Gerstmann-gate: Sunday morning update

by Kyle Orland { Dec 2nd 2007 at 10:55AM }

Developments have slowed down a little bit over the weekend, but there is still plenty of chatter around the web about Gamespot's controversial firing of Jeff Gerstmann. Among the juicier bits from around the intertubes:

In response to a Gamespot forum thread, the new Gamespot Manager of Community Development said he is "eagerly anticipating the official word to be released on Tuesday."
Gamespot has halted user reviews of Kane & Lynch after a flood of 1.0 ratings lowered the game's user score to a 2.6/10.
Destructoid has registered cashwh0re.com and changed their front page banner in support of Gerstmann.
GameSpot employee Aaron Thomas explains why more employees aren't speaking up on the matter: "This isn't GameSpot suddenly clamping down on me or any of us here--this is how it is for anyone with a job."
Gamespot freelancer Frank Provo: "Personally, my respect for CNet is shot, and writing for GameSpot is going to feel like a chore for quite some time going forward."
GameSpot users are reportedly canceling paid subscriptions left and right, and planning boycotts of Gamespot and its advertisers.
Rumor has it that Gamespot forum moderator have been told to squelch any discussion of the controversy. This seems unlikely, though, as the main discussion of the topic on the site has reached 11,110 posts as of this writing. UPDATE: Numerous Gamespot moderators have written in saying discussion on their forums isn't being stopped, but redirected to one of these two threads to maintain order.

One thing is clear: This story is not going away anytime soon.

[Thanks to all the tipsters who sent items in]

Tags: controversy, eidos, gamespot, gerstmann, jeff-gerstmann, journalism, kane-and-lynch

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

Fatass of Kickassness @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:15AM

Hot diggity shit, eleven thousand posts?

hvnlysoldr @ Dec 2nd 2007 1:27PM

IT'S OVER NINE THOUSAND!

Cal @ Dec 2nd 2007 2:17PM

APPROACHING SOUND BARRIER!

BPM - The Return @ Dec 2nd 2007 2:22PM

OSHI--

Shiro @ Dec 3rd 2007 12:04AM

We broke the Internet again, guys.

SID SPACE @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:18AM

"Gamespot has halted user reviews of Kane & Lynch after a flood of 1.0 ratings lowered the game's user score to a 2.6/10."

"GameSpot users are reportedly canceling paid subscriptions left and right, and planning boycotts of Gamespot and its advertisers."

Wow. I love you, videogame community. It's so awesome to see everyone banding together like this and showing what they are really capable of. If this type of stuff keeps up much longer, I'm not really sure how Gamespot or Eidos are going to recover.

That "official word" on Tuesday had better be damn good if either of them hopes to salvage any of their lost credibility/respect.

copa @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:47AM

The only thing they can possibly do in an "official word" at this point is to announce a public, transparent reorganization of their Games and Entertainment division that sets up meaningful firewalls between their advertising and editorial divisions, and issue a public apology to Gerstmann.

We know that Eidos did a large ad buy with Gamespot, and then became furious when they saw the text and video reviews for Kane and Lynch. Nobody has disputed that.

We know that Eidos threatened to withold hundreds of thousands of dollars in future advertising from Gamespot. Nobody has disputed that.

We know that Gamespot subsequently edited the text review, and pulled the video review off of the site. CNet does dispute that the text review was edited to come across more favorably to the game, but that is a verifiable lie when you compare the old text to the new text.

We know that after the Thanksgiving week releases, when all of the major editorial and review work has been done for the year, Jeff Gerstmann was unexpectedly locked out of his offices and removed from the premises. This was a senior editor with ten years of service to the organization. Nobody has disputed that

We know that Gerstmann was fired for his reviews. Gamespot does not dispute that. They merely state that there were multiple instances of "tone" (rather than content) that caused him to be fired. It's not that he said negative things about the game, it's that he used negative words in order to say negative things about the game. Got it?

Please watch Gerstmann's video review on YouTube. Regardless of whether you agree with every point in it, the review is absolutely tame and reserved compared to your typical negative movie review. Go look up some of Roger Ebert's stinker reviews for comparison. If we really set our threshold in this industry to say that the "tone" of Gerstamann's Kane and Lynch review is unacceptable, then we will be screwing ourselves out of independent, interesting, editorial content.

Vegnagun (Brushed With Fame) @ Dec 2nd 2007 4:19PM

Yeah I agree Sid Space. You can't fire a reviewer for giving a review that you don't like because your getting money from the company. That is called a biased review.

Dan @ Dec 2nd 2007 4:38PM

The thing is... gamespot runs ads for games all the time, whilst simultaneously giving them average or low scores... its only fair that gs should be allowed to give a game the score they feel it deserves.

Dan @ Dec 2nd 2007 4:38PM

Dig @ Dec 2nd 2007 5:18PM

Four identical posts in a row. It's a record!

Penguin Warlord @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:33PM

Any decent competitor wwould hir him on the spot just to show up Gamespot and gather support from the community.

hvnlysoldr @ Dec 3rd 2007 10:06AM

Well I had a septuple-post before. Too lazy to sift through my comment pages for it.

Christian @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:19AM

To clarify GS mods closing down threads related to the topic, they are supposed to close any thread except the Off-Topic thread. This is to focus all the talk into one thread so there is still some organization on the forums.

LaughingTarget @ Dec 2nd 2007 4:10PM

Probably the same thing when Twilight Princess got the fair 8.8; I'd say it is a more reasonable score, fans would make a stink for about a week then forget about it.

Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Dec 2nd 2007 7:56PM

@joe.

So the guy should be fired for having an opinion? Yep that makes total sense.

Captain Cornflake @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:21AM

I love waking up in the morning for news like this.

I am proud of the internet today.

Jeff @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:23AM

At this point, he better have been fired because of that review-- otherwise the internets have made a huge ass of themselves.

Fernando Rocker @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:27AM

That's exactly the same I was thinking.

dark_inchworm @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:44AM

...your name's Jeff...

OH SNAP

HE KNOWS ALL.

Zsavior @ Dec 2nd 2007 1:38PM

Yeah that is true, I was thinking that also, really what if the gun had been drawn to soon because of gamers disdain for gaming journalism in a whole and is now taking it out on Gamespot. My problem is an example had to be made somewhere, I just don't want it to galvanize a person who took advantage of a community.

On the other hand, do you see the message it sends, gamers can still be a threat. On the other hand it sends the message that maybe the casual market is the way to go since they don't pay as close attention. Now with C/net, I only listened to one person on that whole freaking site. It was a man who told people not to buy Ipods, and Zunes because of idiotic DRM. Anybody else 9/10 I just ignored because they sounded horribly bought, like a guy who said the Best PMP out there was still the IPOD. That was laughable, but nobody knew any better, so who would you complain to, it is their job to tell you honestly what is the best value.

And that is what I am afraid of, that because some many games have gotten ripped off listening to reviews we are now thirsty for blood, whether it was true or not. Either way an incident like this was bound to happen sooner or later.

Dale @ Dec 2nd 2007 3:36PM

Whether or not the gamers out there are wrong, GameSpot/CNet could have nipped this in the bud long before now by issuing a more comprehensive, clear statement.

If it's not true, they have ruined their own reputation and that of Eidos by saying nothing.

James @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:27AM

This is great. Before events like this the gaming community looks fractured into sets designated to which console(s) you own.
But it's all come together.

It's a bit good I reckon.

Goes back to [insert any handheld]!

Gillman @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:31AM

The piece about the community manager has been pulled down directly after this article went live.

Fandel @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:36AM

(Gamespot freelancer Frank Provo: "Personally, my respect for CNet is shot, and writing for GameSpot is going to feel like a chore for quite some time going forward.")

Wait a second! So, if Frank Provo truly has lost all respect for CNET and writing for Gamespot is a chore, then why continue too write for them?

If Frank Provo is continuing to accept a paycheck from an organization that he have "no respect for," then doesn't that make him nothing more than a Cashwh0re"

Fandel @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:50AM

Replace "have" with "has".

Gotta love Sunday mornings!

Fernando Rocker @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:53AM

*English Lessons.

Quick question: English is not my primary language... can someone explain me when to use have, has, had...? I always get confused.

mcatrage @ Dec 2nd 2007 12:22PM

Sounds like the average worker now.

BPM - The Return @ Dec 2nd 2007 12:34PM

"Had" is the past tense. "I had a GameSpot account, but I cancelled it."
"Have" is the present tense 1st or 2nd person. "I have heard enough of this crap."
"Has" is the present tense 3rd person. "Eidos probably has more hatemail now than for the release of any of the crappy Tomb Raider games."

Fernando Rocker @ Dec 2nd 2007 12:48PM

Thanks BPM!

Hikaru @ Dec 2nd 2007 12:51PM

Fernando: basically have= tengo, had= tuve has= tiene

Fernando Rocker @ Dec 2nd 2007 12:57PM

Hikaru

Thanks a lot... that realy help me a lot.

MiyamotoRuinedmylife @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:51AM

I've reached the point of who gives a shit.. . Some fat guy got fired. Shit happens. Back to video games news. Not news about ex-workers who have nothing at all anymore to do with videogames. People get fired everyday for fucked up reasons and others for perfectly legit reasons. Now, let's open up our eyes, move on, go back to video games.

Fernando Rocker @ Dec 2nd 2007 11:54AM

Buuu...

... rns.

sinergy @ Dec 2nd 2007 12:03PM

It's boo-urns! Get it right! I'll kill you! I'll kill all of you!!! Especially those of you posting!

uhem.....carry on.

Christopher7xii @ Dec 2nd 2007 12:16PM

Probably because if we just sit around ignoring when shit like this happens, it will continue to happen. Bringing awareness to this could strongly discourage companies for raping their employees for giving an honest opinion of something.

Dunno, I guess it's that thing called "fighting injustice". Wanting to kill the awareness of it, you're supporting CNET's choice to fire a man for doing what he thought his job was.

Spirit-of @ Dec 2nd 2007 12:17PM

"I've reached the point of who gives a shit.. . Some fat guy got fired. Shit happens. Back to video games news. Not news about ex-workers who have nothing at all anymore to do with videogames."

So the ways and means with which you gather information about video games, and possibly the influence you use to purchase those games, has nothing at all to do with video games?

I mean, if that's the case, I'll just start going to Eidos.com for all of my objective viewpoints on Kane and Lynch.

Clack @ Dec 2nd 2007 4:29PM

You're perfectly right. People get fired over stupid stuff every day. Game reviewers get bribed for potentially better reviews all the time.

That doesn't mean when it comes to light in a way that this has, that we should all just sit back and pretend nothing bad is going on. An apathetic society is a society on the brink of ruin.

Bennyishere @ Dec 2nd 2007 12:01PM

I am LOVING that Cashwh0re ad!

As far as Jeff Gerstmann goes, it'll be interesting to see what the reason was. It obviously does not have anything to do with Kane & Lynch, since the rating is both just and the pressure denied by CNET. Good to see gamers unite in the boycott, even though I really don't see any reason behind it. So far it's all been speculation, and it seems very far-fetched to me that they would fire such a sexy specimen as Jeff Gerstmann over any of the alleged reasons.

copa @ Dec 2nd 2007 12:29PM

"It obviously does not have anything to do with Kane & Lynch, since the rating is both just and the pressure denied by CNET."

To be clear, CNet never denied that Eidos exerted pressure (even though at least one website had a misleading headline to the contrary). If you read the text of the statement, they just denied that any pressure caused them to fire Jeff or change their content. This may seem like a small distinction to you and me, but it is a mountain in PR-Speak.

CNet's position is basically that all of the pressure Eidos exerted is meaningless. They just happened to come up with their own independent conclusion at the same time that Jeff's "tone" was "unprofessional", and that he needed to be fired without warning once his work was complete for the year.

B3astofthe3ast @ Dec 2nd 2007 12:01PM

You guys dont seem to realize that this was the guy that gave Twilight Princess an 8.8, the same person every nintendo fan despised for doing so....

James @ Dec 2nd 2007 12:06PM

I'm a Zelda fan but thought 8.8 was just his opinion. Just as mine is the game is worth a 9.

Nice try at a blanket comment.

Jonathan Tran @ Dec 2nd 2007 12:11PM

It deserved it.

fidgetwidget @ Dec 2nd 2007 9:35PM

This isn't about Kane & Lynch being a bad game and everyone thinking that the review was fair. It has to do with the fact that a person’s opinion, an opinion he used to get paid for, is the reason for his firing.
Yes this stuff happens all the time, same with racism, rape, and murder. That doesn’t make it right, and we don’t want to let the people doing it get away with it.

Ebert gives movies I love stink reviews, but I would fight for his right to say that he thought the movie stinks.

And I played Kane and Lynch at PAX, and although it was just one level, it wasn’t a 'Bad' game; just one that was clearly pushed out the doors too soon. And while I don’t know enough about the characters or the story to say definitively, I doubt I would call either of them ‘ugly’.

Its not about his reviews, it’s about his rights to say what he thinks.