Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

PC Gamer: " There's something strange about Ashes of Creation. "

1568101122

Comments

  • blorpykinsblorpykins Member RarePosts: 466
    The article was clickbait, that much is obvious.  They could have just as easily published what they'd received from Kickstarter so we all had context for the quotes and reached out to Intrepid for comment.  Instead, they go straight for the juggler making assumptions and not even giving these guys the courtesy of a notice prior to publishing.

    They chose to throw Intrepid into a tailspin during a fundraising campaign - the people responsible for the article deserve everything they get if they're in the wrong... incompetence in journalism should be called out as such.
  • PresciencePrescience Member UncommonPosts: 255
    The article was clickbait, that much is obvious.  They could have just as easily published what they'd received from Kickstarter so we all had context for the quotes and reached out to Intrepid for comment.  Instead, they go straight for the juggler making assumptions and not even giving these guys the courtesy of a notice prior to publishing.

    They chose to throw Intrepid into a tailspin during a fundraising campaign - the people responsible for the article deserve everything they get if they're in the wrong... incompetence in journalism should be called out as such.
    This happens all the time and any time I see someone, such as your self, pouncing on First Amendment freedoms it turns my stomach.

    PC Gamer has every right to make articles and word them however they want assuming it's truth.
    blorpykinsGdemami
  • TheocritusTheocritus Member LegendaryPosts: 10,015
    Isn't bad publicity better than no publicity? Doesnt it arrouse people's curiousity?
    SBFord
  • blorpykinsblorpykins Member RarePosts: 466
    The article was clickbait, that much is obvious.  They could have just as easily published what they'd received from Kickstarter so we all had context for the quotes and reached out to Intrepid for comment.  Instead, they go straight for the juggler making assumptions and not even giving these guys the courtesy of a notice prior to publishing.

    They chose to throw Intrepid into a tailspin during a fundraising campaign - the people responsible for the article deserve everything they get if they're in the wrong... incompetence in journalism should be called out as such.
    This happens all the time and any time I see someone, such as your self, pouncing on First Amendment freedoms it turns my stomach.

    PC Gamer has every right to make articles and word them however they want assuming it's truth.
    I did not pounce on free speech.  What happens all the time is blogger mommy politicians and SJWs thinking they're journalists with the right to say whatever they want and in the case of lowbrow publications, their bosses let them run with it because clickbait = revenue.  Worst case scenario is dude that published the article gets fired and the world keeps spinning... of course that won't happen because the lowest common denominator these days is really, really low and people think any opinion regurgitated through a publication should somehow be protected by free speech.

    Free speech is what protects us when we argue about cats.  Anyone wanting to call themselves a journalist should hold dear ethical conduct and exercise integrity; they should strive to rise above the noise.  But free speech... yay!
    Gdemami
  • PresciencePrescience Member UncommonPosts: 255
    The article was clickbait, that much is obvious.  They could have just as easily published what they'd received from Kickstarter so we all had context for the quotes and reached out to Intrepid for comment.  Instead, they go straight for the juggler making assumptions and not even giving these guys the courtesy of a notice prior to publishing.

    They chose to throw Intrepid into a tailspin during a fundraising campaign - the people responsible for the article deserve everything they get if they're in the wrong... incompetence in journalism should be called out as such.
    This happens all the time and any time I see someone, such as your self, pouncing on First Amendment freedoms it turns my stomach.

    PC Gamer has every right to make articles and word them however they want assuming it's truth.
    I did not pounce on free speech.  What happens all the time is blogger mommy politicians and SJWs thinking they're journalists with the right to say whatever they want and in the case of lowbrow publications, their bosses let them run with it because clickbait = revenue.  Worst case scenario is dude that published the article gets fired and the world keeps spinning... of course that won't happen because the lowest common denominator these days is really, really low and people think any opinion regurgitated through a publication should somehow be protected by free speech.

    Free speech is what protects us when we argue about cats.  Anyone wanting to call themselves a journalist should hold dear ethical conduct and exercise integrity; they should strive to rise above the noise.  But free speech... yay!
    The First Amendment protects the press also.
  • blorpykinsblorpykins Member RarePosts: 466
    The article was clickbait, that much is obvious.  They could have just as easily published what they'd received from Kickstarter so we all had context for the quotes and reached out to Intrepid for comment.  Instead, they go straight for the juggler making assumptions and not even giving these guys the courtesy of a notice prior to publishing.

    They chose to throw Intrepid into a tailspin during a fundraising campaign - the people responsible for the article deserve everything they get if they're in the wrong... incompetence in journalism should be called out as such.
    This happens all the time and any time I see someone, such as your self, pouncing on First Amendment freedoms it turns my stomach.

    PC Gamer has every right to make articles and word them however they want assuming it's truth.
    I did not pounce on free speech.  What happens all the time is blogger mommy politicians and SJWs thinking they're journalists with the right to say whatever they want and in the case of lowbrow publications, their bosses let them run with it because clickbait = revenue.  Worst case scenario is dude that published the article gets fired and the world keeps spinning... of course that won't happen because the lowest common denominator these days is really, really low and people think any opinion regurgitated through a publication should somehow be protected by free speech.

    Free speech is what protects us when we argue about cats.  Anyone wanting to call themselves a journalist should hold dear ethical conduct and exercise integrity; they should strive to rise above the noise.  But free speech... yay!
    The First Amendment protects the press also.


    Yeah, that's why I said "theycould have just as easily published what they'd received from Kickstarter so we all had context for the quotes and reached out to Intrepid for comment." and then you turned this into a conversation about free speech.

    Clickbait = revenue, that's all this is about.
  • PresciencePrescience Member UncommonPosts: 255
    The article was clickbait, that much is obvious.  They could have just as easily published what they'd received from Kickstarter so we all had context for the quotes and reached out to Intrepid for comment.  Instead, they go straight for the juggler making assumptions and not even giving these guys the courtesy of a notice prior to publishing.

    They chose to throw Intrepid into a tailspin during a fundraising campaign - the people responsible for the article deserve everything they get if they're in the wrong... incompetence in journalism should be called out as such.
    This happens all the time and any time I see someone, such as your self, pouncing on First Amendment freedoms it turns my stomach.

    PC Gamer has every right to make articles and word them however they want assuming it's truth.
    I did not pounce on free speech.  What happens all the time is blogger mommy politicians and SJWs thinking they're journalists with the right to say whatever they want and in the case of lowbrow publications, their bosses let them run with it because clickbait = revenue.  Worst case scenario is dude that published the article gets fired and the world keeps spinning... of course that won't happen because the lowest common denominator these days is really, really low and people think any opinion regurgitated through a publication should somehow be protected by free speech.

    Free speech is what protects us when we argue about cats.  Anyone wanting to call themselves a journalist should hold dear ethical conduct and exercise integrity; they should strive to rise above the noise.  But free speech... yay!
    The First Amendment protects the press also.


    Yeah, that's why I said "theycould have just as easily published what they'd received from Kickstarter so we all had context for the quotes and reached out to Intrepid for comment." and then you turned this into a conversation about free speech.

    Clickbait = revenue, that's all this is about.
    Unless we find out it was all true.
  • PapasmervPapasmerv Member UncommonPosts: 63
    There is the exercising of free speech and then there is libel [definition below].  If an author misrepresents something causing financial damages then they can be held liable for those misrepresentations.  Nothing Messmer wrote until the following appears inappropriate..."which has removed Kickstarter pledges from its referral program."

    Messmer is reporting that Intrepid Studios removed KS pledges from it's referral program.  Sharif has defended Intrepid by stating that, in accordance with KS policy, only the ONE TIME PLEDGE is included in the referral program.   Did Messmer contact Intrepid to validate his statement? A statement that caused a community uproar as people started worrying that the KS pledges were now excluded and Intrepid didn't tell them?  How many people withdrew their pledge because of Messmer's statement?

    That's the bottom line here and is why PC Gamer and Messmer need to be held accountable.

    ========
    li·bel
    [ lahy-b uhl]
    NOUN
    1.
    anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents.
    blorpykinsPhry
    What every dev/pub should stand behind: "We're committed to creating a fair playing field for all players. You cannot gain gameplay advantage by spending real money in [INSERT GAME NAME]."
  • PresciencePrescience Member UncommonPosts: 255
    Papasmerv said:
    There is the exercising of free speech and then there is libel [definition below].  If an author misrepresents something causing financial damages then they can be held liable for those misrepresentations.  Nothing Messmer wrote until the following appears inappropriate..."which has removed Kickstarter pledges from its referral program."

    Messmer is reporting that Intrepid Studios removed KS pledges from it's referral program.  Sharif has defended Intrepid by stating that, in accordance with KS policy, only the ONE TIME PLEDGE is included in the referral program.   Did Messmer contact Intrepid to validate his statement? A statement that caused a community uproar as people started worrying that the KS pledges were now excluded and Intrepid didn't tell them?  How many people withdrew their pledge because of Messmer's statement?

    That's the bottom line here and is why PC Gamer and Messmer need to be held accountable.

    ========
    li·bel
    [ lahy-b uhl]
    NOUN
    1.
    anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents.
    Armchair lawyers have arrived.
    waynejr2Slapshot1188GdemamiPhry
  • blorpykinsblorpykins Member RarePosts: 466
    Papasmerv said:
    There is the exercising of free speech and then there is libel [definition below].  If an author misrepresents something causing financial damages then they can be held liable for those misrepresentations.  Nothing Messmer wrote until the following appears inappropriate..."which has removed Kickstarter pledges from its referral program."

    Messmer is reporting that Intrepid Studios removed KS pledges from it's referral program.  Sharif has defended Intrepid by stating that, in accordance with KS policy, only the ONE TIME PLEDGE is included in the referral program.   Did Messmer contact Intrepid to validate his statement? A statement that caused a community uproar as people started worrying that the KS pledges were now excluded and Intrepid didn't tell them?  How many people withdrew their pledge because of Messmer's statement?

    That's the bottom line here and is why PC Gamer and Messmer need to be held accountable.

    ========
    li·bel
    [ lahy-b uhl]
    NOUN
    1.
    anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents.
    Armchair lawyers have arrived.
    So much for free speech... eh?
    ConstantineMerus
  • ConstantineMerusConstantineMerus Member EpicPosts: 3,338
    Papasmerv said:
    There is the exercising of free speech and then there is libel [definition below].  If an author misrepresents something causing financial damages then they can be held liable for those misrepresentations.  Nothing Messmer wrote until the following appears inappropriate..."which has removed Kickstarter pledges from its referral program."

    Messmer is reporting that Intrepid Studios removed KS pledges from it's referral program.  Sharif has defended Intrepid by stating that, in accordance with KS policy, only the ONE TIME PLEDGE is included in the referral program.   Did Messmer contact Intrepid to validate his statement? A statement that caused a community uproar as people started worrying that the KS pledges were now excluded and Intrepid didn't tell them?  How many people withdrew their pledge because of Messmer's statement?

    That's the bottom line here and is why PC Gamer and Messmer need to be held accountable.

    ========
    li·bel
    [ lahy-b uhl]
    NOUN
    1.
    anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents.
    Armchair lawyers have arrived.
    You're quite a hypocrite, aren't you? 
    Constantine, The Console Poster

    • "One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
  • SwordeBeemeLordSwordeBeemeLord Member Posts: 25
    You can make fun of someone for what they say, without saying they shouldn't have the right to say it. Come on guys, don't be aggresive just because he says mean things about a game you like.

    Iz just vidja gayme, why u haf 2 be mad?
  • ShaighShaigh Member EpicPosts: 2,150
    Gaming journalists do have a responsibility to research articles but that should go for both positive and negative articles. Its important that what journalists writes is true but the obsessive attitude that fans have about their hyped up games is worrisome. Its messed up when the creator of the game starts to speak about the writer having an agenda against their game but that crap resonates with fans, negative stuff is "fake news".

    I would rather see more gaming sites write articles that question things in gaming and not just opinion pieces that hype the living shit out of games combined with things that reads like promotional stuff coming right out of publishers.
    Slapshot1188YashaX
    Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
  • PresciencePrescience Member UncommonPosts: 255
    edited May 2017
    I wanted to point something out regarding sponsored content on YouTube. If you guys know anyone that you believe is making a sponsored video on behalf of Ashes of Creation or any other MMO, that is not disclosing it, report it to the Federal Trade Commission.

    The Federal Trade Commission is cracking down on people doing sponsored content without disclosing it. You can read about it here: https://mises.org/blog/ftc-cracks-down-sponsored-content

    Then here are the raw FTC press releases: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2016/07/warner-bros-settles-ftc-charges-it-failed-adequately-disclose-it

    https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2016/03/ftc-approves-final-order-prohibiting-machinima-inc




    Gdemami
  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    Papasmerv said:
    There is the exercising of free speech and then there is libel [definition below].  If an author misrepresents something causing financial damages then they can be held liable for those misrepresentations.  Nothing Messmer wrote until the following appears inappropriate..."which has removed Kickstarter pledges from its referral program."

    Messmer is reporting that Intrepid Studios removed KS pledges from it's referral program.  Sharif has defended Intrepid by stating that, in accordance with KS policy, only the ONE TIME PLEDGE is included in the referral program.   Did Messmer contact Intrepid to validate his statement? A statement that caused a community uproar as people started worrying that the KS pledges were now excluded and Intrepid didn't tell them?  How many people withdrew their pledge because of Messmer's statement?

    That's the bottom line here and is why PC Gamer and Messmer need to be held accountable.

    ========
    li·bel
    [ lahy-b uhl]
    NOUN
    1.
    anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents.
    Armchair lawyers have arrived.
    Seeing as PCGamer is a professional magazine, i highly doubt that they would not have carried out due dilligence over any statements they may have made, on the other hand, armchair lawyers as usual can pluck suppositions and facts from pretty much any orifice available without regard to such niceties as due diligence. :p
    Phixion13
  • PresciencePrescience Member UncommonPosts: 255
    Phry said:
    Papasmerv said:
    There is the exercising of free speech and then there is libel [definition below].  If an author misrepresents something causing financial damages then they can be held liable for those misrepresentations.  Nothing Messmer wrote until the following appears inappropriate..."which has removed Kickstarter pledges from its referral program."

    Messmer is reporting that Intrepid Studios removed KS pledges from it's referral program.  Sharif has defended Intrepid by stating that, in accordance with KS policy, only the ONE TIME PLEDGE is included in the referral program.   Did Messmer contact Intrepid to validate his statement? A statement that caused a community uproar as people started worrying that the KS pledges were now excluded and Intrepid didn't tell them?  How many people withdrew their pledge because of Messmer's statement?

    That's the bottom line here and is why PC Gamer and Messmer need to be held accountable.

    ========
    li·bel
    [ lahy-b uhl]
    NOUN
    1.
    anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents.
    Armchair lawyers have arrived.
    Seeing as PCGamer is a professional magazine, i highly doubt that they would not have carried out due dilligence over any statements they may have made, on the other hand, armchair lawyers as usual can pluck suppositions and facts from pretty much any orifice available without regard to such niceties as due diligence. :p
    I do not believe PC Gamer made up its interactions with Kickstarter and if it had it would have retracted the article. I believe they are being honest.
    Phry
  • blorpykinsblorpykins Member RarePosts: 466
    edited May 2017
    Here's what Wikipedia says about clickbait:

    "Clickbait is a pejorative term for web content that is aimed at generating online advertising revenue, especially at the expense of quality or accuracy, relying on sensationalist headlines or eye-catching thumbnail pictures to attract click-throughs and to encourage forwarding of the material over online social networks.[citation needed] Clickbait headlines typically aim to exploit the "curiosity gap", providing just enough information to make readers curious, but not enough to satisfy their curiosity without clicking through to the linked content.[1][2][3]

    From a historical perspective, the techniques employed by clickbait authors can be considered derivative of yellow journalism, which presents little or no legitimate well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines that include exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering, or sensationalism."


    ... and Yellow Journalism:
    "Yellow journalism, or the yellow press, is a type of journalism that presents little or no legitimate well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines to sell more newspapers.[1] Techniques may include exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering or sensationalism. By extension, the term yellow journalism is used today as a pejorative to decry any journalism that treats news in an unprofessional or unethical fashion."


    People are free to believe whatever they like, unfortunately for humanity, most people will believe anything they read which is why clickbait is such a common practice in media nowadays.  Not that long ago, irresponsible reporting was considered incompetence (or worse).  Now it's just 15seconds of advertising.
  • PresciencePrescience Member UncommonPosts: 255
    Here's what Wikipedia says about clickbait:

    "Clickbait is a pejorative term for web content that is aimed at generating online advertising revenue, especially at the expense of quality or accuracy, relying on sensationalist headlines or eye-catching thumbnail pictures to attract click-throughs and to encourage forwarding of the material over online social networks.[citation needed] Clickbait headlines typically aim to exploit the "curiosity gap", providing just enough information to make readers curious, but not enough to satisfy their curiosity without clicking through to the linked content.[1][2][3]

    From a historical perspective, the techniques employed by clickbait authors can be considered derivative of yellow journalism, which presents little or no legitimate well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines that include exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering, or sensationalism."


    ... and Yellow Journalism:
    "Yellow journalism, or the yellow press, is a type of journalism that presents little or no legitimate well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines to sell more newspapers.[1] Techniques may include exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering or sensationalism. By extension, the term yellow journalism is used today as a pejorative to decry any journalism that treats news in an unprofessional or unethical fashion."


    People are free to believe whatever they like, unfortunately for humanity, most people will believe anything they read which is why clickbait is such a common practice in media nowadays.  Not that long ago, irresponsible reporting was considered incompetence (or worse).  Now it's just 15seconds of advertising.
    Based on the contents of the article I feel the title Steve Messner chose was proper and relevant. I never once felt the title was inappropriate.
    Gdemami
  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    Here's what Wikipedia says about clickbait:

    "Clickbait is a pejorative term for web content that is aimed at generating online advertising revenue, especially at the expense of quality or accuracy, relying on sensationalist headlines or eye-catching thumbnail pictures to attract click-throughs and to encourage forwarding of the material over online social networks.[citation needed] Clickbait headlines typically aim to exploit the "curiosity gap", providing just enough information to make readers curious, but not enough to satisfy their curiosity without clicking through to the linked content.[1][2][3]

    From a historical perspective, the techniques employed by clickbait authors can be considered derivative of yellow journalism, which presents little or no legitimate well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines that include exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering, or sensationalism."


    ... and Yellow Journalism:
    "Yellow journalism, or the yellow press, is a type of journalism that presents little or no legitimate well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines to sell more newspapers.[1] Techniques may include exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering or sensationalism. By extension, the term yellow journalism is used today as a pejorative to decry any journalism that treats news in an unprofessional or unethical fashion."


    People are free to believe whatever they like, unfortunately for humanity, most people will believe anything they read which is why clickbait is such a common practice in media nowadays.  Not that long ago, irresponsible reporting was considered incompetence (or worse).  Now it's just 15seconds of advertising.
    i would hate to think that the people on these forums are so ill informed that they don't know what click bait is, but thank you for reminding us anyway, however irrelevant that information might be. :p
  • blorpykinsblorpykins Member RarePosts: 466
    I'd argue that most people don't know what clickbait is, or rather that they don't understand the full scope of what clickbait is.  Most would agree a title like "Messner gave birth to a three headed dolphin!" would be clickbait... however, the more refined clickbait title would adhere to the practice of keeping the title in the realm of creating a curiosity.

    "Clickbait headlines typically aim to exploit the "curiosity gap", providing just enough information to make readers curious, but not enough to satisfy their curiosity without clicking through to the linked content"

    What we think we know:

    (1) Messner says he shared messages with Kickstarter
    - he provided no name to attach to the quotes... Kickstarter is not a person
    - he provided a very simple context for the quotes, context is key - he should post the entire message sent from Kickstarter

    (2) Sharif shared messages with Kickstarter
    - he changed the wording of the referral program
    - he made a statement that all kickstarter pledges would count

    The onus of factual reporting is on Messner in this scenario.  Sharif has everything to lose if he's wrong... Messner on the hand loses nothing and goes right back to writing.  So, the doubters will doubt, and the believers will believe but only for a few more days.  Once the Kickstarter is over and people link their accounts to their pledges, the truth will out.

     Looking at Messner, this is from his profile page on PC Gamer:

    "Steven is PC Gamer's contributing editor and has a nose for sniffing out the interesting and unique stories being told every day in the PC community. He likes RPGs of the MMO persuasion but doesn't have friends so regular RPGs are good too."
    http://www.pcgamer.com/author/steven-messner/

    If you look at the sort of opinion pieces he writes, it's all clickbait.




    PapasmervGdemami
  • PresciencePrescience Member UncommonPosts: 255
    I'd argue that most people don't know what clickbait is, or rather that they don't understand the full scope of what clickbait is.  Most would agree a title like "Messner gave birth to a three headed dolphin!" would be clickbait... however, the more refined clickbait title would adhere to the practice of keeping the title in the realm of creating a curiosity.

    "Clickbait headlines typically aim to exploit the "curiosity gap", providing just enough information to make readers curious, but not enough to satisfy their curiosity without clicking through to the linked content"

    What we think we know:

    (1) Messner says he shared messages with Kickstarter
    - he provided no name to attach to the quotes... Kickstarter is not a person
    - he provided a very simple context for the quotes, context is key - he should post the entire message sent from Kickstarter

    (2) Sharif shared messages with Kickstarter
    - he changed the wording of the referral program
    - he made a statement that all kickstarter pledges would count

    The onus of factual reporting is on Messner in this scenario.  Sharif has everything to lose if he's wrong... Messner on the hand loses nothing and goes right back to writing.  So, the doubters will doubt, and the believers will believe but only for a few more days.  Once the Kickstarter is over and people link their accounts to their pledges, the truth will out.

     Looking at Messner, this is from his profile page on PC Gamer:

    "Steven is PC Gamer's contributing editor and has a nose for sniffing out the interesting and unique stories being told every day in the PC community. He likes RPGs of the MMO persuasion but doesn't have friends so regular RPGs are good too."
    http://www.pcgamer.com/author/steven-messner/

    If you look at the sort of opinion pieces he writes, it's all clickbait.




    As far as I know the PC Gamer article has not been taken down nor has the MassivelyOP one. Neither of them have complied with Steven Sharif. For compliance Steven Sharif would likely need to get Kickstarter, the alleged source, to respond stating they are lying.

    They aren't going to just remove the article because he commands them to. That's not how it works. The burden is just as much on him as it is on them for showing evidence required for a retraction.
    Gdemami
  • blorpykinsblorpykins Member RarePosts: 466
    I'd argue that most people don't know what clickbait is, or rather that they don't understand the full scope of what clickbait is.  Most would agree a title like "Messner gave birth to a three headed dolphin!" would be clickbait... however, the more refined clickbait title would adhere to the practice of keeping the title in the realm of creating a curiosity.

    "Clickbait headlines typically aim to exploit the "curiosity gap", providing just enough information to make readers curious, but not enough to satisfy their curiosity without clicking through to the linked content"

    What we think we know:

    (1) Messner says he shared messages with Kickstarter
    - he provided no name to attach to the quotes... Kickstarter is not a person
    - he provided a very simple context for the quotes, context is key - he should post the entire message sent from Kickstarter

    (2) Sharif shared messages with Kickstarter
    - he changed the wording of the referral program
    - he made a statement that all kickstarter pledges would count

    The onus of factual reporting is on Messner in this scenario.  Sharif has everything to lose if he's wrong... Messner on the hand loses nothing and goes right back to writing.  So, the doubters will doubt, and the believers will believe but only for a few more days.  Once the Kickstarter is over and people link their accounts to their pledges, the truth will out.

     Looking at Messner, this is from his profile page on PC Gamer:

    "Steven is PC Gamer's contributing editor and has a nose for sniffing out the interesting and unique stories being told every day in the PC community. He likes RPGs of the MMO persuasion but doesn't have friends so regular RPGs are good too."
    http://www.pcgamer.com/author/steven-messner/

    If you look at the sort of opinion pieces he writes, it's all clickbait.




    As far as I know the PC Gamer article has not been taken down nor has the MassivelyOP one. Neither of them have complied with Steven Sharif. For compliance Steven Sharif would likely need to get Kickstarter, the alleged source, to respond stating they are lying.

    They aren't going to just remove the article because he commands them to. That's not how it works. The burden is just as much on him as it is on them for showing evidence required for a retraction.
    Haha - they're not fighting a war; these are gamer sites... their bread and butter is clickbait!  No one is going to suffer any loss of credibility if they don't comply with a request for retraction.  PC Gamer not complying with the request does not legitimize their claim either, it just means they're still getting enough clicks to feel good about leaving it up.
  • PresciencePrescience Member UncommonPosts: 255
    I'd argue that most people don't know what clickbait is, or rather that they don't understand the full scope of what clickbait is.  Most would agree a title like "Messner gave birth to a three headed dolphin!" would be clickbait... however, the more refined clickbait title would adhere to the practice of keeping the title in the realm of creating a curiosity.

    "Clickbait headlines typically aim to exploit the "curiosity gap", providing just enough information to make readers curious, but not enough to satisfy their curiosity without clicking through to the linked content"

    What we think we know:

    (1) Messner says he shared messages with Kickstarter
    - he provided no name to attach to the quotes... Kickstarter is not a person
    - he provided a very simple context for the quotes, context is key - he should post the entire message sent from Kickstarter

    (2) Sharif shared messages with Kickstarter
    - he changed the wording of the referral program
    - he made a statement that all kickstarter pledges would count

    The onus of factual reporting is on Messner in this scenario.  Sharif has everything to lose if he's wrong... Messner on the hand loses nothing and goes right back to writing.  So, the doubters will doubt, and the believers will believe but only for a few more days.  Once the Kickstarter is over and people link their accounts to their pledges, the truth will out.

     Looking at Messner, this is from his profile page on PC Gamer:

    "Steven is PC Gamer's contributing editor and has a nose for sniffing out the interesting and unique stories being told every day in the PC community. He likes RPGs of the MMO persuasion but doesn't have friends so regular RPGs are good too."
    http://www.pcgamer.com/author/steven-messner/

    If you look at the sort of opinion pieces he writes, it's all clickbait.




    As far as I know the PC Gamer article has not been taken down nor has the MassivelyOP one. Neither of them have complied with Steven Sharif. For compliance Steven Sharif would likely need to get Kickstarter, the alleged source, to respond stating they are lying.

    They aren't going to just remove the article because he commands them to. That's not how it works. The burden is just as much on him as it is on them for showing evidence required for a retraction.
    Haha - they're not fighting a war; these are gamer sites... their bread and butter is clickbait!  No one is going to suffer any loss of credibility if they don't comply with a request for retraction.  PC Gamer not complying with the request does not legitimize their claim either, it just means they're still getting enough clicks to feel good about leaving it up.
    Think about it like this. Do we trust a twenty-three year old source that is well-known in the industry (PC Gamer) or Steven Sharif?
    Gdemami
  • PonziniPonzini Member UncommonPosts: 534
    edited May 2017
    Haha - they're not fighting a war; these are gamer sites... their bread and butter is clickbait!  No one is going to suffer any loss of credibility if they don't comply with a request for retraction.  PC Gamer not complying with the request does not legitimize their claim either, it just means they're still getting enough clicks to feel good about leaving it up.
    Think about it like this. Do we trust a twenty-three year old source that is well-known in the industry (PC Gamer) or Steven Sharif?
    First off PC Gamer isn't one person. It is multiple people. 23 year old company doesn't mean a whole lot. There can be good authors and bad ones.

    This is what the articles author posted on reddit in response to my comment:

    https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/6dpyau/theres_something_strange_about_kickstarters_most/di50zl6/

    It was the last thing he posted. I don't know why it is taking him so long. It has been up since early Friday. It is pretty obvious he isn't 100% sure. You write Steven Sharif like it doesn't mean much but he is the one who is in charge of the referral system. He also hasn't removed kickstarter pledges from the referral page. 
  • blorpykinsblorpykins Member RarePosts: 466
    I'd argue that most people don't know what clickbait is, or rather that they don't understand the full scope of what clickbait is.  Most would agree a title like "Messner gave birth to a three headed dolphin!" would be clickbait... however, the more refined clickbait title would adhere to the practice of keeping the title in the realm of creating a curiosity.

    "Clickbait headlines typically aim to exploit the "curiosity gap", providing just enough information to make readers curious, but not enough to satisfy their curiosity without clicking through to the linked content"

    What we think we know:

    (1) Messner says he shared messages with Kickstarter
    - he provided no name to attach to the quotes... Kickstarter is not a person
    - he provided a very simple context for the quotes, context is key - he should post the entire message sent from Kickstarter

    (2) Sharif shared messages with Kickstarter
    - he changed the wording of the referral program
    - he made a statement that all kickstarter pledges would count

    The onus of factual reporting is on Messner in this scenario.  Sharif has everything to lose if he's wrong... Messner on the hand loses nothing and goes right back to writing.  So, the doubters will doubt, and the believers will believe but only for a few more days.  Once the Kickstarter is over and people link their accounts to their pledges, the truth will out.

     Looking at Messner, this is from his profile page on PC Gamer:

    "Steven is PC Gamer's contributing editor and has a nose for sniffing out the interesting and unique stories being told every day in the PC community. He likes RPGs of the MMO persuasion but doesn't have friends so regular RPGs are good too."
    http://www.pcgamer.com/author/steven-messner/

    If you look at the sort of opinion pieces he writes, it's all clickbait.




    As far as I know the PC Gamer article has not been taken down nor has the MassivelyOP one. Neither of them have complied with Steven Sharif. For compliance Steven Sharif would likely need to get Kickstarter, the alleged source, to respond stating they are lying.

    They aren't going to just remove the article because he commands them to. That's not how it works. The burden is just as much on him as it is on them for showing evidence required for a retraction.
    Haha - they're not fighting a war; these are gamer sites... their bread and butter is clickbait!  No one is going to suffer any loss of credibility if they don't comply with a request for retraction.  PC Gamer not complying with the request does not legitimize their claim either, it just means they're still getting enough clicks to feel good about leaving it up.
    Think about it like this. Do we trust a twenty-three year old source that is well-known in the industry (PC Gamer) or Steven Sharif?

    I don't trust anyone that measures their success through advertising.

    PC Gamer gets paid by the click....

    Intrepid hyped their Kickstarter with something for people to do to help get the word out about their game.

    Dude, this isn't even real drama.  And it only became drama when PC Gamer said
    "which has removed Kickstarter pledges from its referral program."  That's the lie and it'll all shake out in the wash.


    Will the pledges count towards the referal program?  Yes they will.


    The right thing to do would be for Messner to apologize for his part in this drama just to stir the pot for more clicks... He could have taken the high road - but he chose clicks over professionalism.





Sign In or Register to comment.