Video Game Media Watch has an article up about EGM Editor Dan Hsu's attack on rival game mags. The piece includes a short interview with Shoe, who declines to name names and instead explains how he "investigated" his hunch of widespread corruption in game journalism.

Kyle and I had a lively discussion about his article via IM last night and we ended up having to agree to disagree. My contention is that it's hypocritical of Hsu to accuse rival magazines of unethical behavior without being specific because all he is really doing is saying his publication is more ethical than everyone else's and not backing that up without proof, something that I see as being unethical.

If you have proof than lay it out, if you don't, then get some. I like EGM, I think it's one of the better mags out there and I'm sure he's right, but a basic tenet of journalism is proving your allegations. As they say: If your mother tells you she loves you, check it out.

Lots of sites and magazines, including this one, print rumors. But the difference is we print them and say we don't know if they are true. Hsu is printing them and saying they are true, but that he won't tell us the whole story.

With such specific and serious allegations, Hsu owes it to the industry and the readers to name names or keep it to himself.

I also feel that Kyle should have pressed the issue a bit more with Hsu, as it stands the piece feels more like it's just giving him another soap box without getting to the facts or adding any depth to what was originally said.

Game Journalism Gets a "Shoe" to the Head [VGM Watch]

Send an email to the author of this post at .