wira

I completely understand that it is a blog and what the general accepted guidelines of a blog are. However that does not protect a blogger from saying what he/she wants and be free from criticism in the way they write it. The issue is that the writer did not specifically say "In my opinion, what GameStop is doing may be illegal". And even if it was implied that it was just the writers opinion, the average reader will not comprehend that unless it is specfically said. If you need proof of that just look at half of the people who commented that agreed that it is illegal. And if you want to say "well they just dont understand its a blog" just remember that that comment is not just a reader responsibility. It is not the responsibility of the reader to adapt to the writer, it is vice versa no matter what discourse the writer is working in. The writer has to look at what he/she wrote and ask himself "Is what Ive written on the paper the same as what is in my head?". In this case it wasnt. The writer was trying to communicate an opinion but he/she ended up making the article sound like the issue was already a fact that was just waiting to be authenticated, which in itself is harsh waters to tread in.

Maybe the writer is on the verge of something very important but it would have benefitted to wait for the sources to comment and, in the case of the lack of comments, to create an arguement about the issue at GameStop instead.

Im glad other people are on board with me on this one and challange the writer to be more careful in the future.

With all due respect to whoever wrote the article, I dont know how he/she made the connection that contacting the federal trade commission allowed them to imply that GameStop's policy is possibly illegal. Just because the writer thinks it may be illegal (in their own opinion) doesn't mean they are allowed to imply that it is. Im not defending GameStop's gutting practices (I personally dont like the gutting practice) and cant say for myself whethre it is illegal or not but it reeeeeeeeeally bothers me when "journalists" don't take the time to ask themselves if what they are writing makes sense. Right now all I am thinking is that the writer jumped the gun way too early on publishing this story.