Journalism and sexism in the games industry

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

@Keyrock:1.The Young Turks

2. Actually it's MSNBC

 

And I'd be more concerned if someone was able to talk about furries while keeping a straight face to be honest.

Edited December 17, 2014 by KaineParker

[BruceVC]

 

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that it turns out the developers (all of them for this hypothetical scenario for the sake of emphasis) of Hatred are indeed Neo-Nazis.  Does it matter?  I mean, to any one person, the fact that a game is made by Neo-Nazis may matter and may keep them from purchasing the game, and that's fine.  It's that person's money, it's that person's purchasing decision, they can choose to buy or not buy the game for any reason.  But does it matter as far the game's right to exist and be sold on a platform so long as it doesn't break said platform's terms and conditions?  Does a game made by Neo-Nazis have any less right to be sold than a game made by church going Christians, or a game made by a transgender bisexual person, or a game made by ragtag group group of developers?  My answer is no, a game made by Neo-Nazis does not have any less right to be sold than a game made by any other group, diverse or homogeneous.

I really agree here. There is a movement to make the creative effort about the creator irregardless of the creation. Now I have no interest in Hatred (or most shooters in general) but if the game company wants to make it fine. If the game company is proven to be racist facists, the consumer can decide if they want to patronize them or not.

 

Most historical creators could never survive the standards applied to today's creators. Lovecraft was a racist, for crying out loud. He was also a product of his time and place, as are we all.

 

“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, illustrating her view of Voltaire's views in The Friends of Voltaire

 

 

I really liked Keyrocks post and desperately wanted to give it the much respected " BruceVC this is a good post " award

 

But then I realized where it was fundamentally spurious

 

Western society in almost cases doesn't support or purchase from people that are considered to have nefarious or unethical motives. We don't support crime by financially supporting criminals. Its why companies like Nike make sure there factories in the Far East that produce there clothes are not sweatshops manned by underage teenagers, people would have boycotted there products if they thought Nike was guilty of human rights abuses

 

So the point is the same, its just the fact that the developers  are Neo-Nazis should be enough for you to not support them..why do you need more reason? We know they are a movement based on ignorance and hatred, isn't that enough?

 

But if they aren't Neo-Nazis this point is irrelevant and will reduce the overall criticism directed towards them. Because this is a serious accusation

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

That's entirely missing the point of Amentep's post. It isn't about supporting the game by buying it, it's about the right to actually make the game and have it sold on a platform if they follow the ToS.

 

And the devs have said they aren't neo-Nazis, so I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt.

[Blarghagh]

Regarding Nike: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nike_sweatshops

 

Regarding the much bigger and omnipresent western brand, Apple: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxconn#Controversies

 

One-minute Wiki search, I could find much more serious examples if I put actual effort into it.

 

If you think western society won't buy from the worst of the worst if it's "hip", then you're very, very wrong.

[Keyrock]

Neo-Nazis are not automatically criminals.  Sure, there are almost certainly criminals that are Neo-Nazis, but not every Neo-Nazi is a criminal.  The act of being a Neo-Nazi is not in itself a crime, as distasteful as many people, myself included, find it.

 

As for western culture not supporting criminals...

 

 

We like to pretend and talk like we don't support criminals in western culture, but if you truly think we don't then there's a bridge I'd like to sell you.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Keyrock

[Lexx]

Seems like not only is Hatred back on Steam, Gabe Newell himself did send an email to the devs and apologized to them.

 

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B5C0d5pCUAESyzd.jpg:large

What is this with you people and your screenshots with fonts for ants.

[HoonDing]

So the point is the same, its just the fact that the developers  are Neo-Nazis should be enough for you to not support them..why do you need more reason? We know they are a movement based on ignorance and hatred, isn't that enough?

 

But if they aren't Neo-Nazis this point is irrelevant and will reduce the overall criticism directed towards them. Because this is a serious accusation

It's worse. They're furry neo-nazis.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

Seems like not only is Hatred back on Steam, Gabe Newell himself did send an email to the devs and apologized to them. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B5C0d5pCUAESyzd.jpg:large

What is this with you people and your screenshots with fonts for ants.

We've invested in a magnification app and are trying to get it downloaded.

[Nonek]

I agree that in an ideal world people would not support Neo Nazis, such as Mr Tait and Mr Cheung, but fortunately the Polish developers of Hatred are not Neo Nazis. It's encouraging to see the game back on Steam, and that free speech and individuals rights have triumphed in this instance, rather than the censorship and denial of artistic expression that SJFs encourage.

 

A very satisfying and moral victory.

[HoonDing]

Polish neo-nazis? They're a hoot.

 

[Amentep]

@Longknife - First off, what is "TYT"?  Second, I agree with these people that it was unprofessional of the Fox morning show woman to be that unprepared for a story.  That said, I can't really look down upon her too much for her reaction to furries.  I don't completely recall the exact moment when I first found out what furries were, but I can pretty much guarantee I was not able to hold a straight face.  I also found it funny when the one TYT woman admitted to having acted the same way in the past then tried to suggest that their show shouldn't be held to the same standards she was projecting on Fox's morning show because reasons.

 

Anyway, much ado about nothing, as far as I'm concerned.

This does seem to be a slam against someone they don't like. The difference between the TYT anchor laughing and running out of a room and the other host is apparently she "gets paid more". So I guess its okay to act unprofessional* provided you're not getting paid a lot.

 

Furries as a subculture don't have a large identity penetration into the mainstream AFAIK so I'd imagine the average person probably hasn't heard of them.

 

*If you think having any emotional reaction to a story is unprofessional. That said, I actually think the other anchors may have set her up - one specifically prompting "what are furries" and then the other whispering something to her. Seems a deliberate attempt to make her break up on camera.

[Ganrich]

On Amentep's comment about Lovecraft's racism. Walt Disney came to mind. He wasn't exactly a shining example of humanity.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=357693142

 

[Longknife]

TYT, or The Young Turks, is a liberal YouTube news show, they host (among other things) The David Pakman show. As far as I know, I could be wrong.

 

 

David Pakman is a part of their "network," but TYT has basically panned GamerGate entirely and only given it very very brief coverage suggesting it's wrong cuz harassment, whereas affiliates such as Pakman have given it a serious look.

 

 

@Longknife - First off, what is "TYT"?  Second, I agree with these people that it was unprofessional of the Fox morning show woman to be that unprepared for a story.  That said, I can't really look down upon her too much for her reaction to furries.  I don't completely recall the exact moment when I first found out what furries were, but I can pretty much guarantee I was not able to hold a straight face.  I also found it funny when the one TYT woman admitted to having acted the same way in the past then tried to suggest that their show shouldn't be held to the same standards she was projecting on Fox's morning show because reasons.

 

Anyway, much ado about nothing, as far as I'm concerned.

This does seem to be a slam against someone they don't like. The difference between the TYT anchor laughing and running out of a room and the other host is apparently she "gets paid more". So I guess its okay to act unprofessional* provided you're not getting paid a lot.

 

Furries as a subculture don't have a large identity penetration into the mainstream AFAIK so I'd imagine the average person probably hasn't heard of them.

 

*If you think having any emotional reaction to a story is unprofessional. That said, I actually think the other anchors may have set her up - one specifically prompting "what are furries" and then the other whispering something to her. Seems a deliberate attempt to make her break up on camera.

 

 

 

Used to watch their show regularly, have done less so in recent time (like a year) as much of their content has become more hysterical and clickbait-y. Titles are exaggerated and make issues seem worse than they are only for them to then provide the facts over the course of 5 mins as you realize it was kind of a waste of your time. Cenk still tends to cover good stuff when he's on his own and David Rubin (when he's on; another affiliate who wanted to cover GamerGate but decided to hand it over to Pakman) is good too, but that's about it.

 

  It's a very uncharacteristic piece by them, imo. Especially when they actively enjoy a more relaxed show style where they openly mock political opponents all the time. I should also note that Ana (girl on the left) is a feminist, though AGAIN I should note that basically means f*** all since as we've seen feminists seem to hold little to no common ground; she was ranting about how stupid Shirtgate was and how it distracted from real feminist issues, for example. But yeah Ana tends to bring up a lot of stories relevant to feminism.

Edited December 18, 2014 by Longknife

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

http://blogjob.com/oneangrygamer/2014/12/gamergate-game-journo-pros-interview-blacklisting/

 

[Volourn]

"Its another reason I dislike them, I am surprised this doesn't bother. I would think you would naturally distance yourself from anything related to Neo-Nazism"

 

I know I do. Which is why I'm not a SJW.

 

That link flat out lies. The video shows the white protagnaist murdeirng everyone he says no matter the colour yet the stupid crybaby whines about the fact some of the innocents happened to be non white because the writer is racist/sexist neo nazi SJW who doesn't care about whites. That's evil. Why do you support such evil?

[Longknife]

http://i.imgur.com/Hi3Sqze.png

 

Dis guy...

 

Yknow I might tweet him and ask about his thoughts on Fallout New Vegas. Someone teach me how to tweet him in a way that he can and will see.

Edited December 18, 2014 by Longknife

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

http://i.imgur.com/Hi3Sqze.png

 

Dis guy...

 

Yknow I might tweet him and ask about his thoughts on Fallout New Vegas. Someone teach me how to tweet him in a way that he can and will see.

It's been updated.

 

http://m.imgur.com/a/kTgTs

[Longknife]

 

http://i.imgur.com/Hi3Sqze.png

 

Dis guy...

 

Yknow I might tweet him and ask about his thoughts on Fallout New Vegas. Someone teach me how to tweet him in a way that he can and will see.

It's been updated.

 

http://m.imgur.com/a/kTgTs

 

 

 

Seriously, how do I tweet this guy?

 

I wanna hear his thoughts on Fallout New Vegas.

 

 

 

 

 

Likewise, this motherf**ker just shut down the entire SJW argument: http://penny-arcade.com/news/post/2014/12/17/southron-swords-part-two

[Volourn]

No, he didn't. They won't listen. That's their super power - blessed with super ignorance.

[Longknife]

No, he didn't. They won't listen. That's their super power - blessed with super ignorance.

 

 

No...

 

I mean his point was that if SJWs were truly interested in keeping games like Hatred off the market, they never would've covered it in the first place.

We've seen evidence of them boycotting and blacklisting certain names and individuals and that's truly effective, but when they cover something and tell us to be outraged, we only get outraged at them.

 

 

Only an absolute idiot wouldn't recognize this, and the idea they're THAT stupid is ridiculous. They knowingly covered this game, knowing full-well it would lead to the game being promoted. This makes them and their message seem more relevant and justifies their existence.

 

In a nutshell, their interest is in their jobs. Not morality, not in art, but in getting paid tomorrow.

[Orogun01]

On Amentep's comment about Lovecraft's racism. Walt Disney came to mind. He wasn't exactly a shining example of humanity.

During Disney's time the Jewish were rising to control the film industry, which now is a fact. One of Disney's workers was Jewish, they had a strained relationship of firings and hiring, the man's comment on Disney's antisemitism was that it was directed at the corporate body of Hollywood not necessarily at Jews in general. We all hate our publishers.

 

Now if you want to talk about the legal shenanigans by which he founded Disney World, which set the precedent for all the corporate monstrosities that we have today I'll agree. 

 

But I digress

[kirottu]

http://blogjob.com/oneangrygamer/2014/12/gamergate-game-journo-pros-interview-blacklisting/

 

So now we have definitive proof of gamejournopros blacklisting. Perhaps the next argument against GamerGate is: you can't be about ethics in games journalism, because games journalism doesn't have ethics.

[Fighter]

That's the most coherent evidence of collusion that I've seen come out of GameJournoPro list. They are colluding to black list someone, no debate about it. Regardless of who the guy is or what he did (and I know nothing about him) this is unethical and a dangerous precedent.

 

There are other examples that may not include undeniable evidence like emails but are pretty obvious. TFYC and those indie devs that are active in GG.

[Blarghagh]

Indie devs active in GG isn't really blacklisting - I'd say reviewing the games of a person actively trying to take you down is a pretty ****ing huge conflict of interest so in this case they're doing the right thing. Shame it's at the cost of those devs.