Money, money, money.

The more I hear about this, the more reasonable you sound.  If it was only negative editorials being delayed, and only until the short promotional period ended, and negative straight news and reviews could still go up, then I don't see anything wrong with that.  I don't know if Mr. Jackmovich didn't understand "only editorials" or what. 

On the other hand, I'm not impressed that your initial response to this was character assassination.  There is really no other reason to for that video to be in the post you wrote.  And it seems odd to complain about someone airing VGChartz's dirty laundry while doing the same thing yourself in retaliation. 

I know the truth.

I will not reveal it because you cannot handle the truth.

Oooh oooh this is my favorite part!

"The GamrFeed site has a sidebar that they use to promote various features. Two of those features, “Caption This” and “Top Ten”, haven’t been updated since June and August respectively."

What's that, you can't bad mouth "gamrConnect Most Wanted"? Oh yeah, I rock. And I'm humble. Really humble.

The accusations quite clash with many writers of this site being instead often accused of being trollish and biased against games, platforms and console producers, and almost the whole site staff actually being very critical towards some big publishers' policies and attitudes.

This said, for game reviews nothing can beat what PC Zone was when Charlie Brooker wrote on it, but I learned to live with it and I never consider just one opinion to make up my mind. Also, whatever the score, harsh, just or lax, reading the review, if detailed enough, I can quite understand whether a game can be good for my tastes or not.

Malicious and underhanded are not synonyms for unethical.  You admit that you were willing to alter content for at least that time period by withholding it for a few days, whether you did or not.  I believe you when you say you mean no harm and that it hurt no one. 

However, it goes against basic journalistic principles ethically.  Here's a link to the New York Times Co. ethics manual.  There's nothing really special about theirs versus other media organizations.  I just teach journalism and happen to have the link bookmarked.  See section A7 items 80-85.  It strikes me as your site violating many of these.  

I understand that you're not the NYTimes  --a gaming blog is not hard news needing to be held to the strictest standards.  However, I wouldn't be so dismissive about the effect that decisions like these have on your audience.  None of us care about the infighting of employers and employees and he said/she said drama.  But we do want to know that the information we get from a site that at its core is about distributing factual, researched information in the numbers, for example, can be trusted. Your core function doesn't work if people misturst the organization as a whole in any way.  You can talk about how the reviews and news and editorial sections are separated, but your average user sees one site with VGCHartz at the top.  As one section goes, so goes them all in the court of public opinion, and you don't want a "small" decision in one area calling the whole conglomeration into question.  

do people still follow this story??

http://gamejournos.com/post/10296741501/vgchartz-week-day-five-an-open-letter-to-brett
http://gamejournos.com/post/10294397584/vgchartz-week-day-four-day-late-dollar-short

so that's what happend to on of our greatest members Evan aka RubangB, Ghost of RubangB.. :(

I thought it was weird that he disappeared...

So that's what happened to good ol' Rubang. Pity. =(

Well it's the internet... I don't believe it's journalism. Instead the internet breads a sort it's adtertainment...

I mean there's a ton of sites that constantly change headlines of stories until they figure out a headline the produces clicks...

Is there anything anywhere that says websites need to be ethical at all?