I'm concerned about Bethesda's Kotaku blacklist (http://kotaku.com/a-price-of-games-journalism-1743526293) because iot smacks of public manipulation. I wonder if Bethesda relaizes that what they are doing is hindering journalism. It is childish and unprofessional to react this way just because you don't like or agree with what the article states. if your product is better than what they say, wouldn't that play out when the audience got it's habds on it? Why not at that time expect new information to be written in a more positive fashin instead of taking the ugly route of attacking the new medium - which makes it look like your trying to control the viewpoints of the public by bullying midia outlets. I hope you think hard about what you are doing - and relaize that any time you are react the same way Ubisoft is you MUST be in the wrong!

I don't know what your PR department is thinking - but this is giving Bethesda a bad look. It looks like your trying to suppress the press and only want to co-operate with those who kiss up to you. The fact that it is information you did not want to be leaked is no excuse. They are journalists and their job s to report to the public, not help you hype. Even if the information was wrong (which it wasn't) or something that might change - at the time it was true and was verified and was fit to be reported. I hope you show some class and apologize for reacting brashly - looking back it didn't hurt your sales anyway - did it? (Which is still no excuse for not co-operating with the press).

That's what happens when you break an agreement you had nothing to do with (sarcasm). You're right, how Bethesda handled that was dumb. Oh ya and thank God for Jim.

Kotaku blacklisted.... "And nothing of value what lost" meme should be inserted here.

They revealed confidential information from the company, and you expect Bethesda to do nothing about it? They used shady journalism practices and now they are paying for it. And don't cry too much for them, since their parent company is going bankrupt in less than one year (for unrelated to games issues), that site already has a time bomb on it.

Well it's a free world, and people have the right to ignore each other. This is nothing compared to being black listed by the cops or a hospital or etc. Although the article do state that they aren't black listed because they liked or didn't like a review, but because they published internal e-mails and pictures. If someone published private e-mails between me and a friend, I would be pissed. To give you an example, Quentin Tarantino was working on a movie, and one of his workers leaked part of the script, which ended up in an article. Quentin decided to drop the movie entirely because his movie lost the effect of surprise for it's viewers.

From that Kotaku article you linked, it sounds like Kotaku is freely and openly engaging in industrial espionage and Bethesda is doing what they can to protect their secrets. Why is this a problem for either company?

I'd like to know about those shady journalism practices in regards to this case, please.

You are clearly quite confused here. There is absolutely no requirement (legal or moral) that any private individual or corporation "co-operate with the press". Nor is simply ignoring someone "bullying".

As an ostensibly journalistic outlet (I mean "lawl games journalism" is appropriate here), Kotaku have a right to report leaks as long as they're not actulally violating a contract.

But likewise, Bethesda have a right not to deal with Kotaku if they feel their business is damaged by said leaks.

I don't think either party is doing anything wrong, except that Kotaku whining about it makes them look childish.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2zaW1sQg0M

Nicely sums up my feelings on the matter.

In principle it's bad, but Kotaku has published more than a few inflammatory articles in the past without much basis in fact. Publishers are in no way required to provide such sites with the noose with which they will be hung.

Im not professing o be a legal expert, but what I am thinking here is it cannot be "legal" for a CORPORATION (which is a public entity) to offer media information to one media outlet and not another. That is an attampt to sway public opinion for one's selfish gain, and that is NOT legal. Also, Kotaku and no other journalistic venue should have any "contract" with the companies or entities they report on. That inhibits them from reporting without stain. Journalists only responsibility is to the public, and to safeguard the public. It doesn't matter what the situation is, a bad game or a nuclear assault, good journalism is good journalism. As far as a private individual not having to cooperate with the press... haven't you ever heard about "private individuals" who had charges levied against them for lying to the press? Bethesda is not just "ignoring" kotaku, they are enacting revenge on them and they are denying them information that they are sharing with other media outlets. They are trying to punish them for doing something they didn't like, and sharing information that it is BETHESDA'S FAULT for being released in the first place. bethesda GAVE THEM that info, Kotaku didn't steal it - and then Bethesda expected Kotaku to keep it secret, which didn't happen because to do so would have compromised Kotaku's principles as responsible journalism, which resulted in Bethesda doing something uncharacteristically childish and blacklisting Kotaku.

I think the result Bethesda is looking for is for the writer to get fired. But that would be hurtful to all media outlets because it send the message that "If you don't write pretty about us, this will happen to you...". I'm sure Bethesda knows this - and it is shameful. if you didn't have anything to report in the first place, nothing would have been reported. Don't blame Kotaku - it's YOUR FAULT and you should handle it internally, not take it out on people who are doing what they are supposed to do.

Neither of those is anything like illegal in any country I can think of. In fact they're both absolutely commonplace.

There is nothing magical about the media as they relate to private citizens or corporations, their only real (and necessary) protections are against interference by government.

"To sway public opinion for personal gain," isn't that literally what a company's marketing and PR departments do?

And I'm pretty sure its not illegal to refuse to talk to journalists.

Personally? It's a messed-up relationship. No one is ever totally angelic in these cases. The enthusiast gaming press generally is more interested in stirring up controversy and getting clicks than reporting "news."

Kotaku is hardly the New York Times, here.

And gaming companies are generally known to favor those sites that will get them good press (which is hardly surprising.)

Anyone remember that debacle when Shadows of Mordor released and to get a review copy, press had to agree to this whole laundry list of things to specifically gush about?

So we're to become outraged because Kotaku writes an article on it's website claiming that it's being unfairly mistreated by these major video game companies? I'm not really buying it.

In my opinion Kotaku has engaged in some questionable practices itself in the past, so I'm certainly not surprised to see them now having issues with outside companies/sources and then publicly playing the victim card for it's readers and supporters.

Its not a secret for a long time that anti-social media are a tool for PR and marketing depts of companies to spread their version or reality, which is esssiantially a lie in most cases. My first contact with twitter was on F4 launch coz i decided to see whats going on and what I have seen was a total mess. Tens or maybe hundreds of bot accounts spamming non stop somethin that even cant be called content. It was just junk. I was trying to ask something in a hope that some real person will answer. It failed. I answered something that looked like real person - it failed in terms of communication. Anti social media are junkyard, a waste dumpster that needs to be avoided. They are useful in one way however. If you have a problem, with a product go and describe it. You will get attention fast because your post is ruining this alternate reality they trying to create and sell.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVXJmfd3cmg&t=0m5s

Here we go.

No sympathy for Kotaku whatsoever.

Kotaku is getting everything it deserves. It leaks a company's private data on an unfinished work then expects free things and favour from the company? Get the hell out of here. Bethesda isn't in the wrong here. Kotaku may have a 'right' to publish those leaks, but they're reaping what they sowed. In the words of my man Andronicus above me, no sympathy for Kotaku whatsoever.

The people that work at Kotaku mostly fail to write good articles anyways most of it is just sensationalized clickbait which is the big problem with journalism in the first place.

If they did not sign an NDA Kotaku has no real obligation to not reveal the information they get their hands on, nor does Bethesda have any obligation to to interact with them. All this case really does is serve to highlight once more that gaming press in general is too reliant on its symbiotic relationship with developer and publisher PR to fuel their business.

No sympathy for Kotaku at all.

They didn't have to share the text of the dialogue script.

I'm not at all surprised that Bethesda were upset.

Wow. Maybe it's time I get a lawyer and sue every company advertisemant I saw on TV, every biased news organization and every politician speech I heard!

A corporation is not a public entity. Even if it is publicly traded on the stock market, a corporation is a PRIVATE entity.

I read through most of the article and came away with this: Where is journalism's responsibility? Does a scoop trump good sense?

From their article:

So they leak info not for public consumption. I would ignore them, too. I'd also scour my own house to find that leak. Heads would roll.

Now, I realize this is not some "top secret" info getting published, but Kotaku has shown they lack the wisdom to use their info wisely. What did their article do for gaming? Was it so "newsworthy" that they felt breaking a company's silence was more important than keep good faith with them? A resounding "Yes!" answers that question. Consequences for actions are all too often ignored these days.

I'd blacklist Kotaku, too.

Kotaku is just tabloid trash, owned by the same outfit that runs Gawker and Deadspin, only interested in publishing sensationalistic, agenda-driven, borderline libelous rubbish meant to stoke the perpetual outrage machine and generate page clicks.

It's a festering boil on the ass of an industry (games "journalism") that is itself a festering boil on the ass of humanity.

Bethesda and I have more in common then I thought.

Agreed.

They knew Bethesda wouldn't like it if they leaked information, but they did it anyway and are now surprised there were consequences? What the hell did they expect, a 'thank you' card from Bethesda? They acted like an immature brat and got grounded, as they deserved.

Here's a good piece about the whole thing; http://www.gamezone.com/originals/opinion-no-kotaku-you-weren-t-blacklisted-for-speaking-the-truth-jxh2

But it's ok for the press to not be co-operating with Bethesda and spread leaks?

You mean the http://kotaku.com/fallout-4-the-kotaku-review-1743410637? Oh yeah, that's a bad viewpoint they don't want.

And there's no bullying involved, infact there's nothing going on. All they get from Bethesda is silence. They get nothing. And now they are upset because they got nothing. Cause they want free swag.

What selfish gain? Bethesda gain nothing on this. Instead there are people like you who are upset at Bethesda because Kotaku was childish and expected to be able to eat the whole cake and keep it. That's the only thing they have gained, upset people.

How do you know? Bethesda been quiet about the whole thing. Considering the amount of leaks kotaku been spreading over the years, it's no surprise that companies are getting tired of them. This is not unexpected, it's a reaction to kotaku's own behavior.