It was bound the happen – that being the influx of
rumor and gossip pages on the Internet related to computer games. In truth, these sites
are nothing more than digital versions of columns such as "Sushi-X" and
"Quarterman" that appeared years ago in popular videogame magazines such as EGM.
In a nutshell, these sites spread industry scuttlebutt across the Internet and often add a
serious dose of no-holds-barred opinions to game news. Indeed what is happening to the
game industry in this regard is no different than what Ain’t It Cool News did to the
movie industry: Make everyone aware that a single gamer can make a huge difference on the
Internet. Should we applaud these insider news sites or dismiss them as
controversy-friendly trash?
I’ve always believed that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and I
personally love to hear other perspectives on important issues in gaming. One of the main
reasons I write a daily editorial is so I can speak my mind and offer my opinion. Whether
others agree with what I have to say or not is a secondary consideration. In many ways I
am very excited to see so many gamers posting their raw opinions on issues surrounding the
industry online. I think this is a healthy trend because it removes a lot of the PR gloss
that is put on most of the news we read on gaming sites. Editorializing the news is
certainly a positive trend and can spur important debates.
However, some of these sites have turned into avenues for companies to air their dirty
laundry against each other, and in many ways I don’t see a lot of service in creating
what amounts to a third-party flame service.
This is why in some ways I’m opposed to someone from a game company deciding to
run a rumor site, because there is a clear element of bias already present. As the editor
of this site, I receive a lot of information and insider gossip that is never posted here,
because it isn’t appropriate and was divulged with confidence that it would not be
spread across the Internet. As such, I often think very long and hard before posting
certain stories. I worry that some of these sites are starting to turn into anonymous
venues where true insider information is disclosed that would never have been gained by
the source if it was known the news would be posted on the Internet.
Additionally, the question of what is news can be debated – I think a lot of these
rumor sites post information that is never confirmed nor verified by a second source. I
should note that I don’t mind rumors being posted online so long as they are clearly
labeled as such and not obtained through somewhat questionable means (i.e. taking
something that was supposed to be off the record and all of the sudden turning it into a
rumor). The Internet is a free form of information dissemination and if these sites
didn’t exist to air rumors, people would just go on USENET and post them.
I think that over time a lot of these newer sites will establish reputations and this
will help weed out what sites are clearly out there just to inflame the industry and which
are there to actually discuss important issues. Unfortunately, in the hyper-competitive
realm of online game coverage, I’m worried that some of these sites may end up
lowering themselves to tabloid-esque levels.
Perhaps the most important consideration with these sites is the "cloak of
anonymity" that they all decide to use, masking their identities to the public.
Although I can understand why these authors try to do this, it is also troubling for an
editor such as myself who puts his name on every editorial he writes. I’m accountable
for what’s written here on GameSlice and in many ways that helps make sure that I
check into every story I want to post. However, the accountability for these anonymous
webmasters is much less, because no one knows who they really are and as such there is an
element of mystery surrounding whom to complain to. If I were running this site under an
alias, I would probably be less concerned about the validity of what I was posting,
because I could always change my alias. Sure, people may not agree with what I have to say
– an in many cases are very vocal about it – but at least I’m putting my
name on what I’m saying. The cloak of anonymity may be necessary in some cases, but
I’ve always believed you should be willing to state your opinion and be willing to
put your name on it. That’s why I have more respect for someone like Matt Drudge who
is willing to reveal his identity rather than someone who posts under an alias and keeps
his/her identity secret.
So, are insider gaming sites a good thing? In many ways I think so, but to the same
point I’d like to see them checking into their stories a little more and not just
posting any e-mail that arrives in their inbox. (I’m not trying to insinuate any of
these sites are doing this, but I’m sure there is a strong temptation to do so). I do
believe that editorializing the news is a good thing so long as it is labeled as such. In
many ways I wish more people would be willing to state their opinion and not just sit on
the fence day in and day out. I know for a fact a lot of journalists don’t bother
forming opinions on a lot of issues, or keep them quiet for fear of upsetting a company or
developer. To me, you aren’t true to yourself unless you are willing to state your
opinion. Thus, insider gaming sites are a double-edged sword: They present brutally honest
renditions of news but at the same time they always have to be viewed as rumor sites and
not fact. Keep this in mind, and I think they are a positive addition to the Internet, so
long as the webmasters realize they have a reputation – albeit anonymous -- to uphold
too.
