Earlier today, Insider Gaming received emails from several Ubisoft employees that two of its studios were shutting down and hundreds of employees would be affected. Subsequently, after corroborating said information, we ran with those stories.
This is normal journalism. It's a normal practice - you get news from sources, you corroborate, you try to get a comment from the company, and you publish.
After some of these stories went live, Ubisoft contacted us to say that the information was under an embargo (which IG never received), which, frankly, is weird but understandable, since employees should be told first by their employer. However, before each story went live, the affected teams were informed of the impacts, and that's how we found out; it just wasn't a company-wide announcement yet. Sure, there were probably a few people who were affected and didn't know about the layoffs/changes, but it has NEVER been the media's job to protect a company.
Developers find out about layoffs all the time via the media, and I even know of instances of journalists pursuing a story, texting/emailing developers BEFORE their dreaded all-hands meeting to say they would be laid off in a matter of hours. The fact is, it is shit to report on layoffs, but ultimately, it's a part of our job.
Am I glad we published articles on layoffs today? Hell no. But I am glad that we did what we were supposed to do.
Personally, I think as an industry, we're running into quite dangerous ground when we start abiding by embargoes about layoffs, but even more so when we publish the info like we learned info from sources rather than the company itself... But maybe that's just me.
@TgBjorn@_Tom_Henderson_ They announce everything but a remake update. Someone should tell them that they're publicly traded and say they have a fiduciary obligation to disclose information like that.