I’ve seen this question in a few places recently (including in the Joystiq tipline), and I just had a reader send it directly to me via my inbox. Over the last few days, a few people have asked me and other game journalists and sites something akin to the following: “The Entertainment Software Association supports the horrible and ignorant SOPA/PIPA legislation. The ESA also runs the Electronic Entertainment Expo, or E3, convention every year in LA. So will you, Mike, as a guy who writes about games and technology, decline to cover E3 this year, in order to show your opposition to SOPA?”

Most of the times I’ve seen this question this week, it’s actually been about Joystiq, not me personally. And before I actually talk about this, I should say that I’m not in enough of a position of leadership at Joystiq where I even have the ability to choose whether we as a site cover a show or not. I have covered E3 for Joystiq for the past few years, and if I’m asked to go again, I definitely will, but plans haven’t been made yet and I don’t know what my plans are. So all of what I’m about to say about this is completely my own opinion — I can only speak for myself in this case, which is why this is here and not on Joystiq itself. I am pretty sure, knowing most of my talented colleagues on Joystiq and elsewhere, that a lot of games writers will agree with me, but of course their opinions are their own.

At any rate, here’s the answer: No, I will not decline to cover the ESA or E3. Yes, if I’m lucky enough to be asked to cover the convention, I will. And no, of course I’m not in favor of SOPA or PIPA, or any other legislation that puts the interests of a few selfish idiots over the benefits of so many.

But Mike, you say, the ESA supports this stupid legislation openly! Why not send a message to them by refusing to cover their convention?

Well, for a few reasons. First of all, and most obviously, E3 is the biggest game event (in the United States, at least) of the year. Many of the biggest game reveals and interviews (both in my career and in the industry overall) happen at E3, and any journalist who stays away from it for a political reason is simply not doing his or her job. My first duty is to my readers, and my readers want to know about E3, and I have a duty to tell them about it. Not to mention that doing my job makes me money I need to live. So there’s that.

Now, you might suggest that if all of the journalists decide to heroically pull out of E3, maybe the ESA will get a message, or maybe they’ll even cancel it. But honestly, I don’t think that will happen. Because here’s the real thing about E3: It’s not really about the journalists anyway.

I’ve gone to E3 for three or four years now, and guess how much I’ve ever paid to the ESA? Zero dollars. I’ve gone in with a big shiny press badge around my neck, I’ve had the lunches they offer to the press every day, I’ve sipped their coffee and eaten their free cookies, I’ve sat down on their couches and hiked all over the giant convention center that they rent out every year. I’ve cost them way more money than they’ve ever seen from me. If you really want me to stick it to the ESA financially, you should suggest I go to E3, and take up as much space in their convention center as I can. The E3 show isn’t for me — I benefit from it in terms of doing my job, but the ESA isn’t at all dependent on whether I show up or not.

Nope — the ESA is most dependent not on games journalists, but on exhibitors. It’s dependent on the games companies there showing off new titles, on the various accessory manufacturers who pay to rent all those rooms in the convention center, and on the public relations firms that build all of those booths and schedule all of my appointments there. The ESA doesn’t financially benefit from me being there at all. Instead, it’s the companies I cover at E3 that hold the real power. They’re why I’m there too, after all — if the ESA held E3 and none of those game companies showed up, I’d probably stay home and play games.

Now, of course, my press can help sell (or not sell) those companies’ games, and so yes, they’re there spending all of that money on the ESA because they’re trying to get covered by me and the rest of the press. And yes, the ESA does care that I come, but not because it loves me or cares about my opinion. The ESA only cares that I and other journalists show up so that it can sell booth space, and sell memberships to the association, and maintain its status as an influential industry organization. But I don’t affect any of those things directly — again, I work for my readers, and nobody else.

So here’s the deal. Instead of asking me and other journalists to betray both our livelihoods and the readers we serve, you should go to the people that the ESA really cares about: The exhibitors. Already, one studio has decided to not exhibit at E3, and asking other game studios and publishers to do the same would affect the ESA’s bottom line much more, and hopefully convince the organization that its position on SOPA is wrong. I’ll still cover studios, even if they aren’t at E3 — I just saw Red5 at CES, and am really looking forward to Firefall, and will happily write about it whether I see it at E3 or not.

Plus, talking directly to studios and publishers mean you have the power: If they refuse you, you can boycott them or their games until they make a move on the ESA’s stance. Yes, you can boycott my site if you really disagree with my position, but the ESA doesn’t even advertise on my sites, as far as I know. Even if a boycott of Joystiq is super successful, you’re just hurting me and my parent company, not anyone having to do with the ESA.

I’m heartily against SOPA — I’ve called my congresspeople, I’ve talked to my friends and family about how wrong it is, and I support any effort to defeat it. But when you ask me to support SOPA by not doing my job at E3, you’re asking the wrong thing for both of us. The ESA takes its money and power from the game companies that are its members, and if you really want the ESA to pull a turnaround, you should instead be talking to them. Good luck to you — I look forward to seeing (or writing) a post on Joystiq saying that the ESA, due to pressure from its members in the industry, has decided to change its position on this heinous legislation.

Update: And there you go. I will say this about the whole SOPA deal — obviously it took some pretty heinous legislation to bring down the Internet’s fury, but God bless the American legislative system on this one. People talked, power listened.