Thread: Dig the Praise!
View Single Post
Old 02-20-2006, 11:20 AM   #18
After a brisk nap
Elegantly copy+pasted
 
After a brisk nap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,773
Default

I'm not familiar with that game, but I'm guessing no.

As I said in the original debate, I understand that some games (or even some organizations who're associated with a game) might potentially be so loathsome that you just don't want to offer them any publicity at all. I was just surprised to see that the AG staff was concerned that this might be an issue in this case. I mean, I think it would have to be pretty extreme before you get to the point where you don't want to cover it at all, even with disclaimers and a clear stance against the agenda of the thing you're writing about.

I dislike Focus on the Family. A lot. But what's the worst thing we could have expected from them? Let's say a game where homosexuals were depicted as wicked and going to hell. Is that so offensive that it should disqualify them from being covered at all, even critically? Personally, I think the informational value (it would surely be a unique and fascinating adventure game) would far outweigh whatever publicity the organization would get from the article.

If the AG staff disagrees with me, fine. But then I'd like to know about it, and to understand why, and if possible have a chance to argue my point of view.
__________________
Please excuse me. I've got to see a man about a dog.
After a brisk nap is offline