I would like a hash tag about ethics in Journalism discussion.
But #GamerGate isn't that tag.
I was thinking something like #GameEthics or #EIJP (Ethics In Journalism, Please)
Personally, I subscribe to the
RTDNA standards.
However, there are a few things in those standards that people need to realize.
The first one has to do with "doxxing" and it will sound kind of horrible to some people.
There is already a precedent for major newspapers and websites in printing or posting addresses of public figures or people seeking influence or power in a field. If websites and newspapers in New York can post maps of everyone who owns a concealed carry license, than posting the address of prominent YouTube commentators is just par for the course and
isn't against journalist precedent.
HOWEVER,
it is against journalist ethics and both the New York press outlet and the people who posted that information should be condemned for doing this. Although it isn't illegal to post publicly available information in public, it's just irresponsible to do so.
As for people posting threats on the internet directed at someone? That's a bit iffy right there. The internet needs more formal legislation and we will find out when
THIS CASE IS DECIDED. Now, there are courts that are ridiculously out of step on this. The previous precedent was United States v. Bagdasarian and the 9th District Court of Appeals. Although that was in a direct threat case. Now, posting public information in public has no precedent as "threatening speech," no matter how much Tumblr wants it to be that way.
As for the amount of harassment that people get and rightfully complain about? The truth is that those who engage in that activity make up a distinct minority of all video game customers and using that minority as the basis for criticism of all "gamers" is irresponsible and ignorant. Many of the editorial articles that "sparked" the fire on this hashtag's communities should have been labeled more clearly as editorial content. The entire defense from those should have been "
This is editorial content and the opinions expressed therein may not be the opinions of this company." That's all that needed to be said, end of story.
Problem is that, instead of addressing those in this way, many news sites just doubled down on editorial content. Editorial Content is a part of journalism, but it's not journalism as a whole. So, many of these people demanding "ethics" in journalism are really demanding "ethics in editorials" and that is
freaking ridiculous. Clearly marking editorial content isn't going to prevent people from taking editorials as reporting.. but it goes a long way in providing both justification and credibility. As for those editorials "slandering?" Um. No. Slander is spoken, libel is printed.. but only if those are directed at an individual and are not opinion editorials. So, I'm not really sure why the whole "#GamerGate" thing is even still going on. There's just emotional arguments on both sides. I mean, from a legal standpoint, here's what's happening...
1. People are saying stupid things to each other in opinion editorials, private e-mails, and on Twitter. Those stupid things are being taken seriously. Until the hearings on December 1st from the Supreme Court clarify the issue, the severity of threats on individuals made anonymously or not anonymously on the internet in a court of law just depends on the court at the time. While the "fear" is real, the definition as an actual crime is variable. The publication of public information in a public (or private) forum or print media has precedent and is (in itself) NOT a crime. The publication of private information (such as work schedules, life schedules, whereabouts in transit, cell phone numbers, unlisted phone numbers, and so forth) is not criminal in itself, but it is a civil matter and therefore up for debate. In short, I think people who are victims of that kind of "doxxing" should grab a Civil Lawyer and go to town. Although they would very likely lose in a court of law at their own expense. If you post your phone number to Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Google Services like YouTube, and others in your sign up process for those services.. your phone number is now public record. (Always read the Terms and Conditions, people.) Printing that information isn't illegal, it's just TACKY and against Journalist Ethics. If you post your location on Twitter, anyone may use that (now public) information for malicious purposes. My suggestion is to not post your location on Twitter if you are concerned about that possibility. A third party posting your location is a violation and you may want to get litigious.
2. There are people demanding full disclosure on reviews and editorial content. A review is, by it's design and nature, an opinion piece or editorial content. There is no precedent or need, from an ethics standpoint, to divulge information about the process toward a review or editorial. ONLY in reporting news. So, if I know a bunch of people at Mojang and they give me a copy of Minecraft for the Vita to review, I don't have to tell you where I got that copy of Minecraft from. Now, if I'm told about an upcoming expansion to Minecraft that adds hundreds of new animal behavior to the mix, I am obligated to state that the source of the news article I write about that upcoming expansion comes from the company. I don't need to give names though. There is no legal reason for me to do so and disclosure of that information requires an interested party filing paperwork to that regard.
