Threads like these are good to keep a precedent for improvement. If we just pretend bias doesn't exist, then our medium's journalism will never improve either.

I think it's been severely degenerating across the board.

Doesn't mean they have to pay no price.

Man, that 3rd example is just terrible. Way to be professional, journalists! -_-'

I love how all the submitted Kotaku articles are written by Luke Plunkett... lol!

The saddest of all is that some people cannot see anything wrong with how the industry handles the Wii.

Whilst I agree with what this thread is trying to acheive, doesn't this occur to some extent in all media. They all have an agenda and they're all writing to appeal to the readers. If most people reading Kotaku love the HD systems and hate the Wii, then they'll write that way. That's their agenda, to make the Wii and Nintendo appear as crap as possible.

Journalistic integrity would be nice, but if it existed everywhere, we wouldn't have to put up with think like The Daily Mail (UK) and Fox News.

I'm glad you have correlated these troll articles and spelt it out for what what they really are. Something like this needs to be seen more by the Internet and general public.

"I was logged in to Joystiq when Sliwinski posted the second story and he was RIPPED by several commentors. I was one of them. But instead of eating his crow, he (and/or someone else on Joystiq Staff) began deleting ALL the comments the pointed out how wrong Sliwinski was. I got banned for reposting my comments each time they were deleted. VGChartz users Kenny and Fernando Rocker saw the entire thing unfold. In fact in an MSN convo I had with Fernando, he asked Justin McElroy why I was banned. McElroy responded that they 'don't tolerat Joystiq hate'. More like they don't tolerate commentors holding their editors accountable!"

Glad I don't post there anymore.

Yes and and lesser yes with some no. Personal bias is indeed in ALL media and more importantly critical judgement. When Bias is really strong and high it's a sign of upheavle and change. It's also a sign of child like behaviour. A lot of media is like this. There are plenty of music reviwers who don't like Metalica, Enya, Britney Spears, David Bowie, Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, Ozzie..... If some likes say Pink Floyd they aren't given the reviews for say Britney Spears. If someone like Ozzie, they don't review Enya. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense. At the same time a Metalica reviewer isn't going to start writing articles about Aqua and her awful music. Profesionals don't go out aiming to knock on different tastes. Mature reviewers of people who like NSync will respect those who listen to Kate Bush and Kate Bush. Reviewers even if they hate a music won't "professionly" attack. Though there will always be the rare exception. Did this behaviour happen. Very likely. During the era of Beatoven, Mozart and Vivaldi... I assure you, you can find discussion on such. But it's been so long that just general respect for the artistry and creativity is more important that personal taste for bashing. Ok, ok, the level of bias journalism attack is only reduced, never really gone.

This is why gamer reviewing is considered a joke. This is a growing phase for the industry. Come 10, 20 years down the road this style of reviewing will be dead.

The 2nd and 3rd example are terrible, I agree. But the first? I don't really see any difference between the original sentence and the new one: it's just worded slightly clearer.