And of course the rabbit hole gets deeper and deeper.
Games Journalism! Wainwright/Florence/Tomb Raider/Eurogamer/Libel Threats/Doritos
- Thread starter papersleeves
- Start date
- Status
And of course the rabbit hole gets deeper and deeper.
BetaTeaser
Banned
I think the age of Internet Journalism has come to an end.
Everything I'm seeing is based on emotion rather than fact, from both (or are there more at this point) sides.
That's not what reporting is about.
Everything I'm seeing is based on emotion rather than fact, from both (or are there more at this point) sides.
That's not what reporting is about.
You linked a video which has "Created by Kotaku's Credibility and Zoe's Vagina" in the title screen? :\
EDIT: A link to a reddit post about the video, I should say, sorry.
Thought Matt kinda covered that in the post "But the core of this call for transparency comes back to an absolute lack of trust. Yes, we all know each other. Yes, most of us have shared a drink with countless developers over the years. If you dont trust us not to let that influence our work, then no form of transparency is going to change that". Though I think we may be talking about a different form of transparency, I'm mostly thinking about all the cozy journalist conspiracy stuff, obviously transparency on conflicts of interest is important.
What has happened with Zoe Quinn is a pretty clear example of this?
eudaemonic
Member
You know... there's allegations of people sleeping with other people and whatnot but in my entire time of being around journalists, the thing that still gets under my skin is the one who couldn't attend a press event without their dog. I heard the dog had separation anxiety or something and would flip it's shit when they were not around. So they took it everywhere. And yes, this included bars.
Maybe I'm just an asshole though for thinking you shouldn't bring your pet to interviews.
Maybe I'm just an asshole though for thinking you shouldn't bring your pet to interviews.
Gsak
Member
That was stupid, agreed. But what about the actual content of the video and what it describes?
Gsak
Member
Then you need to put some perspective in your priorities when it comes to journalism malpractices.
EDIT: Double-posted by accident, sorry!
So, if it was a kid, it would be just as bad?
Or if it was a service dog, would you still have a problem?
I could understand if the animal is untrained, and just made a lot of noise how distracting it would be, but if it was doing nothing to you besides distracting you, then it might not be so bad.
CambriaRising
Member
Yeah seriously. If it was a just the facts video it would be easier to take. I watched the whole thing, and there are legitimate questions about conflict of interest here.
badcrumble
Member
I think part of the issue here is that gamerz as a demographic think that sex is a really special and hard thing to get.
So you're saying that anyone who identifies as a gamer has trouble finding sexual partners? Really?
eudaemonic
Member
Sure, there's things I take more seriously; things I've seen first hand. But honestly, the dog story sticks out to me because it was an absurdities highlight. It was the first thing that really hit me that I couldn't take gaming journalism seriously except on a case by case basis.
Service dogs I am 100% behind. Kids? It really depends because there are some scenarios I can understand. But in general, no - you shouldn't have your kid with you while you're working at an event. And yes, the dog was distracting because you had other people coming over to pet the dog while they're in the middle of things. Animals attract people and pull them out of the "I should be working" mode. That's their superpower.
But enough of that. I'll stop derailing with a lesser evil.
Honestly, I couldn't make it all the way through the video. The source for a lot of their video is (supposedly) once again an ex-boyfriend of the person in question, yet they don't question the conflict there because it doesn't serve their goals, they make the jump from some people talking on twitter to "they're clearly in a sexual relationship" more than once, and then go on to suggest that flirting on twitter is evidence for the IGF being in the pocket of a PR firm. I stopped about then. I'm not saying it's baseless or whatever, it just makes me deeply uncomfortable having to listen to that kind of shit.
Now there has actually been quite a bit of criticism of the IGF in the past (and rebuttals), but it didn't center around some people doing the wild thing.
That's the thing. The gaming press has given its readership little reason to trust that they can stay impartial while still being drinking buddies with developers and publishers they are suppose to report on. I mean, how many times have you seen these same journalists running to Twitter to defend every asinine decision a publisher makes? What impression should readers expect when they see that?
The gaming press was absolutely shameful during the run up to the XB1 and PS4 launches. The amount of leeway and excuses these people were giving MS was insane. If I'm not mistaken, the press was neck deep in the "Sony, Too!!" bs as well.
The gaming press has utterly failed to cultivate any sort of trust with their readership.
It's a non-answer to wave off any accountability. It's coming from a standpoint to that industry has done nothing wrong to begin with to warrant scrutiny as he cited in the first part. That really breaks down from there, and yea this should cover everything, not just conspiracy theories.
How so? You would need to clarify because it sounds like you are saying anyone questioning what happened or wanting some answers or it looked into are all grouped together as misogynists or bigots. That's dismissive and wrong just like anyone trying to dismiss what Anita had to say in her videos or those agreeing with her as SJW or femi-nazis. It's part of the us vs. them problem and many aren't even aware they are doing it while some in the industry are "stirring the pot" with it creating distraction. I'm for equality in gaming and it if it leads to better stories great. I just want to play games and if people are fighting to make them better for everyone well then i'm fine with that and was even carrying on a calm discussion in that thread about it before the shit hit the fan. .
The problem with this whole thing thats happening right now is alot of people like me are being dragged into it since it has started to be painted as a "gamer" thing and the ones who did that are these same people that were being brought into question. Now you have a couple different narratives going on and its no surprise (well to me anyways) that the ones that don't want the spotlight shown on them for whatever reasons are resorting to character assassination of all "gamers" to make their discussion invalid. And apparently the only way to not fall into that trap is to totally agree with them and disassociate you from gamers. By painting it as a total us vs. them thing and resorting to that tactic it has killed any reasonable discussion and inquiry into these matters.
You should really just finish watching the video.
the video makes a stronger case without the x is fucking x stuff. there's plenty of stuff about the igf you can talk about that's odd, stuff that's been already talked about and should probably be looked at more by reliable outlets. indie games love to talk big game about how they're the new normal and redefining games and the old industry is dead/dying but with that new position comes greater responsibility and (ideally) greater scrutiny.
i'm not sure if presenting that in a 'check out these connected chatlogs by someone who just dumped a bunch of private info online' + a bunch of spurious gossip based on twitter conversations is a very good format for making that argument.
i'm not sure if presenting that in a 'check out these connected chatlogs by someone who just dumped a bunch of private info online' + a bunch of spurious gossip based on twitter conversations is a very good format for making that argument.
If it's a really small dog and doesn't get in the way of work being done then it should be fine.
It's needlessly insulting, I agree, and I think that only weakens the video (the intro was just plain stupid), however, just because someone is being an asshole about it, doesn't meant they can't make valid points worth discussing.
Paging Leigh Alexander.
Case in point.
No, I'm not making generalizations about the everyone who has questions about journalistic integrity (or whatever we're discussing at this point). We were discussing the post in which Lees' says this:
To which you replied that he was dismissing the criticism by painting anyone who disagrees with them as bigots/misogynists. This isn't the case, the point is that this whole conversation stemmed from the original Zoe Quinn fiasco and false claims that she had sex for positive coverage, and was rooted in misogynist thinking and yet people took it and ran with it and IT (the "evidence") seemed to immediately invalidate the integrity of those involved, with no regard for the troubling source and language used (I mean just look at that video I'm discussing on this page). That's what I'm saying.
I did, I'm sorry it doesn't get any better. It points out problems we already knew the IGF may have (that the voting system lacks clarity), but re-frames them using "evidence" from peoples personal lives, it makes me uncomfortable.
AstroNut325
Member
Whoa... that's pretty damning! Had no idea stuff like this was at play!
It doesn't mean their points are wrong, but it does start off all potential discussion in an antagonistic and insulting manner, which is honestly the last thing we need right now. I'm sick to death of gamers childishly slinging mud at journalists, because they childishly slung mud at gamers, because they... and on and on. They may or may not deserve it, but it doesn't accomplish anything.
If we want to have a mature adult conversation about ethics in games media (and I don't know about you, but I do), we need to approach it like mature adults. Even if many in the games media are lashing out at gamers (actually, especially because of that), we need to make sure that any discussion we try to raise with them is actually in good faith, otherwise we give them a perfectly good reason to just ignore everything we say. And if the points we raise about conflicts of interest are delivered alongside gendered insults against a person who isn't even a journalist, it only gives them more reason to believe that the people who are talking about ethics are misogynists.
If there is any argument in that video worth salvaging, someone needs to do some independent investigations on, to compile in a more factual and less emotional and bile filled manner, before we decide to hold it up as evidence of anything.
That article was incredibly binary thinking. Even the way he responded(adding a question or statement and responding) was binary responses. The cause and effect here isnt empirically simply because of the Zoe stuff(although it did most definitely give a lot of fuel). I think what you are seeing is a bunch of people who have disliked the games media for, since, like years(at least a couple years prior to this topic). Seeing something that makes the media look bad(or questionable) and jumping all over it is just what is going to happen, and when you get mobs of people involved, you get mob violence(I could use real world examples of not painting everyone in a mob as X, because people in a riot do Y, but I doubt people would like that). In this case you are getting mob backlash from, what I believe, is them seeing the press as pro industry and not caring as much about the consumer(since they almost always get blamed, the publishers sometimes get blamed, and the devs are perfect).
So while I agree, there is a lot of quacks out there, using the worst twitter or internet mob examples is, to me, being intellectually dishonest and is begging the question.
Agree wholeheartedly. The only value I see in that video is starting a conversation that ought to be had.
Glass Shark
Banned
Some of the claims are dubious and it's needlessly inflammatory, just like most of the "evidence" around this controversy. I do have serious concerns about relationships (romantic or otherwise) between developers and the press, but I have a hard time taking things like this seriously.
One is a professional writer for Gamasutra, and the other is a random youtuber named "shortfatotaku"
I made this point earlier, but there is a lot of people who are very interested in these stories, and this media blackout of said stories gives viewers to people like "shortfatotaku." If these stories actually got covered by actual journalists, instead of just being pushed under a rug, then "shortfatotaku" wouldn't have an audience and you wouldn't have to deal with crap like this.
It boggles my mind just how poorly this entire situation was handled. Like absolutely mind boggling. I hope it leads to better practices, but alas, I don't think the situation is getting any better right now as the journalists are still trying to attack their own readers. it's funny, because Gamasutra according to Alexa has lost a lot of page views since last year, and a lot of other game sites are starting to lose traffic. This might be because of a post E3 loss, but I do think that people are starting to get fed up with the politics of gaming.
Glass Shark
Banned
Yep. And they jump from "there seems to be some connection to blogs and publications" to "she does PR for blogs and publications" with no explanation of how they got there. I can't find any evidence that Silverstring has any gaming sites as a client, and if there is evidence, the video doesn't present it at all.
That's kind of the point though, it was a blog post that was a personal summation of his experiences trying to discuss it with people asking him about it on twitter.
That it isn't all from Zoe is true, and I'm really not trying to deny that there aren't any problems with the industry/journalism, but people regardless of the source of legitimacy of their grievances are still using the videos/posts from sources that are really kinda disturbing.
Ya, all that video showed was nepotism or at least the probability of nepotism, anything beyond that was highly speculatory. It's funny, if he/she(I'm confused who actually put together this video) left the boyfriend out, the Alex Jones stuff out, and just pointed to the nepotism part he/she would have had some allegations worth pointing out.
robovanburen
Member
It seems like some of the YouTubers or smaller sites leading the charge on these "investigations" want to have it both ways. They want the biggest journalists to be more professional and ethical but are unwilling to follow those standards themselves.
Sure, but turning the part of the riot doing bad stuff as the talking point, while ignoring the actual issues the rioters who are not crazy have issues with, it comes across as Fox Newsish, the people who actually are doing this(the boggers and ect). And it isnt the readers job to assume good or bad intentions, the article should stand up for itself and the one you linked, I just dont think does that. I dont think it helps his case or hurts the "rioters". Just because there is looting, doesn't infer that the whole reason people are rioting is because they can loot.
Of course that's also the rationale behind stuff like "Loose Change." While people with credibility have to work to maintain that credibility--and surely journalistic ethics and professionalism plays into this--this does not mean all ideas about what credibility means to you go out the window if one person doesn't fulfill your high standards. You presumably hold those standards for a reason, right? They're presumably important when determining whether or not to accept claims for example. But not if they're just a youtuber? Then maybe those standards aren't as important to you as you want to believe.
Arkage
Banned
It doesn't surprise me that the Indie gaming scene is largely controlled by a power-consolidating few. Nor that everyone has close connections to each other through work or personal relationships. Nor that awards tend to go to devs that are in certain social circles. It truly is a cesspool of intermingling that can't be removed without destroying the system since the system is simply an extension of the cesspool.
It's funny though, since you would think the articles written against "gamers" and "gamer culture" would be rallying against this kind of stuff. But no, let's focus on death threats from trolls, a thing that has been occurring for the past 20+ years despite people politely asking them to stop. But hey, maybe it will work this time! I can only imagine their next goal after defeating internet trolls will be to defeat internet piracy.
It's funny though, since you would think the articles written against "gamers" and "gamer culture" would be rallying against this kind of stuff. But no, let's focus on death threats from trolls, a thing that has been occurring for the past 20+ years despite people politely asking them to stop. But hey, maybe it will work this time! I can only imagine their next goal after defeating internet trolls will be to defeat internet piracy.
A big part of the problem is this is not new from the media and has been "begging the question" for years with many different smaller incidents. This just seems to be one that the industry is doubling down on. There is zero sense of accountability coming from the media and has been that way for a long time. And when questioned its met with disdain and indignation.
I would just add that most troubling to me is the only out being given by people from this mass generalization on the industries part is seemingly "well if you are one of the good ones then you have nothing to worry about" Mind you these people aren't even clarifying that themselves but their followers and even mods on this very board are using that based on their own context drawn. The problem is the general populace is not necessarily going to infer that and some groups will even use it to further their own agendas. For example that Breitbart piece that popped up trying to rally conservatives into the battle and egging them to side with "gamers" against the big bad feminists out to ruin humanity and make money. This is what this whole thing is sowing and its all disgusting agenda driven. That was the problem that people were trying to raise when these pieces started popping up and its happening now. That's why its not acceptable to go to any group, gender or race and say 'well if you are one of the good ones you're ok"
I think it shows a different perspective and that's good for discussion. I wasn't holding it up as a "gotcha" or anything. I think we have differing views on journalism in general though (I think we discussed some of this before??), so I'm not arguing that what you've said is wrong.
The video being discussed is yet another example of baseless accusations coming from source that is at best dubious and at worst misogynist.
Yet it will make the rounds across the web as if it's the gospel truth and just another nail in the coffin of the magical vagina conspiracy.
If there are improprieties of the kinds being brought by these types of videos, then I'm afraid we'll need some kind of legitimate whistle blower for it to be anything but farts in the wind. Especially when all the accusers still have this raging hate-boner for Zoe Quinn and do nothing to hide that fact.
Yet it will make the rounds across the web as if it's the gospel truth and just another nail in the coffin of the magical vagina conspiracy.
If there are improprieties of the kinds being brought by these types of videos, then I'm afraid we'll need some kind of legitimate whistle blower for it to be anything but farts in the wind. Especially when all the accusers still have this raging hate-boner for Zoe Quinn and do nothing to hide that fact.
I don't keep up with things of this nature. This actually happened? The only thing that can come from more jabs from either extreme is just more poo flinging overal, which ebbs over into this forum and detracts from actual game discussion and tries to tie a more tangential things that happen to people in games industry and invariably leads to a similar back and forth that procudes nothing productive where the only generalization of concensus that occurs is "this sucks and shouldn't occur", but not only for those directly impacted and in general everyone within the hobby due to the overal tone shift in journalism and discussion that follows.
im not arguing what you say im arguing, im just saying that you shouldnt expect "ethics" or "professionalism" from a random youtuber who names themselves "shortfatotaku"
In fact, I think the video was poorly done and is incredibly unprofessional, and ethically bad, but I don't really have any expectations going in because, like said earlier, "shortfatotaku"
I don't consume a youtube video for ethics, like I wouldnt consume porn for the story. If a TV show on a syndicated television show had the same story as porn, I'd be upset more because I hold a tv show higher then a porno with standards.
Gaming Journalists shouldve been covering this story to begin with with journalistic integrity. People want to know more about this stuff, and journalists are refusing to cover it objectively or cover it at all, this forces those interested in said story to depend on videos like these.
That video was trash, I think there is an argument to be made on behalf of the ethics of IGF, but that video does a blatantly terrible job of presenting it. But alas, it's the only source that people can get access too.
I would say it's a discussion that should be had, but I don't know how you could expect anyone to argue in good faith when presented with that. Anyone who doesn't already share your position is either going to dismiss the whole video out of hand, or poke holes in the many flawed arguments, insults, and jumps to conclusions without ever feeling the need to address the points you feel are worth discussing.
I understand why the video was posted, and the parts that are directly provable are enlightening for sure. But it's not a smoking gun. It's an anchor that is going to continue to weigh down the arguments until someone can provide a more objective analysis.
Not to mention the jump from "these people are friends" to "they are probably fucking" to "he did favors for all of her co-workers because they're fucking". Way too much speculation to really do anything with. It does look suspect even if they were only close friends, but to my understanding, the IGF isn't a journalist organization, even if it has some connections to journalists. So potential ethical failings on the part of that organization are worth discussing, investigating, and writing articles about, they don't really indict games journalism as a whole (unless someone has evidence that people in the games media were aware of these issues and are intentionally keeping it silent).
sigh...I really loathe to have to link to it but here is the piece. I really hate that this is where its going and unfortunately now there is going to be a large group of conservatives/fox news watchers etc that are going to be jumping on this bandwagon for their agenda. This is where the scorched earth take the industry wanted to take on this is heading.
Glass Shark
Banned
It's disheartening to see someone post "Finally, a video that takes a reasonable stance on all this stuff!" along with a link to an InternetAristocrat rant. Like... how can I express my concerns without being lumped in with nutjobs like IA and Adam Baldwin?
It's easy to express those concerns but nutjobs like IA and Mr. Baldwin are going to get more attention and press because they're... nutjobs.
Legitimate concerns over reviews and previews in the press have been around for ever in Video Games... but now that the main focus of ire is rooted firmly in a campaign of slut shaming it's gained quite a lot more traction. I wonder why.
The people generalizing all gamers, or trying to paint an ideology against a very specific type of person, are not looking for a discussion, they are talking to their friends and social circle. Those types of articles you are talking about, to me, is nothing more then preaching to the choir. Expecting the people who write like this to change, is like expecting Hanity to stop misrepresenting democrats idea's. What needs to happen is the clicks need to go away, which is happening, just in social media(youtube, twitter, facebook, and ect) which I dont think will result in anything better happening. A industry without a press is a scary industry, so hopefully Kotaku is very serious about conflicts of interest and what not, because a 90 billion dollar industry needs at least a few publications playing watch dog.
- Status