Welp, this didn’t take long.

It’s especially interesting that they laid off a lot of people who were the only ones in their particular job, leaving entire jobs uncovered. I suspect this comes right before shutting them entirely or doing it all “with AI” 🤮.

Sad in particular about Alice Bell. She was fantastic, and it always felt like she kept the site going through all the shit of recent years. Plus being the driving force behind their podcast (the Electronic Wireless Show) of course also spells doom for that one though I hope that like Indiescovery they go rogue and run it independent of the site.

Bleak times. Fuck IGN.

10 points

You guys are still reading IGN?

permalink
report
reply
44 points
*

You guys are still reading IGN?

No, that’s why they buy other sites.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

to add their technological and cultural distinctiveness to their own

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

The recent layoffs at the company have been swift and impactful. Notably, several unique positions were affected, leaving entire job functions uncovered. This move suggests a potential restructuring or shift towards automation using artificial intelligence, which is concerning.

In particular, the departure of Alice Bell is deeply regrettable. Her exceptional contributions were instrumental in maintaining the company’s operations during challenging times. Additionally, her leadership in the Electronic Wireless Show podcast was pivotal. It is hoped that, similar to Indiescovery, the podcast team will continue independently to preserve its value.

These developments paint a concerning picture of the company’s future.

permalink
report
reply
227 points

I hate how this is phrased as “redundancies”. IGN literally JUST bought these outlets, they haven’t had time to dig into and examine the organizations they acquired; it’s just straight into the Corpo playbook of “lay people off and let the dust settle where it may”.

These are people, not “redundancies”. They contributed in the old organization, and they could contribute in the new, but they never even got the chance.

permalink
report
reply
55 points

Especially because from what was said, the employees were told the sites will be bought “as is”, so everyone gets to keep their jobs.

It’s in situations such as these where C-suites being required to also apply to them what they apply to others would be nice:

  • CFO or CEO at IGN has to quit. Won’t hurt them much, but eh.
  • CEO at Reedpop has to sell themselves (into slavery I suppose, plus it fits what they do to their workers).
permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

Redundancy means that they get paid for being made to leave the company. That terminology is used because it’s different from being fired.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

It amounts to the same thing, though. Whether you got a few months pay to carry you through or not you still lost your income, and there’s no guarantee you’ll ever find a job that matches it in pay, benefits, etc.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Read the guys comment again though. They say their issue is with calling them “redundancies” in a language sense. But it’s not sugar coating it or anything, that’s the legitimate term for what happened.

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

It’s basically just British terminology for layoffs with a severance package.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

There never was a chance.

Generally when companies like this are bought it isn’t to acquire the talent. That’s legitimately what needs to be taken into account when it comes to things like antitrust. You want to buy out this company, are you buying it because you want their talent to join with yours to make something better? Cool. We’ll let you do that provided you do it today fair and competitive manner.

Any other reason for wanting to buy this company is going to need to be pretty heavily scrutinized.

permalink
report
parent
reply
93 points

Oh they’re redundancies to IGN alright, they literally bought their competitors and got to kill competition with zero resistance

permalink
report
parent
reply
51 points

There used to be laws against this shit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

people also used to vote in their own interests

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

You generally don’t buy a business and then figure all of that out. You figure it all out and then buy the business. IGN already would have 100% known the managerial setup at these companies.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

What should happen is not always what does happen. There are tons of examples of brain dead companies and rich people buying companies they dont understand and then ruining them because of that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Is there anything pointing to that in this case?

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

You now have a chance to follow some of their independent blogs, support them that way, fuck all this big companies, they are laying of everyone for ai

permalink
report
reply
28 points
*
  1. Governments should only allow big mergers in exceptional circumstances
  2. Big conglomerates should be broken up

They are bad for the workers, and bad for the consumers. Half of the time, also bad for the shareholders (according to an old McK study). Lives are being ruined for billionaires to gamble for more billions.

permalink
report
reply

Games

!games@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

Community stats

  • 8.8K

    Monthly active users

  • 4.3K

    Posts

  • 89K

    Comments