Kyle Orland's latest 'Media Coverage' column over at GameDaily covers the concept of sourcing in video game journalism, and does a good job of rounding up some of the complexities that I've also been musing about in recent weeks/months.

Here's some vital points, with (apologies) some quotes from me once again: "When essentially similar information is being reported on numerous sites, figuring out which version to link to can be tricky. Gamasutra's Simon Carless says his writers "make a serious attempt to work out who actually broke the story... if it's original reporting. More to the point, we go back to the original press release or statement if that exists so as to work from primary evidence." Failing to perform this due diligence can lead to problems, and Carless pointed out in a GameSetWatch post on a questionably-sourced Joystiq post that turned into a public gaffe."

Orland continues: "Even when the correct credit is given, the person who originated a story is not always the one who ends up getting the benefit from it. Carless notes that web users would often rather read a two-paragraph weblog summary of a ten-page interview than the interview itself. "There's often little incentive to click through to that external site, yet the external site conducted the interview or originally reported the fact," he said. Game|Life's Kohler summed up the frustration involved with this misplaced crediting. "When people link to my stuff, but they link to Joystiq's coverage of it or whatever, well, that pisses me off," he said." Food for thought, eh?