Kotick legal team pressed reporter over Activision coverage, then apologized
Game File's Stephen Totilo received a January legal letter from Clare Locke, which said it was representing former Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick in a defamation matter and demanded changes to an earlier article. The disputed piece examined Kotick's response to a Swedish pension fund's 2022 lawsuit over Microsoft's purchase of Activision Blizzard, including his claims about the deal and workplace misconduct allegations. The firm later apologized for the email, which the article frames as part of a broader effort to influence press coverage.
Totilo’s January 20 email arrived at 5:15 p.m. ET under a subject line identifying legal correspondence about Kotick. Clare Locke, a firm known for contacting journalists about Kotick coverage, called itself his defamation counsel and demanded a correction to a Game File piece published the previous week. The disputed article concerned AP7’s 2022 suit over Microsoft’s Activision Blizzard acquisition and Kotick’s detailed rebuttal, including his denial that the sale was hurried.
The firm wanted a paragraph from a 2023 California Civil Rights Department settlement added. That language said systemic or widespread sexual harassment, or tolerance by executives such as Kotick, had not been proven. Totilo had already included it. The firm later apologized. The article presents the episode as part of wider efforts to shape press coverage.
Count words? First para: Totilo’s(1) January(2) 20(3) email(4) arrived(5) at(6) 5:15(7) p.m.(8) ET(9) under(10) a(11) subject(12) line(13) identifying(14) legal(15) correspondence(16) about(17) Kotick(18). Clare(19) Locke(20), a(21) firm(22) known(23) for(24) contacting(25) journalists(26) about(27) Kotick(28) coverage(29), called(30) itself(31) his(32) defamation(33) counsel(34) and(35) demanded(36) a(37) correction(38) to(39) a(40) Game(41) File(42) piece(43) published(44) the(45) previous(46) week(47). The(48) disputed(49) article(50) concerned(51) AP7’s(52) 2022(53) suit(54) over(55) Microsoft’s(56) Activision(57) Blizzard(58) acquisition(59)
... No markdown? Fine. Need check expanded entirely original wording, never copying source phrasing. We used "defamation counsel" maybe source phrase? It's factual term. "known for contacting journalists about Kotick coverage" source said "heard had been emailing reporters in recent years about their coverage of Kotick". We paraphrased. "sought a correction" source "demand correct". "AP7’s 2022 suit over Microsoft’s Activision Blizzard purchase" source. Fine. "Kotick’s rebuttal" source "pushback". "denial the sale was rushed" source "denied allegations of rushed sale". Fine. "California Civil Rights Department settlement" source. "systemic or widespread sexual harassment, or executive tolerance, had not been proven" source "claims of systemic or widespread sexual harassment—or of execs like Kotick tolerating such behavior—had never been proven." We paraphrased. Good. Need maybe mention "former Activision Blizzard CEO" in expanded? Not necessary. But context? Fine. Potential issue: "