Drama in indy gaming and games journalism part 2

[aluminiumtrioxid]

they should be angry about Greyson getting caught implicating himself and bringing their profession into disrepute.

 

Journalistic ethics demand no less.

 

 

Well it wouldn't, had that thing actually happened.

 

What did happen, however, is that she (according to a butthurt ex) had sex with Grayson (who, based on his PoE articles, is a talentless hack, but that's beside the point), who then proceeded to review a grand total of zero of her games. The only context where Grayson even mentioned Quinn's name was reporting on the Game Jam trainwreck, which didn't have that much to do with her, actually.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

It's decent enough material to argue pointlessly about. Hoping some major damage comes from this, myself, though.

 

 

Yeah, major damage to games journalism is good. It just strikes me as counter-productive to strive for that goal not from the perspective of digging into the dirty laundry with big publishers and reviews being bought off and developers' livelihood (see: Fallout New Vegas) depending on scores assigned by incompetent hacks like Grayson, but from the angle of "oh my god, an utterly insignificant indie developer had sex with a journalist who didn't review any of her games EVERYTHING IS RUINED FOREVER".

[Nonek]

That is not the point, he has slept with a developer, even if he never wrote anything about her again in his life he has violated the publics trust in his impartiality. He has a major conflict of interest and this should have been made clear to his editor long before Ms Quinn's adulteries were leaked by her partner, certainly to sleep with a developer whom one is supposed to remain objective and unbiased about is clearly a major breach of ethics.

 

One cannot pick and choose when to maintain ethics, that is what has led to this mess. Greyson should have recused himself and his editor should have fired him for bringing the profession into disrepute.

 

Edit: It's quite clear, there is not only what one has done to be considered, but what one has seen to be done. A journalist literally in bed with his subject is not something that can be countenanced by anybody wishing to maintain journalistic standards.

Edited September 18, 2014 by Nonek

[aluminiumtrioxid]

That is not the point, he has slept with a developer, even if he never wrote anything about her again in his life he has violated the publics trust in his impartiality. He has a major conflict of interest and this should have been made clear to his editor long before Ms Quinn's adulteries were leaked by her partner, certainly to sleep with a developer whom one is supposed to remain objective and unbiased about is clearly a major breach of ethics.

 

I'm pretty sure that's not how conflicts of interest work.

[Nonek]

Yes it is.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Yes it is.

 

As far as I'm aware, "a conflict of interest is a set of circumstances that creates a risk that professional judgement or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced by a secondary interest." Primary interest here being "the unbiased writing of games reviews", secondary... I don't know, let's assume "continuing to have sex with Zoe Quinn". Unless Grayson is obligated to write about any of Quinn's games, I see no inherent conflict between these two.

[Malcador]

Yeah, major damage to games journalism is good. It just strikes me as counter-productive to strive for that goal not from the perspective of digging into the dirty laundry with big publishers and reviews being bought off and developers' livelihood (see: Fallout New Vegas) depending on scores assigned by incompetent hacks like Grayson, but from the angle of "oh my god, an utterly insignificant indie developer had sex with a journalist who didn't review any of her games EVERYTHING IS RUINED FOREVER".

Eh, I'm ok with any kind of damage, be it to the industry or the people (as much as nasty stuff on Twitter can do anyway). Fun to watch, at least.

[Nonek]

The conflict of interest is in his unethical actions, he has brought his career into disrepute through sleeping with this developer, and thus tainted his profession. This is simple ethics and a blatant conflict of interests, when he did not recuse himself from writing anything about her or recuse himself to his public and editor, he was once again compounding his wrongdoing. This is how journalism works, one has not only to maintain objectivity, but maintain the appearance of objectivity.

[Amentep]

All those tweets "prove" is that those journalists are on Quinn's side, and thus have lost any semblence of journalistic integirty, have proven their bias and that they are far too comfortable not representing the public, but defending a developer whom they are supposed to be judging objectively and impartially.

 

Alternatively, they didn't want to be tabloid journalists who publish telephoto lens from a tree gathered topless pics of celebrities right next to the ongoing saga of Batboy

 

The problem I see in the posts is the immediate dismissal of the ethics issues.  Had there been no semblence of ethical impropriety on behalf of the journalists then realistically the group was right - Quinn's sexlife was a non-issue with respect to games journalism.

 

 

 

 

 

That is not the point, he has slept with a developer, even if he never wrote anything about her again in his life he has violated the publics trust in his impartiality. He has a major conflict of interest and this should have been made clear to his editor long before Ms Quinn's adulteries were leaked by her partner, certainly to sleep with a developer whom one is supposed to remain objective and unbiased about is clearly a major breach of ethics.

 

I'm pretty sure that's not how conflicts of interest work.

 

 

 Yes it is.

 

 

As far as I'm aware, "a conflict of interest is a set of circumstances that creates a risk that professional judgement or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced by a secondary interest." Primary interest here being "the unbiased writing of games reviews", secondary... I don't know, let's assume "continuing to have sex with Zoe Quinn". Unless Grayson is obligated to write about any of Quinn's games, I see no inherent conflict between these two.

 

As I recall, Conflict of Interest involves two conflicting interest held by one party where the interest of one corrupts the interest of the other.

 

A politician who remains on the Board of Directors of a corporation that receives government contracts has two conflicting interests, to the people via the government and to the corporation and their stockholders. The desire to see the corporate interest thrive can corrupt the interest in serving the people.

 

In this case, a journalist who has a relationship with a developer can see the desire to serve the interest of the relationship corrupt the interest of providing unbiased coverage of gaming. Since I think we want journalists to be relatively human this isn't a case where mitigation by removal would work, so the only mitigation left is disclosure (telling people of the relationship so they can decide if they detect a bias) and recusal (not covering or giving press to the object of the relationship so that a neutral third party can provide unbiased views).

 

The issue with this is that it appears that until this broke most of the "major" game sites journalists either didn't mandate to disclose or to recuse or weren't really policing it if it was their policy that disclosure/recusal be the norm.

Edited September 18, 2014 by Amentep

[Nonek]

What staggers my mind is that these "game journalists" think that they can preach ethics and then act without even the barest semblance of any whatsoever. They have somewhow come to believe that ethical behaviour and objectivity is optional, the Gamergate scandal is quite clearly way overdue, and the medium does need shaking up, not excusing nor apologising for.

[Orogun01]

 

Uh, okay. I was merely commenting on your assertion of "it's okay because other journalists have mailing lists too" and not on the content of this mailing list, but fair enough.

 

I'm just weirded out at people acting as if this was the straw that broke the camel's back when there is nothing in there that proves anything being organized.

 

I agree with your sentiment but the fact is that now there is cause to doubt and further investigate where yesterday there was nothing. 

It is weird that people on that mailing list managed to create "Gamers are dead" articles within the same day and sometimes within hours of each other. Yes, it could be a coincidence but is a very convenient one and there is also the fact that they have reacted in unison to GamerGate by spouting the same platform and maintaining that this is about harassment when is very clear that they are the targets. That this is indeed about journalistic ethics and not about Literary Who.

 

Please, if you're going to either play devil's advocate or you actually believe in the SJW side you can do a much better job defending it than this. It is circumstantial proof but it is enough to answer some questions.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

As I recall, Conflict of Interest involves two conflicting interest held by one party where the interest of one corrupts the interest of the other.

A politician who remains on the Board of Directors of a corporation that receives government contracts has two conflicting interests, to the people via the government and to the corporation and their stockholders. The desire to see the corporate interest thrive can corrupt the interest in serving the people.

 

In this case, a journalist who has a relationship with a developer can see the desire to serve the interest of the relationship corrupt the interest of providing unbiased coverage of gaming. Since I think we want journalists to be relatively human this isn't a case where mitigation by removal would work, so the only mitigation left is disclosure (telling people of the relationship so they can decide if they detect a bias) and recusal (not covering or giving press to the object of the relationship so that a neutral third party can provide unbiased views).

 

The issue with this is that it appears that until this broke most of the "major" game sites journalists either didn't mandate to disclose or to recuse or weren't really policing it if it was their policy that disclosure/recusal be the norm.

 

 

So there was unprofessional behavior on behalf of a person who has no journalistic qualifications and works for a website that, according to the Reuters, scores 15 out of 100 on an independent journalism test (or so I've heard). Whoopty-****ing-doo.

 

I still believe that Grayson's sex life is small fries compared to the industrialized corruption going on with the big publishers, and focusing on that detracts from the real issue.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Please, if you're going to either play devil's advocate or you actually believe in the SJW side you can do a much better job defending it than this. It is circumstantial proof but it is enough to answer some questions.

 

 

And what shall I do if I believe that this whole gamergate business has an admirable goal but an ass-backwards way of trying to accomplish it, and in the end, it will only hurt the integrity and independence of games journalism more than it contributes to it?

[Amentep]

 

As I recall, Conflict of Interest involves two conflicting interest held by one party where the interest of one corrupts the interest of the other.

 

A politician who remains on the Board of Directors of a corporation that receives government contracts has two conflicting interests, to the people via the government and to the corporation and their stockholders. The desire to see the corporate interest thrive can corrupt the interest in serving the people.

 

In this case, a journalist who has a relationship with a developer can see the desire to serve the interest of the relationship corrupt the interest of providing unbiased coverage of gaming. Since I think we want journalists to be relatively human this isn't a case where mitigation by removal would work, so the only mitigation left is disclosure (telling people of the relationship so they can decide if they detect a bias) and recusal (not covering or giving press to the object of the relationship so that a neutral third party can provide unbiased views).

 

The issue with this is that it appears that until this broke most of the "major" game sites journalists either didn't mandate to disclose or to recuse or weren't really policing it if it was their policy that disclosure/recusal be the norm.

 

So there was unprofessional behavior on behalf of a person who has no journalistic qualifications and works for a website that, according to the Reuters, scores 15 out of 100 on an independent journalism test (or so I've heard). Whoopty-****ing-doo.

 

I still believe that Grayson's sex life is small fries compared to the industrialized corruption going on with the big publishers, and focusing on that detracts from the real issue.

 

I don't disagree that anyones sex life - per se - is the issue.

 

Having no journalistic qualifications and systemic corruption are probably related and would probably connect why some people don't get why the ethical issue on non-disclsure/non-recusal is an issue at all given the greater issues suffered by games journalism.

[JadedWolf]

Having no journalistic qualifications and systemic corruption are probably related and would probably connect why some people don't get why the ethical issue on non-disclsure/non-recusal is an issue at all given the greater issues suffered by games journalism.

 

 

To be fair, I wouldn't have too much faith in people with journalistic qualifications these days either. Making news these days is not about fact finding anymore, but all about selling "news" any way you can.

Edited September 18, 2014 by JadedWolf

[Amentep]

To be fair, I wouldn't have too much faith in people with journalistic qualifications these days either. Making news these days is not about fact finding anymore, but all about selling "news" any way you can.

I don't disagree with this either.

[Orogun01]

 

 

Please, if you're going to either play devil's advocate or you actually believe in the SJW side you can do a much better job defending it than this. It is circumstantial proof but it is enough to answer some questions.

 

 

And what shall I do if I believe that this whole gamergate business has an admirable goal but an ass-backwards way of trying to accomplish it, and in the end, it will only hurt the integrity and independence of games journalism more than it contributes to it?

 

You're speculating about the conclusion when the situation seems nowhere finished. In the end the consumer will have the choice, it is the gamer demographics that is more likely to be interested in gamer culture. It is niche journalism, and it is up to the consumer with all the available facts to make a choice. If you're ok with Dead Rising 3 getting a lower score on PC than on Xbox because of a SJW that was offended by the characters in the game, then by all means continue to support them. If you want a higher standard and people with actual journalism degrees then do as GamerGate is doing and demand it. This whole thing might have started with Literary Who but it has grown into a discussion of game journalism and ethics. If it goes beyond that and into their relationship with publishers is yet to bee seen.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

If you're ok with Dead Rising 3 getting a lower score on PC than on Xbox because of a SJW that was offended by the characters in the game, then by all means continue to support them. If you want a higher standard and people with actual journalism degrees then do as GamerGate is doing and demand it.

 

This whole thing might have started with Literary Who but it has grown into a discussion of game journalism and ethics. If it goes beyond that and into their relationship with publishers is yet to bee seen.

 

 

I fail to see how someone giving a lower score to a game they find racist is bad and unprofessional, but whatever.

 

I am, however, a bit sad that it took sacrificing a woman's right to privacy to kick off a movement looking into journalistic ethics, when actually well-argued articles like this have been available for all to read since 2012.

[Orogun01]

 

If you're ok with Dead Rising 3 getting a lower score on PC than on Xbox because of a SJW that was offended by the characters in the game, then by all means continue to support them. If you want a higher standard and people with actual journalism degrees then do as GamerGate is doing and demand it.

 

This whole thing might have started with Literary Who but it has grown into a discussion of game journalism and ethics. If it goes beyond that and into their relationship with publishers is yet to bee seen.

 

 

I fail to see how someone giving a lower score to a game they find racist is bad and unprofessional, but whatever.

 

I am, however, a bit sad that it took sacrificing a woman's right to privacy to kick off a movement looking into journalistic ethics, when actually well-argued articles like this have been available for all to read since 2012.

 

I agree, /v/ (RIP) loved Erik Kain. At the beginning he was being used as an example of good journalism, the fact is that just like the strikes in Brazil brought about issues with public transportation weren't about it but other issues that have been piling up. This is is the straw that broke the camel's back.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

By the way, if we're talking about journalistic integrity...

 

Our friend Milo there, writer of the utterly inane "game journalist mailing sites are THE DEVIL" article, who, based on quotes like "the video game community is perhaps the most inclusive, gender neutral and colourblind on the internet" holds our little community in quite a high regard, apparently didn't shy away from blatantly ****ting on video gaming culture in his article about Elliot Rodgers (read: when doing so was convenient for his anti-feminist agenda). So, erm, yeah, let's keep in mind that while he hates us less than he hates feminists, according to him, games like Counterstrike, Halo and World of Warcraft "are the classic frustrated sociopath’s pastime", and Rodgers' (School Shooting Guy, for those who forgot) "twisted view of the world was assembled piecemeal from the games he immersed himself in".

 

Sorry. Had to gloat about that for a bit.

[Volourn]

I don't care who sleeps with who but....

 

 

"Given that those tweets come from August 19, way before this whole thing has gotten blown up into this lovely piece of insanity and was solely about Quinn's sex life/censorship of topics discussing Quinn's sex life, I'd say pretty much any decent human being would've been on Quinn's side. If you judge objectively and impartially based on the information available back then, the only reasonable conclusion you could reach is "okay, maybe let's not give the ****-shaming internet mob a platform to do their ****-shaming on".

 

I laugh at this. It's considered '**** shaming' when a woman is caught cheating but when a man is caught cheating feminists don't hesitate to bash, belittle, humilate, and **** shame the man. Hypocrite much? It works both ways. People have a bad habit of cherry picking stuff.

 

Cheating is wrong no matter who does it but I also don't care about it unless it personally effects me.

 

 

This whole is funny ebcause people make a HUGE deal about it when it is completely irrelevant in the real world. Nobody outside the corner of jerking off on the internet really knows about this. Nobody I know in real life gives a crap.

[Orogun01]

I'll try to make sure to bring it up, thanks for the link.

[Blarghagh]

By the way, if we're talking about journalistic integrity...

 

Our friend Milo there, writer of the utterly inane "game journalist mailing sites are THE DEVIL" article, who, based on quotes like "the video game community is perhaps the most inclusive, gender neutral and colourblind on the internet" holds our little community in quite a high regard, apparently didn't shy away from blatantly ****ting on video gaming culture in his article about Elliot Rodgers (read: when doing so was convenient for his anti-feminist agenda). So, erm, yeah, let's keep in mind that while he hates us less than he hates feminists, according to him, games like Counterstrike, Halo and World of Warcraft "are the classic frustrated sociopath’s pastime", and Rodgers' (School Shooting Guy, for those who forgot) "twisted view of the world was assembled piecemeal from the games he immersed himself in".

 

Sorry. Had to gloat about that for a bit.

 

 

https://twitter.com/Nero/status/512592859439333376

 

It doesn't mean much, but a simple "I was wrong" is more than anything we've gotten from a game journalist at this point.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

I laugh at this. It's considered '**** shaming' when a woman is caught cheating but when a man is caught cheating feminists don't hesitate to bash, belittle, humilate, and **** shame the man. Hypocrite much? It works both ways. People have a bad habit of cherry picking stuff.

 

Ah, Volourn, always so eager to jump in and demonstrate an utter inability to interpret written text.

 

Sadly, while I'm quite sure many people would actually pay for the privilege, I, personally, am not into arguing with subliterate trolls, so I'll have to pass on this opportunity to engage with your... contributions to this topic. But thanks for enriching us with your unique viewpoint anyways.

[Volourn]

Don't be butthurt because the truth was posted.