This seems like one of those times where the leadership believes that there's actually value in the name of the publication. When it comes to game news, there's hardly any value in the name.
They aren't the New York times of game news. I'm not going to think oh look a kotaku article just because of the name, I went there because of the quality of journalism that was there.
If the quality of journalism falls or has fallen then I won't go there anymore. Simple as that. An editor like this I will probably follow to the next place that they start writing from.
I’m not going to think oh look a kotaku article just because of the name, I went there because of the quality of journalism that was there.
lol, I see that name and it actually lowers the likelihood I'll read it. They do have good info, but sometimes take it too far with editorializing. That said, they're not polygon, which I'll just skip.
Guides are a major source of cash for shitty games websites. So it makes sense, for a journalist who cares about news to resign when the bosses want to race to the bottom of the barrel to try and be the lowest common denominator.
What does this even mean? And shouldn't it be a herb? (Not trying to correct you on it, I know you're just quoting, but I can't figure out how or why you would say an herb.)
A/an before a word is dependant on how the subsequent word is pronounced, not spelled. So for that sentence, the implication is that it's pronounced closer to "erb", thus "an" to precede instead of "a". Another example that's a bit counterintuitive is "one" being pronounced like "won", so you'd get "a one time thing" rather than "an one time thing".
Well I think others have already sufficiently explained the grammar rule that applies to "an herb," so I won't mention it further.
As far as what it means, who even knows? However, it is clear from the context that it is meant to be a negative remark. This person made this tweet while upset after just resigning because the Kotaku CEO wants the authors to focus on video game guides rather than news, which the EIC says is in direct conflict "with her vision for the company." Saying anything unclear about the CEO with that context is obvious that it would be meant in a negative or disparaging way.
They seem to be pivoting because all of their sites views are tanking. I don't really know why but maybe because they haven't changed and people got bored? I only really read kotaku when it shows up here.