So what was the controversy about Doritogate exactly?

I know this is digging up a long dead thing but seriously What was the issue here?

All I just see is product placement and interviews about whats going in Mainstream Gaming. And I have seen the use of Doritos and Mountain Dew as Product Placement for Halo way before this interview happened. I mean I don't even know who exactly is Geoff Keighly or anything. I get the impression that he is the face of Mainstream AAA Gaming Media.

Don't ask me. I had a life back in 2012 and only learned about it 2 years afterwards because of Angry Joe. But let's just say gamers were more uncomfortable with publisher's PR and product placement advertisers having so much control over the gaming press. Nowadays it seems gamers actually defend that control.

It mostly just showed how dominated the games industry was/is by advertisers. He was reviewing the game WHILE he was advertising it AND promoting two other unrelated products at the same time.

Imagine how offputting it would be for a movie review to look like that. yet for a game review, it was merely a little too over-the-top.

What jademunky said. Keep in mind that this was way back, when the discussion about journalistic integrity was still about undue interference from publishers against journalists. This came on the coat tail of the revelation that GameSpot had fired Gerstmann for not giving Kane & Lynch a better review score despite being told so by his editor (because the publisher put ads for the game on GameSpot and pressured GameSpot by threatening to not buy future adspace from them).

At the time DoritoGate was seen as obvious confirmation that many game journalists lacked integrity and had no problems cozying up to game publishers if it meant getting some of that sweet, sweet ad money.

Gethsemani:
What jademunky said. Keep in mind that this was way back, when the discussion about journalistic integrity was still about undue interference from publishers against journalists. This came on the coat tail of the revelation that GameSpot had fired Gerstmann for not giving Kane & Lynch a better review score despite being told so by his editor (because the publisher put ads for the game on GameSpot and pressured GameSpot by threatening to not buy future adspace from them).

At the time DoritoGate was seen as obvious confirmation that many game journalists lacked integrity and had no problems cozying up to game publishers if it meant getting some of that sweet, sweet ad money.

Well that issue is solved with "Mostly" independent youtube reviewers, but than again even most of these people has a problem of living in a bubble.

Samtemdo8:

Well that issue is solved with "Mostly" independent youtube reviewers

How so?

CaitSeith:

Samtemdo8:

Well that issue is solved with "Mostly" independent youtube reviewers

How so?

Yeah I see your point, most of these youtubers are in it for the money.

Samtemdo8:

Well that issue is solved with "Mostly" independent youtube reviewers, but than again even most of these people has a problem of living in a bubble.

As the release of Shadow of Mordor proved, it really didn't. Instead these untrained, uneducated (as far as journalistic ethics go) youtubers made deals with EA to not say or show anything negative about SoM in return for getting to play early. I don't think the problem ever really went away, the actual journalists still get taken on what amounts to paid weekends to play games in luxury locations with fine dining and loot bags and the youtubers make shady deals to get early access to games or exclusive footage to show (or to go to the same events the journalists do).

The only difference is that GamerGate pushed the focus from the interplay between publishers and journalists and onto the journalists political orientation. Prior to 2014 the discussion was about whether it was alright to go on publisher arranged review events as a "real" journalist. After 2014 it was about whether it was alright for a journalist to dock scores because they disagreed with design choices due to their own political or philosophical orientation or whether gaming journalists should write op eds about social justice in gaming.

Keighly was a supposedly objective major journalist/reviewer (even now, he's the host of what is supposed to be *the* Game of the Year awards) doing an obvious paid promotion for a game and its own paid promoters.

As mentioned, this was in the midst of a level of scrutiny over the increasing relation between game journalism and the stuff they were reviewing making up gigantic swathes of their ad revenue, which included someone being fired for giving an unflattering review amidst pressure from the games publishers in form of advertising leverage.

So while game journalism was under fire for being subservient to publishers via advertising, a major face of games journalism appeared in a commercial (essentially) hyping up an advertising promotion for a game. As the actual on-air talent brand to sell the product.

The promotion in general also got a decent bit of flak from the gameing community for the stereotyping sort of nature to it. Where gamers are basement dwelling 20 somethings eating garbage in their parents house. Though that wasn't really the main front of the criticism.

Also there is the fact that a mainstream publication (Forbes?) actually took time and effort to do a little bit of digging and come up with a pretty succinct article (with a catchy title) that basically said "this is a big reason why people do not respect video games as a medium."

*Edit* here it is

https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/10/26/all-the-pretty-doritos-how-video-game-journalism-went-off-the-rails/#426f2d94244d

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here