Dear Junglist, Good Game Team, Media Watch Team and ABC Management,
My name is Brendan Clarke and I was a fan of the TV show Good Game which has come under quite a lot of scrutiny through the removal of Junglist as a host. I am a member of the Save Junglist! Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=189532430599) which has as I write this, 6961 members compared to 7452 members on the official Good Game page.
I have followed this story since I learnt of it and went through the emotions as every fan did when they found out Junglist was no longer a part of their favourite show. Having read through all the reports over the last couple of weeks however, one thing becomes apparent, the ABC as a whole has not treated us, the fans of the show with any respect or intelligence. If you follow the press releases, forum posts etc it becomes clear the ABC only manages to confuse their fan base and anger them with changing stories.
ABC management have the power just like any organisation to change things within their operational scope. I can accept they might have wanted to change aspects of Good Game and sack an employee because they are not happy with his work.
A question asked by many members including myself is, would a well respected and liked presenter risk their credibility and possible future employment by lying and making false accusations against the ABC? I’m sure it can and has happened in the past, but the ABC’s handling of the matter makes us think twice about doubting Junglist. We do not argue Junglist is completely innocent, as confirmed by Junglist himself, but he has shown himself to be more honest and caring of us than the ABC.
I have compiled all the forum and news reports including all links to where they were sourced from, in chronological order, to let the story play out as any one following the story might have seen it. This is long but is necessary so all sides are represented in one place. I would like to thank Adrian Dowie (http://dowzocalypse.wordpress.com/) from the Save Junglist! Facebook page whose hard work and persistence helped shape this letter.
This letter is very long but is accurately documented in full as best to my knowledge. And for those having problems reading through all of this and need the walkthrough, CONCLUSIONS are at the end.
I can be contacted via the Save Junglist! Facebook Group linked above.
11:43am http://www2b.abc.net.au/tmb/Client/Message.aspx?b=59&t=84&a=0&ps=20&dm=1&m=281575&pd=1&p=1
A copy of an ABC Press Release is posted on the Good Game forums stating in part :
“ABC TV’s Good Game Levels UP with a New Presenter and an additional New Show!
Joining Bajo (Steven O’Donnell) in the Den of Gaming from Monday 26th October will be new Good Game host, Hex (Stephanie Bendixsen).”
This release clearly advises a new presenter and a new show to debut in 2010. It advises Hex will be joining Good Game but is carefully worded not to advise as a replacement to Junglist or what role if any Junglist has with the show. A press release 3 days before airing a new episode in which a small few would see is not very transparent. The release goes on to state a new book will be released and a Christmas special which would suggest this release is deliberately released on a timed schedule.
Via the Good Game forums, members start to notice that Junglist is not mentioned and Hex will be taking over. No problems here, things change, fair enough. But then things start to get a bit murkier when they realise the ABC have not explained what has happened to Junglist.
A news story not picked up by the forum members yet states in part:
“From Monday, Bajo will be joined by Stephanie Bendixsen, or Hex as she’ll be known on the show. Meanwhile, Junglist takes a back seat in an off-camera reviewing position.”
Back at the Good Game forums the Production Co-Ordinator “TheGog” tries to quell fears in response to a members post.
“Well, fear not, we're not keen on being anything like CyberShack anytime before hell freezes over.”
Needless to say the forum members are getting restless and quickly starting to spell doom for the show and confusion reins.
http://www2b.abc.net.au/tmb/Client/Message.aspx?b=59&t=84&a=0&ps=20&dm=1&m=281575&pd=1&p=1
TheGog posts again to try and quell the fears of the direction of the show advising it would be still be the same show with a new member. He says at this point we are smart enough to know it wasn’t Jung’s choice and he is unable to say anything further. We still don’t know if Junglist is employed.
This post however was CHANGED. The Production Co-Ordinator advised originally in part referring to Junglist
“it wasn’t anything I personally had a say in, so it was a decision made from above which certainly had a lot of us behind the scenes worried.”
Why would he and other production members need to be worried? What had Junglist done that would make him believe he and others in the production team could be at risk in some way? Was he worried the show might suffer from the directions of people from above?
The original version of this post including the above quote can be found here : http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:2eAatQiXs5AJ:www2b.abc.net.au/tmb/Client/Message.aspx%3Fb%3D59%26m%3D281575%26ps%3D20%26dm%3D1%26pd%3D2%26am%3D281752+%22decision+made+from+above+which+certainly%22&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au&client=firefox-a
Syd the Series Producer starts a new thread of the Good Game forum trying the quell the masses and says in part :
“it is inappropriate for me or anyone from the team to talk about the inner workings of the ABC. Suffice to say this move has not been taken at all lightly, was inevitable and has nothing to do with being politically correct.”
We still do not know for sure Junglist has been sacked.
http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2009/10/fans-angry-over-good-game-host-switch.html
David Knox at TVtonight posts a story in which he reveals fans are not happy with the departure of Junglist and quotes a statement from Amanda Duthie, the Head of Arts and Entertainment. In part this reads :
In a statement to TV Tonight, Amanda Duthie, Head of Arts and Entertainment said, “After three years, we felt Good Game needed a refresh to take the program into 2010 and beyond, and the decision was made to change the hosting team.
“Jeremy had travel plans which meant he was not going to be available to tape the final show of the season, the one hour Christmas Special, and we were announcing details of the launch of the Good Game: SP program on our new channel, ABC3. So it made sense to work in with these timings to introduce Stephanie ‘Hex’ Bendixsen as our new host.
“Understandably, Jeremy has many fans who are disappointed to see him leave the program. However, we are absolutely confident that Bajo and Hex will bring a new dimension to the show and, along with the dedicated behind the scenes team of gamers, continue to bring Australian audiences independent reviews and information about video gaming in
The story continues to advise Junglist left a twitter saying
“Cheers for the kinds words and good times….it’s been great and it’s the people that make it great. Much love to you all.”
Here Amanda Duthie states finally for the fans the show needs a refresh for 2010 onwards and because Junglist had a holiday planned when they wanted to tape the Christmas special they brought Hex in earlier. This makes it sound like the ABC have made a managerial decision to replace Junglist with Hex for a new look.
At this point, it’s sad Junglist is leaving but if that’s the way the ABC want to go, it’s their choice. Fans are angry and start to rally behind Junglist afraid what the “refresh” might bring and feeling Junglist was pushed out of their show.
The new episode of Good Game airs on 26th October 2009 , there is no mention of Junglist until the very end where the presenter Bajo thanks Junglist for his time on the show but tells us (the audience) not to worry as Junglist has taken on a behind the scenes role on the show.
Fans that have not been on the Good Game forums find out for the first time, Junglist is no longer presenting. Confusion abounds, the forums go into meltdown, there is a lot of criticism of the new show and Hex starts to wear the brunt of the backlash against the ABC. The Facebook group Save Junglist! is in full swing with also the domain http://www.savejunglist.com and a petition.
Good Game, as a team, release a statement which reads in part :
“You can't help but have noticed we’ve been quiet regarding Junglist's departure from the show which has really sucked because we're used to having such an honest and open relationship with you.
For all sorts of reasons we are unable to tell you things that have happened over many months inside Team Good Game which have impacted on the production. That's just real life folks. We know it leaves many questions unanswered but we have reached that point where we really can’t say any more than that.
But we can tell you this much…
The decision to take Junglist off air was not forced upon us by ABC Management and it's one that is fully supported by all the GG team. We are gutted that it has come to this but in our opinion it absolutely had to happen.
Finally, we genuinely wish Junglist all the best, and we hope he finds a medium for his awesome analysis and presenting skills that works for him.”
The fans are now told there have been some sort of issue or issues going on for months now and Junglist leaving HAD to occur. They then say he is really good at presenting and has awesome analysis but it does not fit with their medium. It would appear at this point they believe he is unable to do the work assigned to him which has been happening for months and he had to be removed. This suggests his performance of his duties must have been so bad it affected his job and a decision was made to sack him. It was not forced upon them so Good Game Production must have had a role to play in the decision to fire him even though they originally said it came from above!
Junglist obviously unhappy with the statement leaves a reply which states in part :
“I can tell you that this is a lie. There was no vote taken, no consensus reached. In fact, the GG team was completely unaware of the change until the same day I found out. The same confidentiality clause that prevented me from saying anything publicly, prevented management from telling them anything.
I have spoken to members of the GG team who clearly DON'T support this, but can't say anything publicly. Of course they'll tow the party line. They have to.
Up until now the situation has just been poorly handled. But to now LIE to your own audience, in an effort to save face for replacing an experienced reviewer/presenter with an inexperienced one, is quite simply the lowest thing I've ever seen ABC management do.
I feel now as if I'm being professionally attacked, so here's a truth bomb. In the meeting where I was told I would be replaced, the reason given was they wanted a girl on the show. "Mass appeal" was a direct quote from that meeting. After a half-hour of explaining how they'll lose their hardcore following, they responded that yes, they knew this, but expected to make up the numbers with a new following. "A show can grow beyond its hardcore base", is another direct quote.”
Junglist expresses the productions original (and retracted) post that ABC Management made the call for the changes and Good Game Production Team did not know about it until the same day he did. Junglist claims he was in a meeting by himself where he was told of the new direction for the show and why he would not feature. Doesn’t mention ABC Management were unhappy with his performances or that production sacked him.
Junglist leaves another post in response to Bajo’s which he says in part :
“I've made mistakes too. I've disagreed with the ABC on reviewing policies, which sometimes resulted in footage being handed in late. And it's a shame that the Christmas special was decided on around the same time I booked an overseas trip, and neither party were flexible enough to change plans.”
So now according to Junglist the problems over time have been in regards to disagreement on reviewing policies and production with him unable to come to an agreement over a booked holiday. He admits he has handed footage in late but no time frames are given.
Syd The Producer states in part
“none of us were in that meeting after all… BUT the GG team is here with me in the office right now..
Jung mate, I'm sorry to say it but you are wrong… no one on the team feels we have to tow the party line here - no one has been coerced into doing or saying anything they don't want to. Sure we didn't all find out till you did - but that does not mean we don't feel it's the right thing to do for the show. That's the truth we need to swallow here… as bitter a taste as it might leave in our mouths.”
So production confirms a meeting took place, a meeting they were not a part of and they did not find out he was sacked until he did. Syd tells Junglist they do not have to follow ABC Management but they accept and support the decision 100%.
Now we have the Good Game Production Team saying it wasn’t them, then it was and Junglist was not up to par for months and his sacking had to happen. Now it wasn’t them again but they support the decision 100%. Again, the story changes.
Junglist posts in response to Syd’s message:
“I completely believe that you have the best of intentions, Syd. It's you that holds this show together. And I likewise believe you when you say it has nothing to do with bringing in a girl.
But it's not up to you, is it? This change comes from higher up.
As I said, I've spoken to team members who contradict what you say about "supporting the ABC's decision", so this is damage control, pure & simple.”
Junglist claims management made the changes to the show and supports Syd in her role and work on Good Game and none of this is over bringing a girl in (something major press did not pick up on). Junglist’s last sentence is actually quite believable as in any work place with a lot of people it’s unlikely everyone is going to agree with a decision to sack someone. He must have had friends, I’m sure some of them would not have agreed.
Bajo feels compelled to write to the fans to try and tell them how the show will not be changing apart from the presenter and wants the fans to give them a go.
Bajo further posts in relation to the Open Day but goes on and states in part :
“work related issues cannot be discussed outside the work place, it's just as simple as that, and I wish we could tell you more - but we can't and that can't change and it's not going to. It feels unfair to us that we can't say our side of the story, but that's the position we're in and we understand and respect why these rules are in place in our workplace, or any.”
As just an employee I can understand why Bajo himself is unable to say anything, he would only get himself in trouble with management and where would that get him?
Junglist responds to Bajo and states in part
“I actually believe that you believe what you're saying, but you weren't the one who talked to upper management for 30 minutes about their new mass appeal plan.” Then “Explain then why I'm only contributing 1 token review a week? And quite possibly those reviews won't even make it into the show? A proven reviewer over 3 years has been replaced with a less experienced one. The content HAS changed, already.
As ever Baj it seems like you couldn't wait to just get on with things...fair enough if you don't care about this whole thing, but asking everyone to just forget about it by promising fruit hats and horse heads is insulting peoples' intelligence.
For my part, I've been honest about my own weaknesses in my role. There is no more "we can't say anything". I've said it. So have at me bro, if that's what you feel like.”
Again, we know Production including Bajo was not at the meeting, it would be correct in saying Bajo wouldn’t know what Management was doing, he gets told what he needs to know when it’s ok, the same as any office. What he does do is allow Junglist to confirm his side of the story further and continue to cast doubts over the ABC. Junglist tells us his role has been diminishing also with his input into reviews. At this point it’s a fair bet if the ABC even offered Junglist his job back it’s unlikely he would take it.
Baj posts again and says in part
“I can't speculate on Jung's reasons for leaving the show, I wasn't there so I have no right to do so. That's fair in my books, and I have no intention of trying to prove what happened in a meeting I wasn't in or a descision I wasn't part of. I love the guys work, and loved working with him, and I really hope he goes on to do something awesome. I'm sure he will, he's freaking taleneted and I hope we can sit down and beer about this one day soon. I'm sorry Jung, if you think I'm at wars with you here, I'm not and I'm sure it's just the internet being what it is. Tone is hard to convey in times new roman.”
Bajo extends the olive branch to Junglist and admits he was not in the meeting and is unable to speculate on what was said in it and dare I say it? Give’s Junglist the benefit of the doubt!
1:15am http://www2b.abc.net.au/tmb/Client/Message.aspx?b=59&t=151&a=0&ps=20&dm=1&m=289368&pd=1&p=1
Syd posts the following :
“If you only watched the show for Jung and/or the on air camaraderie between Jung and Bajo then all I can say is we are very sorry to lose you.
The team will continue in it's quest to bring you the best damned gaming show we can... in the same way - with the same goals it's always had.
The show will live or die by that and that can only be proven in the weeks and months to come. I'm heading into the office now to get working.
Again, my sincere thanks for caring about the show so much.
Syd”
It has been said by some fans that this forum post is having a go at those who like Junglist and the Junglist/Bajo combination. To me it sounds like acceptance that Good Game are going to loose viewership and there is nothing that can be done about it.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/10/30/2729132.htm
The ABC Online story states in part :
“an ABC TV spokesperson has told ABC News Online that Ray was let go due to "ongoing behind the scenes performance-based issues".
"Jeremy Ray's performance issues were severely impacting the quality and smooth-running of the show, as well as making life difficult for the rest of the team," he said.
"The ABC categorically dismisses Jeremy Ray's assertion that he was replaced because of his gender. The Good Game team is sad and disappointed he has taken this attitude.”
So now this ABC spokesperson lays the blame squarely on Junglist and confirms he was let go. Strange that he was going to be “behind the scenes” earlier. Why couldn’t they have just said all this at the start? Now Junglist hadn’t actually said he was replaced for being a man. He just conveyed managements desire for a “refresh” and a new direction. The ABC spokesperson also says Junglist was “severely impacting” the show. Why would production say the decision came from above and they were worried. As soon as they knew he was fired you would most likely think, “ahhh must have been because of all those performance based issues that was severely impacting me or my mate Joe“ It’s not really making much sense is it looking at everything together. But I’ll press on.
The SMH article by Asher Moses states in part
“Ray said in a phone interview yesterday there had been occasional disputes over how long the show's game reviewers should play a game before preparing a review.
Ray said the ABC wanted all playing and filming for each review to be done in a day but he had opposed this, insisting that some games needed more time to do them justice.
The show's producer, Janet Carr, hinted yesterday there were “time management” issues behind the replacement.”
Junglist tells SMH the real issue is the time taken to review games. Obviously ABC had placed time constraints on their reviewers. What needs to be asked is, Junglist is an experienced game reviewer and has been for some time before he suddenly is unable to do it anymore. Are the games more in depth, do they take longer to play, had ABC changed the way their productions are done. If changes were made did these come from ABC management of did Syd in the production department feel times given to Junglist were just. Are ABC just saying he got bored and could not do what he used to be able to do in the same time period?
The article continues in part
“Carr said this morning it was unlikely Ray would continue contributing to the show until the end of his contract next month.
She said she would be meeting ABC management today to discuss the next move but rejected the “mass market” claim, saying the show couldn't be any more mass market than it already was considered it was the most downloaded show on the ABC.”
So is Junglist sacked? More conflicting statements from the ABC.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/02/2730963.htm
ABC Online posts another, the story in full :
“The fired host of Good Game says he wants the war of words with the ABC to end, but he is sticking by his claims that he was kicked off the show because of his gender.
The show's founding host, Jeremy Ray, was fired last month, with viewers informed via a statement on the TV show's online message board last week.
Ray, also known as the Junglist, says that statement failed to mention the true reason he was let go.
He says he was told in a meeting almost three weeks ago that he was going to be replaced by a woman because the ABC wanted the video gaming show to garner "mass appeal".
Ray, who was born in Australia but lived in the United States for most of his childhood, says there was "a lot of internal politicking" going on behind the scenes, but that was not the reason for his dismissal.
"In the meeting, the only reason they gave was that they wanted a female presenter," he told ABC News Online.
"There were comments made in that meeting that it would be great if the audience assumed, seeing as there is only four or five weeks left in the season, that I was sick or on holiday and that this whole thing was my idea.
"It was even suggested [at a different time], that I say on air that I'm going back to the States, which I found a little offensive because I'm an Australian citizen.
"Those sorts of comments made me worried that I was going to be misrepresented."
Ray's departure caused backlash from fans on Twitter. A website and Facebook groups also quickly popped up in support of him.
One of those Facebook groups, Save Junglist! - Support the Former Good Game Host Through His Mistreatment by the ABC, already has more than 5,000 members.
"The poor handling of the situation made the backlash even bigger than I thought it would be," Ray said.
Ray, who is putting together proposals and hopes to stay in show business, thanks his fans for all the support, but says he is ready to move on.
"I don't want to be at war with people," he said.
"I don't want to get into a mudslinging match with the ABC."
And there has been mudslinging over the past week - Ray admits both sides have been "naughty" in breaking the show's confidentiality agreement.
Firing reasons
But Ray says he wants to set the record straight one last time. He told ABC News Online why he thinks he was given the heave-ho, and dismisses the ABC's reason of "performance-based issues".
"They don't really understand the audience and the need to have a gamer's gamer as a perspective on the show," he said.
"You need to have someone at the top that understands the medium."
Ray also says there were issues over how long he was taking to review games and he suspects that played a factor in him being shown the door.
"There was a view that a review should be finished within the 10-hour production day period," he said.
"I explained at times as a reviewer, you like to have a bit more time.
"You wouldn't tell David Stratton to review all of his movies in one hour and when he refuses to, then publicly blast his reviewing ability.
"It probably played more of a factor in who they chose to replace me with, rather than the actual replacement."
That replacement is newcomer Stephanie Bendixsen, and even though the gaming community is tight-knit, Ray says he has never met her.
But he says he had an inkling his time was up when they were holding auditions for his replacement at the Good Game studios. Despite that, he says he wishes Bendixsen, also known as Hex, all the best.
"I thought she did well in terms of the first show," he said.
"The poor girl, it's a real baptism of fire - she doesn't deserve that. She presented quite well."
Reports have said Ray thinks the show will be "dumbed down", but he has a slightly more optimistic view of its future.
"I never said the show would be dumbed down," he said.
"All these people on the forums are saying it will be the death of the show. The show will go on.
"I'm not arrogant enough to think I'm the best person to present the show or write reviews for the show. I'm willing to accept that my replacement might be better."
But Ray, who maintains a sideline role as a reviewer off-camera until the end of November, does believe the show will not suit hardcore gamers any more.
"The perception is now that they've got two casual gamers on the show, whereas I come from a competitive background," he said.
"I do think the show is missing that element - I don't think the hardcore gamer will be represented.
"If you want to look at it mathematically - an experienced reviewer and presenter is taken away and one with less experience is put on so technically you have less than you had before."
An ABC spokesman says the ABC does not wish to make any further comment on the issue, but is sticking by its statement last week that Ray was not fired because of his gender.”
Here we learn the meeting between Junglist and ABC Management happened almost three weeks prior putting it around the 12th October 2009. We also know Junglist was continuing to work at this time until
Things begin to quieten down on the press side with no one prepared to issue any further statements and the mass media no longer interested in the report.
http://www.gamearena.com.au/videos/latest.php/the-benny-and-richie-show--episode-230
Junglist appears again for fans on The Benny and Richie show online
During the show Junglist tells us there are :
“Disagreements over the way reviews were done” and ”what you see before you is what they wanted”.
Media Watch Presenter Jonathon Holmes posts the following on the Media Watch forums
“Ok gamers. Think about this.
If the ABC had decided it wanted to change the host of The Good Game to appeal to a different audience, or because it wanted a woman instead of a man (though both of those things MAY be true) would it really have done so a few weeks before the end of the Good Game's run? Wouldn't it have waited until the end of the season? Would it have courted the reaction it's got from its hard core fans by just dumping Junglist without even a chance to say goodbye, without explanation etc?
We have looked into this. If we thought there had been a gross and high-handed management intervention we'd happily have said so. But we don't. And like the team at The Good Game, we can't say why without making matters worse.
Frustrating, I know. But there it is. Calling me a coward won't change anything, or make Junglist feel better either.”
Media Watch appear here to be looking at the matter just from the way this saga was reported in major media outlets. The real issue is actually the handling of this whole matter from the ABC. The ABC can do what they like with the show, but when dealing with the media and the fans they have constantly changed their story and been poor.
Junglist posts on the Good Game forum about Media Watch :
“Personally, I would've thought the ABC forcing that "team post" on the team, and being caught out in a lie to the audience would be reason enough to be covered. But 2 people from Media Watch have contacted me and after talking for a while, they told me they probably wouldn't cover it due to it being a staffing issue rather than an editorial one. I half agreed with that point, as there's lots of internal politicking, and the editorial side issue of reviewing policies. But even so, the reviewing policies aren't so much a matter of journalistic ethics as what direction they want GG to have.”
I agree with Media Watch in the fact a lot of this is a staffing issue, however the real issue is the ABC’s handling of what they have released to media and fans, it’s been appalling and made this whole thing much worse than it should have been. Is this not worthy of Media Watch’s time?
Syd posted the schedule week Good Game runs under as follows :
“GG's weekly production schedule is tight there's no doubt about that.
Every week is slightly different depending on whether there's a developer in town or something but in general most weeks go like this:
Monday - Studio day - shoot all links/reviews etc for the following Monday's show. Gog does all the online stuff for the show going to air that night. Set up forums etc. Try to be on couch by 8.30.
Tuesday - News/Backwards Compatible/Ask Good Game shoot day. Often this only requires one presenter and we try to keep it to that whenever possible - ie if its Bajo's news he'll do the BC too etc. We also attempt to make it that the person with the biggest/longest game to review that week is not required to come to do the news etc giving them an extra review day (not always possible.)
Wed - Game Review day unless the presenters are required for a shoot. Most often not as Rei does most of the "field" reports. Shoot day for Rei and Moe. Office/prep/edit day for Syd, Gog and the rest of the gang.
Thurs - Game review/write/capture day for hosts. Final Edit etc for rest of us for following weeks episode.
Friday -
I'd be lying if I didn't acknowledge that everyone on the team puts in many hours of their own time. This weekend alone Bajo is lost to Dragon Age, Hex is stabbing her way through Assassins Creed II, Jeremy Pencil has New Super Mario Bros. Wii and I'm on XBLA game duty.
Cheers,
Syd “
Junglist replies to Syd with the following :
“Ah, 2 review days per week. I see. So what happens when 1 person is reviewing 2 triple-A games in 1 week? It equates to 1 review per day, and the quality of the reviews suffer. Without counting beyond August, 22 of the first 30 weeks this year involved at least 1 person doing more than 1 review in that week. That's 73% of January through August that reviews suffered due to this schedule. Time management issues, indeed.
Some of those extra games would just be smaller downloadable titles, yet some of them would be AAA, or worse, MMOs, and SOME weeks involved review days being taken up with filming interviews, gags, etc.
As Syd states, everyone's happy to dig into their own personal time because it's just games.
But that shouldn't be a given. When footage capture time is factored into a 10 hour production day, this system promotes only getting 7 or so hours into a game, and certainly doesn't allow for the necessary reflection time that breeds proper insight.
That's been my position for the last year, and I believe both parties are guilty here. Myself for not working the way I was asked to, and management for not understanding the medium.”
Again Junglist admits he is partly to blame but also management for the processes in place, processes Junglist did not agree with. Suddenly it’s all starting to come out and it would appear it’s just a simple case of employee not happy with employer and vice versa, this happens in offices and job sites around the country all the time. This lends more credibility to Junglist’s side of events and makes you wonder again, what was the ABC doing with their press releases.
Bajo posts the following towards Junglist
“"h, 2 review days per week. I see. So what happens when 1 person is reviewing 2 triple-A games in 1 week? It equates to 1 review per day, and the quality of the reviews suffer"
This has only happened to me once this year, with batman and wolfenstien, and I finished both games before Monday, and yeah it went into the weekend as the job often does, but Im fine with that now and then, and I don't believe the reviews suffered at all.
Like I said [in the other thread about this], this is my schedual and not a comment on what yours is at all Jung, l'm not trying to bring that into question or anything, just stating what I do with my review time on the show, and that I don't feel it's unmanageable. That's my position. “
Junglist replies back to Bajo with :
“"This has only happened to me once this year, with batman and wolfenstien"
Actually Baj, it's happened much more than that to you, as this image will show.
http:// img689.imageshack.us (link to picture by Jonny Booker – Save Junglist! Facebook page as original did not work)
This image was made earlier this year to chart the review workload. I post this because you're misleading your audience. Green is myself, blue is Baj, and yellow is other. 3 units were given to big games such as MMOs, 2 for a triple-A (or equal time), and 1 for a smaller game that required little effort. When made, this image was presented to Syd with no argument.
It's worth noting that it doesn't take into account any extra work that might have needed to be done during review days, such as interviews. If you're saying the solution will be a freelance budget, IMO that's another step away from the people delivering information actually knowing what they're talking about.”
Syd posts in reply to Junglist :
“No doubt about it everyone works damned hard on the show and that some/most games take a lot more time to review than other entertainment mediums.
All I intended to do here was outline the average production week for the program - not make any value judgments.
Syd”
Junglist replies to a forum user Nei Nei with :
“"Now, Jung probably wanted to be reimbursed for those hours he spent playing and reviewing games"
Nope. Just wanted to be able to write a properly insightful, in-depth review.”
Again, it seems like production appears to be the biggest problem between Junglist and the ABC.
Junglist weighs in on forum discussion on the production and review system of the program
"and a question, something with GG is that you give the reviews from 2 perspectives instead of just one, but some of the things said recently are pretty much saying that only one person reviews each game, so how is the other person has an opinion of the game when it sounds like they haven't played it?"
Typically 1 person will write both perspectives and scores for a review. In rare cases there'll be enough time for the other person to play a bit as well, and write some first impressions. Usually just the 1 writer though, it's been that way since season 1.
“Syd provides further information on the production of the show detailing how scripts are done
For purely time and practical reasons (we like having more than one game reviewed in each episode) one presenter (or a producer sometimes) takes "carriage" over a review, in other words, the main responsibility for it, playing as much of the game as possible and writing the review script in a draft form.
We then circulate the drafts to each other for reading/comment asap. On a Friday we "read" the scripts in the same room and that was the opportunity for us to change anything anyone disagreed with, add stuff, final thoughts etc.
As all of the team are gamers the discussion about what games we are playing is constant in the office and we all use this to bounce ideas/thoughts around and sharing perspectives.
Not always, but often, once the principle reviewer had finished with the game someone else would give it a play too. We do have the budget to purchase more than one copy if we felt we needed to (ie multi format or if the games multiplayer is a key feature).
It’s common knowledge that Good Game has writers and presenters and producers. The whole team contributes words to the show, it's the skill of the presenters that they make it their own.
Syd”
I still wonder if the ABC had of managed this correctly from the outset could they have avoided so much information on how the show is put together coming out. Sure, it’s good to know from a fan perspective how the show is put together but it was never supposed to be broadcast in such a public place and I doubt ABC management would call it good business practice, but with an ex host telling so much what choice do they have?
Junglist now replies back to Syd
“"We then circulate the drafts to each other for reading/comment asap"
Hard to comment on a game you haven't played tho, and...
"Not always, but often, once the principle reviewer had finished with the game someone else would give it a play too"
This rarely happens. I can only remember 2-3 times. So yes, it's pretty much always 1 person writing the whole review, both perspectives and scores. The system is as strong as the reviewer's ability to put him/herself in another person's shoes, which is a necessary skill for any reviewer addressing a mainstream audience. For a reviewer that knows the game well, it's reasonable to assume they can write for both the hardcore and casual perspective.
The bigger problem will come as GG brings in more freelance reviews, as has been announced will happen next year. Then you've got both presenters who haven't played the game.”
Bajo decides to post again on his game playing
“Well from my own point of view, next year and the rest of this, I plan on playing every single game we review on the show. I don't see a danger at all, because I have total turst our team and we have very open script reads.”
Junglist comes back in with his own perspectives
"Well from my own point of view, next year and the rest of this, I plan on playing every single game we review on the show"
lol, that's actually impossible. Not to mention you said that last year, and only played the games you were in charge of this year. There's no reason to make ridiculous statements like that, I'm not dissing that part of the system, I was a part of it and I think it has worked for years. Credibility will be a problem with a reliance on freelance writing though.
lol, seriously...
Could you seriously ever see these two together again?
Bajo replies to a fan from the forum Nei Nei
"Bajo, how can you promise something like this when it's obvious the games you are already slotted to review are already eating into your free time? There's only 24 hours in the day"
I've said it a bunch of times, we always have one person main on a review - obviously I can't complete them all, but I can play them all as much as possible, no dramas dude. I do like games you know!
Bajo wants to reply further to Nei Nei’s post
"if it is true you get the rest of the team involved in editing the review script, I find it hard to imagine anybody who hasn't played the game would be able to offer any insight other than the generic comment that could pretty much apply to any game. This is why people are concerned the review quality will drop, because we want you to tell us something about a game we haven't heard 100 times before."
Well our whole team are gamers, so everyone likes to ask questions even if they haven't played the game, which promotes discussion, know what I mean? Last week we had an extra long production meeting, and I think our reviews were better for it tonight so it's something we're gonna keep doing. It's really not that hard to play every game we have on the show at least a little bit, and that's something hex and I are focusing on so we can get used to each other, and get a more rounded perspective. It's not that big a deal imo, it's the way most magazines and websites work, so I'm told from the few I know who work there. Please let us know if you think a reveiw is crap, we live for your banter. This thread has gone of the rails a bit tho, Bajo out!
Wow! I agree with Bajo here, this thread has gone off the rails and is developing as I type. To ensure this mess is accurately covered I will continue to ensure everything is captured accurately.
Now Hex, the new host decides to get in on the forum action and tell the story of the review process from her short and limited time replying to Bajo’s post of
“"I've said it a bunch of times, we always have one person main on a review - obviously I can't complete them all, but I can play them all as much as possible, no dramas dude. I do like games you know!"
I can obviously only vouch for what has happened since I've started working on the show, but - yes, one person 'carries' the review, putting the most time into it - but everyone does have their input.
Say, to use AC2 for example - as I'm working on it now - I take notes and capture footage as I'm playing, and then draft a script upon completing the game.
I then give the game to Bajo to play (Jeremy Pencil has also played it at length - we all wanted a go), he offers his own changes and opinions to the script based on his experiences of the game, and we discuss it together on a Friday afternoon to get a bit of perspective and conversation going.
No, not everyone can finish every game. But we all try to get our own experiences and perspective in there. Nearly everyone in the office had a good run of DJ Hero so that they could offer their thoughts.
Over the weekend the script is finalised, last changes are made, and we film the review on the Monday.
Like I said, I can't really speak for the process before I arrived, but that's certainly how things work now.”
Junglist replies to a forum fan l_Spock_l ®
"I can't agree with this. Both people need to have played the game and give their honest opinion"
I kind of agree with you man. It's no fault of the reviewers, it's the schedule and format. Over the last year, the amount of games that were played by more than 1 person were very few. I can remember the Guitar Hero games were passed around, and Beatles. And unless someone can wave a logistical magic wand, it'll stay the same, in fact probably get worse due to the upcoming reliance on freelancers.
With 2.5 days of filming every week, it just can't be done. Otherwise you'd have 2 people getting halfway through a game, rather than each person getting fully through. I know what you mean though man, it's not ideal. I'm not sticking up for the process by any means, but I'm not saying it's Baj or Hex's fault either. Only reason I post it is so there's no misleading of the audience going on.
Junglist here lays it out and says he does not want us, the fans, misled and says whilst not an overall fan of the system he did work within it and it’s not the current hosts fault.
CONCLUSIONS
So lets look at this in an overall context.
ABC Management wanted a change – This is not our business and should they ever want to put a Smurf and Mary Poppins in the presenter chair, that’s their business. If they make decisions which are unpopular they will see it in the ratings and on the forums.
Hex – This is not her fault. She accepted a job offered to her. If you want to write about her it should be done on her performances as a presenter of Good Game and gaming ability and knowledge only.
Junglist and ABC have a falling out – technically, this should be between the parties and not us but the ABC in their wisdom put Junglist in a position where he felt he had to defend himself and further details came out which really, is just a dispute and sides could be taken with either one depending on your point of view. From the majority of fans however, we trust Junglist now a lot more than the ABC.
So,at the end of it all, ABC’s handling of their press and forum releases caused this whole mess and ABC should take responsibility for this. They have angered the fans and alienated them and Good Game is currently not getting good reviews of the shows without Junglist. They also put the new presenter Hex under enormous pressure to perform with their actions.
The fans want ABC to take responsibility for their part in all of this and have Media Watch represent us to make the ABC realise they dropped the ball. Procedures need to be put in place so this does not happen again.
The above actions as documented clearly show Junglist has one story to tell and stays true to it, the ABC have changed constantly and tried to cover their tracks. We’ve had the head of Arts and Entertainment, Productions staff, spokespeople all provide us with differing accounts of the events. They have left information out and not properly disclosed information to their fans leaving them confused and angry. In later days the staff of Good Game on the forums have been providing much more information which is only weakening the trust in how the review processes are done.
The ABC boasted in their original press release that Good Game is the most downloaded program and has the most active forum of ABC Online. Surely they would have the foresight to realise they are dealing with a fan base adept at using technology and would use it if they felt the ABC had done wrong. Did the ABC envisage a Facebook page supporting Junglist could have nearly as many fans as their own official Facebook page.
Would Media Watch agree the ABC has lived up to their part under Section 5 of the Code of Practice (http://www.abc.net.au/corp/pubs/documents/200806_codeofpractice-revised_2008.pdf) and Section 7 of the Editorial Principles? (http://www.abc.net.au/corp/pubs/documents/EdPols07_updateFeb09_FIN%20tools.pdf)
If the ABC genuinely care about their audience and ever want us to trust them, the ABC again, I invite them to present the fans with a signed document from Management and the Good Game Production Team admitting mistakes were made and every effort is being made to ensure these events do not take place again and will actively try and repair all the bridges they managed to burn throughout this process.
If the ABC are able to do this it would be appreciated if the signed document be scanned and posted on the Good Game forums and in the Good Game and Save Junglist! Facebook groups.
We the fans look forward to the olive branch being extended and look forward to seeing Junglist again in the gaming industry soon.
Regards
Brendan Clarke
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAs_reXxSsc
