Ideally, journalists should be totally independent from the subjects they cover. As unbound, impartial observers, we should be able to report the facts and give our opinions on them without bias and without fear of reprisal.

In reality, though, things are never so simple. Like it or not, we journalists rely on the people and companies we cover for information and on-the-record quotes. If those sources decide to withhold that information for any reason, we're often at their mercy – "no source, no story," as they say. In video game journalism the codependence is even deeper, because we rely on the companies we cover for the preview access and early review code that is the bread and butter of the industry. Piss off a game company, and you can say goodbye to that FedEx'ed review code and hello to Best Buy on launch day.

And no one is immune. Take Electronic Gaming Monthly, one of the largest game magazines in the country. In the February issue, 1UP Editorial Director Dan Hsu wrote an editorial calling out three companies – Midway, Sony and Ubisoft – for withholding press assets as punishment for negative coverage in the magazine. According to the editorial, these publishers were a little pissed off by the magazine's "candid reviews" and "less-than-totally-positive previews." As such, Hsu says readers will get "get little, late, or no coverage" of some or all of these companies' games. (None of the three accused companies responded to a request for comment as of press time. Full disclosure: I have written for EGM as a freelancer).

The problem isn't exactly a new one, according to Hsu. "Sony's sports division and Midway's Mortal Kombat team have been on-again, off-again problems for several years," he said in an exclusive interview with GameDaily BIZ's Media Coverage. "They would say they're banning us, but then not really mean it, then do it again ... so it's hard to say exactly when the official, definitive ban happened. But it wasn't very recently."

With Ubisoft, though, things were a little more clear cut. "They banned us shortly after our 1UP Assassin's Creed review appeared, but it wasn't just because of the review. They didn't like our last two previews of the game, which pointed out some of the design flaws that we were concerned about." Indeed, the short, post-E3 preview in the magazine's October issue gave the game the decidedly uncoveted "Game We're Most Worried About" award. While a more in-depth preview in December was a little more forgiving, it still took the game to task for what the previewer saw as slow combat, rough controls and potentially repetitive gameplay. "[Ubisoft] basically said, 'That's it -- we're no longer working with the 1UP Network in any capacity,'" Hsu paraphrased.

You might think withholding assets is a little counterproductive for a game company – after all, even skeptical coverage gets your game in front of readers, and there's no such thing as bad press, as they say. That may be true, but the widespread competition in the game press means publishers can take their exclusive access to a more receptive publication, leaving the blackballed outlet with little leverage. "The press definitely has some power, but it's not like we're the only option for readers out there," Hsu admitted. "So on one hand, any bans mean roughly five million EGM readers per month aren't exposed to those games and coverage, plus several more million via Games for Windows magazine, 1UP.com, GameVideos.com, etc. But readers have many choices and the companies know that and can hold that over you."

That said, the pressure isn't quite the same as it used to be, Hsu said. "It's not like the cartridge days, where you could get final, reviewable code two months ahead of time," he said. "Nowadays, they can push the game code right up until disc manufacturing, so print reviews can sometimes be late regardless. So whether we get an early review disc or the final retail disc, that difference in time is less than what it used to be. So late reviews aren't as bad a punishment anymore. The bigger punishment is not letting us cover the games, period."

This isn't the first time Hsu has publicly discussed ethical issues in the industry. An editorial in EGM #199 looked at the prospect of publications trading coverage for advertising buys. Some readers have chastised Hsu and EGM for making too much of these issues, but Hsu felt he had to speak up in this case. "I had to let our readers know why this coverage was missing from our print and online properties," he said. "I know some people are thinking I'm getting on my soapbox too often, too loudly, but I know I'm more vocal about these subjects nowadays. I think part of that is due to me being in a position to talk about such things. Maybe the other part of it is having the experience. Maybe I'm a grumpier old man now who cares less and less about what other people think."

But Hsu also wants to make it clear that, while these types of reprisals are a problem, they're not exactly a regular occurrence. "Even though this issue is getting a lot of airtime right now, I wouldn't say this is a widespread problem -- at least not with us," he said. "Of course, one time is one time too many, but the majority of the companies we deal with don't apply this sort of pressure all the time. Some do, some of the time, but it's not an everyday thing."

When the occasional company does turn the screws, Hsu relies on advice from those that came before him. "The thing that always guides me is something my first editorial director [Joe Funk] told me on the day I interviewed at EGM [in 1996]," he said. "I brought up an old EGM editorial where the editor said that Capcom has pulled advertising, but EGM wouldn't change its ways to win them back. I asked the editorial director about that, and how can EGM survive without advertising...how does the magazine deal with that pressure? He told me, 'As long as you write for the readers and not the companies, the readership will come, and the advertisers will have no choice but to advertise with you.'"

As of this writing, Capcom is currently a prominent advertiser in EGM. "Eventually, the companies all come back because they need to reach our audience," Hsu said. "I know that sounds cocky, and I don't mean it to be, but that's what keeps me going, even when things are looking bad and down for us. ... We are unwilling to bend on this. I'd drag EGM down with me or quit before we compromise our integrity."

— —

Got something you'd like to see on Media Coverage? Send it to kyle.orland@gmail.com.

Kyle Orland is a full time video game freelancer based out of Laurel, MD. He's co-author of The Videogame Style Guide and Reference Manual. He has written for a variety of outlets, as detailed on his personal site. He's finding it harder to be a gentleman every day.

Media Coverage is an opinion column. The opinions expressed in this column are solely the opinions of the columnist and are not necessarily the opinions of GameDaily.com.