A Pokedex of game journalists that only lists negative traits?

Feelings-type vs. Ethics-type?

Ethics is a major component of social justice, and in recent years, it has also become a hot button issue in the world of videogame journalism. It is with this in mind that a group of social justice warriors decided to come together to fight against unethical videogame reporting by cataloging a number of game journalists and applying one-dimensional negative labels (AKA “types”) to them based on things that they may or may not have done before. If summing up the entirety of other beings’ operational functionality by placing them in one or two categories works for keeping track of your Pokémon, I guess it will also work for watch-dogging videogame enthusiasts? It’s an idea so wacky that it just might work. 

That said, I’ve only taken a cursory look at the “Actually-its-about-ethics-in-videogame-journalism-dex” and I’m already concerned that it may be incomplete and/or inaccurate. lists me as a “Cronyism type,” because I have given “favorable coverage” to game developer Zoe Quinn without disclosing our “friendship.” While I do know Zoe a little, and like her just fine, I’m not exactly sure that our relationship could be defined as a “friendship.”

So you tell me, if you’ve met someone a few times and you admire their work, does that mean you’re automatically biased towards them in a notable and/or concerning way? Is disclosure of all past or current emotions and the potential causes of those emotions the only way to evolve into a legendary “Ethical Type” Journalist-mon? If that’s the case, does that mean I should disclose that Reggie Fils-Aime every time I write about Nintendo? Should I disclose that I once every time I write about something from Choice Provisions? Trust me, I’d be happy to continue to bring those events to your attention if that’s something that you’d like me to do.

In all seriousness though, this is a of games bloggers and journalists, so check it out if you’re looking for some new writers to peruse.