Gamers Nexus alleges LMG has insufficient ethics and integrity

[Guest]

Steve also stated why they didn't reach out before posting the video in the latest HW News. You can disagree with his reasoning but it's there.

[Amaninacity]

1 minute ago, bxxr said:

Steve also stated why they didn't reach out before posting the video in the latest HW News. You can disagree with his reasoning but it's there.

He said it only after being called out, and denied that he had fucked up. If I recall correctly, he also sidestepped discussing the thing that actually merited a request for comment and focused on the part of his reporting that didn’t.

[djenson]

6 minutes ago, RadiatingLight said:

Yep, you're right.

LTT didn't need to agree to send it back, but once they did, it should have been sent ofc.

I totally agree it should have been send back, but i also understand in an organization that has raced to 100+ employees that the methods that should get something like that going do not exist. I imagine it was a game of chinese whispers that eventually led to a different part of the team sending it for auction. 

The original GN 'They sold this prototype from the small business that wanted it back' isn't false, but it also does miss crucial context that makes an otherwise unforgiveable thing forgivable 

[DakotaCx]

13 minutes ago, Amaninacity said:

“In comments to ICIJ, Mossack Fonseca “categorically” denied hiding or destroying documents that might be used in an ongoing investigation or litigation.“

https://www.icij.org/investigations/panama-papers/20160403-mossack-fonseca-offshore-secrets/

This is from the first piece about the Panama papers. They reached out to the law firm implicated in the scandal for comment. They even published an article the same day going into great detail about the firm’s response.

 

https://www.icij.org/investigations/panama-papers/mossack-fonseca-response-icij/

 

investigative journalists reporting on non-public information usually request comment from the subjects of their investigation. They usually do it right before they are ready to publish, but they do it. If they don’t do it, they explain the reason that they decided to forgo that step. Now, they don’t request comment from anyone who might possibly be affected. But if the report is “law firm fucked up big time” they ask the law firm to comment and include their response if any.

 

It took five minutes for me to confirm that your specific example did request comment from the subject, in the first published story.

I was just going to mention this. 

The Panama Papers began as a leak, Wikileaks origin if memory serves. From there, the journalists that got ahold of things went off to start verifying documents and doing investigative work, which involved reaching out to various parties to prove or disprove the validity of documents. It was a pretty massive collaboration, and if anything is a hallmark of great modern investigative journalism work.  

 

[bandainamcofan]

Just now, Amaninacity said:

He said it only after being called out, and denied that he had fucked up. If I recall correctly, he also sidestepped discussing the thing that actually merited a request for comment and focused on the part of his reporting that didn’t.

There is no ethical obligation to contact the subject of a story you're reporting on. This has been done to death and it doesn't invalidate the points made. There is no reason to mention it besides avoiding the issues at hand.

[atxcyclist]

6 minutes ago, Amaninacity said:

He said it only after being called out, and denied that he had fucked up. If I recall correctly, he also sidestepped discussing the thing that actually merited a request for comment and focused on the part of his reporting that didn’t.

Also, Steve is visibly fumbling when he makes the statement about not having to reach-out. It’s clear he isn’t even 100% convinced of his actions, so it’s surprising that even with that obvious doubt from Steve, the GN cheer squad that has signed-up in the last two days, feel so strongly about it being the right course of action. 

[dustypaws]

All that "Steve Burke is a bad guy" shit is really annoying the hell out of me to be honest. Whether he had "malicious intent" or put LTT on the hot seat out of spite for missed or supposedly stolen business opportunities is besides the point really. He had valid points to make. Why? Terren, Linus, Luke, Yvonne and Nick agreed in their video. And because of that they're building better and higher quality processes resulting in better and more reliable data and again resulting in better videos for all of us...

 

I don't think that Steve is a bad guy. He forewarned LTT about a year ago in a public video that he was to keep a close eye on them and started to "investigate" a few weeks later. There's no backstabbing or anything....he only got annoyed by Linus' response (and apparently most of the LMG crew was annoyed as well).

 

So...in my books, whether Steve wanted to see the whole of LMG burn or not, it led to something good...

 

That's my two cents...I don't get why people tend to go ad hominem so quickly.

[Amaninacity]

Just now, bandainamcofan said:

There is no ethical obligation to contact the subject of a story you're reporting on. This has been done to death and it doesn't invalidate the points made. There is no reason to mention it besides avoiding the issues at hand.

IPSO in fact stayed in that very post that there is an obligation to request comment when reporting non-public allegations, with exceptions that don’t really appear to apply here. And other organizations (including most in the US) take a firmer stance. SPJ says you do have an obligation to request comment except under very specific circumstances. NPR is clear in their guidelines that a failure to request comment must have valid reasoning.

 

Even the most pro-don’t-request-comment professional org has a wording that implies an obligation in this circumstance. And even if you do not request comment, you have an ethical obligation to explain why.

[throwawayManMode]

From the LTT Discord: 

 

Yikes

[IAmDarthMole]

For everyone going for the throat and saying that LMG/LTT doesn't care and that they are just corporate puppets/monsters now, I would like to ask a question:

 

Do you really think if LMG/LTT didn't care they would be allowing all of this discontent/accusations/rage/vitriol/nasty on their own forums?

 

They haven't censored anything, they have responded (though it can be argued they did so poorly) multiple times now, and have stated they are going to engage the community even more then before, despite the practically violent reaction they have received thus far.

 

The level of no-win, can't be forgiven, the world is over, LMG/LTT should be burned at the stake, LMG/LTT personally harmed me (you) and my (your) soul is rather scary in my opinion, but mostly sad.

 

Quote

"A person is smart, people are dumb." - Men In Black

 

Quote

"I think he knows what Rome is. Rome is the mob. Conjure magic for them and they'll be distracted. Take away their freedom and still they'll roar. The beating heart of Rome is not the marble of the senate, it's the sand of the coliseum. He'll bring them death... and they will love him for it." - Gladiator

 

[jamaniek]

I'm somewhat satisfied with the video answer although the jokes were in bad taste. Too bad it took so much escalation to get to this point. Now we as a community have to watch them and hold accountable on delivering on the promises made. 

 

I'm not gonna touch Madison thing with a ten foot pole. If true it can't be resolved with a simple video but it certainly needs to be addressed in some way and fast. The accusations are really, really serious and for now it's word against word and frankly nobody on this forum should cast judgment at this time. 

[TechDeckCAD]

It's really annoying how many people have chosen to misunderstand GN's point about not reaching out to LTT/LMG regarding the Billet Labs story + data misrepresentation.

 

1) GN isn't a journalist, so I don't understand why the majority of people here are trying to hold him to trained journalist standards when he's not had any formal training or an abundance of experience in journalism prior to making Gamers Nexus channel (as far as I know, his education and expertise is in engineering, QA testing, and software development). This has to be an intentional distraction to avoid dealing with LMG's tendency to gaslight and lie.

 

2) GN's logic of avoiding talking to the other side for their story isn't any less valid. LTT/LMG clearly showed a level of negligence regarding their dealings with Billet Labs to the extent that BL were never contacted about UNTIL GN's initial video went live. When you're dealing with an organization that is willing to lie and gaslight people in order to play the narratives game, why on God's green earth would their word be given so much importance? Why should anyone care what their side of the story is?

[atxcyclist]

@bxxr has basically gone through this thread and left an emoji reaction to countless posts, but made 6 actual posts since signing-up yesterday; What a joke. These are the types of low-effort people brigading the forum currently.

[bandainamcofan]

Just now, Amaninacity said:

IPSO in fact stayed in that very post that there is an obligation to request comment when reporting non-public allegations, with exceptions that don’t really appear to apply here. And other organizations (including most in the US) take a firmer stance. SPJ says you do have an obligation to request comment except under very specific circumstances. NPR is clear in their guidelines that a failure to request comment must have valid reasoning.

 

Even the most pro-don’t-request-comment professional org has a wording that implies an obligation in this circumstance. And even if you do not request comment, you have an ethical obligation to explain why.

You appear to be uninterested in actually discussing the issue. Steve reported on faults from public videos or things that happened in public domain. There are perfectly valid reasons to not reach for comment and to grasp at it as if it means Steve acted unethically is simply incorrect and besides the point at hand. 

[jack20591]

The video a few months ago "what it's like to work for Linus" was a baffling eye opener and the fact the company seemingly ignored staff comments says a lot.

Your main cameraman says he's never proud of a video. Should have been a huge red flag. Your writers saying they need more time. Another flag.

 

The extreme tech upgrade for the companies owner, another horrendous red flag. And sad that people actually fell for the charity donation aspect. It was clearly a token gesture because they knew they had made a big error.

 

Complaining that people like gamers nexus should have spoken privately because they have a YouTube relationship. Gigantic red flag.

 

And when you really think about, a lot of videos about his new house when much of the gadgetry has likely been obtained for free isn't great.

 

After loving LTT for a long period Linus has begun to feel like the biggest issue with content for me. There's only so long you can watch someone be so flippant and often arrogant in the project videos, and regularly appear to not really have much respect for things or the skill of his other staff.

 

I actively look out for videos featuring the likes of dan, Jake, Luke and lesser used people like Sarah far more these days. They have clear talents in different areas and are much more interesting to hear from. They aren't just there as personalities.

[Amaninacity]

Just now, TechDeckCAD said:

It's really annoying how many people have chosen to misunderstand GN's point about not reaching out to LTT/LMG regarding the Billet Labs story + data misrepresentation.

 

1) GN isn't a journalist, so I don't understand why the majority of people here are trying to hold him to trained journalist standards when he's not had any formal training or an abundance of experience in journalism prior to making Gamers Nexus channel (as far as I know, his education and expertise is in engineering, QA testing, and software development). This has to be an intentional distraction to avoid dealing with LMG's tendency to gaslight and lie.

If you’re going to do a journalism, you do a journalism the right way. Steve also clearly has a grasp of the need to request comment as he has done it in the past for similar stories.

Just now, TechDeckCAD said:

 

2) GN's logic of avoiding talking to the other side for their story isn't any less valid. LTT/LMG clearly showed a level of negligence regarding their dealings with Billet Labs to the extent that BL were never contacted about UNTIL GN's initial video went live. When you're dealing with an organization that is willing to lie and gaslight people in order to play the narratives game, why on God's green earth would their word be given so much importance? Why should anyone care what their side of the story is?

All of this was “Billet labs claimed”. Works of journalism have an ethical obligation to be accurate, and getting comment from the subject of the journalism you’re doing is one of the steps in verifying the accuracy of your reporting. This practice is standard. Even Steve treats it as such for everybody except Linus, apparently. 

[bandainamcofan]

1 minute ago, Amaninacity said:

This practice is standard.

It isn't, and it's been shown why, but you appear uninterested in that.

[Amaninacity]

2 minutes ago, bandainamcofan said:

You appear to be uninterested in actually discussing the issue. Steve reported on faults from public videos or things that happened in public domain. There are perfectly valid reasons to not reach for comment and to grasp at it as if it means Steve acted unethically is simply incorrect and besides the point at hand. 

Those aren’t what I’m talking about and you know it. The billet labs allegations were not in the public domain. They were serious and merited a request for comment. I have repeated that over and over again while discussing this subject. Public domain shit should still get comment but it’s not a big deal to leave it out. New, serious, non-public allegations require comment or a good explanation (in your story, not only after it got pointed out). Steve fucked up.

[bandainamcofan]

Just now, Amaninacity said:

he billet labs allegations were not in the public domain.

What was alleged? LTT auctioned the block when it wasn't their property to sell. That's a simple fact and isn't even in dispute by anyone at LMG.

[Amaninacity]

1 minute ago, bandainamcofan said:

It isn't, and it's been shown why, but you appear uninterested in that.

It has not been shown why. The best that has been pulled out is a guideline from one org, whose standards are laxer than most. And even by that org’s guidelines, this story falls under needing a request for comment about a major part of the story or a good explanation.

[andreimj]

1 minute ago, bandainamcofan said:

What was alleged? LTT auctioned the block when it wasn't their property to sell. That's a simple fact and isn't even in dispute by anyone at LMG.

Dude, you keep ignoring the fact that Billet stated it was LMG's to keep untill Billet changed thieir mind, AGAIN. Why is this so hard to understand?

[AbsoluteWoo]

4 minutes ago, jack20591 said:

The video a few months ago "what it's like to work for Linus" was a baffling eye opener and the fact the company seemingly ignored staff comments says a lot.

Your main cameraman says he's never proud of a video. Should have been a huge red flag. Your writers saying they need more time. Another flag.

 

The extreme tech upgrade for the companies owner, another horrendous red flag. And sad that people actually fell for the charity donation aspect. It was clearly a token gesture because they knew they had made a big error.

 

Complaining that people like gamers nexus should have spoken privately because they have a YouTube relationship. Gigantic red flag.

 

And when you really think about, a lot of videos about his new house when much of the gadgetry has likely been obtained for free isn't great.

 

After loving LTT for a long period Linus has begun to feel like the biggest issue with content for me. There's only so long you can watch someone be so flippant and often arrogant in the project videos, and regularly appear to not really have much respect for things or the skill of his other staff.

 

I actively look out for videos featuring the likes of dan, Jake, Luke and lesser used people like Sarah far more these days. They have clear talents in different areas and are much more interesting to hear from. They aren't just there as personalities.

Jeez talk about looking for problems.

 

I agree with some of this but the Extreme Tech Upgrade, relationship with GN and the house upgrade issues are really clutching at straws. For the Tech Upgrade and house upgrade issues, its just content, if you don't like it it's not the channel for you. There are millions of channels I don't like, that's not a "gigantic red flag." The relationship with GN is real, they have worked together numerous times, this isn't a case of "oh they both happen to have YouTube channels."

[bandainamcofan]

Just now, andreimj said:

Dude, you keep ignoring the fact that Billet stated it was LMG's to keep untill Billet changed thieir mind, AGAIN. Why is this so hard to understand?

Where was this stated?

[Chairman Boofy]

That Madison stuff is absolutely disgusting and if there is no comment or acknowledgment of it at some point then to hell with Lienus and his incel infested company. 

[andreimj]

1 minute ago, bandainamcofan said:

Where was this stated?