Don’t Ask About Rock Band On IGN’s Music Hub – UPDATE
Shawn Elliot, formerly of Games for Windows Magazine and 1UP.com, tweeted earlier this evening about IGN.com’s MusicHub – a community, news, and wiki site dedicated to… something other than what you might think.
Check out IGN’s response to this story here!
Instead of covering each title in the plastic-instrument genre, MusicHub focuses on pumping out story after story in Activision’s Hero series. Wanna know who’s going to be in Band Hero? They have that info. Did you hear about the DJ Hero Special Edition? They have that too. But don’t ask about this week’s Rock Band or SingStar DLC releases – that info just doesn’t exist. In fact, the only mentions of Harmonix on the site muck this up even more. For example, a revisionist history wiki page seems the suggest that Harmonix got out of the music game biz when they moved to MTV/EA. And the only mention of Rock Band on the site’s Twitter account states simply “Guitar Hero 5 to Outsell The Beatles: Rock Band by 2-to1.” Thanks, IGN MusicHub! You fulfill all of my rhythm action game news needs. So, what’s going on here?
Nowhere on the site does IGN claim that MusicHub is a promotional offering. In fact, their rules page makes it clear that advertising is simply unallowed. So then, let’s give them the benefit of the doubt. Let’s say that this is content fresh from IGN’s news and editorial departments. If so, I have to ask: Why make a centralized music game site that doesn’t cover both of the industry’s biggest titles in that genre? Is this just poor reporting? Alternatively, is what Shawn Elliott’s tweet said true? Is this entire site a massive, dayglo advertisement paid for by Bobby Kotick’s Activision? The hub’s narrow focus, one sided timeline and narrative, and Twitter bio (“Official Twitter account for MUSIC HUB, the Guitar Hero 5, Band Hero, and DJ Hero community site. Rockin’”) support that thesis.
And to speak openly, what’s worse is that after years of SNAFUs of this sort (and worse), I’ve become so cynical that it’s just easier to believe that this is a corporate sell-out than poor journalism; or rather, that it’s both. When we got vocal in the inner-circle about this matter, a peer asked us again and again: Why should we care? We never trusted IGN anyway, right? We know this sort of thing happens all the time. Why get mad at this? How is this different from, say, Nintendo Power advertising a first party Nintendo game?
First: It’s different because unlike official magazines, and unlike “proper” advertisements, there is no transparency here. As I said, nowhere on this site is there an admission that this is a promotional site offering advertisement, not editorial and news content. This equates to a literal cashing in on the good faith built between IGN and their consumers. It is as if tomorrow morning the New York Times starts running a new Automotive section, but filled it only with news and opinion on Ford products (and how wicked sweet they are, bro) – and assured that the entire section was identical to the rest of the paper in style and layout.
Second: This sort of advertisement stands outside of the standard system. If a site like ours wanted to secure Activision sponsorship – in a traditional, banner-ads sense – then we’d have to show Activision “big” numbers. The reason that a site like IGN can broker a deal with Activision is because their traffic makes them worth Activision’s time. But what if you can tell a publisher that you’ll be promoting their product in a way that customers don’t associate with advertising? What if instead of being in those corners of a site (that most gamers are too webwise to click anyway), an entire site was devoted to their product. Then you’re hitting the guys who are interest in music games, not just the guys interested in Activision’s music games. As such, if this is promotional and not just weak editorial content, then what IGN is doing is supporting their business on something other than the product that they make. They’re not selling ads on articles that will get high hit counts, they’re selling articles with high hit counts.
And, when asked a final time: “Who cares? How does this affect you?” I answer twice, plainly:
If Shawn Elliott’s suspicions are right, then this hurts everyone in the business. It makes every reader on the ‘net a little bit more weary and a little bit more wary. Now when upstart blog X runs a super positive review on some Activision title, there will be a reader who says “Yeah… but we know the whole game journalism thing is a sham anyway.” It doesn’t only affect IGN, it affects the entire mood of the conversation journalists and critics are having with readers, and it makes it that much harder to break from the established Metacritic mold without being called biased or paid-off. It happened when Jeff Gerstmann left Gamespot, and it could happen here.
But mostly, even if it doesn’t directly affect me, even if I’m done with this games writing thing the moment I hit “Post”, I care because it’s wrong. Because I don’t like it when people cheat at board games, even when I’m not playing. Because I can’t stand it when a young songwriter is plagiarized, even if I hate the pop song that was stolen. Because even if it isn’t “valuable in and of itself” I feel like integrity is a thing that’s always worth pursuing.
Update: Since the time of this post, Teddy Pierson, Community Site Manager at IGN.com, contacted us. Here is his (unedited) response:
The author of that article seems to be lacking something pretty important, knowledge. So I wanted to set you guys straight as your article is very misleading and full of holes.
Music Hub is a Community Site (AKA fan site) for only the “Hero” games. Another example of one of our Community Sites would be GTA ‘Hood (http://gta.ign.com/), that only covers the “GTA” series. We have about 55 other such sites that cover specific games and/or series. So I guess the author was sort of right that we are catering to only the “Hero” games, but not in the sense he was attempting to imply. Just like a community site for Super Mario would not cover Donky Kong games. So I find it hard to believe the author has never heard of a fan site before. It also seems he didnt even attempt to investigate that we have been running fan site for over 14 years, via the Planet and Vault Networks. Each site is run by actual fans of the game from the community. Music Hub is no different.
Though to be fair to the author, our name choice for this site might not have been the best one and it may have helped confuse the guy who wrote that article.
Here are the main hubs for the networks, you can find links to all our community sites.
http://www.gamespy.com/network/
http://vault.ign.com/
Interesting side note you may not have been aware of. GameSpy.com actually spawned from a fan site, Planet Quake, back in 1996. Thats where it all got started and it was GameSpy’s first site… before being known as “GameSpy”, and well before merging with IGN. You can learn a bit more by going here – http://ten.ign.com/
I ask that you rethink that article and rethink keeping it published in its current state. Because you are actually attacking all fans sites across the internet, and thats not cool. It also make gives the impression you do not investigate facts that you publish.
OneLastContinue.com has decided to stand by this piece as it was originally published. The following letter was sent as a response:
Yes, I am aware of IGN’s VaultNetwork (and yes, the concept of fan and community sites.) But this doesn’t change many of the questions I’ve put forth.
My original claim was that the site lacked transparency – that it might be a promotional site, and that if it was that there was no way to tell that. Even if the end result is not that this page is sponsored by Activision, the true nature of the site is still clouded. This problem is due to number of design elements, and yes, the name is one of them. You are correct to state that the title “MusicHub” does add to the confusion. It differs from other Vault communities like City Of Heroes Vault and the mentioned Grand Theft Auto ‘Hood. People expect a certain, single type of news and opinion from those sites. Viewers who land on your GTA community site from a web search for “GTA” will find what they expect. If the title of the site was “CrimeHub” or “OpenWorldHub” though, there would be a clear set of rival products missing from the news feed. MarioHub shouldn’t be expected to cover Donkey Kong games, but I think PlatformerHub would. My issue with the title MusicHub is that it isn’t a MusicHub.
But the title might be the least confusing part of the issue. Compare the header of MusicHub with the header of the CityOfHeroes Vault. Both have the IGN logo displayed prominently, but MusicHub is missing the link to and logo of the Vault Network. In fact, the only place “Vault” appears on MusicHub’s homepage is in the default IGN footer. Also absent is any claim that the site is a communty or fan site, not even on your FAQ. The site is prominently branded with the IGN logo and your twitter feed has the IGN name in it. I cannot find the familiar statement that “The views and opinions here in do not reflect those held by IGN.com and its staff,” etc.
It is shortsighted (at least) to imagine that the readers landing on your site from web searches or links around the internet are familiar with the history of the Vault. It is even more surprising that you suspect them to know that this site belongs to that network of fan sites. The name, prominent IGN branding, and lack of information stating the purpose and design of the site all combine to obfuscate what MusicHub is. The average consumer will see these things and expect the same editorial tone and authoritative voice that comes from the rest of IGN’s content, and they’d be wrong. I don’t say this to disrespect the work you and your writers do, only to emphasize that this content isn’t coming from the newsdesks at IGN HQ, but that no effort is made to make that known.
It is even unclear as to the employment status of your staff writers. I’m confident that you, as the Community Site Manager, are a paid employee of the company. But hiring practices on other hubs indicate that these are run by dedicated, caring fans – not paid contributors. Is it the same here? The reader who knows their work is coming from unpaid fans enters a given text from a different angle than one who thinks they are paid, generalized reporters. And sometimes this can work to the benefit of the fan site. I’m also unsure as to the ad revenue that these sites (whether penned by volunteers or employees) generate, and I make no claims about the integrity of your work – but it certainly highlights the long standing problem of endemic advertising in our industry.
I’d also like to note that these observations weren’t only made by me. Shawn Elliott pointed it out first, on his twitter feed. A NeoGAF thread asks “So, this is legal?”- which wasn’t even a question I asked. These people, and others, didn’t need my article to reach this conclusion. It is absolutely anecdotal, but everyone I linked to the site (even when I didn’t explain my editorial opinion) reached the same conclusion, and had the same questions. When multiple, independent groups reach the same conclusion it may not make the conclusion true, but it certainly helps to validate the thought process. It reveals, at least, that I’m not coming from nowhere with my concerns. I even went so far as to mention how upsetting it was that our default response is the cynic’s response.
I love fan sites. You may have noticed I linked to your City of Heroes vault more than once – that’s because as a long time CoH player I’ve always respected the work done there. I’m a reader of Let’s Plays, an explorer of mod communities, and I spent years of my adolescence writing games that I liked (or didn’t) for free on a LiveJournal account. I would like to be clear that I’m not attacking fan sites. In fact, I don’t think I’m attacking any sites. I’m only asking for clarity and disclosure:
Who is running MusicHub?
Check out IGN’s response to this story here!
Great article, even if the content is scary as hell. I’m glad we have people openly questioning this move and calling IGN on passing off advertising as editorial content.
What makes this even more alarming is that it’s coming on the day that Conde Nast closes four major magazines, including the Gourmet, which has been around for almost 50 years.
Frightening times for journalism.
This is what happens when you have the games industry supporting games journalism. If games journalism had real advertising, this wouldn’t really be a problem.
If games journalism were taken more seriously and a distinct method of deliberation between critics and readers floundered a better understanding of the relationship between consumers and the industry than we’d be able to overlook this oversight.
I think it’s rather fortunate that much of IGN’s content can’t be taken at face value (a value that has depreciated steadily over the years) because it lends to opinion and original thought outsourcing. I personally never go to IGN if I want to know what someone thought about a game or the experience provided by a game. If I want to know what I can take away from a game, after I’m done playing it, I look elsewhere.
It is unfortunate that the typical consumer, the typical gamer, has no interest in that insight. The industry has lead us to believe that the experience the typical gamer is looking for is as shallow as the “editorial content” provided by IGN.
Everybody likes fun but not everyone is a child. Some of us belong here and some of us don’t. People go to IGN for stats and crap information that ultimately doesn’t matter. People come to places like this for thought and insight. Much of our medium has matured with us – it’s up to us to make sure that we can tell the difference between discourse and bullshit.
You said it yourself, “You know, why does fiction affect us even though we know it’s false, what determines the meaning of a work, on a scale of 1 – 10 how stupid is it to try and review games on a scale of 1 – 10.”
They claim “we are a community site for fans of the “Hero” games.” in the comments section of this post..
The site is dubious to be sure because I had to dig around to even find that little nugget.
However, I have to ask, what about journalism? Has anybody contacted those who run the site? I know this is an op-ed piece based off a tweet but have you dug around at all?
The Harmonix entry on the Music Hub wiki has been updated — it’s now a cut-and-paste of the Harmonix Music Systems page from Wikipedia (complete with inline citation numbers, but stripped of all hyperlinks), which itself has nothing new to say about Harmonix as of November 2008, back when The Beatles: Rock Band was so in-development that it didn’t have an official title.
It still has a blank “People” section, and of all the games mentioned in the wiki article, surprise — only the GH ones are listed in the mini-bio at the top of the page.
Also: “Gerstmann.” :X
This article is kind of funny actually. You do realize its a fan site for the hero games just like Score Hero is http://www.scorehero.com/ (which happens to be a great site!). Did the person who wrote this piece even heard of a fan site before?! IGN and many other sites have whole networks for them, just look at Curse Gaming or Ten Ton Hammer. You guys talk about journalism but then you write this article? Whats next, writing an article about a Call of Duty fan site just because they dont include the Medal of Honor games? This article is pretty bad and there is nothing wrong with fan sites and I go to plenty of them, Im sure we all do.
I would watch out they could go after you for slander and the journalism police might arrest you too for not knowing your facts or the internet.
@trancehead –
Teddy Pierson, is that you?
I think Mr. Walker ought to do an IP trace, just in case. You never know if it’s really from IGN’s offices…
@trancehead –
First, Score Hero has a dedicated Rock Band subpage: http://rockband.scorehero.com/
Second, even on their main Guitar Hero-focused page, Score Hero acknowledges Rock Band: Beatles existence.
Third, Music Hub is such a general name that it gives off the false impression that it encompasses all aspects of the rhythm game genre, not just the Activision-funded subset on display. It is equivalent to, say, Gamespot creating a sub-site called “FPS Central” that only contains articles about Halo.
Fourth, when Music Hub uses the IGN logo, that is equivalent to throwing the entire editorial weight of the IGN network behind their claims. This isn’t some fans putting together a score and chart database before the current-generation emergence of online scoreboards, or some fanboys proclaiming that their console franchise of choice is the clear victor. This is a major videogame “journalism” site creating a page which implies that only one franchise is worth paying attention to within that genre.
@trancehead – I’m not sure if your insane or just really bad at humor.
The more I peruse both Music Hub and IGN music, it looks much worse. I still would like to see a “journalist” get an official statement from IGN.
What’s the big deal? I can’t believe Shawn is leading the crusade about this on twitter either. His magazine would surely not have ads masquerading as editorial… oh wait…
@Mike G. – Sorry, just saw the update, thank you for getting some clarification even if it doesn’t clear a lot of things up. Looking forward to Pierson’s response…
Just to clarify, that wasn’t a dig at Shawn’s magazine being nonexistent. I was just pointing out that in every issue they had ads that looked like editorial content unless you looked closely. So I find it very funny that Shawn has his panties all in a bunch because of this.
@sp0rsk Those are pretty clearly marked “ADVERTISEMENT” tho, usually didn’t fit the look of the magazine, and had no relation at all to the actual editorial staff. Big difference.
@sp0rsk – Likewise, other parts of the magazine weren’t telling you to go check out those ads.
GFW always said “Advertorial” on the pages sot that you very clearly could see what was editorial and what was paid content by the Games for Windows platform.
I’m looking forward to the upcoming BreakfastHub, featuring the McGriddle.
@sp0rsk – Don’t mistake a person with a publication. Even if that is true (I don’t really know), he could have been opposed to it.
Well this is an awesome url for an image:
http://ads.ign.com/advertisers/activision/musichub/gh5_backUp.jpg
Great discussion. I must side with the writer who I believe has clearly investigated this matter. Pierson and MusicHub are the ones who are misleading. Either cover all “Music Games” or change your name to HeroHub!
Now there twitter page is saying that they do cover rock band.
http://twitter.com/IGNMusicHub
@TheCrowing –
They’re saying that IGN Music covers Rock Band, but Music Hub does not.
“Just to clarify, that wasn’t a dig at Shawn’s magazine being nonexistent. I was just pointing out that in every issue they had ads that looked like editorial content unless you looked closely. So I find it very funny that Shawn has his panties all in a bunch because of this. ”
Both Jeff Green and Shawn have always been vocally against this type of thing – EVEN while working for Ziff Davis.
Listen to old GFW podcasts and it comes up fairly often (the big one that comes to mind was the discussion about the Jeff Gertsmann scandal)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Gerstmann
It should also be kept in mind that although editorial has control over editorial content, they don’t necessarily have control over advertising / marketing content. Hence the problem.
I’m honestly not sure what to think about this. Whats the difference between musichub and the various planet sites IGN does?
Well, let me weigh in here folks with one question.
Why does the title of the hub page have the following text:
“Music Hub: Guitar Hero 5, Band Hero, DJ Hero Official News, Videos, Guides and News”
Official news? Surely that means the page is an official outlet and NOT a fansite. Fansites, as far as I know, are not a source of official information. Furthermore the City of Heroes Vault has no “Official” in its header leading further credence as the Hub as an outlet for the Hero franchise and specifically – Activision.
well done.
Shawn Elliott is our king.
kinda fucking disgusting, but i stopped reading games news since EGM died.
How is it that the user names “NextWeek” and “[GSI]lufiaguy “, doing a quick Google search, produces these:
http://club.ign.com/b/about?username=NextWeek&which=boards
http://planetthesims.gamespy.com/static.php?page=site/staff
Now, correct me if I am wrong, but if your job title is “Staff” or “VaultStaff”, how can that not point to anything but incrimination or at least suspicion?
What about the title “Site Director” under “Staff List” ?
Even if they are not, it gives one pause to think that not everything is on the level or particular clear with this issue
@Kevitivity
The difference is totally obvious if you actually read the article.
The first issue is the name:
PlanetQuake is a site about Quake.
PlanetTonyHawk is a site about Tony Hawk
Grand Theft Auto Hood is a site about Grand Theft Auto
Music Hub is a site about … No, not about Music games!
If it was called Guitar Hero Hub, the most major component of the problem wouldn’t even be there.
The second issue is the clarity of separation of advertising and editorial. No one expects a fan site to be totally impartial, but there’s a difference between a sincere fan testimonial and a paid advertisement, and the author is clearly arguing that Music Hub doesn’t make that distinction clear.
If you read a magazine and there’s an advertisement, it’s clearly visually an advertisement. “Advertorial” content must be clearly delimited. No one is surprised when a developer blog claims they’ve made the best game of all time, but it’s important that if a third party source makes such claims that we know it’s not because they were bought and paid for.
Even just a simple caveat on the “Hub” or “Vault” pages stating that the views expressed there are not the views of IGN or affiliated outlets.
Instead, IGN brands the hell out those areas, muddying the distinction.
Can they be nailed with this?
“Federal Trade Commission revised their “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials” (click here to download), urging bloggers who review products, from a book or DVD to a video game system, to disclose if they received the product for free when giving an endorsement. According to the Washington Post, breaking these new guidelines could generate up to $11,000 in fines. (There are no penalties directly associated with violating the rules. But the FTC could seek a cease-and-desist order. If you ignore that, the fines start coming in.) These new guidelines will be put into effect on December 1, 2009″
@Anonymous
Thanks for making this a little more clear for me.