this is basically what happened for myself as well. i feel a lot better about myself these days but really regret the years i spent not empathizing with people who tried to get me to listen.
#GAMERGATE: The Threadening [Read the OP] -- #StopGamerGate2014
- Thread starter besada
- Start date
- Status
this is basically what happened for myself as well. i feel a lot better about myself these days but really regret the years i spent not empathizing with people who tried to get me to listen.
Yeah, I didn't mean that "your friends are your sources" didn't apply to game journalism too. It obviously applies to every field of journalism. Patrick Klepek recently said that every major story he has broken has been because of a source he's actual friends with, and explained why that obviously made sense (when you're giving away information that would get you fired, people prefer to give it to someone they actually trust on a personal AND professional level). I only used political journalism as an example because that is probably what most people see as the most "important" journalism, where ethics is extra important.
But yeah, I agree with you on your last point here. Anyone with a half-decent outlook on this should've backed away from gamergate several days ago. It was obviously toxic from the start, and any legitimate point that were made was always gonna get drowned out.
The legitimate conversation and criticisms have already taken place. They've taken place for I don't know how many hundreds if not thousands of posts. If you still want to bang on that drum, fine, but you should realize that there's simply a limit to how much time you are going to spent on one single point of how much you have been hurt by someone labelling 'gamers' as misogynerds. If you still can't understand the thousands of points people have made, then you should simply say "agree to disagree".
But while you feel the need to discuss the article again and again and again, PEOPLE and especially WOMEN are being harassed and bullied and threatened. Ffs, 4 prominent women have already quit video games culture. So yeah, I think enough is enough and we need to talk about the misogyny and harassment of women in games culture and how to address it instead of one article.
Start by listening to women. Don't start going on a tirade about your hurt feelings when some are being bullied and harassed and driven away from their livelihood and having their personal life hurt.
And here are some tips: http://leighalexander.net/but-what-can-be-done-dos-and-donts-to-combat-online-sexism/
Gamergate wasn't the point where it at all started. It started with Quinn and continued with Sarkeesian and then Alexander wrote the article and then Gamergate occured. You played into the hand of the ones who were harassing women in the games industry.
That's true. But banning Patreon was implicitly rewarding the harassers.
People have unrealistic expectations of games media. I wonder what happened that caused such a divide among the consumer and media over the last 3 years. I've noticed this tension bubbling under the surface for some time now. In the last two years, I've noticed more and more folks having mistrust for them. I guess you had the Kane and Lynch shit. The doritopope stuff. I'm sure someone could write an outline of the last 5 years. Is it because people in this hobby are just more vocal/demanding? Is it because the media in this industry do a poor job?
Either way, I do feel that what people are asking is pretty unrealistic.
I'm not even sure it's anything resembling corruption at the root of it just so much as a growing number of individuals starting to feel alienated as they see the media representing them (personally) less and less the more "gamers" become a highly fractured group. "Corruption" is just one way to assign a source of blame for this.
What's concerning is that the person who wrote that, Boogie, has 2 million subscribers on YouTube and has been supporting GamerGate to his considerable audience for days now. While I believe he is a genuine, kind person who doesn't want anything to do with the harassment that's been happening here, he needs to realize how much damage he is doing.
RadarScope1
Member
Perfectly said. As a former journalist, it's often frustrating that people have no clue how the process works. I'm sure that's true for nearly anyone who works in any field, but it's especially frustrating in a field where the work is so public and the only currency you have with your customers is trust.
That makes sense. Let's say the media has never done anything wrong. And let's say they have been inviting with all the content they put out. Even then, there would be people upset that the stuff they cover no longer represents them. Basically, it's a shift in demographics that no longer represents them, and they feel like they are losing control of their hobby.
Earlier in this thread, I criticized the media/activist for how they have handled their messages (how they present the message). I wonder if they could do a better job making it more inviting. If they have done things to alienate people. I think that as you said, these people would have always felt alienated regardless. But I wonder if there is more this industry could do to make all of this more inviting for people (especially those who aren't opposed to change, but are also kind of just in the middle and are either apathetic or just going with the flow).
I'm kind of looking forward past all of this. Like what can be done moving forward. I do not think the answer is to lash out and strike back. I wouldn't mind the press covering the IRC logs to put a spotlight on the fact that we have extremists in this industry. ie. Exposing their idiocy. I'm fine with the media condemning them, and at least showing people what they are having to deal with.
The ethical standards in place at major outlets today are by and large totally fine and in line with other types of entertainment journalism. To give you one example: Boogie wanted outlets to disclose when they get a game for free from a publisher. Smaller blogs have to do that by law when they're covering a game, but sites like Gamespot, Giant Bomb and IGN are exempt because its readership take for granted that they do indeed get a lot of these games from publishers, and that there's rules in place at that publication. And there are rules in place.
PairOfFilthySocks
Member
Yes, a handful of people posting in an IRC chat truly represent thousands of people who frequent various games-related sites. The triteness with which some of you attribute the attitudes of these jackasses to the rest of the people involved in the 'gamergate' shit makes me wonder why you don't lambast yourselves for apparently associating with people who favour ISIS over internet trolls, or keep the age-old tradition of bullying nerds alive. But then of course I'm expected to take your distance from such people at face value. You're clearly one of the 'good guys', after all. However, I'm not allowed or expected to do the same for about 10 assholes who chat in an IRC channel.
Yeah, what he's suggesting is ridiculous. I like Boogie, and I understand where he's coming from. I get where he's coming from (and he has good intentions with it). I'm just curious about his feeling of deep mistrust with the media. Because clearly he has that mistrust if he's making a suggestion as this.
I think as someone already pointed out though, I think apart of it is probably the shifting demographics in the industry, and the media representing something that isn't what the hobby used to be, or what they are. So they feel like they are losing their hobby/passion. I think that explains a lot of the intense relationship between consumer/media we've seen slowly grow over the years.
I honestly don't see anyone doing that.
Of course some people have legitimate concerns about journalistic integrity, but unwittingly those people have been supporting or white-washing a movement striving to harass women out of video games. I.e. whatever "goal" or purpose that you are supporting or associating yourself with, remember this:
and
There were several hundreds in some of those chat rooms, and a few notable people (that lawyer, one of the Youtubers who has been banging the drum on this etc.). As for your other arguments, the point here is that gamergate was started by assholes who wanted to attack women in the industry and didn't care about "ethics" or some article written by a writer they already didn't like (Adam Baldwin had the first tweet after all, and I don't think he cares much about that stuff). You can scream about your legitimate concerns all you like, what matters is that this movement was toxic from the fucking start and all of your legitimate concerns would just get drowned out by the harassment.
The majority who supported "gamergate" might've had some good reason to do so, but you should've abandoned ship when that hashtag quickly turned into shit. That's the point here, not whatever you're writing about ISIS or your other strawman arguments.
That kind of thinking is discrimination at its finest.
flatearthpandas
Member
No thanks on the article. Leigh explicitly said her articles aren't for people like me because I sometimes line up to go to gaming events.
Since you still seem dead set on stifling any subject except your own (though you apparently have nothing to say about it when I try to engage you), it seems your main goal is just to harass people who want to talk about lesser issues and complain about Kotaku becoming more ethical.
Maybe you can explain how that is meant to help things? Should we lower the ethics of game journalism to spite the #GamerGate? How does lower ethics in journalism benefit women in the industry, particularly in their struggle against anonymous online misogyny and harassment?
The problem is that the campaign was disguised from the very beginning as being about something else that a lot of people have had an issue with for years. So for many, the GG thing is something they strongly believe in. I do agree they should know what the campaign is really being used for.
Doubt it will deter people though, as in the minds of many, this campaign is not about that anymore. But I still question the point of all this, when even those with concerns of corruption and who do not support the anti-feminist stuff, have no...actual goal. So if there is no goal, and the campaign is being used as an outlet to attack people, at what point do you step back from it and say this isn't the right thing to support.
None of that is about those thousands of people with well-intentioned concerns about transparency and the like. It's about where all this began, under the #GG shit, and that hashtag's ulterior motivation. #gamergate was nothing but a bus being driven by dipshits. They stuck "Journalistic Ethics Town" on the front as the destination, picked up as many unsuspecting people as they could (not for their voice, but solely for their weight), always with the intention of eventually hoping to steer that bus through targeted females' homes, hoping it had enough momentum to (paraphrase) "end careers and marriages."
edit: The sooner people get off that specific bus the better (which isn't to say that they shouldn't still aim to get where they believed they were heading).
Son of Cervantes
Member
Absolutely agreed with your post. Kotaku and jschreier have dismissed, for example, the various lengthy articles that Patricia Hernandez has written in support of ex-gf's, friends, and roommates obscure (and poor quality IMO) indie games as 'mistakes' and 'lapses in judgment', and we are expected to give them the benefit of the doubt, to accept the excuses and move on. Ok, I'm willing to do that, since I researched Analogue and Hate Plus, found them to be lacking, and decided against purchasing them (if I had wasted my money on them, I doubt I'd be as forgiving, lol).
And yet, when presented with these IRC logs, I can't give the movement the same benefit of the doubt and accept that whole there may be a number of bad apples, that in no way poisons the majority of the people involved?
The double standard is funny, as is jschreier's condescending offer to explain to poor, ignorant Boogie why he's wrong.
This was really sad to read, dude. I seriously think it's important we stop trying to demonize each other. I'm definitely in the camp that believes this is about a segment of the community that really just wants to feel included/respected, and this isn't helping.
And no, I don't consider those people in the IRC channel to be defensible. That's why being lumped in with them sucks, and takes away a lot of the positivity I got from Stephen's olive branch article.
Proving bad people started this doesn't mean anything. The tension that allowed it to start is a real thing independent of the trigger, and it won't go away until both parties show they care about fixing it rather than proving they are the good guys.
I understand her piece was aimed at the extremists and not everyone else. I get that the point she was making was largely misunderstood. But can you really not see why people would be turned off or offended by the way this is written? This is what I'm talking about the poor messaging of this movement. It's alienating. Moving forward this really needs to change. I don't see how you expect anyone to listen to what they have to say, when this is kind of tone being used with this messaging.
This reaction is predicable because of this:
Metalingus5150
Member
These past couple of days have been very interesting.
We're talking about this specific campaign, not whatever arguments some of the people who used the hashtag had. The point is that this campaign was toxic from the fucking start, and people should've realized that and backed away from it. Your arguments about ethics and whatever else can still be voiced, and will still be voiced as they have since before Doritosgate, but not under that banner. He's not dismissing the underlying arguments that the more sensible people had, he's dismissing using gamergate to voice them.
DICKS AHOY
Banned
That tumblr with the IRC screenshots was simultaneously hilarious and depressing at the same time.
You'd think you'd just let something like this play out naturally if you were trying to make a certain group look bad instead of orchestrating an elaborate movement anybody could casually get the link to off a public /v/ thread.
You'd think you'd just let something like this play out naturally if you were trying to make a certain group look bad instead of orchestrating an elaborate movement anybody could casually get the link to off a public /v/ thread.
flatearthpandas
Member
How much damage is he doing? Serious question. If Boogie can get 2 million people involved in a conversation about journalism using this hashtag, do the people trying to besmirch Zoe somehow win even if she ends up fine?
OK, let me put it this way:
If you care about ethics, and that's why you're doing this: great. I'm happy to talk about ethics in this thread or wherever else. (I've been talking to Totalbiscuit about possibly going on his show to chat about ethics/Kotaku/etc.) Let me know if you have specific complaints or questions, and I'll try to address them.
If you feel disenfranchised by journalists and you feel like there's an "us vs. them" divide that you'd like us to bridge: OK. I agree that it's a problem, and I'm also happy to talk about that in this thread or wherever else. Again, let me know if you have specific gripes or questions, and I'll try to address them.
But by associating yourself with GamerGate, you are attaching yourself to something that goes way beyond those two issues. You can see this in the hateful words used by GamerGate's most prominent voices. (Baldwin, Breitbart guy, YouTubers, etc.)
charlequin put it eloquently so I'll just link to what he said: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=128715233&postcount=1567
'Ends up' fine? A lot of damage has been done already. It's not a case of 'all's well that ends well' when people are leaving their jobs and homes.
I definitely understand and sympathize with people who felt hurt by the article, no doubt. It's just that thousands of posts have been dedicated to talking about it and explaining it and clarifying it that I consider it no longer conducive to the discussion at hand, since people are actually being hurt and bullied to the point of quitting video game culture, along with severe chilling effects throughout everything.
Were some gamers' feelings hurt by the article? Fine, I am sorry that anyone feel that way. But RIGHT NOW prominent female voices and writers and developers in video game culture have been harassed and quitted working in the industry/culture, because of the harassment associated within the umbrella of this entire discussion.
It's time to move on from that article and instead talk about the misogynistic campaign that so many people have been unwittingly supporting and white-washing throughout the last couple of weeks.
You asked for advice. I gave you some tips. And now you're sticking your fingers into your ears instead of listening to the advice you asked for. I'm not sure I see a positive end to our current conversation.
You're misunderstanding what is being argued. Paying extra attention and care towards people who are harmed and marginalized within video game culture does not mean that game journalism has to "lower their ethics bar".
Pretty sad by Boogie's reaction, im gonna give him the benefit of the doubt because he seems like a man capable of showing empathy but im surprised by how by simplistic its his take on this, its essentially getting late to a movie, seeing a bit of it and leaving when seeing something he doesnt likes without understanding context or motives, it was overly reactive and even extremely selfcentered, I feel bad with people getting their feelings hurt, but I feel a litter bit worse for the ones getting death treats and harassed.
I get the feeling that he is taking his own bad pasts experiences and seeing insult when there isnt any, meanwhile he finds himself associated with a problematic movement with problematic leaders and problematic beginnings that is disproportionately harassing journalists that have taken a very defined and specific stance while some other publications like Giant Bomb get a pass because reasons.
People really hate generalizations when they are aimed at them, now Ron Paul might not be racist, but people are gonna keep wondering why does he keep showing up on white supremacists newsletters and speaks on anti-semitic conferences, and at some point saying "I just like their fiscal views" is not gonna cut it. Thats how I see him right now.
I get the feeling that he is taking his own bad pasts experiences and seeing insult when there isnt any, meanwhile he finds himself associated with a problematic movement with problematic leaders and problematic beginnings that is disproportionately harassing journalists that have taken a very defined and specific stance while some other publications like Giant Bomb get a pass because reasons.
People really hate generalizations when they are aimed at them, now Ron Paul might not be racist, but people are gonna keep wondering why does he keep showing up on white supremacists newsletters and speaks on anti-semitic conferences, and at some point saying "I just like their fiscal views" is not gonna cut it. Thats how I see him right now.
Exactly. Boogie is being one of "those guys" who is more concerned about his games--the kind of guy involved with childish garbage Leigh references to--over real issues like harassment over sexism, etc. If you're clinging that fast to your stupid toys and keep handwaving away the issues with your "movement's" hashtag, you deserve to be handwaved away, as well. He's doing nothing.
hydrophilic attack
Member
So has this been discussed:
Assuming this isn't just a photoshop (I wouldn't be qualified to tell whether it was) or that it's not just one guy talking out of his ass (very possible, I remember all the pastebin "leaks" before XBO reveal and stuff) this makes me very uncomfortable.
Sure, I appreciate that he's saying you should refrain from harassment and that he's not saying it's their official stance. But if this kind of sentiment is widespread among one of the platform holders (and maybe others as well) I can't help but feel a bit uncomfortable.
Of course, just because you own a white Xbox One, you may not necessarily work at Xbox. It could be someone's kid or something like that.
Assuming this isn't just a photoshop (I wouldn't be qualified to tell whether it was) or that it's not just one guy talking out of his ass (very possible, I remember all the pastebin "leaks" before XBO reveal and stuff) this makes me very uncomfortable.
Sure, I appreciate that he's saying you should refrain from harassment and that he's not saying it's their official stance. But if this kind of sentiment is widespread among one of the platform holders (and maybe others as well) I can't help but feel a bit uncomfortable.
Of course, just because you own a white Xbox One, you may not necessarily work at Xbox. It could be someone's kid or something like that.
I'm not even saying you should feel sympathy for them. I mean hell, when you consider the shit that journalists/women/devs have to go through on a daily basis, some people being offended by an article is well..kind of silly. But my larger issue is, you are going to continue to alienate these people if that is the kind of tone/language you are going to use for your message.
You NEED these people. They need to be the ones that you educate and get them to understand your points. Because they are a large part of the industry. So for me, this isn't about making them upset. It's about alienating them with the type of messaging you are doing. I really do not think this will go anywhere if this what we are doing. So the point isn't that some people got upset by what she said. It's a larger point that, the kind of messaging that has been done for these issues at times has been pretty poor.
Even if you 100% think these issues/opinions are not debatable (for instance, sexism is bad..yeah there is no debate on that), you have to understand that a large part of the industry isn't going to change over night. They aren't going to understand everything you are trying to say. So going in guns blazing, and telling them this is how it is, you have to accept it, accept it or you are my enemy. I think it's a losing strategy. I'm only bringing this up in this thread, because I really really really want to look forward on all of this. And I really think this movement/ and the media/activist need to re-consider how they are going to present this information/message moving forward.
PairOfFilthySocks
Member
I really and truly don't see it that way. The controversy that began all of this shit was nonsensical. The details it drummed up in the interim have been more than sufficient to give me an even lower impression of the games media than I had before.
Nepotism and flat-out corruption, topped off with a solid dose of high-horse bollocks from the writers who seem to be getting bent out of shape at the idea that people might be getting more than a little sick and tired of being spoken down to by so-called journalists whose job entailments categorically lack actual journalism.
I see people here say that misogyny is the REAL reason this is all happening, yet we've had reams upon reams of people who play games getting angry at ACTUAL EVIDENCE of corruption. Why is the games media so afraid of actually initiating a thing known as a journalistic investigation? Investigation is generally what actual journalists do. And by investigation I don't mean skimming through a bunch of tweets, cobbling together an opinion piece, and then telling readers why "now isn't the time to talk about this" or "we shouldn't really pay attention to this". Of course, we don't see such a thing happen because the games/media scene is so ridiculously insular that nobody wants to venture past the wagon perimeter. And then people wonder why 'gamers' are getting so angry while still claiming that this is absolutely all about misogyny with such insufferable authority.
And in that specific instance, he equated that small set of people to a much larger set of people to prove his point, which doesn't prove anything.
Lalalandia
Member
Why not one more analogy seeing as some folks on here are hell bent on ignoring the fundamentally evil motivations of the initiators of this campaign. Say you see a twitter campaign #SaveOurSchools and you think' I like schools I should support this. Later there is a rally and you attend as you wish to support your local school. The speakers gets up on the podium and starts to rant about how certain groups of pupils are ruining the school and should be excluded. What do you do? Do you get up on the podium and start talking about budget measures or longer school days? The only response is to walk away and try and support your cause via another route.
Extremist groups always try and subourn reasonable protest groups don't be suckered by these groups. If you have something to say start a new group, trying to rescue something so deeply compromised just plays into the hands of these extremists.
Extremist groups always try and subourn reasonable protest groups don't be suckered by these groups. If you have something to say start a new group, trying to rescue something so deeply compromised just plays into the hands of these extremists.
Its Quite Toasty
Banned
Everyone keeps saying a youtuber who keeps banging the drum was in those chats but who specifically. I have a good idea of who it was but I would rather be sure to avoid their content if it was made with a far less then noble goal.
flatearthpandas
Member
I don't know if this a valuable time for semantics. They have failed in their goal. End up fine in this context is not chased out of the industry like the people in that chat wanted. So how do they somehow win if boogie commandeers the helm and steers the whole thing towards one of the positive ends it was supposed to have?
Intheflorsh
Banned
I think Alex Navarro has the right idea: if you truly care about ethics in game media, wait a week or two until this #GamerGate stuff has blown over and start the conversation again.
You can't continue this discussion under the Gamer Gate mantra because it, by design, is inseparable from the harassment and negativity of these past few weeks.
You can't continue this discussion under the Gamer Gate mantra because it, by design, is inseparable from the harassment and negativity of these past few weeks.
What is this ACTUAL EVIDENCE you are talking about? Quinn's nude pictures? Or her having intercourse to a writer who once mentioned her game in a brief article?
Because the whole shitfest of this thing has been rooted in the whole Quinnspiracy misogynistic bullshit. You cannot separate the name and the movement from its origin.
It is suppose to be MundaneMatt. And according to his twitter it is him.
Oh, I have been waiting for this:
Called it from bloody Day One (Although I can't remember if I posted so here or elsewhere). Especially with the wilful twisting of words of Leigh Alexander's article as it was pretty fricking obvious that she was addressing the marketed label of 'Gamer' and not us as gamers.
With the FBI involved now, I hope there's at least some repercussions coming out of this towards the appropriate people.
Son of Cervantes
Member
There you go again...always bringing things back to these reprehensible things nobody agrees with. There's been plenty of other revelations which you're conveniently ignoring because they don't for your narrative. And those nude pics were taken for a porn shoot, not that it even matters.
DICKS AHOY
Banned
Probably also keep everything transparent and have a public forum anybody can at least view to discuss stuff outside of twitter after those 'top secret IRC' caps, god.
The boyfriend never actually alleged that she slept for press. In fact, his entire goal of leaking this information (so he claims), is that Zoe is a terrible person that manipulates and abuses people. And he didn't want anyone else to go through what he did. He didn't want anyone else to be abused by her. Again, whether you think that is true or not, whatever. My point is, his entire reasoning for doing what he did was completely separate from the games industry. It was purely a personal/social reason and had nothing to do with ethics/gaming. He never alleged she slept for press. He never made any such allegations.
People just looked at this leaked info, and then extracted what they wanted from it. They said, well ONE of the people she slept with was a journalist, therefore it's possible that a breach of ethics took place. Okay, but there was never any proof to I. Suggest that was true. II. That she was even in a relationship with the guy before he wrote that one article. And it was only ONE tiny article, that barely even talked about it.
I'm still wondering where is the proof of corruption. Because as far as I'm concerned, there was never any proof. And if that is your jumping off point for a campaign against corruption, you should be concerned.
hydrophilic attack
Member
I'm not associating myself with the hashtag, if that's what you mean. I agree it needs to die. But your post was saying "what this has been about all along", which is the gist of what others are saying here, too. That deprives the non-virulent among us with a voice, and that's only going to make us feel like we need to shout louder to be heard over the noise.
If you really want things to calm down, you need to stop giving so much attention and focus to the assholes.
- Status