<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><b>We agree, Edward. The image was manipulated in poor taste and we sincerely regret running it. Expect public apologies online and in our April issue. Thanks for your concern.</b>
---------- From: Pyle, Edward Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2004 2:05 PM To: EGM Subject: Your SOCOM2 preview image and how it highlights your complete lack of good taste or respect for the dead
Dear editors,
I recently saw a copy of your SOCOM2 article (image here: <a href='http://www.gunsnet.net/album/uploads//6673/f.jpg' target='_blank'>http://www.gunsnet.net/album/uploads//6673/f.jpg</a> , original image here: <a href='http://www.gunsnet.net/album/data//500/6673f2.jpg)' target='_blank'>http://www.gunsnet.net/album/data//500/6673f2.jpg)</a>, and I must say that basing something something as trivial as a video game review on the deaths of Soviet soldiers and the sadness of their comrades is inexcusable. As someone who's lost his fair share of brothers in arms during 6 years in the Marine Corps, I think you owe your readers, veterans, and veteran's families everywhere an apology. What's next, replacing JFK's coffin with a giant Pepsi bottle as it rolls along on the caisson, while a saluting John Jr. hold's the hand of Mario the plumber?
------------------------------------------------------------ Ned Pyle Sgt, 0341, USMC 1992-1998 <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Who says you can't fight city hall? <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--cri.tical+Jan 12 2004, 04:09 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (cri.tical @ Jan 12 2004, 04:09 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> That was quick. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> They feared my reputation as a master PR guru and quickly retracted!!! ALL PHEAR MEH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111
late post, but ill post it anyway im not normally a very nice/sesitive person, but that is just unacceptable, i think there should be some lawsuits going around, despite the official apology, this just should not be tolerated, given the current human rights stuff. i think someone seriously needs something large and pointy shoved far far beyond the limits of their body, and then some.
<!--QuoteBegin--Vulgar Menace+Jan 12 2004, 05:47 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Vulgar Menace @ Jan 12 2004, 05:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> w00t! Yeah..but what makes a party hat a "MonsE" party hat?
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
<!--QuoteBegin--SuperTeflon+Jan 11 2004, 06:55 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SuperTeflon @ Jan 11 2004, 06:55 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--SuperTeflon+Jan 11 2004, 02:58 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SuperTeflon @ Jan 11 2004, 02:58 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--moultano+Jan 11 2004, 01:34 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (moultano @ Jan 11 2004, 01:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> To play devil's advocate here, what's more disgusting about using a picture like that in an ad than making a game out of a similar subject? You could equivalently say that making an entertainment product out of a war is mocking the lives of all the people who died in it.
What's the significant moral difference between making a WWII game, and using a picture like that in an ad? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Hmmm...
<span style='color:white'>Do not revert nukes. And no matter what your point might be, it is still inappropriate in its own rights.</span> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> As I just told Nem0 in a PM, the picture was no less nor any more appropriate then the pictures on the first page: It's disrespecting other people's loss by turning an emotional scene into an advertisement for a fictionalized game. (The picture was of the 9 - 11 firefighters hoisting a nazi flag and it advertised 'Solve the real government coverup of 9 - 11!'). The picture was in response to Moultano. He seems to be fine with the soldiers having their lost ones photoshopped out and replaced with ads, so I hit a target a little closer to home to see if he'd still feel the same. So either: <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm as offended by that picture as you are, but I in general don't play war games because they similarly disturb me. I was just wondering how people draw the distinction between that picture and the games they don't have any problem with.
Woot their going to fix it. I think its great that they owned up to what they did and are fixing it. However the fact still remains that they shouldn't have put it in the first place.
Dear readers, In the February 2004 issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly, we printed a picture of soldiers holding what appear to be SOCOM II boxes. We altered this image to fit a story theme (soldiers preparing for online war), not realizing what the original context was (soldiers mourning their fallen comrades). We truly regret this and take full responsibility for our lack of better judgment. No excuses, we screwed up. It was completely unintentional, and we absolutely didn't mean to offend anybody. And then our company compounded the problem by sending a copyright infringement notice when the picture was scanned and posted without commentary on a third party's website, without understanding that the picture apparently was being displayed for critical purpose. We've addressed this issue head-on and are issuing apologies everywhere we can, and will also be doing so in our April 2004 issue. And, to further our apology, we're also making a contribution to The Veterans of Foreign Wars.
Please also note that this image was not used in an advertisement for SOCOM II, and was used without SOCOM II publisher Sony Computer Entertainment America or developer Zipper Interactive's knowledge or approval. We used it in our own editorial section, on our own efforts.
We'll try to be sure not to repeat this type of error again.
Sincerely,
Dan "Shoe" Hsu Editor-in-chief, Electronic Gaming Monthly
It's great to see that they've owned up and admitted that what they did was incredibly insenstive and in revolting taste. A contribution to the Veterans of Forieign Wars fund is also a great way of saying "We're sorry".
Kudos to EGM for taking responsability. +1 respect.
Ah, the joys of citing quotes one learned in DX <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
I'm glad EGM had the sense of responsibility to apologize - seeing this effort, I'm willing not to tread any further and start arguing about intentionallity.
Comments
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><b>We agree, Edward. The image was manipulated in poor taste and we sincerely regret running it. Expect public apologies online and in our April issue. Thanks for your concern.</b>
----------
From: Pyle, Edward
Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2004 2:05 PM
To: EGM
Subject: Your SOCOM2 preview image and how it highlights your complete lack of good taste or respect for the dead
Dear editors,
I recently saw a copy of your SOCOM2 article (image here: <a href='http://www.gunsnet.net/album/uploads//6673/f.jpg' target='_blank'>http://www.gunsnet.net/album/uploads//6673/f.jpg</a> , original image here: <a href='http://www.gunsnet.net/album/data//500/6673f2.jpg)' target='_blank'>http://www.gunsnet.net/album/data//500/6673f2.jpg)</a>, and I must say that basing something something as trivial as a video game review on the deaths of Soviet soldiers and the sadness of their comrades is inexcusable. As someone who's lost his fair share of brothers in arms during 6 years in the Marine Corps, I think you owe your readers, veterans, and veteran's families everywhere an apology. What's next, replacing JFK's coffin with a giant Pepsi bottle as it rolls along on the caisson, while a saluting John Jr. hold's the hand of Mario the plumber?
------------------------------------------------------------
Ned Pyle
Sgt, 0341, USMC 1992-1998 <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Who says you can't fight city hall? <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
They feared my reputation as a master PR guru and quickly retracted!!! ALL PHEAR MEH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111
<span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'>not</span>
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'><b>YES!</b></span>
I'm guessing their digital & real-life mailboxes have been brim-full with complaints. POWER TO THE PEOPLE!
this is the best forum ever #^o^#
P.S I smell a franchise..
im not normally a very nice/sesitive person, but that is just unacceptable, i think there should be some lawsuits going around, despite the official apology, this just should not be tolerated, given the current human rights stuff. i think someone seriously needs something large and pointy shoved far far beyond the limits of their body, and then some.
stupid marketing ****
and MonsE, one word, OWNED!!!(n1)
P.S I smell a franchise.. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm afraid that from now on, you must refer to it as the 'MonsE-style Party Hat ™®© 2004' in all posts. It will look something like this:
That's freaking low...
Making a mistake but having the maturity to admit & retract it is enough to warrant allowing the mistake, imo.
What's the significant moral difference between making a WWII game, and using a picture like that in an ad? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hmmm...
<span style='color:white'>Do not revert nukes. And no matter what your point might be, it is still inappropriate in its own rights.</span> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As I just told Nem0 in a PM, the picture was no less nor any more appropriate then the pictures on the first page: It's disrespecting other people's loss by turning an emotional scene into an advertisement for a fictionalized game. (The picture was of the 9 - 11 firefighters hoisting a nazi flag and it advertised 'Solve the real government coverup of 9 - 11!'). The picture was in response to Moultano. He seems to be fine with the soldiers having their lost ones photoshopped out and replaced with ads, so I hit a target a little closer to home to see if he'd still feel the same. So either: <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm as offended by that picture as you are, but I in general don't play war games because they similarly disturb me. I was just wondering how people draw the distinction between that picture and the games they don't have any problem with.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->An Apology From EGM
1/12/2004
Dear readers,
In the February 2004 issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly, we printed a picture of soldiers holding what appear to be SOCOM II boxes. We altered this image to fit a story theme (soldiers preparing for online war), not realizing what the original context was (soldiers mourning their fallen comrades). We truly regret this and take full responsibility for our lack of better judgment. No excuses, we screwed up. It was completely unintentional, and we absolutely didn't mean to offend anybody. And then our company compounded the problem by sending a copyright infringement notice when the picture was scanned and posted without commentary on a third party's website, without understanding that the picture apparently was being displayed for critical purpose. We've addressed this issue head-on and are issuing apologies everywhere we can, and will also be doing so in our April 2004 issue. And, to further our apology, we're also making a contribution to The Veterans of Foreign Wars.
Please also note that this image was not used in an advertisement for SOCOM II, and was used without SOCOM II publisher Sony Computer Entertainment America or developer Zipper Interactive's knowledge or approval. We used it in our own editorial section, on our own efforts.
We'll try to be sure not to repeat this type of error again.
Sincerely,
Dan "Shoe" Hsu
Editor-in-chief, Electronic Gaming Monthly
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's great to see that they've owned up and admitted that what they did was incredibly insenstive and in revolting taste. A contribution to the Veterans of Forieign Wars fund is also a great way of saying "We're sorry".
Kudos to EGM for taking responsability. +1 respect.
Now they'd better not do it again.
Especially seeing how the probably paid for the picture...
Oh well. At least they're honest about their collective stupidity.
I'm glad EGM had the sense of responsibility to apologize - seeing this effort, I'm willing not to tread any further and start arguing about intentionallity.