Bonus Round just got updated with a new vid focusing on the relationship in Journalism between the journalists, PR dept, and the Marketing dept. The guests are:

Tiffany Spencer, VP of Communications @ Brash Entertainment - PR for 12 yrs
Dan Hsu, Editor in Chief of EGM
Ryan Schneider, Marketing Director of Insomniac Games

This is a hot topic right now with the Gamespot ordeal, its just a shame they didnt focus on this topic before the debacle. Either way its hot on peoples minds so why not shed some light. Geoff Keighley pulls no punches addressing this either. I think problems stem from companies where the PR dept starting to work for the Marketing teams. Both depts control the flow of information to the journalists, but whose got the agenda. Most people would say the Marketing dept, and I would agree. They are the ones putting the money out there for advertising so the feel directly harmed when a bad review comes in. The PR dept has a better agenda I feel, they should be getting the right information to the right journalist. Tiffany and Ryan both bring up good points when they discuss the audience the journalist writes for. Who wants a review for a sports game from someone that plays FPS's all the time. That review would suck, flat-out.

Sometimes a bad review come from the game sucking ass and thats a hard hit the game companies egos/pocket book, but if it comes from the journalist then thats a whole different issue. Now its the publication or the websites duty to give the game to the right writer. Im sure this is difficult with a small staff or when there are a lot of the same genre games out at the same time. Also journalistic responsibility falls on the writer to consider the audience. I dont mean pander to them, but try to themselves in the players who would buy this games shoes. As Ryan points out, one of the complaints from the gamespot review "They say variety is the spice of life, but there's such a thing as too much spice." I agree with him, that does sound like a false premise for a review. I feel the reviewers here and most reviewers around do their craft properly.

At the end Dan brings up a nice anecdote about publishers pull advertising that rings pretty true. He says, "As long as you just write for the readers and service the readership, the advertising will come, becuase they need to reach those people." I've heard Aaron "loves the reach around" Linde is eager to give "service" to his readers. Just be sure to ask for the happy ending.

PS: another thing they wont bring up until the next part of the discussion but I wanted to mention is the "rating scale", a clip about is in their teaser. Yup its broken, we all know that, but really its best we got. I like to think of it like the BCS rankings, sure they suck and it can screw over teams for have a bad day, but until there is something different we gotta live with it. We are obsessed with rating thing. How has this number value gained so much strength? In the end its still some arbitrary number assigned by a writer with *their* own opinion and it shouldnt be taken as fact, but a lot of people will take that score to heart. Its a deep hole to dig out of, suggestions?

PSS: This has to be one of the coolest DIY's, its a shame Halloween has passed. Go Butane powered Egg Guns.

Egg Gun Revealed - Watch the top videos of the week here