for the use of an anonymous source. That is, you have to ask yourself, is this story important enough to allow anonymity? Typically, this is the case in investigative reporting, where the subject of your story may be in a position of power and able to retaliate against the source.
Why this guarding against using anonymity? Well, because of the problems it creates. How can you trust the source and what the source is saying, when the source is not willing to stand by his words in public? How can we trust his impartiality? How can we trust that there's no conflict of interest? Ultimately, how can we trust what is written?
If this sounds a bit high-aired for an article about e-sports, I suppose it might be. But esfiworld presents itself as a credible source of journalism, and is usually, by esports standards, producers of high quality material.
But here they've dropped the ball. They've allowed an anonymous source to make a statement of opinion ("LOL naniwa totally sucks!") and apparently for no other reason than to underline how terrible a person naniwa is. It's a hit-piece in support of the powerful, naniwas previous employee, aimed at the powerless, the player who've been 'sold'.
How that can be celebrated as a great piece of journalism is beyond me.
|
On December 10 2011 07:58 EZSkull wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 07:47 Akta wrote:On December 10 2011 07:26 EZSkull wrote:On December 09 2011 20:18 ggahSoO wrote:On December 09 2011 19:52 EZSkull wrote:On December 09 2011 18:57 Full.tilt wrote:On December 09 2011 12:49 Piledriver wrote:On December 09 2011 11:49 Spicy_Curry wrote:On December 09 2011 11:43 aMies wrote:On December 09 2011 11:37 Hydroxyl wrote:
[quote]
Considering ESFI has Complexity ads on every page of their website I'm not surprised to see them releasing such "unbiased" articles featuring "secret informations"... Before this statement goes any further, we are in no way associated with ESFI's operations. According to an anonymous source you are lying. HMM i dont know who to believe now. Maybe you should get an editor like most journalism oriented business'? User was temp banned for this post. Do you actually read any newspapers or sites outside of e-sports ones? Seriously? Reputed journals and newspapers use anonymous sources ALL THE TIME, especially to protect the identity of the source. I mean NaNiwa is such a successful player that if some other player came out and said his feelings openly about NaNiwa, the community would roast that source alive. They do, although usually it's not to make a cowardly personal attack. It has happened. People have used sources to get information on someone and they print the information they get. For example, let's say the Yankees release Jeter from his contract. The New York finds a source, who doesn't want to be named because they know Jeter personally. Lets say that source says Jeter has been hurting the moral in the locker room because of his recent change in attitude. It's happened, that kind of stuff has been printed before. But that's not what the source in the ESFI article said. The source simply commented negatively on Nani's behavior and personality, which is fine, but then made a personal attack and said that he had mental problems and should get checked out by a shrink. If you honestly see quotes like the second part in reputable newspapers, please show me. Saying Jeter is hurting the moral in the locker room is nothing compared to saying someone needs to see a shrink. That's a downright attack. The second portion of the quote was wrong and shouldn't have been used. But the rest of the quote up until the last part, should and was used correctly. You are correct. I'm more or less commenting on the fact that people are arguing that you can't use an anonymous source. I've seen it debated by journalists and professors more than once and the press ethical part seem to be pretty clear. The short version is usually something like this: -You can use anonymous sources for publishing information but you better be sure it's correct if it's sensitive information because you are putting your credibility on the line. -You generally don't use anonymous sources for publishing opinions. Problem is, ethics vary from place to place. What one editor might not find wrong, another might and won't put it into print. I've had my professor tell me multiple times for stuff I've written that he wouldn't put stuff into print, but knows others would, it's a grey area. It varies of course and there are grey areas but that doesn't mean all scenarios are in grey areas in good journalism. Can take some basic examples on use of anonymous sources:
-Public figure X is beating his wife.
Sensitive information and potentially criminal to publish.
-Public figure X is an idiot.
Useless opinion without substance.
-Public figure X did this and that and is therefore an idiot.
Information(possibly sensitive) with useless opinion.
When someone has an opinion about something the journalistic value is normally in the specific person, not the opinion itself on it's own. If it's important you can put the source into a lot of context and add substance to the opinion but then we are back where we started. As in, the source is not completely anonymous anymore and the opinion changed to information.
Like you said, anyone might publish anything but that doesn't mean everything is good journalism. And it's not interesting for readers to read things that lack substance and context either.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, he tells his version of what happened, not particularly sure why that is more believable than what else has been thrown around, given naniwa's history. I'm sure what he said is true for the most part, but it's probably a sanitized version of the events.
|
On December 10 2011 01:31 FXOpen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 01:05 Choboo wrote:On December 10 2011 00:58 WhiteraCares wrote:
So uh, let's say Quantic fires Naniwa in the future; Is there ANY foreign teams left that he could join that hes has not already been kicked/fired/transfered/etc from except EG and TL?
Hes running out of options...And a career it seems. Millenium? Mouz? Reign? Fnatic? Acer? fixed for you
This really isn't necessary....
My mind is being blown by how silly some team officials are acting recently...
|
I heard that Naniwa is a piece of shit on account of he is a piece of shit.
User was banned for this post.
|
Observation: Jason Lake's statement making reference to Naniwa "not shar[ing] the core values of compLexity" is a remarkably direct jab. Usually, in these kinds of situations, everyone involved finds more neutrally polite things to say about each other. It's a sign that, regardless of what happened, their relationship probably deteriorated quite a bit before this step.
|
I'm glad that Naniwa came out and explained why he is changing teams because i think he does come off as a cold person to a lot of people, including myself, and I think a lot more people will respect his decision knowing it was not just that Complexity didn't want to deal with him anymore, but rather it was for reasons have to do with both his career as well as personal reasons.
I know that when I first saw that he moved teams I thought to myself "there he goes again!" just like I do when Major/Princess/Kitty/CuteAngel etc changes teams lol. But hearing his reasons I think it was a good thing that he moved and I wish him the best of luck!
|
I really must say that I respect Naniwa a lot by hearing him admit that he comes off as cold and harsh in interviews, but that he is actually lonely at heart. That just proves that no matter what somebody seems like on the outside, their core values on the inside remain unshaken.
With that said, I am actually very excited for Quantic Gaming, and I think they have a very good shot now at becoming one of the most dominant foreign teams out there. Congrats Johan & QxG!
|
On December 10 2011 09:49 Brett wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 01:31 FXOpen wrote:On December 10 2011 01:05 Choboo wrote:On December 10 2011 00:58 WhiteraCares wrote:
So uh, let's say Quantic fires Naniwa in the future; Is there ANY foreign teams left that he could join that hes has not already been kicked/fired/transfered/etc from except EG and TL?
Hes running out of options...And a career it seems. Millenium? Mouz? Reign? Fnatic? Acer? fixed for you My mind is being blown by how silly some team officials are acting recently...
Yeah but in the case of Complexity you can't say that's somehting being recent they alway treated players like livestock that could be hired, sold or sued depending on their mood.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
