Quote Originally Posted by Ed Oscuro
... but I think that passion and committment to finding things out makes up for youth.
Experience, age on the one hand, and passion and committment on the other hand are not mutually exclusive. Of course you need passion and committment always, but they don't balance out inexperience; intelligence does, however, and more importantly socialization as a journalist.

Politics, economics, movies, and literature give young intelligent journalists opportunities and are not age restricted; but every journalist will tell you how important experience is dealing with issues, people, writing, and even more important, finding the delicate balance between getting information and remaining independent. Young journalists, no matter how intelligent, have to LEARN that, and this isn't done within a couple of years.

Do you seriously think that people raised on the Atari systems will be the game journalists for all time? Education is the answer, make no mistake.
I understand your argument. Of course restricting journalism to the old farts is not an answer; and having EXPERIENCED the Atari age as a condition to be a journalis would be ridiculous. You need a good mix between young and old. You need young journalists for lots of reasons; one is a very different view about games, and in general another attitude about life and cultural youth phenomena.

I completely agree with you that education is an answer. Experience about Atari isn't necessary, KNOWING about it is. However, it isn't enough. Socialization as a journalist beyond writing reviews and previews is important, and that is where experience comes in.

A 26 year old journalist who just started out isn't (as a rule) given the task to interview Rumsfeld in an important matter; Rumsfeld would eat him up and spit him out in 30 secs.

Game companies are run by businessmen with lots of experience. They are slick, they know marketing startegies, they have experience handling the public opinionmakers; you don't let naive intelligent boys and girls play with the big boys who experienced a lot of similar situations, know discussion strategies, having learned how to avoid Qs and give their answers positive spins. The game industry professionalized and became big business, the quality level of game journalists didn't keep up with it.

Why not let Bill Kunkel and other experienced journalists wrap-up the recent E3 with younger journalists? The younger ones could certainly learn a thing or two. Guys who experienced launch dates of different systems over the years as ADULTS and professional observers have a very different attitude than guys who experience hyped marketing startegies for the first time as adults.

Can you imagine ony 25 year olds sitting around talking about politics, movies and music and try to analyze it as well as newer developments?

The game industry became big, very big, and the professional observers have to grow up with it in terms of quality AND age; and like with all reviewers, you need a strong GENERAL educational background in lots of areas -- games, of course, their history, game design, pop-culture, but also economics, history in general and lots of other areas.

Enthusiasm and passion is good, age and professionalization is better. ...and one small aspect of experience and professionalization is to check facts before you publish. A wrong date, a wrong name about something fundamental and important is embarrassing, and even questions (deserved or undeserved) the entire publication.