Sony Blackballs Blog Over PS3 Rumor

Earlier today Kotaku ran an article looking at the possible future of PlayStation 3's online component. They detail a form of Sony Mii, with achievements accruing in an actual room as you succeed in playing games. During their correspondence with Sony as preparation for the story, the company asked them very specifically not to run the story. They then threatened to pull PR support for the site if they ran the story. When the story went up anyway, Sony followed through with its threats: "So, it is for this reason, that we will be canceling all further interviews for Kotaku staff at GDC and will be dis-inviting you to our media event next Tuesday. Until we can find a way to work better together, information provided to your site will only be that found in the public forum. Again, I take absolutely no joy in sending you this note, but given the situation you have put me into, I have no choice. - Dave Karraker, Sr. Director, Corporate Communications, Sony Computer Entertainment America." Update: 03/02 02:27 GMT by Z : I am happy to be able to add that Sony and Kotaku made up after what sounds like a lengthy phone call. 'Good on you' to both Mr. Karraker and Mr. Crecente.

Comments

Close to the mark?

[sylvainsf]

Perhaps Kotaku has described something very akin to a trade secret of Sony. This action certainly lends credence to the rumor.

Re:Close to the mark?

[_xeno_]

I seem to recall Sony saying achievements were stupid and that they wouldn't bother implementing them because no one wanted them, or something to that effect.

Apparently this is more Sony innovation in the "SIXAXIS" sense: bad mouth the innovator when people praise the idea, and then come back and "invent" it themselves and pretend it's some huge new feature, that they'd been planning for years!

I can understand why the may not want "innovation" of that kind leaked, instead preferring to very carefully "manage" the PR to try and pretend this is some great new idea and not just a crappy knock-off of both X-Box Live and the Wii's online services.

Re:Close to the mark?

[kinglink]

There's two schools of thought. This idea is so amazingly better then their announcement this weekend that it screwed Sony. Or that it's exactly what it is and it makes people realizing they are ripping off the other two consoles.

Either way it's Sony doing what Sony does, finding new ways to create bad press. They wanted bloggers and grass roots stuff happening for them, hell they paid for a couple blogs through advertising, but they don't realize bloggers are gamers, not just the press and they'll give stories to gamers and not put up with Sony telling them not to publish a rumor that they might have.

Now Kotaku is NOT 100 percent right here.... well wait, yes they are, they got a rumor, went to sony for a comment, got none worth publishing other then Sony telling them not to publish it, and then published it. Perfectly fine. But Sony is right to black ball them. However instead of telling them they are blackballed, they should have done it subtly, not talked to them, never grant interviews to them and so on. Doing this just produces a PR nightmare that is added to the list of nightmares that they have to deal with.

On the other hand because of all the other hell Sony has caused themselves, this is a relatively minor problem.

Re:Close to the mark?

[PoderOmega]

I believe Sony also took a shot at Microsoft for poor backwards compatibility as well... and now they are releasing PS3s that play "only" 1000 games. I am not sure what that percentage is but I would guess it is only 50% of the PS2 library at most. I don't really care that much about BC, but I don't understand why they badmouth MS and Nintendo at first, then do the same thing later. However, having weak BC is not really "ripping off" MS or Nintendo like the achievements or motion controler.

Re:Close to the mark?

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps Kotaku has described something very akin to a trade secret of Sony. This action certainly lends credence to the rumor.

Or perhaps they have no intention of doing this and would prefer such rumors did not get started. This guy had access to inside information, given by Sony, in exchange for certain agreements. He chose to violate those agreements even when the consequences were spelled out for him.

These understandings are nothing secret, in exchange for holding a review until release date, you are given early access to that information so you can prepare a review. Post your story 2 days early to "scoop" your rivals, get cut off from the privledged access because you can't follow simple directions.

The summary is trying to make out like Sony has done something wrong...

Re:Close to the mark?

[Southpaw018]

A direct ripoff of two major competitors and combining them into one idea is a trade secret?

Sony's in even more trouble than I thought.

Re:Close to the mark?

[Anonymous Coward]

"But Sony is right to black ball them. However instead of telling them they are blackballed, they should have done it subtly, not talked to them, never grant interviews to them and so on. Doing this just produces a PR nightmare that is added to the list of nightmares that they have to deal with.

On the other hand because of all the other hell Sony has caused themselves, this is a relatively minor problem."

Yes, but given that Sony couldn't even handle a simple maneuver as you suggested, one even the most socially inept geek could handle....it begs the following--if they cannot handle basic PR, why would I trust that they could handle the rest of their console which includes complex tasks such as hardware, software, and programmer/developer relationships?

The PS3 may be a glorious piece of hardware and have jaw-dropping graphics. But at this point, who the hell cares. A bank that isn't unstable that is perceived as unstable becomes unstable (as people withdraw funds due to fear, like a stock market bust); Sony has a product they are just mauling themselves with every action they take, so why should I drop $500-600 on the console + $200 for games for something going down the drain?

Nintendo with the Wii is printing money. Sony seems to be content flushing money down the toilet with the PS3; hell, I wouldn't be surprised if *PS2* purchases we see from all the industry console and games numbers has become the unintended *bright* side to the PS3's launch for Sony.

Re:Close to the mark?

[shimage]

This guy had access to inside information, given by Sony, in exchange for certain agreements.

The only reason I'm replying to you, coward, is because some idiot thought that this gibberish was insightful. McWhertor got an "anonymous" tip from an insider, not an off-the-record insider tip from Sony proper. There were no agreements (e.g., an NDA) to be broken. Finally, it's not like Kotaku even posted it as fact; it's very obviously labeled as RUMOR (and McWhertor reiterates this repeatedly in the post). While I don't think Sony did anything immoral, I still think it was pretty stupid to react to the story in this way. Certainly, if their intent was to stifle the spread of this rumor, it has failed spectacularly. Or maybe they thought this would be a good way to spread the news?

Re:Close to the mark?

[gomiam]

...this guy had access to inside information, given by Sony, in exchange...

Please go read TFA before shooting your mouth. As I read it, Kotaku never worked on exclusive inside Sony information but on rumour (and called it a rumour up front) and published comments by Sony execs. It was Sony who asked them not to publish when asked about the matter, and I find no mention to Sony's giving any inside information.

If Kotaku isn't lying, some Sony execs decided to throw a tantrum about public information when they couldn't stop someone from drawing conclusions and publishing them. Whether Sony acted wrong I'll leave to Slashdoters to decide individually.

Re:Close to the mark?

[PopeRatzo]

Sony is acting exactly like you'd expect them to act after having their own way for so long. It's a recurring theme in the corporate world. They'd been given so much power over the consumer that the become outraged when people don't fall in line.

It's another story entirely, but I blame the privileged status given to corporations in this country (which is now the model for the world). A corporation gets all the benefits of the individual without any of the responsibilities. Sony tried to spin the release of some product and journalists didn't play ball. Since when should journalists be EXPECTED to play ball? It's not really their job to "play ball". It's their job to report the news. There's been such a cozy little circle jerk between the corporations and their captive press that any disruption in the smooth flow from PR flack to public eyes causes havoc. Screw 'em.

Re:Close to the mark?

[Anonymous Coward]

You have a source that they can only play 1000 ps2 games?

And Sony always said their plan was to go from ps2 hardware to software emulation when they could. The issue is if they are transitioning too early.

Re:Close to the mark?

[heinousjay]

I think maybe you overshot the target. Let's not forget that the people running the corporations make these decisions. Sony is not some autonomous entity capable of thought and action. Only the people employed by the company can do those things.

I'd also say you're dead wrong in your conclusion, specifically regarding the 'cozy little circle jerk.' Certainly, there are members of the media who are little more than flacks. That's not the whole story, however, and it's probably not even the half (although I have no numbers one way or the other.)

Let's not get carried away. It serves no one.

Re:Close to the mark?

[leadsling]

Yes, but given that Sony couldn't even handle a simple maneuver as you suggested, one even the most socially inept geek could handle....it begs the following--if they cannot handle basic PR, why would I trust that they could handle the rest of their console which includes complex tasks such as hardware, software, and programmer/developer relationships?

Please go back and re-read your quote. Everyone knows social competency and geekness are polar opposites! Maybe Sony's problem is that it is too far advanced for the market. Or maybe that the geeks are running the store instead of doing what they do best.

Re:Close to the mark?

[leadsling]

Why would they be in trouble? Microsoft does this on a regular basis and gets praised for it!@

Re:Close to the mark?

[Samah]

Something to add to their list right next to Lik-Sang.

Re:Close to the mark?

[krotkruton]

Yes, but given that Sony couldn't even handle a simple maneuver as you suggested, one even the most socially inept geek could handle....it begs the following--if they cannot handle basic PR, why would I trust that they could handle the rest of their console which includes complex tasks such as hardware, software, and programmer/developer relationships?

I understand your argument and don't intend to argue about the rest of your post, but this comment really sounded wrong to me, especially the part I marked as bold. You use "the most socially inept geek" as an example of someone who could handle this decision better, but why would you trust someone to do PR for you when the person can't avoid making a complete fool of him/herself at a party? It really isn't fair to compare PR ability with software or hardware design, although it is more applicable to programmer/developer relationships. You made some other valid points, but this quote really detracted from them.

Re:Close to the mark?

[Rycross]

They literally said "over 1000" but speculation is that the number is fairly close to that.

Re:Close to the mark?

[bogjobber]

Apparently this is more Sony innovation in the "SIXAXIS" sense: bad mouth the innovator when people praise the idea, and then come back and "invent" it themselves and pretend it's some huge new feature, that they'd been planning for years! I can understand why the may not want "innovation" of that kind leaked, instead preferring to very carefully "manage" the PR to try and pretend this is some great new idea and not just a crappy knock-off of both X-Box Live and the Wii's online services.

Right, because Nintendo invented motion sensing in video games. Just because they announced it first doesn't mean that Sony wasn't planning on including it also.

Every video game company takes other people's ideas and uses them. The Wii's online services you praise greatly are largely knockoffs of other existing services. You consider avatars, polls, and news and weather updates original? Please. Xbox Live took things that PC games had been doing for over a decade and simply moved them to the console. Get the stick out of your ass.

Re:Close to the mark?

[KDR_11k]

Right, because Nintendo invented motion sensing in video games. Just because they announced it first doesn't mean that Sony wasn't planning on including it also.

If they really were planning that from the start they might have told developers a bit earlier than two weeks before E3, barely enough to hack some motion controls into one demo.

The reason you don't see Microsoft doing this is that they already tried it a few years ago with the Freestyle Pro and realized that tilt sensors in a traditional controller shape suck.

Re:Close to the mark?

[KDR_11k]

The geek would stay in the basement and say nothing which would still be considerably better than most of the crap Sony manages to spout these days. Their decision makers constantly pretend that there is no problem withg the PS3. While that may be supposed to instill confidence and make people believe there are really no problms it actually looks more like that Iraqi information minister guy. It also makes people wonder if Sony even realizes its mistakes (which is the necessary first step for fixing them).

Re:Close to the mark?

[DrXym]

Or that it's exactly what it is and it makes people realizing they are ripping off the other two consoles.

You can probably accuse them of ripping off achievements, however somebody on NeoGaf mentioned that they have been working on this for at least 9 months and possibly more. I.e. way before launch. Therefore it's highly unlikely that they ripped off the Mii.

I have no idea what it will look like, but part of me thinks it will resemble Puzzle Pirates or Sims Online. In Puzzle Pirates you can buy a "shack" and decorate it. If you have more money you can upgrade to other kinds of houses, buy fine furniture etc. Then you can invite other people into your house and have a party or whatever.

I think Sony Home will resemble this where you may be able to pick a house from various starter designs and then it either grows with achievements, or you get points for achievements to decorate / upgrade it, or you buy stuff to fill it. Then people can turn up and you can arrange voice / text chat, and perhaps even arrange ad hoc network games. What would be really cool is if you could play music, or even video in your house and have it stream to everybody else standing around.

Re:Close to the mark?

[king-manic]

Right, because Nintendo invented motion sensing in video games. Just because they announced it first doesn't mean that Sony wasn't planning on including it also.

I think they had the first mass market motion sensing controller, except it sucked. It was the power glove.

Re:Close to the mark?

[kinglink]

The problem with this argument is Nintendo likely worked on it far before then. Avatars aren't something new either so I'm sure you can look back to find others who have had it. However they didn't deem it worthy enough to do at launch? Why not?

Remember a little game called Animal crossing. This sounds a hell of a lot like that. That's at least 3 years old, plus achievements which are at least a year old.

Sony actually came out and said Achievements and Miis are stupid, or something similar to it, that it doesn't enhance the experience, now they think they are a good idea?

They might not have ripped off miis but they are definitely not being original with this idea. Someone found the patent, and apparently it's more of a social networking thing (with the ability to download music) than this, but I'm almost definite they are going to be including some form of this.

And then...

[elvum]

Dave Karraker, Sr. Director, Corporate Communications, Sony Computer Entertainment America, then picked up his ball and went home with it.

Re:And then...

[spun]

And thought to himself, somewhat sadly, "Why won't more people play with my balls? People used to love my balls! My balls were the best balls on the market. Now they just want to play with Bill's balls and Reggie's balls. Damn it! My balls are just sitting on the shelves collecting dust. I'm gonna get fired, and then I'm gonna have to play with my old, dusty balls all by myself."

Re:And then...

[buffer-overflowed]

In a related note, Ken Kutaragi was heard to say, "The next generation doesn't start until Sony says Microsoft and Nintendo have started it."

Re:And then...

[Secrity]

I certainly will not be buying any more of Sony's balls.

This story had nothing to do with my decision not to buy another Sony product, I have been not buying Sony products for over a year now.

Re:And then...

[Rob T Firefly]

I haven't handed one out for ages, but you have just won the Internet.

Re:And then...

[ZX3 Junglist]

"And if you can find my balls anywhere in North America, I'll give you 1,200 bucks for it."

Nutshell

[Shadow Wrought]

That'd be the difference between on the record and off the record. Now we need only await for the blogosphere's calm and reasoned response.

Re:Nutshell

[ninti]

They never told them anything "off the record". They just told them not to publish a rumor they heard from someplace else or else they would punish them. Big difference.

Re:Nutshell

[Shadow Wrought]

Big difference.

Indeed it is. Thanks for the clarification.

Re:Nutshell

[Castar]

It's not so much "punishing" them as it is "stop doing them special favors". They haven't threatened to sue or anything like that, they just said they wouldn't invite them to special press conferences and so forth.

Because it's Slashdot, here's a bad analogy:

I regularly loan my car keys to my neighbor, and let him borrow power tools and things. One day, he calls me up. He says he heard a rumor that I have leprosy. I ask him please not to spread the rumor around, I was planning on having a big meeting with all the neighbors in a week to talk about this. He goes ahead and spreads the rumor. So, in response, I stop loaning him my keys and so forth - our relationship becomes frosty. It's not like I'm trying to burn down his house, but he can't really expect me to keep doing him favors.

Re:Nutshell

[Aladrin]

Okay, you admitted it's a bad analogy already, but let's finish it off:

Your neighbor happens to be the guy all the cool people come to talk to. He gets all the gossip, and people like to listen to what he says. He's very careful to label rumors as such.

But the rumor isn't leprosy, as that could be considered a danger to the community. (Whether it is or isn't, isn't at issue here.) Instead, the rumor is that you're getting a pool. But you REALLY want to be the one to tell everyone. You neighbor, gossip monger that he is, can't help himself over such a trivial, fun tidbit that he really isn't even sure of.

So you turn the cold shoulder to him. In return, he tells all his people how you are now treating him. Over a silly little rumor that he wasn't even really sure of. Why are you being so mean to him? You don't have to TELL him you're going to be mean, just stop telling him anything that might be rumor-ish.

That's a better bad analogy. ;)

Re:Nutshell

[nacturation]

So one week later everybody jumps in the new pool and gets leprosy, right?

Re:Nutshell

[TeraCo]

Great analogy.. or GREATEST ANALOGY.

Re:Nutshell

[Krazy Nemesis]

[off-topic-rant]

blogosphere

The dumbest upper-middle-management-catch-phrase in the history of the spoken word. Why that caught on, I'll never know... I'd feel stupid actually using it... and think less of those who do on a regular basis -- not to offend the parent-poster or anybody else for that matter, it's just that it sounds like some CEO's lackey made it up to impress his/her superior.
[/off-topic-rant]

Back on topic: you're absolutely right... Sony will only have people be less likely to comply with requests like that now, just to spite them.

Waaaaaaah

[fotbr]

Rule number one about secrets: If more than one person knows it, its no longer secret.

Re:Waaaaaaah

[Anonymous Coward]

Rule 0 about secrets - its not a secret unless you tell someone..

Re:Waaaaaaah

[multisync]

I thought it was "wiiiiiiii"

Re:Waaaaaaah

[Stolovaya]

If you don't tell someone about it, what does that make it?

Re:Waaaaaaah

[Anonymous Coward]

Schizophrenia

Re:Waaaaaaah

[UbuntuDupe]

Or, to generalize Franklin's Law:

n people can keep a secret only if n - 1 are dead.

Re:Waaaaaaah

[Zantetsuken]

wouldnt it be paranoia?

Play by their rules, or else

[Erioll]

They said not to do it. They reinforce it. And yet they do it anyways. Makes sense that they get blackballed. If you want exclusive info, you play by their rules. If you want to be a "stick it to them" outfit, then they'd better be prepared to get their information from other sources.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[krakelohm]

Exactly. How many times do you need to warn someone? If you don't play by the rules sometimes you get your ass swatted.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Mr. Sketch]

That is exactly what I was going to say. After all:
1) Site does interview with Company
2) Company says don't publish this story or there will be these consequences
3) Site publishes story anyways
4) Company follows through with said consequences

And this is news?

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Erioll]

And this is news? That's the thing actually. In many cases (politics, news, etc), there's PLENTY of "we say there's going to be consequences, but actually we've never followed through... ever." But these guys did. Anybody may or may not agree with the initial decision to not release upcoming information, timing, etc, but it wasn't like it was a surprise to those who ran the story. Sony followed through on what they said, which is unfortunately a too-rare occurrence these days.

I wish honesty (harsh honesty, but honesty nonetheless) wasn't news, but these days it is.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed except this was a rumor not some kind of exclusive content.

The rumor wasn't confirmed by Sony. They asked kotaku not to publish the rumor because it was just a rumor.

They published it anyway..

Sony asked nicely for them not to publish the rumor but since when has that ever stopped anybody from publishing a rumor on the internet?

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure why the above comment is 'insightful'

You are either a journalist or a PR outlet. If you want exclusive news and you agree to conditions, such as obeying a companies PR plan or suppress news they don't like, you are no longer a journalist, you are a PR outlet.

Kotaku decided to be not Sony's bitch.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[beckerist]

WRONG.
1. Site gets a rumor from an outside source
2. Site asks company about the rumor
3. Company denies rumor and asks site to ignore it
4. Site publishes rumor
5. Company punishes site

Since when does SONY dictate what journalists (let alone BLOGS) publish?

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[PeelBoy]

It wasn't exclusive content it was a rumor that Kotaku tried to confirm. Had Kotaku never tried to confirm the rumor and just published it then Sony would have never had a chance to ask them to please not publish the story. So what would you say if Sony blackballed a site for publishing a rumor and nothing more?

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[W2k]

The thing is, Sony has no right to tell another website what they may or may not publish. Sony even trying to tell a journalist what he may or may not write about them is unethical. Kotaku did the right thing by standing up for journalistic integrity, and Sony's PR department are a bunch of asshats. Keeping information from being leaked is an internal matter for Sony. Once it's out, it's out. Now they've left an influential gaming blog with nothing left to lose in terms of their relationship to Sony. And Kotaku no doubt still has whatever source they got the rumours from.

It can be argued whether Kotaku was smart to act the way they did, but they are certainly right - and Sony wrong - from a moral perspective. The big mistake was the Sony PR guy threatening to blackball. To Kotaku, that must have been a sure sign they were sitting on some hot stuff. It would have been stupid not to publish at that point.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[eln]

Sony doesn't dictate anything, but it does determine how it will work with certain journalists. It's similar to the stories about the Bush White House: if a journalist publishes a lot of negative stuff about the President, that journalist is unlikely to be called on during press briefings, and can probably forget about getting any of the insider information that "senior White House aides" leak on a regular basis.

It's all politics, whether it's government or business.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[feepness]

Since when does SONY dictate what journalists (let alone BLOGS) publish?

Since when do BLOGS dictate who SONY gives non-public information too?

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Tim C]

Since when does SONY dictate what journalists (let alone BLOGS) publish?

Since when is Sony forced to extend special favours to a site that has refused a request?

Sony isn't dictating what the blog can and cannot post, they're merely saying that if they post something they don't like, they'll stop giving them access to inside information. Seems fair enough to me - or would you expect Sony to continue treating them as they were no matter what the blog posted about them?

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[feepness]

The thing is, Sony has no right to tell another website what they may or may not publish.

Agreed. And Kotaku has no right to future insider information.

This isn't about rights, it's about relationships.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Null537]

Since when does SONY dictate what journalists (let alone BLOGS) publish?

Since those BLOGS started getting special information news favours from SONY.

If a prostitute is sucking your cock you don't punch her in the mouth. The blog should have been aware of who was greasing their pole, and refrained from balling up their fist.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Anonymous Coward]

"The thing is, Sony has no right to tell another website what they may or may not publish. Sony even trying to tell a journalist what he may or may not write about them is unethical."

Companies place embargoes on their news material all the time, there's nothing sinister going on here. Professional journalists abide by them, especially if they expect to retain a good working relationship with said company.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[TubeSteak]

Sony even trying to tell a journalist what he may or may not write about them is unethical.

I don't think the word 'unethical' means what you think it means.

PR is about three things:
1. Advocating and disseminating one point of view.
2. Crisis avoidance
3. Damage control

Sony's PR people were doing #2 when they first asked Kokatu not to publish that story and again when they threatened to blackball the site.

Kotaku did the right thing by standing up for journalistic integrity, and Sony's PR department are a bunch of asshats.

I'm not sure you know what "journalistic integrity" is about. It can be summarized as 'critical thinking' and 'not printing lies'. Sony's PR department, as I've mentioned above, was just doing its job.

It can be argued whether Kotaku was smart to act the way they did, but they are certainly right - and Sony wrong - from a moral perspective.

I fail to see how either organization has the moral high ground and you say nothing to support this assertion.

Kokatu decided not to print the threat along with the original article so that Sony could back away from it behind the scenes. Sony followed through & in the long run, Kokatu is the loser for it.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Stolovaya]

That could be argued. This is NOT good press for Sony. What happens when the next website prints something that Sony doesn't like? While difficult to do, it's made me think even less of them. Kotaku can report rumors all it wants to, as long as it reports that they received this information as a rumor.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[seebs]

I dunno why you're all fussy about him walloping her. He done told her she'd get a whuppin' if she kept carryin' on like that.

*spits*

Seems fair to me. She wants to get all up in her man's face, she oughta expect a couple black eyes. Yup!

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Tweekster]

I lack mod points at the moment, but 3 other people said the same thing as you did but your version was by far the best.

nicely done!

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[petehead]

but they are certainly right - and Sony wrong - from a moral perspective

Let's say you have a friend and someone tells your friend the hot rumor about you getting a new job out of state. Then your friend asks you about it. You say, "I don't want to talk about it right now. Can you please not talk to anyone about it?" Then your friend goes and tells everybody that you are moving. Who is morally wrong here?
 
Kotaku has no moral responsibility to publish or not publish this type of rumor. It's not like it's a rumor about Sony's batteries catching on fire. Journalists often establish give and take relationships with sources and there is nothing wrong one side pulling out if the other side just takes.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[seebs]

This is a good analysis.

Sony needs positive press a lot more than Kotaku needs help finding Sony stories; empirically, they were finding stuff Sony wasn't giving out even to the people they were supposedly helping out.

Sony just pissed off every video game blogger in the world. Kotaku just showed real class.

It's about relationships, and Sony doesn't understand any relationship but "you suck our cock and pay for the privilege". This is working against them now.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Anonymous Coward]

If you run a company with strategic decisions and announcements against competitors, how would you like it if one of your employees leaked the information to media before a strategic date, effectively hurt your sales due to untimely leak?

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[MorderVonAllem]

Thing is they didn't get the information from Sony themselves. Sony may refuse to give them information but that doesn't stop Kotaku from getting said information from other sources. Either way they should have just denied the rumor and left it at that. Now we have no reason to see/hear the GDC yet if they denied the rumor people will still want to find out what, exactly, it was.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[StrahdVZ]

I don't see the problem, its a free world.

Kotaku is free to blog whatever rumours they want as long as they indicate it is rumour (which they did). And Sony is free to provide information and interviews to whoever they choose.

To me its just a case of both sides exercising freedom of choice (something slashdotters are very sensitive to). No need to get your knickers in a twist over it. Get over it.

Nothing to see here, move along.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[StrahdVZ]

or would you expect Sony to continue treating them as they were no matter what the blog posted about them? Exactly... To be honest I think this is just the blog community pulling its usual drama queen routine, something it is notorious for.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[shimage]

3. Damage control

Sony's PR department, as I've mentioned above, was just doing its job.

I wouldn't really say they're doing their job. Perhaps two thirds of it, but they seem to be making a miserable failure of "PR thing #3". People keep talking about how journalism is about relationships, and while that's true, it cuts both ways. Clearly, Sony sees Kotaku as more of a liability than a resources, but I don't see how Sony's actions change anything. Kotaku still has their mole, and the story not only got published, it's now on every gaming blog on the internet. Your opinion on this is obvious, but I wonder who will be the worse off for this falling out. Since I don't read Kotaku for their Exclusive Sony Insider Info, I'm not convinced that they'll suffer for it. Maybe it is a big part of what Kotaku is and I just never noticed; it's possible. Either way, we'll have to wait to see.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Shihar]

[quote]Sony has no right to tell another website what they may or may not publish.[/quote]

Sony didn't tell them what they can and can not publish. They just told them that there would be a consequence of they did publish... namely they would not get anything other then press releases from Sony from that point on. That is a perfectly fair thing to do.

I don't know what Sony said exactly to the blog, but what they should have done was offer a deal. In exchange for not publishing the rumor, Sony should have offered an exclusive interview or something like that. This is general what is done. The deal is "okay, you got us, but don't tell and we will reward you. Tell, and we will punish you." Most journalist are happy to take such deals.

Both sides are playing fair. Sony doesn't need to be nice to journalist/bloggers that leak information (even if they didn't get it from Sony), and bloggers/journalist don't need abide by requests of a corporation.

Sounds like good old free speech working to me.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[feepness]

Sony just pissed off every video game blogger in the world. Kotaku just showed real class.

I still honestly don't think Sony did anything wrong. No one has a right to their information. And Kotaku is just doing what works for themselves. No big surprise or class there.

But I think Sony would have been smarter to quietly 'X' Kotaku's name off their buddy list rather than get all pissy about it.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Lynxara]

Anything published on Kotaku ends up on every gaming blog on the internet. That's probably why Sony didn't want the rumor appearing on such a prominent and well-regarded site to begin with. It would repeatedly cited as fact even if it was not, and Sony has had previous negative experiences with similar blog-fueled rumors in the past. While their response is excessive, it's certainly not unexpected.

Kotaku won't really suffer for this; they're widely perceived as being very biased in favor of Nintendo's products, and ridiculously critical of Sony and Microsoft's. Fans are angry at Sony at the moment and will likely support Kotaku's move as "sticking it to the man". What remains to be seen is whether Sony loses more from not having Kotaku coverage, or whether Kotaku loses more for not having Sony coverage.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[radish]

The smart move would have been to offer Kotaku an exclusive in exchange for an NDA. That way everyone's happy - Kotaku get a big scoop and Sony get to keep their secret. The dumb move would have been to threaten one of the most widely read news outlets covering your business with "not being invited to our next press conference".

I guess it comes as no surprise which Sony chose to go with. I don't think anyone's saying Sony weren't entirely within their rights, I think we're just saying they were really, really stupid. Kotaku will continue to get plenty of Sony stories just seconds after they're posted elsewhere, and now they and their readership will be less predisposed to spinning thing's in Sony's direction. Dumb.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Anonymous Coward]

Kotaku is to journalists as Britney Spears is to musician.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[radish]

The point is that the secret was out. The story was going to get posted, Sony knew it and Kotaku knew it. Had Sony just stayed quiet it would have been buried under the days news like every other unsubstantiated rumor in the tech world and no-one would have thought anything else of it until the keynote where it's announced. But by making such a big issue of it they've done three things - (a) they've confirmed the rumor as 100% true, (b) they've given it far more publicity than it would have got otherwise and (c) they've made themselves look like idiotic bullies (again).

Sony have every right to handle their PR however they see fit, but I personally think they could have handled this a whole lot better. At least Apple have the smarts to not go after bloggers posting leaks until AFTER the big announcement.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Lemmy Caution]

What I'd like to know is what outlets are withholding news stories from the public because they don't want to lose those special favors from the industry. And to blackball them.

If I want to read Sony press releases, I can do so on Sony's website. Video-game journalism needs to be a lot more independent - it's been an industry mouthpiece for too long.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Cadallin]

It isn't really that Sony did anything wrong per se. Just that they done (yet again) something monumentally stupid and possibly suicidal. The thing I think people are really taking issue with is Sony's "Fuck you! I don't need you, Kotaku, I don't need anybody, and I don't care who Knows!" attitude. Had Sony done as you described it wouldn't have been nearly as big a deal. But they DID get all pissy about it, and that's the point.

Kotaku has a fair degree of credibility to the core gamer demographic, which is exactly the people Sony expected to carry the PS3 through its loss period and into profitability and mainstream acceptance. Because let's face it, people going out and buying a $600 game machine, or a $600 DVD player, aren't casual anything. It is my opinion that a company should not be able to blatantly show this much disgust for their target market and survive. If Sony manages PS2 level success in 3-5 years, I will be utterly stupefied. If they are still in the game business in 10 years, I will be quite surprised.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[seebs]

What Sony did wrong was threaten a journalist.

Sure, they have no obligation to give out freebies and exclusives -- but saying they're being withheld just because they don't like a story the journalist ran? Petty and juvenile.

Of course, even past the threat: It is just plain dumb of Sony to deny information to a company that could be generating buzz for them.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[jstomel]

I would call them "Apple"

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[apoc06]

you bring up a very important dilemma. is kotaku a blog or is it a journalistic site?

a blog has no responsibility to anyone, nor do they need to answer to anyone.

a journalistic site needs to remain professional and unbiased. they need to report the news, and maintain a certain level of integrity.

if kotaku is simply a blog, they did the right thing by not backing down. however, if they are simply a blog they should not be able to benefit from industry perks such as debug systems, prerelease games, exclusive interviews, etc. these kind of perks are simply noncash bribes so that the product gets a mention.

if they are a journalistic entity, they should work with the press officers at sony and within the confines of journalistic fact. if they wanted to proceed, perhaps they could have offered a re-write [lets not forget that kotaku slanted the article to imply that the feature would be a copy of its various competitors] and requested a possible exclusive the day of the conference.

if the rumor is 100% incorrect, sony could have just stuck with the party line of no comment in regards to rumors. the problem is that the rumor is so huge that it could very well overshadow whatever announcements sony will actually make at GDC. that would lead to sony needing to request it to be removed.

lets say sony replied back that the rumor was 100% true. that gives competitors a solid week to work on a FUD campaign to derail their announcement. it gives the internet a solid week to complain about it being a copy of this and that, and get desensitized to the news. its a no win situation, other than suggest sony reply back with the 'sony does not comment on rumors and speculation' what would you have done?

the fact that sony ALWAYS replies back with no comment except in this situation, 1) gives credibility to the rumor [sony wins]. 2) creates a big hoopla over the internet and wins sony headlines over the next week [sony still wins] 3) gets EVEN more people to listen in for the keynote next week 4) elicits a bunch of "i'm not going to buy a ps3 now" comments from people who never had intentions of buying a ps3 in the first place [they dont matter to sony's bottomline; sony still wins] 5) kotaku starts writing a bunch of negativity about sony [kotaku has always been pretty hard on the ps3 anyways, so sony doesnt 'win' but still... no loss for sony there either.]

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[beckerist]

Sony never gave them anything. It was an external source. Sony just didn't like the fact Kotaku wanted to post it as a rumor and decided to try to pull some corporate strings to bully them into doing what they want. Since Kotaku did not comply, Sony made good on their claim and retracted the relationship. I'm not saying that what Kotaku did was right in posting a rumor, but seriously, as a gaming blog they cater to their visitors, NOT to corporate pander. I commend Kotaku for sticking to their guns, and I hope Sony gets cast into the bad light they deserve as they are nothing but corporate bullies.

By the way, I own a Sony Wega 50" LCD TV. I was an active Sony consumer, but with moves like this where they clearly don't care about anything but their precious image, I will be very hard pressed to buy any more of their products...

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[cgenman]

Agreed. And Kotaku has no right to future insider information.

This isn't about rights, it's about relationships.

So Kotaku posts Sony's fluffy PR pieces an hour after everyone else, but in exchange gets to post any real news days before anyone else is "allowed" to? Sounds like a good deal to me.

Severing all relationships with an information portal is the nuclear option. Sony resorted to the nuclear option over a rumor that was already in the public eye anyway. Sure, Kotaku could have avoided publishing the rumor, so that Sony would have a bigger bang. And Sony had every right to sever the relationship.

But the relationship between Sony and the gamer is what should be receiving their highest attention. Their relationship to Kotaku should be secondary to Kotaku's audience's relationship to Sony. This reaction is not helping that currently rocky relationship at all.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[feepness]

Sony never gave them anything.

And will continue not giving them anything. So what's the problem?

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Aladrin]

I agree, Sony did nothing wrong. What they did was not smart. With all the trouble they've had in the last year, the last thing they want to do is piss off any gamers or gamer news sites.

If they'd done exactly as they did, but didn't TELL them they were doing it, none of this would be an issue. This is simple PR, and Sony has failed even in that arena.

2 years ago, I'd have been seriously considering getting in line for a PS3. I love(d) my PS2 and had a ton of fun with it. But their attitude, and their increasingly shoddy products, have made me reconsider. The PSP, while a good machine, has hardly any games I care to play at all. The PS3 still doesn't have a game I'll even look at. Their 'innovations' are simply an arms race. And their attitude towards their customers is absolutely abbhorent.

And now they go and deliberately piss off customers and sites. Not smart.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[khchung]

This isn't about rights, it's about relationships.

Exactly.

Trust and respect build relationships. Treating everyone as your adversary and see how much you can "score" against them will not make you friends, even though all you did was "legal" and "within your rights".

For example, if you works in IT dept of a company, and one guy comes to you and ask you about a rumor of a potentially very disruptive new IT policy. Without confirming the rumor, you ask that guy "don't spread such rumor", and then that guy goes about spreading it anyway and caused you a bunch of headaches. Wouldn't you got pissed about it? Are you going to do that guy any special favor from now on?

The only dumb part about this is Sony goes about it publicly. They should have just written off that guy internally and drop him off from all their invitation lists.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Anonymous Coward]

If it wasn't fact, they were given the chance to deny it. They decided to make no comment, expected to be able to silence the rumor. It didn't work and now they're whining about it.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Lord_Dweomer]

Here's a crazy mind-fuck for you down a slightly different path...

1. Site has conversation with PR company about how to drum up traffic and buzz for both the blog and the company.
2. Company pretends to have dispute with blog that blog then makes public drawing in the attention of the masses.
3. After every major online news site relevant to the audiences of both parties is paying close attention and driving massive ammounts of traffic to both sites they "make up".
4. Both parties walk away with millions and millions of dollars in free press and the blog enjoys increased revenue ad sales due to higher traffic.
5. You knew it was coming....PROFIT!!!!

Naw.....a company who published a fake blog would NEVER pull something like this....

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[adam31]

You are either a journalist or a PR outlet.

There is a balance. "Either/or" is an argument meant to lure people to think only in extremes.

In particular, this isn't an issue that makes a blogger the bitch of a corporation. Such an issue might be if Sony were using child labor to make PS3s, or if PS3 were causing a surge of heart attacks among its owners. This is about stupid Achievements. The only thing Kotaku did was affect announcement timing by 3 days. They didn't save anything, there's no moral victory here.

Unfortunately, Kotaku went with the 'scoop' mentality. Scea blamed Kotaku, reconsidered, and decided that it can only blame itself for the leak. So undoubtedly, there is a major witch-hunt brewing, and Kotaku has really only succeeded in outting its best source. Over nothing.

Really, nothing. Good job. Way to draw the line, Kotaku.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[KDR_11k]

That Sony even responded to the rumor was a mistake, had they taken the normal "no comment" stance noone would have taken this rumor as more valid than any other.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[drawfour]

So it's moral to publish uncomfirmed rumors?

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

It can be argued whether Kotaku was smart to act the way they did, but they are certainly right - and Sony wrong - from a moral perspective.

I disagree! What about all the potential harm that this reckless Kotaku could cause? Will someone please think of the children?

And by children, I mean, of course, the Sony executives.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[PDAllen]

Sony doesn't dictate; the site can do as it wishes. But you are missing:

0. For a long time Sony provides site with much free information which it is in no way obliged to do, because it is so nice (or more accurately because it thinks it's getting decent publicity out of it).

and you should be saying

5. Sony decides that if someone they trust to provide them with good publicity is doing things they don't like, then they won't trust them with any more free info. It didn't attempt to play legal games.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Anonymous Coward]

Warning, I work in PR, but not in the games industry.

I agree that both parties have been doing their job. But IMHO based on limited statements online from Kotaku and their reporting of what Sony said, I think Kotaku has come off worse.

As other posters have noted, PR is about relationships. Why on earth do people think there is a social contract about "off-the-record" discussion?

Kotaku appears to me somewhat immature not in the fact that they ignored the request but because they published the Sony comments. Managing such rumours is what PRs in companies do - there are many reasons why they might have wanted this rumour quashed, not all of them because the rumour is true. Publishing rumours is what bloggers do, but in PR in general you really, really have to believe its worth it especially if you've received a polite request not to publish. This rumour didn't, to me, seem worth risking a relationship over.

Of course they are back on the PR lists, but the damage to the relationship with Sony is probably already done. Kotaku gets just as much out of the relationship as Sony does, and if it were in my area of PR, you would simply expect fewer breaking stories to be posted their way, fewer exclusives, etc. This would not be vindictive, but PR is a social network that supports "positive" feedback (where positive means fair and balanced, but also useful and non-hindering from all side's point of view).

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Guysmiley777]

The problem, dear sir, is the threat. Trying to strong-arm a news organization with threats was just a Bad Idea.

#1: It is morally questionable. Yes, Sony is a big, evil corporation. That doesn't change the fact it was wrong.

#2: It was a stupid play on Sony's part. They were bluffing on the guess that Kotaku would fold and not publish. They didn't and Sony got nasty. Kotaku published that too.

#3: The best way to confirm a rumor is to threaten over its publication. If Sony would have said "No comment" or "I can't talk about that right now" it leaves it as an unconfirmed rumor. By saying "If you publish that I'll go to war against you, I'll burn down your house and murder your family!!!" they mine as well say "Yes, that rumor is 100% true."

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[DrXym]

It can be argued whether Kotaku was smart to act the way they did, but they are certainly right - and Sony wrong - from a moral perspective. The big mistake was the Sony PR guy threatening to blackball. To Kotaku, that must have been a sure sign they were sitting on some hot stuff. It would have been stupid not to publish at that point.

It's called quid pro quo. Kotaku gets invited to all kinds of swanky launch parties, previews, exclusive interviews etc. In return they're expect to obey rules about embargoes and so forth just like every other outfit that is extended these privileges. Sony asked them to not talk about the rumour (obviously because it has some basis in fact) but they go ahead and publish. Sony pull their privileges.

Kotaku isn't being "moral" here. They went ruined one of Sony's most anticipated keynotes for quite some time and Sony were well within their rights (and justifiably) to yank Kotaku's privileged access to Sony info. It's too bad they didn't follow up on the threat.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[LKM]

So the games media is crap, and those which aren't crap are stupid for not being crap? What's your point?

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[LKM]

Why would a Company be so stupid and do something like this intentionally? I mean, they basically destroyed the credibility of any positive article on the company, because now you can't be sure whether they blackmailed the reporter into writing it. What company would be so stupid?

Oh, wait, we're talking about Sony here.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[LKM]

Sure, Kotaku doesn't have some kind of inherent right to get information from Sony. So?

Sony was in a position of power and used that power to influence a news source. That makes them both untrustworthy asshats as well as idiots.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I'm sure the "blog community" will all laugh about it at their next meeting.

Whether or not they were drama queens, the end result is that Sony ended up looking like a bunch of pissy, strong-arming bullies. Which, of course, they are.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[flitty]

Hello, I'm Ken Katarugi, and I'd like to hire you as a Sony PR Rep. /Sarcasm
Best Idea and best way to handle this that i've heard of so far. If you are in marketing or advertising..... Kill yourself. /quote

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[G. Ratte']

The thing is, Sony has no right to tell another website what they may or may not publish. Sony even trying to tell a journalist what he may or may not write about them is unethical. Bullshit. There are no "ethics" here - this is about _toys_ and _money_. Toymaker Sony tells a website, which only exists to run free ads for toys 24/7, to play ball. But they wanna act like brats and bite the hand that feeds 'em. Why? To get a little scoop (a gain on their competition, Joystiq, to get more hits so they can charge more for ad-placement). In doing so, they blow their access to the crumbs Sony throws them. It was a gamble, but essentially a dumb move in the long term. Nobody's curing cancer here. Just pushing toys. It amounts to nothing.

Re:Play by their rules, or else

[Voltageaav]

As long as you don't advertise it as a confirmed fact, sure, why not?

So?

[Anonymous Coward]

Blog decides to leak information Sony didn't want leaked yet. Sony says they're not going to do blog any more favors. Am I supposed to feel sorry for the blog or something?

Why say anything in the first place?

[betamaxV2.1]

If the information being discussed is so important to Sony's strategy or business, why discuss it with members of the MEDIA in the first place? It seems to me that if they wanted them to post a story or interview at a certain time or after a certain date they should have politely requested such an action.

Reacting the way that they did just isn't smart on any level. Something is really wrong with Sony. And I am not jumping on the Sony hating bandwagon either. With all of their problems (rootkits, batteries, flubbed product launches, etc) I don't see how any Sony investor could be happy with the way the company is headed. I would hate to see Sony go completely out of business. We all know that the more competition in the market the better. I honestly think that Sony has become to large. They need to split into separate entities and change their branding accordingly. The Sony name needs to refer to TVs, stereos, Walkmans, and other hardware since that is what Sony is/was originally known for.

Re:Why say anything in the first place?

[RiskyChris]

I doubt the information was so important that it is essential to Sony's lifeblood. Companies often disclose secrets to the media so that all outlets are given a reasonable chance to prepare material prior to some simultaneous media explosion. Kotaku's release of the information harms friends of Sony , i.e. the media outlets that play by the rules, so to keep a strong relationship with their partners, Sony closes contact with offending parties.

This is absolutely NOT a case of Sony being evil.

Re:Why say anything in the first place?

[Stolovaya]

Except that this wasn't material given to Kotaku as information (as far as anyone knows; not sure about the source of the rumor). If it was information that was released early by Sony, then I could see Sony have *some* merit to asking the information not be published.

Re:Why say anything in the first place?

[RiskyChris]

I spent the better part of the evening reading various sites discussing the event, and I absolutely agree with you. Kotaku was definitely not in the wrong here -- they simply displayed high standards of journalism. I give the staff kudos for standing up to Sony with regards to independently gathered material!

Grey

[MeanderingMind]

This is a case of grey area if ever there was one.

We can argue that Kotaku was foolish and that Sony was harsh, but really it looks to me like both companies were doing their jobs.

It's in Kotaku's interest to publish rumors, to not be "under the thumb" of any one company they report on, and to do their journalism in as unbiased and unthreatened a fashion as possible.

It's in Sony's interest to dodge rumors, save important features for display at key media events, and handle their PR in the fashion they feel is best for their image.

Could Kotaku have tried harder to get Sony's blessing on the article? Maybe. Could Sony have been less harsh? Maybe. I don't think this constitutes a mistake on either's part, just a sad end.

Re:Grey

[The Ultimate Fartkno]

> It's in Kotaku's interest to publish rumors,

This is hardly "rumor," though.

FTA: "During their correspondence with Sony as preparation for the story, the company asked them very specifically not to run the story."

If they were actually corresponding with Sony about the story then I'd say this looks much more like "proprietary information that, if you guys will just sit tight on it for a few days, we'll show off to you at that conference we invited you to next week."

> to not be "under the thumb" of any one company they report on,

Again, they're hardly "under Sony's thumb." That's more like Nintendo Power. This is simply a case of "Just like every other business in the world, we like to have press conferences and announce things on a set schedule. If you'll just play along and help us maintain our schedule then we'll give you inside access that other outlets don't get. Oh, no? Well, see you later."

> and to do their journalism in as unbiased and unthreatened a fashion as possible.

Sony did neither. They simply refused them further access to inside information.

That being said, DIE IN A FIRE YOU AMORAL ROOT-KITTING BASTARDS!

Re:Grey

[DingerX]

Er, "news" and "journalism" do not involve "rumor". Rumor can lead you to something, but if you are going to publish a "high ranking source" article, you better be sure that source is high ranking, and that your information is reliable. Otherwise, it is, as Kotaku stated, "a rumor". An "anonymous source" does not cut it: that could be my grandmother. Spreading rumors is neither journalism nor publishing news.

Okay, so here's probably what happens: someone leaks something to Kotaku. Who's leaking it? We don't know; nor do we know why. But they think it's pretty good stuff. So Kotaku pursues the story with their contacts at Sony. Here's the problems:
1. How many new services or products have been announced as "confirmation" of an apparently "off-the-record" story?
2. In their correspondence with their "official sources", was any information about the "rumor" confirmed or denied? If the official source says, "yes, but please keep quiet about it", well, then you've got a worthless source and a privileged one, and -- even if you attribute everything to the "worthless" source --, your decision to publish could have been and probably was motivated by the confirmation through the privileged source. And that's how your privileged source is going to view it.
3. How did Kotaku establish contacts with the "leak"? From the Sony PR perspective, the answer is going to be, "most likely through the access we gave them to our company".

I have no love for Sony here, but Kotaku's argument for a "journalistic ethical stance" is pretty thin. They weren't "just doing their job".

But I guess the competition among game blogs is fierce, as it is for the consoles they write about.

Re:Grey

[GodInHell]

If they were actually corresponding with Sony about the story then I'd say this looks much more like "proprietary information that, if you guys will just sit tight on it for a few days, we'll show off to you at that conference we invited you to next week." I think that's a mischaricterization of the story. The article says they got the rumor, and tried to confirm with Sony. That sounds like journalism to me. "So, Mr Chenny, we hear you leaked Ms. Plame's identity" "nyah.. if you print that.. we will cut you out of future information.. nyah". Sure, it's not an important story, but this is Kotaku's beat.. they report on video games. They did their job.

If I feel bad for anyone here, it's sony. They flubbed this one.. Kotaku has played their cards tight here, they get the scoop, and they scoop Sony trying to bully the industry journalism back into line. And what do they lose? Sony won't be covered as much on Kotaku.. oh well.. Hey, I'm seeing lots of good stuff about Wii and 360 on there!! I guess I know where to spend my money!

Sony's error here is in presuming that access to its developers is SO key, that the denial of that access will harm this site. Sony, you are not a government.. and information about your games is still good, whether it's issued on the day of, or a week after you want everyone talking abou it. Kotaku on the other hand, is making a play for legitimacy.. which tends to help journalists.

-GiH

Re:Grey

[Anonymous Coward]

There is nothing remotely grey about this. Sony is 100% wrong from every perspective.
1)From a business perspective. This rumor would have been lost among the hundred or so other Sony rumors if they had used the standard "Sony does not comment on rumors." That phrase should be a macro on the keyboard of every Sony PR person. Now every site has zeroed in on this rumor and is analyzing it like crazy. It is almost certainly true or very close to the truth.
2)From a moral perspective. Sony had no problem with giving access and dev kits to Kotaku and other blog sites that published rumors as long as they got free hype or the rumors were negative to their competitors. This smacks of:
"I'm shocked, SHOCKED to find gambling going on in here."
"Your winnings, sir."
"Oh, thank you very much."

Re:Grey

[sumdumass]

I think that's a mischaricterization of the story. The article says they got the rumor, and tried to confirm with Sony. That sounds like journalism to me. "So, Mr Chenny, we hear you leaked Ms. Plame's identity" "nyah.. if you print that.. we will cut you out of future information.. nyah". Sure, it's not an important story, but this is Kotaku's beat.. they report on video games. They did their job.

I can see that as a responcible reaction. After all, it wasn't Cheney who outed Plame, It was long time democrat Richard Armatage.

If I feel bad for anyone here, it's sony. They flubbed this one.. Kotaku has played their cards tight here, they get the scoop, and they scoop Sony trying to bully the industry journalism back into line. And what do they lose? Sony won't be covered as much on Kotaku.. oh well.. Hey, I'm seeing lots of good stuff about Wii and 360 on there!! I guess I know where to spend my money!

I see this as bad news for Kotaku. It isn't uncommon for companies to do a press release and unvail some product all at once in a media blitz. It is likley they heard the rumors while sony was trying to put this together. They want to make sure everyone understands what they are doing before the press goes public. Kotaku was likley priviledged to this information under these specific conditions and broke that agreement.

Sony's error here is in presuming that access to its developers is SO key, that the denial of that access will harm this site. Sony, you are not a government.. and information about your games is still good, whether it's issued on the day of, or a week after you want everyone talking abou it. Kotaku on the other hand, is making a play for legitimacy.. which tends to help journalists.

No, Sony's real error here is in thinking it could trust a media source that it doesn't already have a proven relation ship with. This means that most everything in the future that Kotaku has a scoop one concerning Sony will be a planned press release or some strategic marketing ploy. Yea, Kotaku will still get inside stories but nothing that doesn't directly benifit Sony at a time they see fit.

This isn't hardcore jounalism like you eluded to with the plame story. This is rumors at a website that serves as a secondary marketing and promotional effort. Of course it is offered to people already looking for this information so it isn't surprising or anything. They blew it on this one and now have to suffer. I'm thinking this is only a story on slashdot to gain sympathy from visitors who will start wondering why all the current rumors on the site are someone else's product anouncment at a different site. (it is damage control)

Re:Grey

[GodInHell]

This isn't hardcore jounalism like you eluded to with the plame story. This is rumors at a website that serves as a secondary marketing and promotional effort. Of course it is offered to people already looking for this information so it isn't surprising or anything. They blew it on this one and now have to suffer. I'm thinking this is only a story on slashdot to gain sympathy from visitors who will start wondering why all the current rumors on the site are someone else's product anouncment at a different site. (it is damage control) You seem to have many opinions but all your suppositions are DIRECTLY contrary to TFA. If a person wanted to construct this situation in the way most favorable to Sony, they would write it as you have. Normally you might be able to argue that the article itself is just a kotaku story and therefore the world as best benefits them.. But, the bulk of the second article is an e-mail authored by the Sony rep which confirms the story as written by Kotaku.

You may feel that gaming journalism is mere advetising, but I disgree. There is NO reason not to expect as much from these folks as you do from other journalists. The import of the rumor being discussed may be far lower - but there is nothing in TFAs that to suggest your theory hold water. Frankly, it's FUD.

-GiH

Re:Grey

[sumdumass]

You seem to have many opinions but all your suppositions are DIRECTLY contrary to TFA.

I'm not sure which article you read. I don't think it was the same one's I did.

First, The review although claiming it is a rumor eludes to the rumor comming with some support from some guy named Phil. And it attempts to piece together public statments to confirm it while making the claim "Sony said it doesn't comment on rumors". But the article says that they were in conversations with Sony all along. These conversations resulted in Sony asking them not to go with the story until sony did (won't comment on rumors?) and escelated into threats of not getting access to review items and Sony events if they released the story about the rumor before Sony. (still won't comment on rumors huh?).

The TFA goes into details of sony making good on their threat/promise. Tell me were I'm wrong so far.

If a person wanted to construct this situation in the way most favorable to Sony, they would write it as you have.

You see, that is the problem I had. It was this story is centered around "Wois me, sony asked me not to do something then told me i would get any priviledges if i did. Then after I did it, they took my priviledges away". The fact is that Sony was the one wronged here, not the guys who knew full well what sony's position was before doing it. And let me tell you how rediculous this sounds. Imagine your wife (imagine your married) telling you she will divorce you if you cheat on her. Then you cheat on her and she divorces you. Who deserves the sympathy here? You the cheater or your wife? It is a sad day in common sence and reality if you the cheater should be the one getting sympathy.

Normally you might be able to argue that the article itself is just a kotaku story and therefore the world as best benefits them.. But, the bulk of the second article is an e-mail authored by the Sony rep which confirms the story as written by Kotaku.

And the second story also tells them they were in conversation with sony before going live with the story. It also says that sony had told them of the steps they would take in their reaction. The email was confirmation. Kotaku knew full well where sony's position was before hand and is now complaining because sony did what it told them they would do. And no this isn't censorship or suppresion of freedom of speech. As everyone knows, Sony is under no obligation to give them access to anything or invite them anywhere. They had a choice of running the story or losing these priviledges and they chose to lose them. Unfortunatly, sony backed down and recinded their decision.

You may feel that gaming journalism is mere advetising, but I disgree. There is NO reason not to expect as much from these folks as you do from other journalists.

And other journalist don't expect free playstations for writing stories about the president. And yes, It is secondary advertising. The majority of game journalist don't pay for their games or game systems because of their reviews. This story even admits they got review playstations and games from sony. And publishing press releases, just like with the White House press releases is advertising.

The import of the rumor being discussed may be far lower - but there is nothing in TFAs that to suggest your theory hold water. Frankly, it's FUD.

Again, what articles did you read? It cannot be the same ones I did. I just clicked the links in the story sumbision and they took me to the articles the story is about. Sure they took a stand. And thewy found out that there are usualy problems that tag along with taking a stand. But whining about those consequences when you knew about them beforehand just shows how immature this fine journalism really is (not).

So tell me, are you really upset with my take on this story or are your panies in a not over the plame stuff i set you straight on? I don't really think we could have read the same stories or you are trolling me because of something else.

Re:Grey

[sheared]

When it comes to VIDEO GAMES, why is rumor not a story? I mean it is VIDEO GAMES we're talking about, not world events. I would argue that in light of the way video game manufacturers have decided to use "journalists" for their on PR purposes (as discussed by the Games for Windows podcast), then they have forced the "journalists" to turn more to rumor as a means of keeping their readership interested in anything video game related. Heck, if it's not some official PR posting that every site and their mother gets, when is it not rumor?

Good for Kutaku for doing what their readership would want them to do -- get them information before the Sony PR machine wants them to have it.

Re:Grey

[glindsey]

"An anonymous source reported to Bob Woodward today that several high-ranking members of the Republican party have been involved in a break-in attempt at the Watergate Hotel."

Yeah, you're right, those anonymous sources just don't cut it.

Re:Grey

[DingerX]

That's right. They don't cut it. Deep Throat wasn't just an anonymous source, he was a high-level source within the administration, who, while choosing to remain anonymous (until recently), provided Woodward with hard evidence to back up the claims.

Otherwise, Deep Throat coulda been Parker Posey.

Re:Grey

[GodInHell]

So tell me, are you really upset with my take on this story or are your panies in a not over the plame stuff i set you straight on? I don't really think we could have read the same stories or you are trolling me because of something else. So I guess this reveals your general level of interest in the opinions of others. "You disagree with me because I am wrong and reading hate and bile into the words of this reporter? HAH! It's because you got your panties in a bind over something else I said."

Or no, it's because I disagree with your assement of the facts - and no - I don't think you've read the article in a fair and neutral manner. You have invented and inserted your own beliefs over the pattern of the stated facts. I raised my argument because I disagreed with your argument. You, as a person, are slightly less important to me than a worm I should happen to see crawling along after a rain storm.

As an example of your "interesting" bent on reality:

And other journalist don't expect free playstations for writing stories about the president. And yes, It is secondary advertising. The majority of game journalist don't pay for their games or game systems because of their reviews. This story even admits they got review playstations and games from sony. And publishing press releases, just like with the White House press releases is advertising. You really believe journalists pay for the books, movies, computers, etc that they review? If you do, you're wrong. Even consumer reports expects donated equipment to test on. If you cover the president, you don't pay for the flights on air force one to follow him around. Your fundamental error is in assuming that the agent being covered is the actor with the power to negotiate.. Sony wants coverage of it's PS3, it lends out its equiprment to encourage that coverage - much the same way that the auto-industry lend cars to auto-journalists, and host events where thouse journalists can meet the designers and the corporate big-wigs so that their cars get covered. If BMW stopped throwing parties to attract attention, it is BMW, not car and driver, that would suffer from decreased exposure. The reason Chenny and company can get away with hard ball negotiations is that there IS no other source for your government services. The minority producer is Chenny, the majority consumer is the journalist. Here, that's not the case. While there are many gaming magazines, those magazines are more likely to attract readers by playing hardball with the gaming companies, even if it costs them privledged access - you talk to gamespy and gamepro (and increasingly Kotaku) because if you don't, readers will simply not hear about your product.

As for your "correction" that is again an interesting example of where you have substituted your opinion for the facts. An argument that I have no interest in hashing out with someone with your glaringly self-centered world view and fact focus.

-GiH

Re:Grey

[randyest]

While the nearly-illiterate troll you're arguing with is 100% wrong in my opinion, I must correct you on this point:

Even consumer reports expects donated equipment to test on.

Consumer Reports (magazine and website) does not accept loaned or donated products for testing. They purchase every product anonymously and through normal retail channels to avoid being given "superior" or "unusually good" example products.

Now please, carry on.

Not a Big Deal

[Rycross]

Its Sony's right to give out information to whoever they choose.

I think the more interesting thing here is that they're planning on copying Nintendo and Microsoft's ideas. Its a pretty cool combination of the two ideas though.

Re:Not a Big Deal

[GrayCalx]

Yeah I agree. Someone dig up the quote from Sony before the PS3 release about how Achievements and Gamer Points are silly and aren't needed. I'm too lazy. And tired. And I might have dreamed it.

Re:Not a Big Deal

[rishistar]

Well what they should have done is copy Nintendo's approach to this: say the complete opposite is going to happen, and then proceed as planned anyway. Nintendo are great for doing this (eg we are not going to upgrade the DS) and in the long run people appreciate thats how Nintendo play the game. Its almost like Sony are going through the phase Nintendo were 10 years ago.

They're both right

[Vaibhav_Locke]

Both sides have a point here. Sony depends on the media to generate buzz about their products and releases, and so provides them with a lot of exclusives and insider information. The flip side of this is, they do not expect information on a service that is in development to become public before they are ready to announce themselves However, Kotaku did not receive this information from Sony. They only went to Sony to confirm it, this was not something sony provided to them and so they had no right to ask Kotaku not to run it. I wonder how it would have played out if KT had not been so diligent, and just reported the rumor without attempting to confirm it.

Hate to say it...

[JRSchulke]

I hate to say it, but I have to side with Sony on this one. They had an agreement and it was broken. It sounds like Kotaku perhaps had some privaleged information and took advantage of it. I know Sony has been digging its own grave lately, but it seems like everyone jumps on any chance to report anything negative about them. And there's a lot of it out there. -justin

Re:Hate to say it...

[ninti]

"They had an agreement and it was broken" What agreement? They got a rumor and went to Sony to ask if it was true. Sony could have just said "no comment", but they said "don't publish that or we will punish you", and then did so. WTF is that?

Re:Hate to say it...

[falcon5768]

All Kotaku asked was to confirm it. Sony went beyond confirming and denying and said you publish this we are through. Thats not how you play ball in the media market and in the end its going to kill Sony's relationship with every media source since as a news organization I would be less likey to publish ANYTHING unconfirmed about Sony, which is the #1 way these companies trump up excitement for their machines.

All Sony did was shoot themselves in the foot to the people most likely to buy their stuff. They could have simply had said "no comment" and be done. Now everyone knows Kotaku had solid info (and thus ruined the surprise tuesday), and Sonys PR people are a huge bunch of assholes.

Re:Hate to say it...

[slantyyz]

Yeah, but Sony brings on all the PS3 hate on themselves. Harrison and Tretton keep saying the dumbest things, which just compounds on the hate.

Personally, I really like the PS3 (enough to buy one), but I can also understand why everyone hates it. It's expensive (for a console, but not a BD player) and it seems like the Sony brass doesn't care about their core market, the gamers, who don't have loads of cash oozing out of their pockets.

Re:Hate to say it...

[Jartan]

I hate to say it, but I have to side with Sony on this one. They had an agreement and it was broken. It sounds like Kotaku perhaps had some privaleged information and took advantage of it. I know Sony has been digging its own grave lately, but it seems like everyone jumps on any chance to report anything negative about them. And there's a lot of it out there. -justin

As usual RTFA. This isn't like some people are trying to spin it. Kotaku had a normal press relationship with Sony. They had a test unit (kotaku is big enough that you can't act like this is some sort of bribe) and some invitations to press events. They contacted Sony to try and confirm the rumor and got shot down.

This is just what it appears to be. Typical corporation trying to cover up stories by threatening to withdraw future release of info. Kotaku just happens to be big enough to laugh at Sony for even trying. This is actually quite a snafu on Sony's part. They probably think they just dusted off some small blog but here they are sitting on slashdot.

Re:Hate to say it...

[seebs]

What agreement? This was not information provided by Sony, but embargoed. This was a proper legitimate rumor.

Re:Hate to say it...

[JRSchulke]

Hmm. After reading your responses, I've changed my mind. I'm not sure what I was thinking there, because if it wasn't some kind of insider information that Kotaku was privaleged to, then they have the right to report whatever they want. Maybe Sony got one of their rootkits implanted in me. *checks colon* -justin

Good

[Jherek Carnelian]

The web is full of sites that kowtow to vendor's marketing departments. These websites are not worth the electricity they run on. Every reporter and ever editor will have inherent biases, but what we don't need (and have waaaay too much of) are stories that are biased by the reporter's desire to stay in the good-graces of the companies they are reporting on.

If the choice is between press-release reporting and real reporting, I'll take real reporting every day.

Blackballed?

[Trillan]

I'm not sure even calling it blackballed is fair. When I think of blackballing, I think of someone deliberately trying to destroy the "blackballee" in an industry, not simply disconnecting them from a single "blackballing" company.

In other words, I'm totally justified in not letting you play with my ball. It's only when I try to stop you from using any balls, or play in any game I'm related to, that it becomes blackballing.

Re:Blackballed?

[apoc06]

i think the right term would probably be blacklisted.

Rumors are reported daily on every game blog

[Maddhatter1]

and this one was no different. It's not like Kotaku just had an interview with some sony higher ups and released information before they were told to. They reported a rumor and that's it. It would've just been seen as a rumor if Sony hadn't all my confirmed it with this overblown response.

And I should care why?

[kabocox]

Um, Sony told them not to publish their article. I'd believe that Sony didn't want the news/idea out there yet. They may have been afraid that it would be easy for Nintendo or MS to copy the concept for their systems once published. From the slashdot summary alone, I actually support Sony's decision on this one. Sony is just blackballing that blogger's site. Sony isn't sueing them. Sony isn't black balling every blogger. Sony is just targetting this one site that had Sony insider knowledge and Sony asked them not to publish the store. This blackballing by Sony is the polite responsee by Sony. So what if a blogger gamer site that I've never heard of before till it made slashdot's front page gets black balled by Sony! They can still cover Nintendo's and MS's products. They just lost out on "insider" news from Sony. If they wanted future insider Sony stores, they should listen and do what Sony asks. Gosh, I don't even know why this made it to slashdot except that Sony has been evil lately. All of Sony's actions aren't evil though. This action doesn't look evil to me. It looks polite to me.

Re:And I should care why?

[falcon5768]

two points. 1) they could have said no comment, all it was was a rumor up till that point.

2) Technically they are copying MS and Nintendo on this one. The rumor basically said it was a MS style achievements system which used Nintendo styled Mii's.

3) People are calling it a blogger, but its not a blogger its one of the biggest web based news organizations that doesnt have a real world based presence, Gawker Media. Gawkers on slashdots main pages all the time, and infact many of Slashdots tech stories have been coming from Kotaku, Gizmodo and Lifehacker recently, all Gawker media sites.

4) The media is supposed to report news. Rumors are newsworth items. Sony can blackball all they want, but in the end all it does is make Sony look bad. Just look at Apple when they pulled a stunt like this with other sites in the wake of their misinformed lawsuit. The rule is as a company if you dont want a secret to get out early you keep the lid tight. You dont blackball media sources otherwise the hand you bite is going to slap you right back.

Re:And I should care why?

[cowscows]

Who is Sony to tell a website what not to publish? Kotaku wasn't breaking any NDA, they weren't even shown this stuff by Sony under some sort of verbal agreement to secrecy. They heard a rumor through unofficial channels, and when they called Sony to ask about it, they were threatened. Sony didn't politely ask them not to publish it, they placed demands on them. They were dicks about it.

Was this "Evil" for Sony? I don't know if I'd go that far. But it was most certainly stupid. Kotaku isn't the end all of video games, but it is a popular site, and is a potential source of lots of good free PR. They don't have to kiss Kotaku's ass if they don't want to, but going out of your way to piss them off isn't smart either.

And so now instead of a discussion about the PS3's new features, we're discussing how Sony treated a random website. No matter which side of this debate you fall on, how is it in Sony's interest to have the discussion derailed like that? I don't buy the "any publicity is good publicity line". When you're dealing with a market that's knowledgeable about your product (I have no doubts that 95% of the hardcore gamers out there keep up with video game news on the internet to some degree), then bad press is not what you want.

Sony just keeps making their own lives harder. If I was a Nintendo or MS Xbox division exec, I'd constantly be laughing my ass off at Sony.

Re:And I should care why?

[Tsiangkun]

Let me summarize the article for people who haven't read it.

This was not insider information.

This was not information from SONY.

This was information from an anonymous source.

This was reported as a rumor from an anonymous source.

They called SONY to inquire about the rumor before publishing.

SONY neither confirmed, nor denied, the rumor, but instead threatened the blog if the blog should run the article.

The blog ran the article.

SONY followed through on threat.

{-- end of story --}

{-- begin commentary --}
SONY should have confirmed the rumor, and then asked the blog to wait for the okay to run the story as being the official word of SONY, or else face the wrath of SONY and lose their insider access. That would have been in the spirit of the agreement between the blog and SONY.

Punishing a blog for publishing an rumor from an anonymous source is just another bone-headed SONY move.

Re:And I should care why?

[goatpunch]

They may have been afraid that it would be easy for Nintendo or MS to copy the concept for their systems once published.

They were terrified that in some unimaginable future, the Xbox 360 would have a universal Achievements system, and the Nintendo Wii would have customisable Avatars...

Re:And I should care why?

[seebs]

Um, Sony told them not to publish their article. I'd believe that Sony didn't want the news/idea out there yet. They may have been afraid that it would be easy for Nintendo or MS to copy the concept for their systems once published.

Well, who the **** cares what Sony wants? I don't recall asking my news sources to filter everything based on whether or not Sony wants it out there.

That said: Of course it would be easy for MS and Nintendo to copy the feature. It's easy because they already have these features, which is why Sony is copying these features from them.

This is like saying that Microsoft should have the right to force blogs not to comment that the new Vista interface looks like a cheap knock-off of Aqua, because if news gets out, Apple could copy them. It's barely even wrong.

In other news...

[RingDev]

News at 11:00.

-Rick

Rumor and speculation?

[kjlong]

Why not just "no comment"? Would it have been quite as big a story if Sony had just refused to comment instead of throwing out lots of threats? Does Microsoft do this? I know Apple sues, but what do other companies do when faced with this kind of thing? Did Sony ask them to hold off on the story, or try to work with them, or just throw out threats?

Re:Rumor and speculation?

[cowscows]

Exactly. If Sony had just said no comment, they still might have had their big announcement slightly ruined, but then at least we'd all be talking about these new features instead of talking about how Sony threatened and then blacklisted a video game website.

I guess they bet on Kotaku folding, but I'm not sure what made Sony think the odds were in their favor.

Re:Rumor and speculation?

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft? Since when does anyone get ANY response from Microsoft? To ANYTHING?

Exactly. Mod up.

[PeelBoy]

Couldn't have said it better my self.

This wasn't some kind of exclusive content or interview. It was a rumor.

Typical Sony

[Tepshen]

I think that Sony will find this happening more and more as they continue to put out crazy marketing. Its gotten to the point that the PR that they dole out is so innacurate that bloggers find themselves actually researching stories on thier own to get accurate information. Sony doesnt want this because the actual news regarding thier plans is nowhere near as good as they would like us to belive.

Re:Typical Sony

[ivan256]

Quite honestly, that's a big load of crap.

This is the kind of thing that happens with almost every company's press relations. If a publication doesn't honor a street date, or prints a rumor against the request of the company, they receive sub-par treatment when it comes to interviews and exclusives. Every company does this. The only reason this is a story is because this site has an anti-Sony bias.

Re:Typical Sony

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the difference between a "news site" and a "Puppet" I'm too old for a puppet show.

Re:Typical Sony

[buffer-overflowed]

And no site that honors that vendor crap has a lick of journalistic integrity. It's a rumor, not prerelease software, a movie, or hardware with an embargo on the release date. The company can say no comment. Hell, the company has little power at all if the journalists collectively tell their PR department to fuck off.

What site without PS, Sony, or Playstation in it's name *doesn't* have an anti-Sony bias these days? Hell, even AVSForums is a bit anti-sony. Is it the few, the proud, the recently made poorer by $600-$700 Sony supporters against the world? Apparently, and apparently all of the bad press is entirely because of this horrible horrible *bias* all of these other places have against Sony. Nothing to do with the reality of the company, their hubris, their backpeddling, their statements that go straight against established facts, and their actions.

Fuck, if this rumor is true, which their actions seem to indicate it is, but we'll find out at GDC, the age old adage "What Nintendo makes, Sony takes" gets the briefly modified to "What Nintendo and Microsoft make, Sony takes." For the umpteenth time they will have panned things their competitors do only to quietly adopt them and claim "It's our innovation!" That's unfrickin' believable.

I take no pleasure from your pain :)

[Anonymous Coward]

Again, I take absolutely no joy in sending you this note,...

Translation: I've got this warped world view where punishing people for "disobedience" is the greatest pleasure there is - but I have to pretend I'm not enjoying this so people don't think I'm wierd.

actual room...

[wpegden]

They detail a form of Sony Mii, with achievements accruing in an actual room as you succeed in playing games.

I can't help but see this sentence as as indicator that the Slashdot crowd is a bit disconnected from reality. In what sense is this an "actual" room??

Re:actual room...

[Anonymous Coward]

oh it will be a real room. sony has planned to build a mega-warehouse kinda like a self-service storage center. from what i hear, every gamer will have their own "room" to display their "achievements or awards". on problem is that its on the moon, so actually visiting your room in person is pretty darn hard. unless you have ties with nasa or John Carmack, you just have to have "faith" in sony that is there...

Re:actual room...

[Franklin Brauner]

It's likely the "actual room" that they keep their server in.
--
Franklin Brauner

Re:actual room...

[kperson]

I've been to this "actual room", and when I saw it my head "literally exploded" with excitement.

Re:actual room...

[GodInHell]

I can't help but see this sentence as as indicator that the Slashdot crowd is a bit disconnected from reality. In what sense is this an "actual" room?? Don't make me go all Humian on you!! I will!

(David Hume was a philosopher and renowned skeptic of reality).

-GiH

Re:actual room...

[Grim Leaper]

Just when you thought it was safe to forget Sony Rootkit... ...

Sony Lockpick!

Every time you achive a high score, a Sony executive breaks into an actual room of your house to deliver a shiny trophy.

Re:actual room...

[k8to]

Death of utility of word "actual" reported. Film at 11.

(In related news, 'actually' apparently now means "I am a rude person".)

Re:actual room...

[sesshomaru]

Well, this is because "actual" means the same thing as "virtual" and "literally" means the same thing as "figuratively."

What are the words that mean the opposite of the words "virtual" and "figuratively?"

There aren't any.

Apple and Sony

[hansamurai]

Wow, Apple and Sony sound more and more similar every week with stories like these. Products going for "five hundred and ninety-nine US dollars", company getting pissed at bloggers for leaking stories, what's next? Maybe someone from Sony will diss DRM. We can only hope.

Re:Apple and Sony

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, Apple and Sony sound more and more similar every week with stories like these. Products going for "five hundred and ninety-nine US dollars", company getting pissed at bloggers for leaking stories, what's next? Maybe someone from Sony will diss DRM. We can only hope. Maybe Sony will create a portable music player locked into one format and dominate the industry.

Oh, wait.

For this Sony went ballistic?

[Sarusa]

Who really couldn't have guessed that Sony would badmouth and then copy Xbox Live Achievements and Miis while passing it off as innovation? And of course several people have. Really, being dicks like this just adds more credence to the rumor than ignoring it would have.

Next up: WHOOPS I guess rumble isn't so last-gen after all.

Re:For this Sony went ballistic?

[shimage]

Funny you should mention that.

No story here

[geekoid]

Journalist get's information.
Company says "If you publish it we won't talk anymore"
Journalist run's story.
Company won't tlak to them anymore.

Everybody did their job, big deal.

The Journilst decided the story was important enough to take the risk, it happens to some degree with every story.

Kotaku was anti-Sony anyways

[gamer4Life]

I'm surprised Sony took so long to pull it's support from the site. If you look at it's entries, they always bash Sony while praising Microsoft. Kotaku and it's parent, Gawker media, are in the pockets of Redmond.

The real news here

[oGMo]

I think the real news here is that Kotaku actually had a reliable source for one of their stories.

Blackball Sony

[ubuwalker31]

I personally refuse to buy any Sony product. They are complete scum.

hmmm

[TB]

Their biggest mistake was talking to Kotaku in the first place, those guys are total idiots and do nothing but spread rumours and false information.

For the love of god...

[goatpunch]

... can someone just put a bullet in this corporation and put it out of it's misery. Watching it die like this is just painful.

Re:For the love of god...

[Anonymous Coward]

That krazy Karakker.. hey Krakker, Krakker, Krakker ....

Maybe they could have worked it out

[talk2sk]

IMO Kotaku could have reworded their article (there was an initial cut down version up on their site) so that it may have been acceptable. Its just a matter of courtesy/negotiation, they could have said this is all "a rumour from some anonymous coward". Sometimes corporations have to guard the timing of announcements and the perceived impact. Its just a matter of co-operation, maybe kotaku could have bargained the story for something more juicy.. like when the price cut can be expected ;-)

This is what journalism is about.

[Animats]

"What someone doesn't want you to publish is journalism; all else is publicity." -- Paul Fussell

Re:This is what journalism is about.

[k8to]

Yes and no. To wit, libel is not journalism.

I agree with the point of that quote. Not sure it applies here. The standards of journalistic integrity generally suggest that one does due dillegence in investigation of stories so as not to simply spread false or misleading rumours. Is publishing rumours explicitly labelled as such a transgression of that? Maybe not, but it doesn't really seem in close keeping with it either. Perhaps if they dug up a bunch of corroborating information, but that's not really what (most) blogs are about. Blogs are typically about skipping a lot of the traditional journalistic overhead, and that's fine, but doing so _and_ denying the line between blogging and journalism isn't so great.

sony is the britney spears of electronics

[swschrad]

they are bound and determined to kill themselves. and are hard on the right path.

Resolved

[StrahdVZ]

Dont know if this has been posted yet.

http://kotaku.com/gaming/sony/sony-and-kotaku-make up-240922.php

Re:Resolved

[Dahamma]

I wish I had mod points... though knowing /. it would just get modded back down so that people ccould keep bashing Sony for another few hours.

Re:Resolved

[Quaz and Wally]

That is hilarious. Sony goes, "OH SHI- We're getting boat loads of bad press from this! We take it back!"

MOD PARENT UP!

[Siberwulf]

This is indeed resolved. Sony isn't the she-devil anymore. (Not reall, and yes I own a Wii)

Unexpected publicity stunt

[reybrujo]

Apparently they made peace. Maybe the positive fan reaction (at least from what one can see at NeoGAF and other gaming forums) made them realize that fans were desperate for good news and that the leak, while getting comments about Sony stealing Nintendo's Miis and Microsoft's Achievements, it was welcomed.
 
In another note, I wonder what kind of avatars they will be using. After all, in a recent interview with Newsweek's N'Gai, Phil Harrison stated that

I think it's a really great idea. I think the lo-fi execution is not for everyone.

and

If you are going to have an avatar which is your representative in a virtual world, it has to stand for more of your personality than some 2-D cartoons. So while I think that millions of people would be happy with cartoony looks, the planet at large probably isn't. And it's an experiment that will be played out very soon, actually.

Sims meet Animal Crossing?

this has nothing to do with the parent...

[beckerist]

This has nothing to do with the parent, but I just wanted to let y'all know, this is all old news.

Looks like they're friendly once again...

[Tronster]

Sony's PR contacted Kotaku, they talked, and while continued to disagree reverted on their decision to ban them from their press channels:

http://kotaku.com/gaming/sony/sony-and-kotaku-make up-240922.php

Everyone makes mistakes; I'm glad to see Sony realized their err and wasn't prideful about maintaining their snap decision.

And just as quickly, it's all over.

[Dormann]

http://kotaku.com/gaming/sony/sony-and-kotaku-make up-240922.php

It doesn't matter if it's a blog or journalism

[jchenx]

if kotaku is simply a blog, they did the right thing by not backing down. however, if they are simply a blog they should not be able to benefit from industry perks such as debug systems, prerelease games, exclusive interviews, etc. these kind of perks are simply noncash bribes so that the product gets a mention.

if they are a journalistic entity, they should work with the press officers at sony and within the confines of journalistic fact. if they wanted to proceed, perhaps they could have offered a re-write [lets not forget that kotaku slanted the article to imply that the feature would be a copy of its various competitors] and requested a possible exclusive the day of the conference.

I would say Kotaku is, well, neither. Or a mix of both. Or sometimes one, and sometimes the other. There are many times where they just repeat whatever corporate statement has been made. And times where it's really just an opinion piece.

In the end, though, I don't think it matters. To publishers and developers, Kotaku is just another media outlet, and one they manage however they want to. There are certainly lots of blogs that DO get personal treatment (access to builds, interviews, etc.), and lots of journalist sites that DON'T get such things, because they're just too small.

That said, Sony is well within their right, obviously, to NOT grant Kotaku anymore access to information, press events, etc. I don't think anyone is saying that's illegal by any stretch of the imagination. However, it's a pretty damn crappy thing to do, as well as dangerous ... especially in an industry where the fans are so connected and vocal. There's going to be a lot of debate about Sony's actions in blackballing Kotaku, rather than this potentially cool feature that was rumored on in the first place. I don't think Sony realized fully the consequences of what it has done (as usual).

Serves them right

[DarwynFour]

That ought to teach them folks over at "shittaku" a lesson.

Asked to remove, sure ... but blacklisting?

[jchenx]

First of all, I think the proper thing to do is to just stick with the standard "No comment" approach, which is what Nintendo and MS always do. Ask them something that's fairly obviously true, you'll get "No comment". Ask them something outlandishly false, you'll also get "No comment". That's pretty much been the MO of the industry, and we're all pretty used to it.

Now, I'm sure there are times where a "No comment" isn't enough. Maybe it's leaked confidential information. Or someone broke an NDA. In those cases, they'll ask a site to remove it, and sure enough most will.

Even if they don't, I don't recall blacklisting as a tactic that's been done before (please correct me if I'm wrong, and supply examples/evidence). Of course Sony/MS/Nintendo/anyone-else is free to do what they please, but there's a reason why it's generally (never?) done. The backlash is pretty severe, especially in this industry where its fans are so vocal and connected.

"dis-inviting"?

[Vinegar Joe]

God, I hate corporate English.

Re:"dis-inviting"?

[mollymoo]

The corporate English was much better than the self-proclaimed journalist's English:

Know this, while I disagree with this decision and think it is a monumental mistake, it will not effect our continuing coverage of Sony and the gaming software and hardware your company makes and supports.

The first comma should be a colon and "effect" should be "affect". I love the way so many bloggers rant about being journalists without bothering to learn the most basic tool of a journalist's trade - the language.

Re:"dis-inviting"?

[GodInHell]

Heh, beats the living hell out of the federal rules of civil procedure, lemme tell you.

Quote from a brief posted by my opposition: Re: Rule 12 (b)(6) motion to dismiss - it is the definitive position of the parties in the first and second case that the third and fifth claim are discountable, remaining elements of first second fourth and sixth claim fail to conclusively state in what way the parties in the third and fourth part can be said to have contributed to the negligence of the first and second parties which deny any negligence nor contribution to the negligence of unnamed or unknown or unknowable parties.

Fire that man.

-GiH

Re:"dis-inviting"?

[geminidomino]

Fire at that man. Fixed.

Re:"dis-inviting"?

[GodInHell]

In their defense, we're all just law students.. sooooo...

-GiH

Re:"dis-inviting"?

[randyest]

It's easiest to kill evil when it's young and (relatively) wek, you know?

Re:"dis-inviting"?

[geminidomino]

Even better... kill it before it spreads.

Maybe Sony (and others) will learn from this?

[jchenx]

I am hoping that Sony (and other companies) will learn a few things from this whole experience:

1) The gaming community is extremely connected. Good news travels fast, but bad news is lightspeed. Wait before you do something stupid like blackball a popular gaming website. Maybe it's worth trying the "count to 10 before sending off a nasty e-mail" tactic?

2) More respect needs to be given to the gaming press in general. You can't push them around, just because you happen to be the content provider. Maybe that will get some companies to be a bit more open (*cough* Nintendo *cough*).

3) Image is important, especially in this industry where virtual wars are fought over these brand names. Yes, that means not screwing around the press. But maybe taking it further like not lying, not being overly egotistical, being more honest, etc. will actually help for once.

Anyone else want to pitch in?

Over and done with

[kamapuaa]

Interesting story, but it's over and through. Soon after, Sony called and retracted their statement.

He told me his take on the story and his frustrations and I told him mine, in the end we agreed to disagree on some level, but also decided that our readers and gamers in general would be best served if Sony and Kotaku could still play nicely together.

In a nutshell: The story remains up and Sony has re-invited us to the meetings and interviews initially scheduled for the Game Developers Conference.

Re:Over and done with

[Torvaun]

Wow. Not the best move by Sony there. Now they look like pansies, and no one else will listen to any of their threats. If you make a threat, be ready to carry through. If you carry through, don't backtrack. Now they've confirmed a source, punished their own PR department, and presented them as people you don't need to worry about offending. Slick.

Mythical Man Month and Game Systems

[alexhmit01]

In the mythical man month, there is a talk of system generations. The first system you build kinda works but is kludgy, you fight to get it to do what you want, but it works. The NES was a CHEAP system to build, nothing fancy, but hacking processors onto cartridges kept it going long after the hardware was obsolete. Sega's SMS was better looking than Nintendo's offering, cartridges more reasonably sized, but didn't have the fun factor as nailed down, but they got cool games out there. Sony's first system, the PS, was similar, switched controllers in the middle, did whatever they could with their hardware, dumped it on the market (trying to recover SOME sunk costs, not even turn a profit originally, and pricing reflected that). MS figured out how to build a system for people that wanted the best graphics at a subsidized price, they never set out to make a profit, and succeeded at turning a nice loss.

The second generation system is better, you have things under control, learned from your first system, make things a bit better, etc. The SNES had a nice lifespan, could do more out of the box (didn't need lots of custom controllers, etc.), was the NES but better. Genesis was an awesome system, it was a lot of fun, had awesome games, awesome controllers, a good stretch, made Sega money. The PS2 and Xbox 360 were good sequel systems. Backwards compatible, did what the old one did plus more, etc. They learned along the way (Sony came out the gates swinging, fought for each franchise, etc., pushed Nintendo out of several large chunks of the market), MS realized that you need parts where you get price breaks or can buy on the open market, otherwise you can't win the marathon.

The third system is over engineered, over thought, rediculously complicated, expensive, beyond schedule, and a disaster.

The N64 had plastic parts everywhere to put upgrades in, stuff hanging out of controllers, etc. It was shipping cartridges that cost serious money to produce (and had limited space), everyone else CDs that cost next to nothing, etc. While they made money, it was a disaster for a market that they were the leader of... didn't help that Sony was competing with a second system, so they weren't idiotic. The Saturn was the best 2D gaming system ever made, just as console games moved to 3D. It was ridiculously expensive from throwing everything in to avoid a Sega-CD and other upgrade fiasco, and set the stage for Sega's exit from consoles. Sony's third system IGNORES everything that got them there (cheap systems, easy to crank up production, granted the PS2 had some custom hardware, but NOTHING like the PS3), playing around with Blu-Ray, etc. In short, Sony is making every third system mistake, and we're watching it in the marketplace.

I predict that Sony will lose a LOT of money this round, but maintain a leadership position. They need to start selling the machines for $299 and not care how much they lose, and they'll do it, but it will be a REALLY REALLY expensive mistake. The PS worked because it was cheap and the R&D was already sunk. The PS2 carried the first gen system forward as just a better Playstation. The PS3 is a third system nightmare.

Re:Mythical Man Month and Game Systems

[Psiven]

So you're basically saying that all those systems had poor success because they we're the company's third system? Sorry but that's a bit arbitrary, don't you think?

The fact that Nintendo made nothing but profits in it's third console throws this theory out the window. Naturally there is a certain degree of evolution though,

I do agree with you though that Sony should take a major hit on the PS3 to increase market share. From the amount of talk among developers pulling support based on unit sell through, this is something Sony really should do.

Re:Mythical Man Month and Game Systems

[Pancake Bandit]

Typically, it's the immediate sequel to something (whether it be a system, an album, whatever) that tries to do too much and fails.

Re:Mythical Man Month and Game Systems

[ECMIM]

I don't think he argued that Nintendo didn't make money on N64, but it was a very, very far cry from their halcyon days of NES (domination) and SNES (semi-domination) and set the stage for a very sizable loss in marketshare that is only now being rectified with the Wii (in the home console space.)

Re:Mythical Man Month and Game Systems

[Anonymous Coward]

"The Saturn was the best 2D gaming system ever made"

Nope, that was the Neo Geo, which had more 2D power than the xbox, let alone the Saturn. Of course, it's finally been surpassed even at raw 2D by the 360. And it wasn't exactly in the same market.

Re:Mythical Man Month and Game Systems

[king-manic]

I just got a PS3, and I have to agree it made some mistakes. The CF/SD/Duo slots are useless, a PS2/Ps1 memory card port would have served them better. Not having composite/HDMI cords out of the box is a bit annoying and the lack of good docs on wireless set up annoyed me. The eject button also feels odd. I really enjoy the current models abundant backwards compatability. Dropping it would be a huge mistake. The price is arguably a mistake as well but that one can be mended easily for the true battle (X-mas 2008). But over all I like the gloss on the system. Decent web browser, usb support for keyboards, intuitive gui, fiarly intuitive wireless set up, garenteed built in HD, intuitive contoller indicator. I feel blu-ray is a asset too, many feel it was a liability but it's an easy way to show off HD.

So far it's doing better then the 360 at similiar points in it's life cycle. Who knows if it will be enough with the wii rampaging through the market. The Wii will be my #2 system once I can find one. Although I'm debating that since casual play of most of those games have led me to be bored with the mini-game style. wario/Rayman/wii sports have all played themselves out for me. They lack the depth to keep a medium-core player interested. They're all geared for casual players.

Re:Mythical Man Month and Game Systems

[Fozzyuw]

Typically, it's the immediate sequel to something (whether it be a system, an album, whatever) that tries to do too much and fails.

Hmm... I wanted to agree with this, but then I thought...

• Empire Strikes Back vs Return of the Jedi
• X-Men 2 vs X-Men 3 (IMHO 2 was much better than 3)
• ...

Then I'm stuck. But there's Probably more out there. Of course, this is in comparison to the 2nd vs 3rd, not 1st vs 2nd or 1st vs 3rd.

Lets see, then I think about...

• Star Trek vs TNG vs DS9
• Game Boy vs Virtual Boy vs Game Boy Advanced vs DS

And I cannot really see this for all areas. I guess my 'golden' rule would apply: "There's always an exception to a rule; even this one."

Cheers,
Fozzy

Silly Sonies.

[anduz]

I havn't really followed the ps3 stuff in close detail because I'm not even considering buying a ps3, but I do find it sort of strange that Sony doesn't want potentional customers to know what kind of features to expect. More so when they don't seem to think twice about telling us about the giant enemy crabs in Japanese history and the ridiculous price, but especially when it's about online features. I say especially because the ps2 online service was upright horrible and even if these ideas are not new inventions they sure beat having nothing at all...

I'm not sure I understand this thing right though, I mean, why is Sony giving people outside Sony information Sony doesn't want people outside Sony to have? But I guess you have to try to run the independent blogpages when your own viral marketing blog gets outed? :p

PS3 Meets Cyworld

[saunderscc]

Super. We'll be buying cyber garbage with acorns to adorn our rooms and impress our virtual neighbors. Why should anyone care about this?

Simple Theory...

[Vacardo]

1.) Slam competitors' innovations as useless
2.) Generate some really awful PR
3.) Re-invent the wheel
4.) ????
5.) PROFIT!!!

A Note to Sony and Mr K ...

[Anonymous Coward]

... Please go away!

It would be a better world had Sony, never existed, and that our Mr. K. had never existed.

Perchance, Fate, will yet intervene.

Toodles

It's worse for those overseas

[TheNinjaroach]

In order to save costs, the European and Australian models will have a "limited range" of backwards compatibility.

They used different hardware specs for their models, replacing a PS2-like hardware chip with software emulation that isn't as good.

Who cares?

[davewalden]

Does anyone here care? /rollseyes

Sony screwed up

[LKM]

Huh? A corporation tries to blackmail a news outlet into not printing an article - which the outlet has researched on its own, by the way, and not received from the company - and you think this is fine? Sure, it's not illegal, but I don't want to buy goods from a company who tries to supporess a free and fair press, and from a public relations standpoint, this just makes me doubt whether positive articles about Sony are actually the result of Sony's blackmailing of reporters.

If Sony suspects that somebody leaked trade secrets, they should just go to the courts and see whether they can force Kotaku to reveal the sources. But don't try to blackmail the press.

If Bush does it, it must be OK?

[LKM]

So the fact that Bush does it makes it okay? Or what exactly are you trying to say here?

Re:If Bush does it, it must be OK?

[eln]

I'm not saying it's okay or not okay, I'm saying it's reality. Believe me, "If Bush does it, it must be okay" is not a stance you're ever going to see me take.

Re:If Bush does it, it must be OK?

[LKM]

I think most people realize that it's reality. That doesn't mean that all companies behave like this, or that we should just accept it and not talk about it.

Wrong

[LKM]

Apple didn't try to blackmail the rumor site. They tried to find the leak of a trade secret and sued against unknown persons. They then tried to force the rumor sites to reveal their source. Kind of something entirely different.

Wrong quotation

[fnc]

Mythical Man Month says that the SECOND system is normally over engineered.

Goodbye Sony, and HAIL MICROSOFT!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

All hail our new DRM and closed proprietary format overlords!

If their past is any indication, we should all be looking forward to good times when they take over the console market!

And you know, it is only a matter of time before they take over Nintendo, and Nintendo starts developing for the Xbox 360....