The topic of "ethics in video game journalism" has become something of a meme after two months of GamerGate, but that doesn't mean the industry doesn't face these sorts of issues regardless of the existence of a hashtag-based movement. And now, one of the gaming press's most recognizable faces is experimenting with a new way to take many of these concerns head on.
That would be Jim Sterling, formerly of Destructoid, and now formerly of The Escapist too, it seems, as he's striking out on his own to become essentially a self-funded games industry critic, using Patreon to pay his bills and fund his shows and writing.
Sterling is the boisterous host of "The Jimquisition" video series, but also wants to get back to review writing and podcasting as well, according to the page. He's a cross-between a traditional games journalist and a new-era YouTube star, with one foot in both video and the written word depending on which outlet he's currently employed by.
But Sterling is trying something incredibly ambitious by hoping his fans will be able to fund him directly, rather than him remaining beholden to any site or slate of advertisers. Last night he announced a Patreon where fans can pledge a monthly sum to support his work. In little more than twelve hours it's attracted 900 supporters pledging just over $4,000 a month to back him. Initially, Sterling had a goal of $6,000 a month on the page, but later removed it due to it conflicting with his self-professed "pay whatever you feel like" philosophy, though it looks like he may reach that mark regardless at this rate. (Update: Sterling has hit $6,745 a month off of 1680 Patrons, which is impressive. Hopefully supporters unfamiliar with Patreon realize this is not a one-time donation.)
So why is Sterling's experiment worth noting? Because by essentially crowdfunding a journalist, Sterling is now completely free of editorial oversight on any site he might work for, and presumably may not have to deal with YouTube partner nonsense as well, depending on how he's planning to publish videos in the future. Past that, no advertisers means no one can possibly claim he's being influenced in that regard, a common complaint among those decrying a "corrupt" games press who write about certain games when there just so happens to be a dozen banner ads promoting the same title surrounding the review.
In this sense, this is what should be games journalism utopia, as I can't think of a much better feeling than being fully funded by your own fans without reliance on any other corporate entity, be it advertisers or a larger media outlet.
And yet, I think such a thing is only possible with a very, very select few personalities in the games criticism scene right now. Sterling may be one of them, given that he's been a rising star these past few years, but it remains to be seen if Patreon can fulfill his dreams (how many fully-funded Kickstarters have still endured problems?). Past that, I can imagine other video-makers like John "TotalBiscuit" Bain and Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw doing quite well if they decided to flip the Patreon switch, but Bain is such a massive force in gaming right now, I can't imagine such a move could hope to compete with his YouTube earnings, and Croshaw is tied into the very DNA of The Escapist to the point where I'm not even sure the site would exist without him.
But for even prominent games journalists at outlets like IGN, Kotaku or Polygon, I'm not sure any writers or editors there could ever decide to simply abandon their corporate overlords and strike out on their own with nothing but Patreon to support them. I think it's great that Sterling has reached the point where this could be possible for him, but I think that's a trick that only a few industry figures could ever hope to repeat, and examining the idea closer, it comes with its own set of problems as well.
So great, you're not beholden to a parent company or advertisers anymore. But who then is supporting you directly? Your fans. Again, that sounds awesome, but fans can be...fickle. I can imagine situations where Sterling could lose Patreon supporters based on the topic du jour. Even though Sterling has an entire section on his page saying "you are not paying me to agree with you," I know that there would be at least some supporters who would easily say "no more!" if Sterling used his pulpit (he literally has a pulpit) to loudly criticize something they liked, or came out in support of something they didn't.
I've seen this happen first hand, and I would love to see what might have happened with my own imaginary Patreon if I had one over the past few years. While I was a "champion of the people" for supporting fans during the Mass Effect 3 ending saga, in recent months I'm more of an enemy of the state for publicly stating my grievances with GamerGate. That's something that could directly translate into a steep decline in financial support using the Patreon model. Standing up for your principles could mean you watch your income fluctuate wildly as you potentially lose supporters.
Despite all these claims of parent companies and advertisers influencing content across gaming journalism, I think it's much easier to be influenced by your readers, either consciously or unconsciously. Nobody likes to be hated, and it can be tough to be yelled at by readers on any given day for having a particular opinion or addressing a certain topic. But with traditional media, your paycheck comes regardless thanks to advertisers and media outlets that frankly, don't care about your opinions 99.9% of the time. Fans are much more fickle, and in the Patreon model, they wield incredible amounts of power.
And also, this is the Patreon that gamers asking for a "more ethical press" were decrying weeks ago, as it theoretically creates bonds between writers who may be supporting indie devs using the service. But now if it's the journalist drawing all the support he can from fans and the industry at large, he'll have no control over who is giving to him which could create the appearance of impropriety. For example, a cluster of supporters who are known Activision employees might have fans saying Sterling is being too easy on Call of Duty in his videos. Or what if Anita Sarkeesian decided to donate a tidy sum per month to a fellow game video-maker like Sterling? The world might explode. I really do not think Patreon relationships create actual ethical compromises as some claim, but a journalist supported by at least some industry figures could draw a new type of criticism from fans that hasn't even been invented yet.
I hope Sterling succeeds with his Patreon experiment, but I won't view him as more or less corrupt just because he's self-supported as opposed to working for a website or having pre-roll ads on his videos. I think fans learn to trust specific journalists in time, and those that don't are generally conspiracy theorists who may be occasional readers, but never really true fans. Sterling is on the trusted "whitelist" for many (myself included), regardless of which outlet he does or doesn't work for, which is why this Patreon dream is even remotely possible in the first place.
I think there's room for all kinds of financial models for game journalism, be they traditional writing gigs, YouTube and Twitch partnerships, or now theoretically fan-funded Patreon support. But all have their own perks and pitfalls, and honestly and corruption are not exclusive to one type or another.
But thank god for Jim Sterling, for being brave enough to try this. Help him out here if you like.
Follow me on Twitter, like my page on Facebook, and pick up a copy of my sci-fi novel, The Last Exodus, and its sequel, The Exiled Earthborn, along with my new Forbes book, Fanboy Wars.
Check out how Shadow of Mordor’s Nemesis system might work in other games:
