Malstrom: Game Industry tries to justify corruption

[vanatos]

rocketpig said:

He just tried his hardest to make Jeff Gerstmann look like an ass for no real reason, twisting his words and blowing it all out of proportion. Do you really need me to scrounge up old articles to show where he's done that sort of thing in the past?

Ask yourself this question: was it really necessary to try to make Gerstmann look bad and was it necessary to get his op-ed's point across? If it wasn't necessary, why'd he do it? More importantly, why does he seem to do it so often? This is the third or fourth Malstrom article I've read where I thought the same thing and I generally avoid the guy's writing nowadays.

You do realize that Maelstrom is responding to a kotaku article ABOUT the ethical concerns of company-paid trips to reviewers/journalists?

and that Gerstmann's comments is IN THAT KOTAKU ARTICLE?

When your going to make an opinion piece about game reviewers/journalists and companies paying their trips to games you have to talk about

1.Game reviewers/journalists

2.The companies

And Maelstrom's article IS ABOUT reviewers/journalists downplaying what is (in his opinion) an ethically wrong situation?

It is like you want Maelstrom to talk about reviewers without talking about reviewers.