ESFI and the changing world of eSports journalism
A couple of weeks ago, I had to leave right at the end of the finals of Dreamhack Winter. Hero was up 50 or so supply when I left, but when I got home, the very first thing I did was to check what exactly happened.
How did I do that? Well, I went through the labyrinth that is TeamLiquid. I went to the home page, then to SC2 Tournaments, then to the DH thread, and then scrolled down to the results and looked under the spoiler tag. Then, I went into the depths of the LR thread to see what happened in the game once I left, and then just decided I’d wait for the VOD.
Alternately, I could have gone to Reddit, where I would’ve known who won immediately, but I would’ve had no way to see what else happened in that game. Did Puma come back and force a longer game? Or did he gg about 5 seconds after I left? (It was the latter, by the way.)
There is a clear gap that needs to be filled, and thus, eSports journalism is in an exciting, dangerous time of transition. TeamLiquid has caught some flak for not having anything newsworthy on their front page, which seems to me like a vestige from their BW days. But the reality is they are a forum, not a news site. The line is blurring, I know, but it doesn’t seem like they want to be that destination for hard news.
And neither does Reddit. It’s unfair to expect that of them, since they are practically the anti-hard news website. Imagine in-depth articles about the GSL next to gifs of Keen celebrating.
Thus, some other websites are trying to fill the void, which is admirable, since eSports needs it (and the journalism industry is in such a transition, but that’s another topic). A couple of shows have broached the subject this week, and they should. It’s a key development for eSports. The site I’ll focus on is ESFI, and in particular their article from yesterday on Naniwa switching teams again. It’s an intriguing read, and I highly recommend reading it before continuing.
As a disclaimer, I’ve only been checking out their site for a couple of months, so these are definitely snap observations. (Also, my credentials: I’ve been a sports reporter for about seven years and have covered Virginia Tech football and basketball from press row. I am about to receive my BA in Journalism, specifically journalism and new media, and am looking for my MA in a new media field.) But I’ve been generally impressed - they send out their own people for events to get independent interviews, pictures, and stories. The design is nice and wouldn’t turn anybody away, and the writing is of a good quality.
The event coverage, in particular, I think is something easy to improve upon. I’d like more writing (although that may put me in the minority), covering what exactly happened in the matches and what the outcome was, similar to your typical AP recap. For example:
ONTARIO, CALIF. - It is becoming almost tradition at the finals of large foreign events: Liquid’Hero against EG.PuMa. Most recently, Hero took the Dreamhack Winter 2011 title.
PuMa got his revenge Sunday, beating Hero 4-2 to win his second straight NASL title. In a frantic Game 6, PuMa barely scouted Hero’s proxy Stargate and killed the pylon powering it just before the first Void Ray completed.
“I felt really good,” PuMa said. …
And so on. Every game could be discussed (in length or in brief), and the tournament as a whole could be mentioned as well. It would be a good jumping-off point for a lot of the other content ESFI already does a good job with, and the type of big article that would bring casual fans to the site just to keep up on news. Add this with pictures and some embedded videos, and you would have an awesome story. (And a very tired reporter.)
But as much as I’d love that, that information is out there if you want to piece it all together. For something like the Naniwa article, there was actual reporting done. First, there’s been a lot of complaints about the anonymous source. I agree with these people - anonymous sources need to be handled with extreme care, and that’s not the case here. First, I’d like to see some mention as to why the source asked for anonymity, such as: “an anonymous source said, who asked for confidentiality due to the sensitive nature of the issue.” If the source can’t come up with a good reason, they shouldn’t be confidential.
Part of me is scared that angry players/coaches will try and use ESFI as an official channel to flame somebody. I have no indication ESFI would let that happen, but it’s something to be aware of nevertheless. They must remember anonymous sources must be used sparingly, only when there is no other chance to get the information.
A problem with the anonymous source is that it’s so bizarrely placed in the story. It’s in the ninth paragraph, after a bunch of quotes from management. Ideally, it should be right up front and center:
NaNiwa has switched teams again, this time from Complexity to Quantic, and sources tell ESFI…
If that feels a little too TMZ-y to you, then put it right after the lede:
NaNiwa is on the move again. His contract was bought by Quantic Gaming today, leaving Complexity as his fourth former team in a year.
NaNiwa’s manner has been a constant question throughout both his WC3 and SC2 career, and sources tell ESFI that this move is linked to that. ….
There’s just no reason for it to be that low in the story. The only thing it infers to me is that ESFI isn’t too confident in what was said, in which case they shouldn’t be publishing it at all.
But the biggest problem is that the source seems to defame Naniwa with no evidence. As a reporter, there has to be some type of a follow-up to the statement the source made. It’s not like the quote is that Naniwa smells bad and sucks - it’s that he needs professional help, which is quite serious. What did he do? Why does he need help? This is something that needs answering - if not from that source, then another. Without another source, I’m not sure that line can be published. It’s a difficult question, to be sure, but I don’t think it makes the stringent situations where anonymous sources are acceptable. (Of course, I’m applying typical print rules to online journalism - I think that’s fair.)
An underlying aspect of this situation is that anonymous sources are relatively new to eSports journalism (SC2 at least), which mostly is either copy-and-pasted press releases or game recaps. The key to journalism ethics, however, is whether the source is reliable and accurate. We need some type of further information for me to mentally make sure that everything checks out. ESFI doesn’t have that built-in trust factor a publication like The New York Times has.
So yes, I think the anonymous source was handled poorly, but it is still an important step for eSports journalism. We need to have more whistleblowers. Most people who have a voice in the SC2 community are affiliated with someone and won’t talk bad about a friend. (With one exception - remember when Artosis started to talk about players BMing in the pre-game chat a few weeks ago on SotG? Wasn’t that shocking? This pretty easily could’ve been handled in an article with some anonymous sources and some public ones, handled correctly.) Kennigit also mentioned that eSports is an old boys club, and thus, no one will publicly slam another. This is why this type of journalism is important and needs to continue - with some guidelines, of course.
(Note: in the time that I’ve written this, ESFI has added a statement regarding the source’s contact with Naniwa. I think if this person would give some details, some specifics, something else, then it would be fine. But just that one statement - no matter who it is - is shady at best.)
My only other thoughts on the article is that it’s an interesting hybrid journalistically. It’s part news, what with the signing and quotes from management. But it more resembles a column with a weird lede. There’s a lot of opinion sprinkled in throughout the piece, especially in little inferences made. I’m not saying ESFI needs to follow the inverted pyramid style, but this is definitely a weird hybrid.
As the site grows bigger, I’d like to see a little more separation between news and opinion. Most of the things Ruiz connects in the article aren’t too difficult to do yourself, but I can see problems developing down the road if a player gets upset at how he’s portrayed in one of these hybrid articles. (If I’m Naniwa, I almost certainly am upset at the way the article portrays me as solely negative, with no one to back myself up.)
This is eSports’s Wild West period. There’s so much to do, but the rules are practically non-existent. ESFI is doing a good job generally, but if they want to continue growing, they need to take a look at thornier issues, including their policy on anonymous sources and the structure of the articles they write. eSports is growing, and we need a solid, trusted website to protect the sport we love.
