Jim, I think if there are formats out there that give the same thing, they should be covered equally. And if you look at what I wrote, which you quoted, you basically say the same as I did in regards to people making their own decisions.

And as far as trial and error, wouldn't you rather be wrong about the cheaper in cost player than the $500.00 player?

LOL

I cannot for the life of me understand why studio support is touted as an advantage of one format over the other: it's so fundamentally antithetical to the foundations of consumerism that the ethics of any pundit who touts it MUST be called into question.

As consumers, we are concerned only with buying a product that fulfills our needs in an economical fashion. As a dual-format owner, I feel that both formats accomplish this goal for me.

If, say, tomorrow, all studios decided to call it quits and begin releasing only on VCD, would pundits begin advocating an exodus en masse to this format? It is, after all, more widely supported in hardware than ANY other medium other than compact disc, and would, under my hypothetical situation, have the most studio support (it may, in fact, actually have this).

If you want to argue that Blu-Ray has advantages in terms of disc size and maximum bitrate, fine. That is logical and supports consumers. But Bill's two fundamental reasons for supporting Blu-Ray are actually against consumer interests because they support corporate collusion. It's a crime against the intellect, really.

I'll have to assume that you applied this courtesy to Harry Knowles before your infamous smear campaign?, as I would find it strange that you can easily jump on your soapbox to refute another man's opinion but if somebody else does...then it's "crappy" and "low". I realize the difference between implying that one man is wrong and one man is a schill but the end result is the same...a superflously negative aura surrounding what should be an exciting venture. Speaking as a reader, Bill's rant against HD was a big slap in the face. With the recent price drop on the Toshiba player or as Bill smears: the "fire sale" (applying the same logic, Sony is now having a "fire sale" with the PS3s), I was finally able to afford to dip my toe in the HD waters and I was, frankly, very excited about it. A mere hours later of unpacking my player, I make the mistake of checking up on HD news on thedigitalbits. Who the hell are you to sour my experience? For me, this is not about HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray but about getting the best out of my passion for film in the most financially feasible way. Not all of us are surrounded by provided hardware and software where we can easily deem a format superior without dropping a hardearned dollar and that's where I find fault with Bill Hunt's agenda. It's the lack of reverence. The common response from BH that "it is our responsibity to say the truth to our readers to make their decisions easier" is BS, a selfish stance on a area where he should feel like he has a duty to be impartial. And comparing HD-DVD to "Divx" or "Anamorphic Widescreen" as a past example of impartiality is ridiculous on it's own terms for the obvious reasons. For a lot of us, this format war doesn't boil down to which HD format should I choose, but more: which HD format can I choose...

Sounds great, can you point me to your petition to get every studio to release HD Movies on VMD, Xbox Live Marketplace, and on D-VHS? You're so pro-consumer that its obvious you fight for the market place to decide. I would love to pick up Half Baked on VMD in HD. Thanks.

Geoff, you need to ban Bill Hunt from DVD Talk! He is upsetting many of us. I avoid TDB because of Hunt's rants about how stupid I was to purchase an HD-DVD player, and how smart he is to own a Blu-Ray. I am genuinely sick of his egomaniacal shilling.

I would still like to know if the Las Vegas "party" for the Blu-Ray supporters includes the wives also. I know that Sarah Hunt works hard on TDB. Does she get to go to the birthday "party" with the guys? Or is this Las Vegas party for guys only?

Did Mike Hunt also get invited?

Now that the subject of this thread is actually involved I am going to make one last post and leave this “discussion”. As it hurts all of us, directly and indirectly!

Yes Josh, I am perfectly familiar with the concept you pointed.


Alas, you chose to pick only a portion of the full story (addressing and drawing parallels concerning only one of the sides when de facto TDB was not the only party involved). Furthermore, your analogy can not be applied here as Bill Hunt isn’t paid to remain neutral or be objective (certainly not according to someone else’s criterion or ethics code) unlike those CBS reporters you give as an example. This is just the reality of it.

As I noted earlier Bill Hunt has made his choice, stated why, and is enduring plenty of criticism for it. Whether or not, you, I, or anyone else agrees with his position is an entirely different matter. It has nothing to do with what is/was being thrown his way throughout this thread! So, let's leave it as it is, time will show whether he was a visionary or manipulator.

Agreed?

Furthermore, the one reason I’ve always supported DVDTALK during the years is because I found it to be the one place where pluralism was always held in high regard. No matter what the subject or its origin TALK has always been a place where we discuss, argue, and disagree with each other in a civilized manner! We look for different angles in every story, every debate. That is why I stated in my post that I respect Bill Hunt’s stance even though I also happen to disagree with some of his writings. It was a natural extension of my experience here. I believe he has the right to say what he believes in just as I believe that you have the right to criticize him. Plain and simple!

So, I find it very strange that you, a person who often claims neutrality, chose to bring ethics as an argument in this discussion and counter my conviction that Mr. Hunt has the right to express his (biased) preference, no matter how “conflicting", without taking the slightest of interest in the fact that just a few posts before you he was called a whore. This is not how TALK disagrees. It also certainly isn't how one's credibility or objectivity for that matter is questioned!!

Lastly I, just like everyone else here, constantly read to find more about what interest me. I come to TALK daily to discuss with other equally passionate members new cinema, new technologies, new trends. I don’t come here to create enemies, I come to learn.

As cliché as it may sound to you I also value the opinions of those I disagree with just as I hope that others value what I have to say!

After all, I think it is the ethical thing to do!

Sincerely,

Pro-B

Because banning someone with a differing opinion than yours is certainly a step towards that journalistic integrity I've read so much about.

I guess it sucks to have to deal with replies from the actual person you're bashing. It's so much more fun when it's one-sided, isn't it?

Fact of the matter is, if the situation was identical EXCEPT Bill was backing HD-DVD instead of Blu-Ray, it would be a frickin' lovefest here.

Now I don't know what Bill's journalistic background is; maybe it's zilch. For that matter, I don't know if he even considers himself a journalist. Whatever the case may be, I've never taken his daily column as anything but editorial with release dates thrown in. I don't see him misrepresenting facts. He's giving his opinion on what those facts mean. It's up to you to read, not read it, believe it, not believe it, etc. (And BTW that's the difference between Bill and AICN/Knowles, where Knowles was GROSSLY misrepresenting facts).

Also, I have no love for Sony. I have owned considerably more products from Toshiba in my life than from Sony. I have no allegiance to either format. They are what they are - a means to an end. Sooner or later we won't need both.

Having said that, I've never read anything in Bill's opinion posts that I wasn't already thinking myself. And I didn't need Sony to pay me off to arrive at those thoughts - how about that! From a logical standpoint (meaning devoid of emotional attachment to a format), it is my opinion that HD-DVD can't win at this point. They might stick around for a while, but they're not going to eliminate Blu-Ray.

I do think it's very unfortunate how this situation has been handled. Regardless of what anyone thinks of Bill, using one's position as head of a rival site to publicly mudsling ultimately seems vindictive and petty. Why not write an editorial instead and plaster it on the front page?

Has Bill ever attacked DVDTalk or its representatives publicly on his site? If not, why attack him? Is DVDTalk now the self-appointed vanguard of journalistic integrity across the web? That could be exhausting.

I suspect the root cause of this whole thing has largely nothing to do with the whole "journalistic integrity" debate. But that's just my opinion.

Now pardon me, I have to see if my check from Sony arrived...

Geoff rocks! Bill sucks!

Geoff has a right to express his opinion on his own website. Bill Hunt came here to attack Geoff's opinion and then to rant some more about his beloved Blu-Ray. Some of us are tired about how this bully-boy continues to hard-sell his Blu-Ray magic box. I hope he has a wonderful birthday party in Las Vegas with the Sony camp. They can all conspire together to figure out new ways to block studio films from being distributed on HD-DVDs. Everyone knows Sony has the biggest dick in town. Hopefully, this corporate tyrant will be knocked-out before this format war is decided.

I think if he's already taken a stand that BD is the format to go with then it's not as big a deal. Imagine this scenario, he announces that he's having a BD sponsored party and then the very next day says, "BD is the best format to go with, HD-DVD doesn't have a chance" then I think all of us would say that is definitely a no-no. He's been, for the most part, constantly making posts leaning towards BD for a quite a while now and to me that's his choice as it's his website and his blog. He makes some good arguments for it and doesn't just shill for it.

People, of course, will say that this was from the outset planned. But, How do we know? Only until this war started that we can say that he's been biased in any sense of the word. I have never noticed him being biased before in the previous years of him posting. Everyone here can say emphatically that he isn't just shilling for BD as he's posted some very good arguments for it. He hasn't just said my disc is better than your disc.

Some of the posters who claim that they are format neutral are simply not and that includes reviewer or two. Let's face facts, this is an HD-DVD leaning forum. I've seen more than enough postings to warrant that opinion. I will agree with Bill that Geoff should have contacted Bill to clarify what that party was all about. Although at the same time, Bill, you did note that you were having the HD-DVD people at another event but don't mention the fact in the email. You only mention that you're having a BD party.

One definite point is that Bill doesn't ignore HD-DVD in his postings. He often posts what's coming out for HD-DVD and doesn't really say anything negative in those postings. When I go to his site, I don't get the feeling that I'm getting hit with "Blu-Balls," or anything like that. If he ignored HD-DVD completely, only then I can go and say "oh this guy is Blu all the way" and this party wreaks of payola, but I don't think anyone can. I mean hell we can say hey Geoff is a Jesus freak and we don't want that conservative bullshit posted on the site after all of those damn Jesus Camp ads. I think that any site that is accepting ads is never, ever going to be completely impartial. It's impossible. In this case, Bill had chosen BD as his choice to win the war. Would we do the same back when he was choosing DVD as the winner of the DVD-Divx war? I doubt it.

This war is bringing out the worst in all of us. It's dividing people who normally wouldn't be divided and causing us to choose sides when we shouldn't have to. I think both Geoff and Bill are equally at fault, one for making accusations and one for not clarifying what the intentions were.

That depends on your opinion. I have read several editorials by Bill where it seemed clear to me that his opinions on the current state of HD were formed by downplaying the positives of HD while highlighting the negatives and downplaying the negatives of BD while highlighting the positives.

I'm one of those reviewers and I will admit, when I first bought HD DVD, Blu-ray had just come out and looked like crap. I got into a million senseless fights on AVS, here, and other forums, and one day I realized that I was spending more time arguing than I was watching this format that I was fighting so vehemently for. And so I generally dropped it. Then BD started picking up and I got a PS3 at a good price and have been reviewing both since. I recently wrote an article (Geoff linked to it earlier) where the main point was: Don't worry about the format war. Just buy the movies you like. Let the studios sort it out. And I think, if you'll look at my posting history, you'll find that as time has gone on I've taken an increasingly impartial stance, calling both formats on their faults and praising both when they do something right. Am I quick to call out people who twist the facts to make their format of choice look better and the other format worse? Yes, of course I do, because twisting the facts is wrong and has no place here. But I do it for people who twist on either side, not just against BD supporters. And having read Bill's site, I would say that if he were a regular poster here, I'd be calling him out for ignoring many of the positives of HD. Just as I would call out Harry Knowles for more than just this format war, believe me.

As for the other reviewers, well, I'll let them speak for themselves, but I think they do their best to be as impartial as they can be.



Bill has spent plenty of time downplaying any positive news HD garners, which to me smacks of bias far more than just ignoring it outright. And the party just cements that view. It's not even an issue of whether or not Bill is actually a shill. I don't think he's getting paid to support Blu-ray. But if that's really true, then he shouldn't be accepting offers of funding like this from the BD group. It would actually bolster his reputation if he mentioned how the BD group came to him and offered to pay for a party, and he said, "No, I don't want people to think I'm getting paid for my opinions. You just keep making great BD releases and I'll keep on praising them." The fact that he did accept, as well as the fact that he's a contributing writer to Blu-ray's website, looks improper. And that's what is important. Bill talks about his reputation, but doesn't stop to think how this will affect it. I have no interesting in attacking Bill personally. I did not once say "This party is 100% proof that Bill is getting paid to support BD." But the reason journalists avoid this kind of thing entirely is they don't even want the rumor of it to start. Reputations are fragile, and this is exactly the kind of thing that can ruin them. And by "this" I do not mean Geoff's reaction, I mean Bill's choice to accept the party in the first place.



As I mentioned before, Geoff shields the reviewers from advertisers and studios and has never once told us what to write, or made us change a review because it was unpopular and/or would lose him revenue.

I agree that the bickering and infighting that this war has engendered is absurd. That is exactly why I wrote the HD Talk column about neutrality, why I own both formats, and why I don't give a flying fuck who wins and who loses, as long as I get the best PQ, lossless sound, all DVD extras ported, and new HD extras created.

I'm still waiting for Mr. Hunt to come out with his statement saying he has and never will accept money or gifts from the Blue Ray group.

Since he is refusing to do so I will have to come to my own conclusion.

Very interesting point, and one to which I'd like to know the answer, as well.

For what it's worth, I agree with each and every word of this post...and this is from someone who generally agrees with Bill's conclusion that either both formats will limp along or that Blu-ray will win out.

You're focusing too heavily on the fact that Bill has taken a hardline position on the format war, and although that has been mentioned in a handful of posts, that's not what this thread is about at all.

Yes, Bill is a blogger, not a journalist, and he has every right to pick whatever side he wants. Still, bloggers with that sort of editorial bent should still adhere to a standard of ethics.

I don't think Bill's recent editorials were the result of any sort of payola, and I'd even tend to doubt that the Blu-ray camp throwing his site a birthday party would have any impact on the opinions he expresses, but if you paint yourself as someone pro-consumer who arrived at an opinion independently and based solely on the facts, you cannot let one faction of the monolithic corporations you cover throw you a birthday party. I can't fathom how this can even be in dispute.

As for so many posts overlooking the HTF's role in all of this, I don't think that they should've accepted the offer of an anniversary party either, but I don't consider that an analogous situation because it's a discussion forum with a wide variety of voices. I realize that The Digital Bits has other contributors as well, but everything there is filtered through a single overriding voice.

How dare you come into this forum and spew hate for it's founder like this. Especially considering you are a poor, pathetic version of a shill, who hides the fact he's on the take worse than Alan Freed.

I always knew your site was a worthless, meritless, and meaningless corporate blog, and your action have done nothing to prove that otherwise.

At least Geoff has the balls to have a forum where his readers can interact with him. You come in here with your hit and run tactics and probably post on your blog to readers about how unfair Geoff is. You don't allow for democratic interaction on your site unless the speaker has his wallet open.

Your site has no relevance anymore, but I guess you just bought some with BD, didn't you Billy Boy? Jealousy is an ugly, ugly thing.

I am not upset. This is the internet!

Why ban someone over a disagreement. I could see if words used were really inappropriate or something but not because one disagrees with the other.

This sounds like a personal attack on a DVDTalk member (Bill Hunt). Post reported.

Great post!

Excellent post.

I have no problem with Bill preferring Blu-ray or voicing that opinion on his web site. The issue here is that he posts time and again about the virtues of Blu-ray, and then the Blu-ray Disc Association throws him a big party. Do you really not see the conflict in that?

The fact that he also writes for an official Blu-ray promotional site, which he is undoubtedly paid for, and then continues to post about the format war in his blog without disclosing that information, is also a violation of journalistic ethics.

This isn't a debate about freedom of speech or diversity of opinions. It's a matter of journalistic conflict of interest, and from your posts I don't think you're quite understanding the meaning of that term.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest

"A conflict of interest is a situation in which someone in a position of trust, such as a lawyer, insurance adjuster, a politician, executive or director of a corporation or a medical research scientist or physician, has competing professional or personal interests. Such competing interests can make it difficult to fulfill his or her duties impartially. A conflict of interest exists even if no unethical or improper act results from it. A conflict of interest can create an appearance of impropriety that can undermine confidence in the person, profession, or court system."

Regardless of whether there really was any improper behavior here or not, it has the appearance of impropriety, which is itself hugely damaging. It doesn't matter whether the party is thrown before or after he wrote to support Blu-ray, because that just forces the question of whether the Blu-ray camp promised to throw him a big party later if he wrote something nice about them.

Again, it doesn't matter whether that's the way it actually happened or not. Bill has put himself in a position where he's created the appearance of impropriety, and that itself is the problem.

That's how I read it too.

The problem here it seems is that Bill Hunt supports Blu-ray. I guarantee most of you HD-DVD lovers wouldn't be calling him a shill and insulting his site if he supported HD-DVD instead. I'm just surprised and disgusted at the level of personal attacks directed at Bill Hunt. Isn't it one of the forum rules barring personal attacks against other posters?

One of the main reasons I visit this site daily, aside from their excellent and deep assortment of disc reviews, is the fair and balanced tone of everything here, from reviews to trend coverage to the forums themselves.

When I read Geoff's original post, I didn't read it as a personal attack on Bill Hunt or a personal beef. I read it as an understandably pissed off reaction to the rapidly increasing trend in this format war of passing off misinformation as fact and press releases as reality.

Bill Hunt has every right to vote in favor of Blu-ray and slant his website every which way he can to support that stance. But when you see the BDA throwing a party for him and hiring him to write on their new pro-BD website .... sorry, but that just gives things a whole different spin. I don't care if its business as usual in the industry or not: It makes me not believe another word he writes, because I'll be forever questioning why he wrote it and why he was given the information, etc.

And that kind of skepticism ends up tainting every DVD-related website, the way all newspapers take a hit in credibility whenever a reporter is busted for fabricating stories or behaving inappropriately.

So props to you, Geoff.