Anybody know these video game journalist's qualifications?

[NinthPlanet86]

Anyway, I'm pretty sure TB has mentioned a few times in VLOGs and such that he has a degree (financial, I think?) from a university in England.

According to his Twitter feed [https://twitter.com/Totalbiscuit/status/189813526628536320], TotalBiscuit has a (Bachelor's) degree in Law. IIRC in a Co-Optional Podcast he mentioned that it was from Newcastle University, but I may be wrong.

And physics degrees, and chemistry degrees, and biology degrees, and astronomy degrees and mathematics degrees are fairly new compared to their respective professions.

But that doesn't mean that the achievements of Aristotle or Archimedes are any less worthy or useful in the advancement of human knowledge. Holding a degree in a subject only means that one has completed a course of study comprising of whatever the curriculum for that degree includes. Like any level of education, a degree merely provides a vehicle for imparting certain information from one person to another. The only difference with a formal qualification is that it provides a certificate as proof that one has studied a subject.

 

[Lieju]

Angry Joe.

I specifically remember Angry Joe saying in one of his videos that he is no journalist.

Which I considered to be BS, he does journalism, he is a journalist.
He reviews games, he is a reviewer.

Might not be a good one, or an unbiased one, but he does the job.

 

[Zhukov]

I'm putting it together in a totally unbiased format...

There is a Patricia Hernandez who has a degree, but she'd a Ph.D in biology and something tells me Ms. "Should killing female gamers in online games be considered rape?" didn't study biology.

Dude, just who the flying fuck do you think you're kidding here?

"Totally unbiased".

"Something tells me [proponent of viewpoint I disagree with] couldn't possibly have a degree."

It burns man.

Dude, your tits are angry, you need to calm your tits.

I'm just saying I don't think that I don't believe Patricia Hernandez with the Ph.D in Biology, might not the same Patricia Hernandez writing articles for Kotaku.

My tits are calm.

My tits also know the sound of an axe being ground when they hear it.

It is just so painfully obvious that a lack of bias is the complete opposite to what you're aiming for.

 

[Gankytim]

The only difference with a formal qualification is that it provides a certificate as proof that one has studied a subject.

Precicely my point.

Do you recall Spax3? He was a video game journalist who neither studied journalism nor game design. He never became a sucsess because his lack of an attempt to study either of these things meant for a low quality product.

I'm not saying a degree will magically make your content better, I'm just saying it's like a Heart Foundation Tick on my cereal, nice to have.

 

[Gankytim]

I'm putting it together in a totally unbiased format...

There is a Patricia Hernandez who has a degree, but she'd a Ph.D in biology and something tells me Ms. "Should killing female gamers in online games be considered rape?" didn't study biology.

Dude, just who the flying fuck do you think you're kidding here?

"Totally unbiased".

"Something tells me [proponent of viewpoint I disagree with] couldn't possibly have a degree."

It burns man.

Dude, your tits are angry, you need to calm your tits.

I'm just saying I don't think that I don't believe Patricia Hernandez with the Ph.D in Biology, might not the same Patricia Hernandez writing articles for Kotaku.

My tits are calm.

My tits also know the sound of an axe being ground when they hear it.

It is just so painfully obvious that a lack of bias is the complete opposite to what you're aiming for.

Aside from that one joke, where could it be evident that I'm doing anything underhanded?

 

[Zhukov]

[snip]

Aside from that one joke, where could it be evident that I'm doing anything underhanded?

Underhanded? That's not what having an axe to grind means.

Anyway, like I said, you are kidding precisely nobody.

Judging by the comments in this thread, I'm far from the only one here to pick up on it.

 

[Zontar]

Wait, those people are what pass as video games journalists? I'm not saying that as a slight against them, it's just, as someone studying journalism, none, or at the very best a minority, of their work seems to be any real journalism.

Though then again that applied to pretty much everyone with the title "games journalist" these days. Kind of an oxymoron at this point.

Anyway on topic the answer is pretty much all have none, at least none which would qualify them for journalism outside of gaming. They make fantastic pundits though, so I will give credit where credit is due.

 

[Gankytim]

[o I will give credit where credit is due.[/quote]

[snip]

Aside from that one joke, where could it be evident that I'm doing anything underhanded?

Underhanded? That's not what having an axe to grind means.

Anyway, like I said, you are kidding precisely nobody.

Judging by the comments in this thread, I'm far from the only one here to pick up on it.

Actually I feel I've argued my position quite well, it doesn't take much to assume that everyone with a joke up their sleeve is out to decapitate the subject of the joke. Yes, I do think nothing would be different if Hernandez wasn't working for Kotaku, but does that mean I'm incapable of dropping bias in order to make something worth thinking about within the game industry?

All I'm asking is if any of these people have known credentials because I like doublechecking when I make a claim about a person.

But if you're willing to jump to the conclusion that I'm going to tear everyone in the list to pieces I guess there's not much of a point to making it.

 

[Caiphus]

Snip

Maybe you won't tear anyone to pieces. But when you claim to be attempting to put a video together free from bias in your first post, and then make a snide jab at one of your subjects in your second, what are we supposed to think, exactly?

Why should we trust that you have good intentions, and go around digging up private information about people we've never met, for someone we've never met, when you act like that?

 

[Andy Shandy]

Anyway, I'm pretty sure TB has mentioned a few times in VLOGs and such that he has a degree (financial, I think?) from a university in England.

According to his Twitter feed [https://twitter.com/Totalbiscuit/status/189813526628536320], TotalBiscuit has a (Bachelor's) degree in Law. IIRC in a Co-Optional Podcast he mentioned that it was from Newcastle University, but I may be wrong.

That was it! I thought it might've been finance because - like Pink Gregory mentioned - he worked in finance, but yeah, now I remember that it was law. Thanks for that.

And I guessed that it was Newcastle what with TB being a Geordie and all, but wasn't 100% sure on that either =P

 

[Gankytim]

Snip

Maybe you won't tear anyone to pieces. But when you claim to be attempting to put a video together free from bias in your first post, and then make a snide jab at one of your subjects in your second, what are we supposed to think, exactly?

Why should we trust that you have good intentions, and go around digging up private information about people we've never met, for someone we've never met, when you act like that?

That's a fair point, but maybe you're thinking about a joke as too black and white.

And for christ sake it's not like I'm looking for their phone numbers, al I'm doing is checking and seeing if they have qualifications.

For instance, I'm a big fan of Doug Walker, I think he has a great understanding of film. To my knowledge, he never studied film. I like Angry Joe and Eric Kain, to my knowledge neither spent a day understanding game design, and Joe has been proven to be average skilled at best, Eric Kain has been proven to pander to the "They made it acsessable, now it sucks" crowd. Affects my opinion on neither of them.

Patricia Hernandez is an oddity to me, I understand that she's the butt of a lot of jokes, but hell, if I make a joke about Jim Sterling having man-tits the size of my head does that devalue anything he has to say? If I make a joke about Angry Joe looking like he walked straight out of a '70s porno with that fucking facial hair does that change a thing he has to say? If I say Erik Kaine shouldn't shave his head because it makes him look like a penis, am I refuting him?

Well, I just made jokes about all of them, do I now have nothing unbiased to say about all of them?

 

[Caiphus]

That's a fair point, but maybe you're thinking about a joke as too black and white.

And for christ sake it's not like I'm looking for their phone numbers, al I'm doing is checking and seeing if they have qualifications.

For instance, I'm a big fan of Doug Walker, I think he has a great understanding of film. To my knowledge, he never studied film. I like Angry Joe and Eric Kain, to my knowledge neither spent a day understanding game design, and Joe has been proven to be average skilled at best, Eric Kain has been proven to pander to the "They made it acsessable, now it sucks" crowd. Affects my opinion on neither of them.

Patricia Hernandez is an oddity to me, I understand that she's the butt of a lot of jokes, but hell, if I make a joke about Jim Sterling having man-tits the size of my head does that devalue anything he has to say? If I make a joke about Angry Joe looking like he walked straight out of a '70s porno with that fucking facial hair does that change a thing he has to say? If I say Erik Kaine shouldn't shave his head because it makes him look like a penis, am I refuting him?

Well, I just made jokes about all of them, do I now have nothing unbiased to say about all of them?

1) You implied that you couldn't believe that she was an educated woman because of one notorious article that she wrote. I get that you were trying to be funny, but it isn't a strong second post.

2) Correct, and if you were asking for their phone numbers then that really would be strange. But if you can't find these details, even after thorough google searching, there's a good chance that those people consider it private.

3) Good. If all you'd written was that third paragraph, I'd be more inclined to believe that you were sincere. And maybe you are. I'm sorry, but on the Internet, I just don't know you from a bar of soap.

4) All of those jokes target their physical appearance. Presumably your video is going to be about their work, not about their appearance. The joke about Hernandez implied that you are strongly biased against her work. Which, whatever. You can be biased towards/against people all you want. It's still not a good look straight after you claim to be unbiased.

Edit: Furthermore, the remark about Hernandez was unprovoked. Here, you've made jokes to try and make it seem as though you are ready to tar them all equally with the same critical brush. Except only after being called out. This is less convincing, I'm afraid.

 

[Uhura]

I figured someone calling themself a journalist would need a journalism degree. There is a Patricia Hernandez who has a degree, but she'd a Ph.D in biology and something tells me Ms. "Should killing female gamers in online games be considered rape?" didn't study biology.

What were the mistakes on that article (that I haven't read) that were purely about biology? Did she misspell 'vagina' or something?

And your video won't be particularly well researched if you go about it by asking random people on the net. Ask those people directly.

1) You implied that you couldn't believe that she was an educated woman because of one notorious article that she wrote. I get that you were trying to be funny, but it isn't a strong second post.

FYI, the article he talks about ("Should killing female gamers in online games be considered rape?") is a fake one. Here is a reddit thread about it
http://www.reddit.com/r/TumblrInAct...uld_killing_female_gamers_in_online_games_be/

and 4chan has also made a bunch of other fake articles attributed to Hernandez http://imgur.com/a/y8jII

A quick google search would have revealed it as a fake article but I guess the OP was too busy making his "totally unbiased" video to check the facts...

 

[Caiphus]

Snip

Well there we go. Marginal egg on my face there.

 

[carnex]

I specifically remember Angry Joe saying in one of his videos that he is no journalist.

Which I considered to be BS, he does journalism, he is a journalist.
He reviews games, he is a reviewer.

Might not be a good one, or an unbiased one, but he does the job.

Why would you call BS on that? He is not a journalist, he doesn't have the training nor skills. He is, at best, video equivalent of column writer. Which is not bad, it's just that he realizes what he really is and the fact that he respect's profession that he lies on outskirts of.

Journalists, in school, learn skills for writing, analytic, reasoning, investigation etc. It's mish mash of several different majors like philosophy, language etc. Usually you can clearly see that in their work although there are self educated journalists. But Joe isn't one.

 

[Lieju]

I specifically remember Angry Joe saying in one of his videos that he is no journalist.

Which I considered to be BS, he does journalism, he is a journalist.
He reviews games, he is a reviewer.

Might not be a good one, or an unbiased one, but he does the job.

Why would you call BS on that? He is not a journalist, he doesn't have the training nor skills. He is, at best, video equivalent of column writer. Which is not bad, it's just that he realizes what he really is and the fact that he respect's profession that he lies on outskirts of.

Journalists, in school, learn skills for writing, analytic, reasoning, investigation etc. It's mish mash of several different majors like philosophy, language etc. Usually you can clearly see that in their work although there are self educated journalists. But Joe isn't one.

I just don't have a very high opinion of journalists, I know too many and have seen way worse crap than Angry Joe's stuff published in professional capacity. (Like local newspapers just making up stuff because they know no-one reads it, or how the editors and journalists consider their audience complete idiots, or how the main point of the article is that there needs to be a picture of boobs in it...)

I'm not saying there aren't good ones, and good publications, but I personally have very low standards for what I consider 'journalism'.

 

[carnex]

I just don't have a very high opinion of journalists, I know too many and have seen way worse crap than Angry Joe's stuff published in professional capacity. (Like local newspapers just making up stuff because they know no-one reads it, or how the editors and journalists consider their audience complete idiots, or how the main point of the article is that there needs to be a picture of boobs in it...)

I'm not saying there aren't good ones, and good publications, but I personally have very low standards for what I consider 'journalism'.

Got it, and to a certain level i do think the same. Where I digress, is the idea that since so many people drag the profession of journalism through the mud, I should too. I try to recognize real journalists, trained ones or at least self educated ones and tell others about them together with my recognition. There are people who, by my account, are far better as "hobby journalists" then people mentioned here like host of youtube channel "Errant Signal" and Al Russel of "Allosaurus Rex" but never the less, their style is, just like that of Jim, is that of a columnist. Opinion, not objective look. Joe on the other hand is reviewer or, as we understand it, Critic. Critics are again not journalists, they are critics.

Well, I just can't stop yapping. But I hope you get what I thought.

 

[Lieju]

I just don't have a very high opinion of journalists, I know too many and have seen way worse crap than Angry Joe's stuff published in professional capacity. (Like local newspapers just making up stuff because they know no-one reads it, or how the editors and journalists consider their audience complete idiots, or how the main point of the article is that there needs to be a picture of boobs in it...)

I'm not saying there aren't good ones, and good publications, but I personally have very low standards for what I consider 'journalism'.

Got it, and to a certain level i do think the same. Where I digress, is the idea that since so many people drag the profession of journalism through the mud, I should too. I try to recognize real journalists, trained ones or at least self educated ones and tell others about them together with my recognition. There are people who, by my account, are far better as "hobby journalists" then people mentioned here like host of youtube channel "Errant Signal" and Al Russel of "Allosaurus Rex" but never the less, their style is, just like that of Jim, is that of a columnist. Opinion, not objective look. Joe on the other hand is reviewer or, as we understand it, Critic. Critics are again not journalists, they are critics.

Well, I just can't stop yapping. But I hope you get what I thought.

I get what you mean, my view of it is that there is sort of a danger of people holding people working for traditional publications to a different standard.
And I've seen a lot of crappy journalism from newspapers and tv.

So from where I'm looking from, there are so many people who call themselves journalists and are generally recognised as such, that I don't have a problem using the word to describe people just like them who only differ in how they get their paycheck.