Donkey Konga 2 review marched to the beat of the editor's drummer
by Ben Zackheim 
{ May 13th 2005 at 4:39PM }
Peterb has sent in an interesting story. Apparently Gamespy posted a heavily edited review of Donkey Konga 2, with
favorable copy (and a final score) that was not part of the reviewer's original piece. Uh-oh.
One take is that this is unethical, and an example of
everything that's wrong with gaming journalism and its apologists. Another
take is that this is more of
the same and an example of how rushed we all are to get content — whether it's good, or not.
The idea that Gamespy would do such a thing makes me wince. Editing a review is more than just touching grammar; but
to change the entire intent of the piece? That's unethical. If Gamespy wants to remove the authors' names from their
reviews, that's one thing. But if they offer writers credits, then they have to represent their brand, and their
talent. After all, they hired the scribes. Don't they trust them?
Gamegirls opinion that this incident is a sign of how rushed we are is valid, but it also makes me wince. She
argues that the editors probably didnt have time to contact the writer, in the rush to publish. Of course, we never
make time for things that arent important to us.
Gamespy has taken the review down, so they know they did something wrong. But, in the end, there isnt a resolution to
this kind of problem since its built into the culture. Gamegirl is also right we want our news, we want it now, and
we want it good. In that order. Sometimes the media will skip that last criterion to get you #2.
I see posts by Joystiq writers that make me uncomfortable, but if thats their opinion (and they back it up in the
piece or in the comments section) then so be it. This is why I love blogging. The piece only begins when its posted.
From that point on, it keeps on living for as long as you want it to.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
john @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
Nintendo and Gamespy are working closely together now.
Be advised.
Michael @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
Straight up, Ign entertainment, and Nintendo are kissing/business partners; therefore, all sides need to be equal to each other no matter what. I think that is the reason why the editor flipped the script. This is a disgusting situation though.
Michael @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
Straight up, Ign entertainment, and Nintendo are kissing/business partners; therefore, all sides need to be equal to each other no matter what. I think that is the reason why the editor flipped the script. This is a disgusting situation though.
JBob250 @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
Yup, Nintendo is in bad need of online, who to turn to? Why, Gamespy of course!
R-Bro @ Dec 18th 2005 8:45PM
In all my years of writing game reviews, this kind of thing happened only once. I'd reviewed Black and White for a now-defunct but very high-profile gaming site, and given it a pretty low score (two stars out of four, as I recall). My editor, having seen all the gushing at other sites, felt that I'd obviously missed something, and insisted on raising the rating (to three stars, I think). I was furious, and immediately lost all respect for that editor. And while I was vindicated by the eventual Black and White backlash (some game mags actually admitted they'd make a mistake in rating it so highly), I never forgave that editorial strong-arming.
I have no idea if something similar played out at GameSpy, but I can speak firsthand that on rare occasion, this kind of thing does happen.