Imagine my surprise, then, when I recently found out both Sushi-X and Quartermann didn't exist!
Well, they did exist, technically. But, according to on-again off-again EGM writer Chris Johnston, their columns were not authored by one person, as I had previously believed. Turns out that after the original creators of these characters got tired or moved on, other staff writers would simply take turns writing their columns. Shocking!
This got me thinking about the role that pseudonyms in particular and anonymity in general have had on the video game journalism industry. There are many different ways not to put your full name on an article, and I'm against almost all of them. Here are some examples, and why I don't like them:
- GamePro's emblematic character-reviewers. I remember enjoying the antics of "Scary Larry," "Dan Electro," "Dr. Zombie" and the rest of the crew back in the day. I even have fond memories of the occasional comics that would feature the characters. Of course, I subscribed to GamePro when I was between 10 and 12 years old. Now I find the characters childish and a little insulting.
How am I supposed to take a review seriously when it's "written" by someone who hides behind a cartoon image? Furthermore, given the pseudonym's potential portability between authors (see above examples of Quartermann ans Sushi-X), I can't even be sure that two different reviews by "Dr. Zombie" are actually by the same person. This become a problem if I want to compare different reviews by the same reviewer to gauge their interest. - Unsigned articles: Sites like Blue's News and Spong often post articles without any attribution. When an article is written anonymously, the true source of the information is left totally to the reader's imagination. At the very least, it makes it look like the publication doesn't fully value the contributions of their writers, or that the writing is a conglomeration of thoughts from the entire staff (in which case the article should be signed "staff"). At the worst, it makes it look like the articles are written directly by a PR person, or simply pieced together from other reports.
As ludicrous as some of these suggestions might be, an article without a byline leaves them all available in the eyes of the reader. Some sort of indication of authorship is neccessary in almost every case to let the reader know who is talking to them. - Web handles: Slashdot, Evil Avatar, and many other blog-like sites often let users post news items using internet handles instead of real names. The problem with handles is they make the writer look like a fanboyish message board poster rather than a serious person that deserves the reader's respect. When I see a bit of writing by someone named "Karl The Pagan," I don't expect any award-winning journalism. A real name immediately makes the author seem more real and more reliable to the reader.
- Game Informer's hidden last names: I just noticed this recently, but the editorial crew in Game Informer are identified primarily by their first names. You have to squint at the tiny type in the sidebar to find the full names, while the first names appear in big type next to the pictures on the Staff page and under each review. To me, this comes off as a little too personal for a professional magazine, but it's not a horrible transgression. Still, I think a well-publicized last name is a sign of respect to the author and an important connection for the reader.
- GMR's Game Geezer: I've only read a few issues of GMR, but the Game Geezer columns and their grizzled writing style stand out in my mind. While I like the humor and tone of the articles, I can't eliminate the feeling that the Game Geezer, like Quartermann and Sushi-X, don't really exist. Back in the days of Game Players magazine, Bill Donohue managed to inhabit his own grizzled persona, The Jaded Gamer, without hiding the his true identity. I suggest GMR do the same.
That's why when I work as an editor at Evil Avatar my user handle is JustinMcElroy, it's not so clever, but it gives me some accountability.
ReplyDeleteI too was let down to find out recently from Chris CJ Johnston's Blog that the fabled Sushi-X and Quaterman were not real. I grew up reading that mag from its inception. It was like finding out Santa wasn't real all over again.
ReplyDeleteWhile I definitely see the point about using handles and such, I can't totally agree. Using aliases doesn't really bother me so much so long as I know there's a person behind it who's responsible for what's said and I can verify what they've said. It's all about accountability like Justin said. Having fake names makes it really easy for people to change personas. (Though, I don't know why anyone would want to dodge responsibility in gaming journalism.) But in that vein, how do we really know Justin's real name is Justin, or that mine is Jeff? (No offense Justin; I'm sure you get my point.)
ReplyDeleteI mean, good luck trying to find any info on my under my real name of "Jeff Bridges" on the internet. But then type "Jeffool," or even "looffej," (my IM names) into Google and you'll find me easily.
(Though, there are two other Jeffools. One's Japanese and one's French. French-Jeffool has nice friends, one IMed me once. And I love Famous Jeff Bridges' website design. And lots of his movies.)
The dudes at Gamepro really never hid behind their "cartoon images" on several occasions they would show the real people playing the games. You got to see Scary Larry and Dan Electro and the others. Each one had a specific genre they really liked. Major Mike really dug his fighting games, etc. I too was also 12-14 when I was really in to Gamepro, but, they're not the dominant Game magazine any more either.
ReplyDeleteI think it's cool that EGM use(d) Sushi-X and Quaterman, it's lets them vent some frustration that you know stacks up when you play a lot of shitty games over the course of the year. That way you can get away with ragging a game without Sponsors yanking ads for an unsavory review...if it's more like an Op-ed...you can't really complain.
This reminds me of the "Robert X. Cringely" pseudonym. InfoWorld sued a former columnist because he kept using this fake name (and he still does). Here's a good article about it.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.blancmange.net/tmh/articles/cringely.html
Yeah, I don't use it anymore--my Xbox Live gamertag will be changed when the account runs out--and I generally like to say "Hey, that was me, but Dan Elektro is (tm) and (c) IDG Entertainment..."
ReplyDeleteI think there's really two issues here: accountability and respectability. The former can engender the latter but they're not always so interconnected or dependent. There is a point behind the idea of demanding more personal accountability (and honesty) from say, a game journalist. However like anything, it becomes silly if taken too far, and maybe a little pretentious. Just because someone uses a handle or avatar doesn't mean they have a desire to avoid accountability or don't understand being "real". There's a difference I think between a well-crafted avatar or meaningful handle, and random Internet forum handle like "Giggadiddyobagman1924" or something that is obviously facetious and intentionally immature.
ReplyDeleteCalling the old Gamepro cartoon characters childish or insulting is a matter of opinion, as is insisting that it is "hiding" to write behind one (or for one, as the case may be). In point of fact, some of the greatest honesty comes from an avatar. For some people, an avatar is actually a side of themselves they have no way (or choose not to) express in other venues. And if a review is well written and insightful... does it really matter who signed it in the bitter end? As another comment said, the writer should not be placed above the writing. Using psuedonyms has long been a tradition in publishing.
I think what is really needed is a greater sense of accountability and maturity, including maturity with how things such as handles and avatars are used... rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater in the process of grasping for respectability. And just judging things by the standards of old time entrenched media and journalism. I look back on my old issues of Gamefan, with the colorful "characters" and avatars that were common and the wit and self-referential personality evident in them and admire the magazine for doing something creative and not sacrificing a sense of fun and whimsy (talking about videogames, remember!) just to look as "respectable" as war-writers in Iraq...
Just two cents.
It's a good thing I don't consider myself a video game journalist... just another Slashdot "fanboy" who submitted the news before all the other Slashdot fanboys.
ReplyDelete