With him being an actually professional he probably is less bias and doesn’t take swag and perks. But the less ethical would be easily swayed with better results.

I’m sure all companies do this. But since MS lost the Anti-trust suit they’ve spent on a ton of money to shape opinion so it will never happen again.

But the biggest MS poster is Amir, their are others though

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/member.php?u=26220

All advertising tends to be manipulative and tries to control public perception. That’s not necessarily bad. Advertising is a necessary and beneficial part of business, even though it can be obnoxious or deceptive. And I don’t see any evidence that Microsoft is less ethical in this regard than anyone else. However, particularly compared to Sony, they have been far more successful and effective at influencing media perception in both subtle and non-subtle ways. And this is a valid point worth bringing up for discussion.

You downplay Microsoft’s actions as merely trying to be accessible. That is naive. Did you read their leaked strategy document on handling the media that Sporty linked? Did you read how they are one of the largest spenders on lobbying-related government travel? Do you really believe they do all that because they are just nice guys? Again, I’m not saying their less ethical than the next guy, but their intent is clear and the impact of this is very worthy of discussion.

You said, “if you could show better examples of [bias], you would”. Believe me, I could! Honestly, though, that would probably just annoy most people, which is why I initially declined. Maybe in the future, there will be a more appropriate opportunity.

I wasn’t involved in Henning’s interview with Insomniac. But of course, I agree with you that all interviews and PR contact don’t involve “pandering” or deceptive bias. However, the two interviews that I cited earlier, did have deceptive bias. And this isn’t just one oddball opinion, *lots* of people feel the exact same way.

Sporty, great links! Do you have any on the avsforum issue you mentioned?

No offense Rjcc, But I have to assume your ignorant or lying. No one can be that in the dark now really.

For the last 6 years Microsoft has been aggressively courting media outlets. Microsoft now does extensive background checks on journalist to find out what they like and history.
http://blog.wired.com/business/2007/03/enough_about_me.html

The Bonus round Darrin was talking about mentioned their tactics, but Joystiq and Kotaku clears said they wont swallow their integrity with free perks, Dustructiod said they love getting bought (ironic they are also the most hostile against PS3).
http://slashdot.org/articles/06/12/27/1423234.shtml

They fly them out to high class hotels, party with them and show them a small part of the game. It’s harder to talk against a friend then a faceless company
http://www.dailytech.com/pay+to+play+uncovering+online+payola/article7510.htm

The main evangelist for Xbox (meaning the fanboy that panders to media and pays for Negative Sony ads) is Andre Vrignaud. He is responsible for 80% of the anti-PS3 media you see.
http://ncroal.talk.newsweek.com/default.asp?item=387439

Most of their newest methods are actually to hire idiots to spread FUD on forums and comment sections of web sites. Serveral of the MS HD-DVD group are open about it on avsforum.

Darrin was only bringing to light the tactics, not pointing out parties, since doing that could end some career if proved.

But really it’s not secret what’s going on.

Making yourselves accessible is not “pandering” to the press.

Question, how did ps3blog get access for the interview that was posted with insomniac,?

It was never mentioned in the interview. Did it affect your impressions of the game, since you talked to the developers?

Were they pandering to you then?

You’ve directly accused named persons of bias and being “weak minded”, if you could show better examples of it, you would. Character assassination is not a good look, especially when gone about so amatuerishly.

I appreciate your polite disagreement. You want “actual evidence” of bias? First, it’s really hard to really objectively demonstrate bias. Also, while I could cite a dozen other instances of blatant bias, and even quantify some of that, I really don’t want to take this issue too far. Thanks for posting, though. I love to chat with people of different opinion.

In general, I would say:

Favors PS3: 1UP’s Shane Bettenhausen and Newsweek’s N’Gai Croal.
Favors 360: Aforementioned blogs, FiringSquad, many popular gaming sites (including my favorite, IGN), Dean Takahashi (although Mr. Takahashi is fairly cool about it)
Favors Wii: Many non-gaming media outlets.

inspectre,

Wow, that’s a comprehensive post!

Sony *does* try to pander to the press. They just don’t do it nearly as much (as Joystiq pointed out) and are not nearly as effective as Microsoft.

In defense of Halo 3, the game reportedly has 4 million pre-orders already. The press has to give lots of coverage to anything that hotly anticipated. OTOH, better selling series like Gran Turismo don’t get nearly as much attention and SOCOM, which was the most popular online console game for a while (more than even Halo), are ignored by the media. Even Counterstrike, which I would bet is far more popular, gets no media attention. I think Microsoft is simply really effective at getting massive media attention for its products.