Journalism and Bias in the Gaming Industry

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

 

 

He tells what he thinks, as a sci-fi writer, on when people complain about his tone and use characters in his stories. Take it as you will.

 

 

Okay, it was actually blissfully short, so that's a plus.

 

Nice strawman at 1:45.

 

I find myself in complete agreement with the "we're entitled to our informed opinions" part. Although it's a funny example of doublethink when people who supposedly nod along vigorously at this quote have no problem bashing feminism based on the most cursory understanding of it (or, to be more cynical, based on other people's opinions based on a most cursory understanding).

 

That said, insulting your own audience? Way to go, Mr. Ellison. Incidentally, isn't the very same thing what allegedly sparked gamergate?

 

 

He insulted mr. Johnson, the midget. Not his audience.

 

 

Mr. Johnson, who's supposedly a member of his audience, having read at least one of his stories.

 

 

You do realize you're digging quite a hole here?

 

 

Do enlighten me.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

...And you people wonder why "entitled man-children" is the go-to insult of anti-GG.

 

"WHO CARES ABOUT REALITY I JUST WANT YOU TO SAY WHAT I WANT TO HEAR BWWAAAAAA"

 

This is just more projection. The entire social justice in media movement is about being entitled to representation.

 

 

So you don't think "entertainment media has to serve its customers" (ie. "ME"; see also GG's persistent and somewhat weird fetishization of the consumer identity) is a tad entitled as far as attitudes go?

Edited April 27, 2015 by aluminiumtrioxid

[aluminiumtrioxid]

That's Mr. Johnson who probably lied. Or maybe didn't read any of the book. If Mr. Ellison was accurate when it comes to the who midgit thing. 

 

You may have noticed we're dealing with a tad unreliable narrator here. Or at the very least one that's most certainly not unbiased.

[Fighter]

So you don't think "entertainment media has to serve its customers" (ie. "ME"; see also GG's persistent and somewhat weird fetishization of the consumer identity) is a tad entitled as far as attitudes go?

 

I thought that was just basic free market reality.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

So you don't think "entertainment media has to serve its customers" (ie. "ME"; see also GG's persistent and somewhat weird fetishization of the consumer identity) is a tad entitled as far as attitudes go?

 

I thought that was just basic free market reality.

 

 

The free market mentality breeds entitlement like there's no tomorrow, no mistake about it, but that doesn't make the entitlement somehow magically nonexistent.

Edited April 27, 2015 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Meshugger]

 

 

 

 

 

He tells what he thinks, as a sci-fi writer, on when people complain about his tone and use characters in his stories. Take it as you will.

 

 

Okay, it was actually blissfully short, so that's a plus.

 

Nice strawman at 1:45.

 

I find myself in complete agreement with the "we're entitled to our informed opinions" part. Although it's a funny example of doublethink when people who supposedly nod along vigorously at this quote have no problem bashing feminism based on the most cursory understanding of it (or, to be more cynical, based on other people's opinions based on a most cursory understanding).

 

That said, insulting your own audience? Way to go, Mr. Ellison. Incidentally, isn't the very same thing what allegedly sparked gamergate?

 

 

He insulted mr. Johnson, the midget. Not his audience.

 

 

Mr. Johnson, who's supposedly a member of his audience, having read at least one of his stories.

 

 

You do realize you're digging quite a hole here?

 

 

Do enlighten me.

 

 

You apply adressing one person to his whole audience. Logically, the only solution then for Ellison is to cater each and single one of his readers, ending with the audience writing the story intead of the creator. 

 

So no, making this the same as "gamers are dead"-articles is quite erronous.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

You apply adressing one person to his whole audience. Logically, the only solution then for Ellison is to cater each and single one of his readers, ending with the audience writing the story intead of the creator. 

 

So no, making this the same as "gamers are dead"-articles is quite erronous.

 

 

Except for the fact that the original "gamers are over" articles were published on a personal blog and on a developer-facing site, and the ones published by gaming journalism were mainly quoting those two while noting the backlash, making the analogy quite apt (ie. no wider audience was harmed in either case, so to speak.)

 

Not like we haven't been over and over and over this easily verifiable fact multiple times, but then again, repeat a lie enough times etc etc.

Edited April 27, 2015 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Fighter]

 

The free market mentality breeds entitlement like there's no tomorrow, no mistake about it, but that doesn't make the entitlement somehow magically nonexistent.

 

Semantics. Sure the word "entitlement" applies. But your use of it is with a unflattering and scornful slant. Mine is basic common sense. You make a thing and either people want it or not, you don't owe anyone anything on the side.

Edited April 27, 2015 by Fighter

[Meshugger]

 

 

You apply adressing one person to his whole audience. Logically, the only solution then for Ellison is to cater each and single one of his readers, ending with the audience writing the story intead of the creator. 

 

So no, making this the same as "gamers are dead"-articles is quite erronous.

 

 

Except for the fact that the original "gamers are over" articles were published on a personal blog and on a developer-facing site, and the ones published by gaming journalism were mainly quoting those two while noting the backlash, making the analogy quite apt. (ie. no wider audience was harmed in either case, so to speak.)

 

Not like we haven't been over and over and over this easily verifiable fact multiple times, but then again, repeat a lie enough times etc etc.

 

 

Lol, and the armenian genocide never happened.

 

Reposting KaineParker's link since it got lost in the myriad of posts:

 

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

The free market mentality breeds entitlement like there's no tomorrow, no mistake about it, but that doesn't make the entitlement somehow magically nonexistent.

 

Semantics. Sure the word "entitlement" applies. But your use of it is with a unflattering and scornful slant. 

 

 

I was merely noting that the attitude might have something to do with "entitled man-children" being an oft-used insult.

 

Not sure why that makes it somehow "my usage".

[Malcador]

That's an impressive dodge there.

[Amentep]

 

That's Mr. Johnson who probably lied. Or maybe didn't read any of the book. If Mr. Ellison was accurate when it comes to the who midgit thing. 

 

You may have noticed we're dealing with a tad unreliable narrator here. Or at the very least one that's most certainly not unbiased.

 

Harlan Ellison is a raconteur; I think if you've ever heard much of him you'll realize he exaggerates for effect.  But he's also fairly blunt in his interactions with people too.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

 

You apply adressing one person to his whole audience. Logically, the only solution then for Ellison is to cater each and single one of his readers, ending with the audience writing the story intead of the creator. 

 

So no, making this the same as "gamers are dead"-articles is quite erronous.

 

 

Except for the fact that the original "gamers are over" articles were published on a personal blog and on a developer-facing site, and the ones published by gaming journalism were mainly quoting those two while noting the backlash, making the analogy quite apt. (ie. no wider audience was harmed in either case, so to speak.)

 

Not like we haven't been over and over and over this easily verifiable fact multiple times, but then again, repeat a lie enough times etc etc.

 

 

Lol, and the armenian genocide never happened.

 

 

Give me a single link to any article published in those 12 hours on a gaming journalist site that was proclaiming gamers dead without noting where the idea was originating from.

Edited April 27, 2015 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Fighter]

 

I was merely noting that the attitude might have something to do with "entitled man-children" being an oft-used insult.

 

Not sure why that makes it somehow "my usage".

 

 

So then you don't think we are "entitled man-children"?

Edited April 27, 2015 by Fighter

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

I was merely noting that the attitude might have something to do with "entitled man-children" being an oft-used insult.

 

Not sure why that makes it somehow "my usage".

 

 

So than you don't think we are "entitled man-children"?

 

 

I take issue with the usage of "man-children" as an insult on a general principle, so no.

[Blarghagh]

Children of Men was a good movie. I don't know why everyone seems to have such a problem with it.

[Fighter]

Children of Men was a good movie. I don't know why everyone seems to have such a problem with it.

 

Sexist title.

[Hurlshort]

Isn't the whole statement "Gamers are dead" just a literary device?  

 

I've always assumed, and the articles I've read seem to support my assumption, that it is simply a statement about the changing gaming culture where casual has supplanted hardcore.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Isn't the whole statement "Gamers are dead" just a literary device?  

 

I've always assumed, and the articles I've read seem to support my assumption, that it is simply a statement about the changing gaming culture where casual has supplanted hardcore.

 

Except the articles didn't even use the word "dead". But yes, you're pretty much correct.

 

This, of course, didn't stop people to interpret it as "they're saying gamers are white and therefore bad!" or whatever inane bull**** they were spewing last time.

[Fighter]

Isn't the whole statement "Gamers are dead" just a literary device?  

 

I've always assumed, and the articles I've read seem to support my assumption, that it is simply a statement about the changing gaming culture where casual has supplanted hardcore.

 

Except for the characterization of casual and hardcore that is spiteful to the latter.

[Meshugger]

 

 

 

 

You apply adressing one person to his whole audience. Logically, the only solution then for Ellison is to cater each and single one of his readers, ending with the audience writing the story intead of the creator. 

 

So no, making this the same as "gamers are dead"-articles is quite erronous.

 

 

Except for the fact that the original "gamers are over" articles were published on a personal blog and on a developer-facing site, and the ones published by gaming journalism were mainly quoting those two while noting the backlash, making the analogy quite apt. (ie. no wider audience was harmed in either case, so to speak.)

 

Not like we haven't been over and over and over this easily verifiable fact multiple times, but then again, repeat a lie enough times etc etc.

 

 

Lol, and the armenian genocide never happened.

 

 

Give me a single link to any article published in those 12 hours on a gaming journalist site that was proclaiming gamers dead without noting where the idea was originating from.

 

 

Notice how you changed the subject back to the articles when your original claim about Harrison didn't work? I'm not biting.

 

Rather, i can present another example that follows your logic of audience. Here is a song by Tool where the singer tells a story of guy named buddy that claims to be a fan, or by the same logic, their audience. The lyrics embedded are quite insightful and i highly recommend reading them

 

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

 

 

 

You apply adressing one person to his whole audience. Logically, the only solution then for Ellison is to cater each and single one of his readers, ending with the audience writing the story intead of the creator. 

 

So no, making this the same as "gamers are dead"-articles is quite erronous.

 

 

Except for the fact that the original "gamers are over" articles were published on a personal blog and on a developer-facing site, and the ones published by gaming journalism were mainly quoting those two while noting the backlash, making the analogy quite apt. (ie. no wider audience was harmed in either case, so to speak.)

 

Not like we haven't been over and over and over this easily verifiable fact multiple times, but then again, repeat a lie enough times etc etc.

 

 

Lol, and the armenian genocide never happened.

 

 

Give me a single link to any article published in those 12 hours on a gaming journalist site that was proclaiming gamers dead without noting where the idea was originating from.

 

 

Notice how you changed the subject back to the articles when your original claim about Harrison didn't work? I'm not biting.

 

 

What original claim? I called Ellison "insulting" his "audience" "the same thing that allegedly sparked gamergate" (direct quote) right in the first post. I made the parallel obvious right from the beginning.

 

Also, really classy, first you equate not agreeing with gamergate's false narrative with denying an actual genocide, then when asked to provide proof of said narrative actually holding water (which it blatantly and verifiably doesn't), you suddenly start talking about something else. Perspective! Integrity! Ethics!

Edited April 27, 2015 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Malcador]

Isn't the whole statement "Gamers are dead" just a literary device?

 

I've always assumed, and the articles I've read seem to support my assumption, that it is simply a statement about the changing gaming culture where casual has supplanted hardcore.

Yeah but was some weird assumptions of what the non-casual gamers are like. But then again it was written by someone who slams people as nerds when the industry was built by those, so it is of questionable worth as is she.

 

Irony in this thread is improving!

Edited April 27, 2015 by Malcador

[Meshugger]

Ellison, not Harrison, my bad.

 

"False narrative", lol what phrasing. Everyone knows that "Gamers are dead" is used, as Hurlshot said, a literary device for all the articles, culminating with Leigh Alexender's piece. Instead doing a thesis again, i can link to someone that already did almost a year ago: http://adland.tv/adnews/gamergate-insulting-consumers-shrinks-market/1027025677

 

I do hope that you are not mad with all your bolding text. Need a hug?

Edited April 27, 2015 by Meshugger

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Yeah but was some weird assumptions of what the non-casual gamers are like.

 

 

More accurately: there was a description of a certain subset of gamers, there was an (arguably weird) assumption that people outside gaming equate gamers with that subset of gamers, and some readers made the (arguably weird) assumption that the description was meant to characterize all gamers/all hardcore gamers/whathaveyou.