See you later?

The inaugural Kunkel Awards are over.

Like all good journalists, our three judges were vaguely dissatisfied with the whole thing. “Lots of room for improvement,” one of them told me during an hourlong Google Hangout last weekend.

Both consumers and producers of video game journalism seem to agree with our judges – perhaps the only time all three groups have been in accord. Here are the three major Kunkel criticisms I’ve heard, summarized from emails, tweets, and image boards…

There weren’t enough categories. Could be. We purposefully started small so we wouldn’t screw up big. There weren’t enough criteria for those categories. Could be. We wanted our judges to have the utmost freedom to pick the first-ever winners. (Interestingly, even our judges complained about this. Sometimes too much freedom is as stressful as too little.) There wasn’t enough publicity. Could be. Our goal was modest this first year: No melodrama. Of course, the flip side is not enough drama.

So what happens now? We’re looking for a total of 20 gamers and gaming journalists who want to make the Kunkel Awards better for next year – and maybe improve gaming journalism all year long.

If you’re interested in learning more, contact us. Don’t worry, no heavy lifting required – we’ll handle all the boring logistics. We simply need thoughtful opinions and advice.

Thanks to everyone who nominated an entry, commented on the finalists, supported the Kunkel Awards, and criticized the Kunkel Awards.

Defending the First Amendment and promoting open government are more crucial now than ever. Join SPJ's fight for the publics right to know  either as an SPJ Supporter or a professional, student or retired journalist.