On the subject of a WB-Games boycott

Alright so I mentioned prior to this weeks treatment that considering the current position of WB Games and their refusal to explain where exactly the non-US purchases of the so-called "charity" DLC are going, I'd be boycotting coverage of WB Games titles until the situation is resolved. Some people didn't like that, I'd like to explain my position and why it would be clearly unethical for me to critique WB Games titles in the current circumstances.

As you're aware, I'm currently undergoing treatment for Stage 4 cancer, which is in most cases terminal. I'm doing well considering, but things are always uncertain when dealing with this disease. As a result when it comes to charity efforts related to cancer, I'm particularly sensitive to those topics. I've gone out of my way to avoid exploiting my disease for any sort of gain, I've never asked for a dime and when it comes to charity fund-raising efforts I'm especially careful to try and support those which are honest and do some real good. Cancer basically took over my life 3 years ago and it continues to control it to this day. I dont know if I'll ever be rid of it.

Currently, WB Games is selling a DLC for Shadow of War which "memorializes" a senior member of Monolith, the developer of the game, who passed from cancer last year. They promised 70% of the revenue would go to the family of said person (the rest presumably to the retailers, because apparently WB couldnt be bothered to negotiate with those retailers to have the rest also given to a charitable cause....), but in the fine print and confirmed by the Shadow of War Twitter they said that only 44 of the 50 states of the US and no territory outside of the United States would result in a donation. When questioned about this their 1 sentence statement simply read "Neither WBIE nor Monolith will profit from any sales of the Forthog Orc-Slayer DLC regardless of the territory in which that DLC is sold."

This statement is utterly insufficient. It directly contradicts their previous statement on the matter and does not explain where this money will be going. WBs flat out refusal to address this and the apparently unwillingness of games media to follow up and investigate what is going on, looks to me like it's going to result in WB profiting from the death of a colleague.

So I ask you, bearing all of this in mind. How could I as someone with cancer, possibly critique a WB Game, especially one that is DIRECTLY PROFITING from the death of a man from cancer, without being outrageously biased against the publisher and the game? How could that possibly be ethical?

The answer is, it can't. The correct course of action is to recuse myself from critiquing their games. I'll keep covering their actions as a business, I'll keep on this story in the vain hope that at some point we might get a straight answer out of them but there's no way I could possibly, ethically, look at this game from a neutral position.

Some people laugh at the idea of "ethics" in this industry. I don't. I take them very seriously and I try my best to lead by example. A boycott isn't necessarily meant to change anything. They more often than not fail to make a difference. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't give it your best shot and stand up for your principles.