GameSpot denies Eidos pressured firing of Gerstmann

To ComicShaman:
"There are actions that are easy to document, like Gerstmann being fired in the wake of a bad review for Kane & Lynch. There's the fact that Gamespot has gotten big advertising from Eidos for this game. There's the fact they took down the video review and all notable links to the print review, and rewritten it (to whatever extent... but it doesn't read like a 6.0 now, does it?). There's the fact that Gamespot is scrubbing and censoring and generally trying to pretend nothing is happening."

And they also took down the Kane & Lynch advertising, and the 6.0 score STILL stays up, along with Jeff Gerstmann's byline on the print review, which is STILL linked to on their site. Certainly doesn't sound like GameSpot made a deal with Eidos to keep their marketing dollars.

And we STILL don't know if Gerstmann was fired. We know that he no longer works at GameSpot, but it could easily have been a resignation, as well. There's an article linked to at Penny Arcade with an anonymous insider within GameSpot who claims that Gerstmann and GameSpot "parted ways" because of CONTINUAL disagreements over Gerstmann's unprofessionalism. Last I checked, unprofessionalism, particularly with journalists, is definitely a reason to get let go.

Get over yourself. The fact is WE DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED. You have NO IDEA how these companies work. The fact that this happened more than two weeks after the K&L review came out should give some indication that this was NOT a spontaneous move by GameSpot OR Gerstmann. I'm sure they have their reasons.

So like I said, stop judging them guilty before getting some REAL facts, not speculation.

http://valleywag.com/tech/jeff-gerstmann/gamespot-editor-on-fired-writer-328775.php

"We're very clear in our review policies that all reviews are vetted by the entire team before they go live - everything that goes up is the product of an entire team's output. Our freelancers are especially guilty of making snide comments, but those are always yanked before the review goes live, because everyone in the office reads these reviews and makes sure they're up to our standards before they get put up.

If there was a problem with his reviews, then it would've been a problem with the entire team. Firing him without telling anyone implies that anyone else on this team can be fired at the drop of a hat as well, because none of us are writing any differently or meaner or less professionally than we were two years ago before the management changed. I'm sure management wants to spin this as the G-Man being unprofessional to take away from the egg on their face that results after a ten-year employee gets locked out of his office and told to leave the premises and then no one communicates anything to us about it until the next day.

This management team has shown what they're willing to do. Jeff had ten years in and was fucking locked out of his office and told to leave the building.

What you might not be aware of is that GS is well known for appealing mostly to hardcore gamers. The mucky-mucks have been doing a lot of "brand research" over the last year or so and indicating that they want to reach out to more casual gamers. Our last executive editor, Greg Kasavin, left to go to EA, and he was replaced by a suit, Josh Larson, who had no editorial experience and was only involved on the business side of things. Over the last year there has been an increasing amount of pressure to allow the advertising teams to have more of a say in the editorial process; we've started having to give our sales team heads-ups when a game is getting a low score, for instance, so that they can let the advertisers know that before a review goes up. Other publishers have started giving us notes involving when our reviews can go up; if a game's getting a 9 or above, it can go up early; if not, it'll have to wait until after the game is on the shelves.

I was in the meeting where Josh Larson was trying to explain this firing and the guy had absolutely no response to any of the criticisms we were sending his way. He kept dodging the question, saying that there were "multiple instances of tone" in the reviews that he hadn't been happy about, but that wasn't Jeff's problem since we all vet every review. He also implied that "AAA" titles deserved more attention when they were being reviewed, which sounded to all of us that he was implying that they should get higher scores, especially since those titles are usually more highly advertised on our site.

I know that it's all about the money, and hey, I like money. I like advertising because it pays my salary. Unfortunately after Kasavin left the church-and-state separation between the sales teams and the editorial team has cracked, and with Jeff's firing I think it's clear that the management now has no interest at all in integrity and are instead looking for an editorial team that will be nicer to the advertisors.

When companies make games as downright contemptible as Kane and Lynch, they deserve to be called on it. I guess you'll have to go to Onion or a smaller site for objective reviews now, because everyone at GS now thinks that if they give a low score to a high-profile game, they'll be shitcanned. Everyone's fucking scared and we're all hoping to get Josh Larson removed from his position because no one trusts him anymore. If that doesn't happen then look for every game to be Game of the Year material at GameSpot."

Personally, I do not know any business that would publicly discuss personnel and their hire or fire status. Also no matter how much the public might want it, it would be reprehensible for Gamespot to speak about anything that caused an employee from getting fired. I also believe that you can be held for litigation if such information is officially given.

The only personal who can discuss this issue I believe is the person who was fired. I know for a fact that a company cannot discuss any details why an employee is fired even if you go to another company and they call that business and ask the question.

At this point in time it really doesn’t matter. On a rumor, everyone has made up their mind weather it’s true or not because they already believed it to be true. Most people are quick to gravitate to negative stuff and once the mob takes up the banner, then it’s over. I believe even if Jeff Gerstmann came out and said it was false. I do believe that if this rumor is true that Jeff would have legal avenues to pursue but then again he probably was fired for something totally different but this was the real issue.

Just listened to CNET's Buzz Out Loud... They are NOT allowed to talk about Gerstmann's firing.


I really like Buzz Out Loud, but if all this CNET stuff fully turns out to be how it looks, I'll unsubscribing from Buzz Out Loud as well as the HotSpot.

between the lines version:

Eidos aggressively pointed out some minor errors in the review, so we were forced to fire Gertsmann due to our high journalistic ethical standards. If we weren't so ethical, we wouldn't of had to fire him.

I'm having visions of Dana Perino...

Yeah sure...
He quit because he was going to be the start in Uwe Boll film.

Gotta love Tycho and Gabe, they advertised Prince of Persio 2 without knowing it wasn't all it was cracked up to be (they liked the first a lot, i think) and when they played it they ended up slating it and annoying those that payed for the own ads. It's a pretty nasty situation, but you need journalistic integrity. I think they knew that they couldn't give glowing approval because of the ads, and Jeff obviously thought along the same lines.

What is Cnet?
A miserable pile of secrets.
But enough talk.
Have at you!

Am I the only one that isn't surprised that Gerstmann was fired? Has anyone else here actually watched the video review? It's terrible, and probably the pits of what could be considered journalism. He makes a point and then spends two minutes repeating himself like a slob. He sounded like a guy that hating the entire game based on the graphics and story. That was until finally he reached half of his review which actually involved making a few really good points but failing to really explain what he meant. There was hardly anything worth calling professional in that review. And being the stubborn man he is, pressed onward like a big dumb idiot and cost a site hundreds of thousands of dollars. It wasn't the 6.0 score that lost Gamespot the money, it was Jeff's inability to be a professional reviewer and editor(especially when it counted)that cost both Gamespot their business and Jeff his job. That is the difference that separates Penny Arcade and how they could buddy up with Ubisoft again and why Gamespot could break even after Jeff's disgraceful and unprofessional review.

I can't wait to NPD numbers on this Horrible F*$&ing game.

"And you just say 'bollocks!' 'Bollocks!' 'Bollocks' is a handy word..."

If all of this fanfare concerned any other reviewer, I might give half a crap, but since we're talking about loud-mouthed die-hard Sony fanyboy Jeff Gerstmann, I couldn't care less. Jeff and his former employer can both rot in infamy for all I care.

A little bit of an aside; it's always really nice to see quality pieces of journalism here.

Keep up the good work Joystiq.

Total horseshit. Does nothing in this country have integrity anymore?

"When pressed for clarification"

Please tell me you yelled "hold it!" at the top of your lungs...

Kain and Lynch sucked anyways...every reviewer thought it was mediocre....why was this guy fired ?? it would look stupid if everyone gave the game a crap review and this guy gave it a 9.5 because the advertisers wanted a good score

I really need to stop digging into this and get some sleep, but this is funny...

http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/kanelynchdeadmen/players.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary;yousay

The 1.0 goes on for dozens of pages...

This is what it comes down to for gamespot: its own users basically deficating all over this game, which probably deserves the 6.0, but because of this debacle it's going to down to 1.0. I'd be impressed if they can hang on to the rest of their sponsors after this.

Kane & Lynch User Reviews Are Currently Disabled

Whaaa.... why? I hope the execs at Gamespot are shaking in their boots 'bout now.

LOL Gamespot is clearly run by a series of idiots. Based on the above, apparently the head idiot is Josh Larson (ever notice that suits think they know everything about everything?). I mean if you going to break down the firewall between the business side and the editorial side, at least make sure to not take actions that let the public know it doesn't exist. Its like rule #1 in the idiots guide to running a publication.

Rule #2 is to not unleash a PR rep without creating a full explanation. When you provide some information here and there but "no comment" others, what that tells us is there is some truth to the story but to outright deny it would risk being caught in a lie. Its pretty clear based on the leaked information that Edios vented its rage over the review to the suits (who HATE being embarassed and looking like they don't know anything, nevermind they usually don't) and so decided they need a sacrifial lamb to get the other writers in line.

Basically the only response to CNET, Gamespots, and Edios stonewalling is a complete and total boycott.

Also its seems that Josh Larson needs to get fired. Look at what a massive PR disaster he has created because of his own lack of knowledge and inability to handle the situation (its why suits should stay on the business side of the line). If I was CNET corporate, I would look at his handling of the suituion, note that any fool could have predicted it, and fire his idiotic @!! for gross incompetence. The actions over the last 24 hours from Gamespot are really pretty damn stupid and inexcusable. Not exactly what you want from someone in charge of the decision making.