If Rab stands by that original article (edit: the part about Laura Wainwright) then he is an idiot.
Don't just spout that and go away, why so?
If Rab stands by that original article (edit: the part about Laura Wainwright) then he is an idiot.
gonna?
Yeah, seriously. People in here like to jump to conclusions.
Yeah, seriously. People in here like to jump to conclusions.
I guess i should have said uglier. everyone loves to hate games journalism and now, with that picture and the threat of lawsuits, there is a shitload of blood in the water. should be fun to watch.
How so?
. I have a mental list of games journos who are the very worst of the bunch. The ones who are at every PR launch event, the ones who tweet about all the freebies they get. I am fascinated by them. I won't name them here, because it's a horrible thing to do, but I'm sure some of you will know who they are. I'm fascinated by these creatures because they are living one of the most strange existences - they are playing at being a thing that they don't understand. And if they don't understand it, how can they love it? And if they don't love it, why are they playing at being it?
3
Don't just spout that and go away, why so?
I don't know if he knows Lauren and he has other info that is not included in the original article, but if he had to word it like, paraphrasing: "I'm suspicious, I'm sure it's not true, but the doubt is seeded, but I'm sure is not true" then he should not have included that in the article. As soon as you start naming specific names, there should be no doubt in your mind, or any dubious wording in the article about what you are writing. It's specially stupid when Rab a few paragraphs after the Lauren comment writes this:
He should name the worst of the bunch. If not it's just inconsistent.
You have to have some nerve to be a douchebag, get called out in public for your douchebaggery, and then instead of doing the right thing continue to be an even bigger douchebag.
Rab losing his job over this is insane, and should be a much bigger story than it currently is. Unbelievable.
The way Rab worded it on Twitter made it sound like he decided to quit as a result of his article being edited.The phrasing suggests that Rab quit rather than being fired; that said, I fully understand him having that reaction.
That said, I think there's scope here for a nineteenth column - on this story.
Do you know Lauren?
I don't know if he knows Lauren and he has other info that is not included in the original article, but if he had to word it like, paraphrasing: "I'm suspicious, I'm sure it's not true, but the doubt is seeded, but I'm sure is not true" then he should not have included that in the article.
Under PCC code and libel law, Florence is entirely in the clear on this one. A public quote from twitter is subject to criticism. This even includes the questions of if she is fit to practice or not due to her public quotes. She hasn't got a leg to stand on. If she makes a public statement that is directly quoted. Then she puts it in the public domain and gives the people the right to analyse and criticise her statements. Politician's quotes on twitter are subject to the same and thanks to the Leveson inquiry, so have Journalists (ex-NOTW editor Neil Wallis in particular) and the right to ask is she fit to practice.
It's the threat and high cost of libel lawyers which is making Eurogamer group back down, however. And if you have been a fan of the esteemed organ, Private Eye, over it's lifetime. You know that the threat of a libel suit is used to stifle criticism as the high cost of fighting it is not worth it to a significant amount of publications (Usually accompanied by a letter from everyone's favourite libel solicitors, Carter-Fuck). Which leads to them backing down.I can't imagine Eurogamer group produces the amount of profit needed to fight such a case.
But then ideally Eurogamer should have cited the precedent of Arkell Vs Pressdram, 1971 in response to her because she doesn't have a leg to stand on but money is money.
"Cash Rules Everything Around Me" - Old Staten Island proverb
Mods, change the thread title to "Eurogamer's Lost Credibility".
I don't know if he knows Lauren and he has other info that is not included in the original article, but if he had to word it like, paraphrasing:
One games journalist, Lauren Wainwright, tweeted: "Urm... Trion were giving away PS3s to journalists at the GMAs. Not sure why that's a bad thing?"
Now, a few tweets earlier, she also tweeted this: "Lara header, two TR pix in the gallery and a very subtle TR background. #obsessed @tombraider pic.twitter.com/VOWDSavZ"
And instantly I am suspicious. I am suspicious of this journalist's apparent love for Tomb Raider. I am asking myself whether she's in the pocket of the Tomb Raider PR team. I'm sure she isn't, but the doubt is there. After all, she sees nothing wrong with journalists promoting a game to win a PS3, right?
Either I am missing something or this dude who wrote the column is a dirty fucking hipocrite. "Boo these other guys for not having any integrity, but don't blame Eurogamer for not having any either. I quit my job with them because they don't have any balls and they edited my column but you should not blame them. It's not their fault." What logic is this?
Must be that I'm missing something, right?
Good ol' Ben
Video Games Consultant at Freelance
The Sun - Games Critic at News International
Freelance (IGN, Future Publishing, Uncooked Media, PlayBoy, Square Enix, News International, CBS)
Either I am missing something or this dude who wrote the column is a dirty fucking hipocrite. "Boo these other guys for not having any integrity, but don't blame Eurogamer for not having any either. I quit my job with them because they don't have any balls and they edited my column but you should not blame them. It's not their fault." What logic is this?
Must be that I'm missing something, right?
Just some baseline analysis
Statements of fact. Dig into the twitter records and see if it's true/justifiable. If deleted, check with twitter itself; pretty sure they archive that shit.
Statement of opinion. Probably a subject matter of common interest. Based on fair facts, as above. Could hit an honest opinion defence, or maybe even a limited privilege defence, don't know how the specifics work in the UK.
I can't myself see a legit case for Wainswright's lawyers... I wonder if she merely threatened legal action and hoped they didn't call her bluff, or if there's some other stuff we're not seeing.
I was just looking up some of here work, as I admit I've never heard her name mentioned before now and came across this linked from her website:
http://journalisted.com/lauren-wainwright
She just hid her account, but she did say those tweets and I'm pretty sure she threaten action rather than call anyone in, she had a tweet saying how a Media law course had been useful.
This makes no goddamn sense.
The point being made was that once you use your twitter feed as paid marketing, which is basically what tweeting good things about a game in order to win a prize is, any rational human being should question any other tweets you make about games being good.
You clearly are...
If anything, the fact that he walked gives him solid integrity.
You need to cut a voucher off of a bottle of Mountain Dew to see her tweets now.