Journalism and Bias in the Gaming Industry

[Meshugger]

Without anonymity the United States would not exist to begin with. It is fundamental to any free society.

 

Of course, if someone is not interested in freedom, then by all means, remove it from the internet.

[Fighter]

When poop hits the fan and rule enforcement disappears social progress goes straight out the window. So sure there is your way of changing the internet. Personally the price is not worth it.

[Zoraptor]

Social media was crying over harassment and the only people who actually took action? GamerGate harassment patrol! That should be their slogan: GamerGate, combating harassment because you're too lazy!

 

Though that was not really an altruistic act to help the victims per se, it was largely done to stop false flags and 3rd party trolls who'd drop in with "[person] needs to die!!! #Trump2016 #Gamergate #ISroolz" on their burner accounts.

 

The Sarkeesian bomb threat one was certainly more than significant than simply a 3rd party troll on a burner account though, since it explained why the police didn't take the threat seriously as well and it wasn't a burner account either, but most have been.

 

And to be scrupulously fair I suspect that some people would point to the GGautoblocker and CON or whatever it's called as examples of prominent antiGG people getting off their butts to do something even if I would regard them more as donation trolling with little actual utility.

[Nonek]

I think it's worth noting that a lack of anonymity does not guarantee good behaviour or even civility: Look at Ms Leigh Alexander spouting her childish toxic insults and demonising a certain recreation, or the writers of Rock, Paper, Shotgun whom advocate and celebrate terrorism and bomb threats, all of these people use their real names and are in no way admirable or ethical. They are morally devoid scum, one wonders what they would be like with anonymity but I suspect that it would be no different.

 

At the end of the day I believe that they are in large part responsible for any recent increase in so called "toxic" behaviour, and have been perpetuating it for a long time from a position of influence. However personally I believe in the better nature of individuals, and that reasonable moderates will in the end seize the day in almost any sphere.

[Malcador]

Meh, people whining about jerks online seem to inevitably find some way to justify the sword cutting away from them. Don't think we will ever end up in some utopia where there are no jerks in reality, don't see why the Internet would differ

[Blarghagh]

 

Social media was crying over harassment and the only people who actually took action? GamerGate harassment patrol! That should be their slogan: GamerGate, combating harassment because you're too lazy!

 

Though that was not really an altruistic act to help the victims per se, it was largely done to stop false flags and 3rd party trolls who'd drop in with "[person] needs to die!!! #Trump2016 #Gamergate #ISroolz" on their burner accounts.

 

The Sarkeesian bomb threat one was certainly more than significant than simply a 3rd party troll on a burner account though, since it explained why the police didn't take the threat seriously as well and it wasn't a burner account either, but most have been.

 

And to be scrupulously fair I suspect that some people would point to the GGautoblocker and CON or whatever it's called as examples of prominent antiGG people getting off their butts to do something even if I would regard them more as donation trolling with little actual utility.

 

 

I'm aware it wasn't entirely altruistic, but they did something. And the people who point those out are simply wrong. Autoblocker was never designed to stop harassment but to ignore people who disagree with you, and Crash Override Network never launched. Go to their website. The countdown just reset itself. The thing doesn't exist. To call it donation trolling is charitable - it's a pure scam.

[Fighter]

I'm aware it wasn't entirely altruistic, but they did something. And the people who point those out are simply wrong. Autoblocker was never designed to stop harassment but to ignore people who disagree with you, and Crash Override Network never launched. Go to their website. The countdown just reset itself. The thing doesn't exist. To call it donation trolling is charitable - it's a pure scam.

 

 

There is also that. The definition of harassment. Because the few people who can legitimately be reported to authorities for their behavior are not the problem for most of these drama queens. Their real problem are all the people who don't agree with them and are outspoken about it. Which is not illegal..... yet.

[BruceVC]

 

 

Yes, why fight against harassment when we can bicker over important issues like ethics in game journalism?

 

Guys this is a very important point, I hope everyone understands and recognizes its value

 

And what value is that point, really ? Other than the usual ersatz wit. Still rather surprised that given how awful this harassment is, no one's killed themselves yet. Has been useful to elevate people's standing, so to speak, though.

 

 

 

 

Yes, why fight against harassment when we can bicker over important issues like ethics in game journalism?

 

I have a better idea. Why deal with any of those things when we can fight windmills instead. None of them are fighting harassment and never were. And I don't think they care about it, the "fight against harassment" is just a tool.

 

Guys this is a very important point, I hope everyone understands and recognizes its value 

 

Well I hope you understand how utterly that's missing the point.

 

 

Guys I am not going to get into another debate on this thread about why " harassment " is relevant and a  real societal problem. I am too focused on RL  issues of harassment which in almost cases come from a foundation of bigotry,ignorance  and discrimination...and I don't think its necessary to raise why that is relevant

 

I just will say this, for anyone who thinks " harassment " is a red herring when it comes to the Internet or for example how it pertains to GG or anti-GG seems to be missing a fundamental point 

 

The problem with the original Leigh Alexander article is actually a question of harassment ...you guys just don't see it. White, male gamers were harassed and vilified due to a certain narrative. So its ironic that some of  you guys seem to dismiss this term when in fact you are victims of it 

 

Food for thought guys, food for thought

Edited August 27, 2015 by BruceVC

[Blarghagh]

At most a bitesized snack for thought.

[BruceVC]

At most a bitesized snack for thought.

Really? I have admitted that my initial assessment of GG was wrong. I never understood the outrage from white, male gamers because I didn't understand how white, male gamers could think they were being victimized because in my world white, heterosexual males dominate most aspects of society

 

But for the majority of people on this thread you guys aren't bigots, you are not sexist and you are not  opposed to meaningful transformation in the gaming industry 

 

What really irks you is how this entire sector of gaming, white male gamers, has suddenly become " sexist, misogynists who lack a progressive view " ...this accusation has become the standard mantra of anti-GG and in many cases its unfair and doesn't represent the reality

 

I realize that now, the reality being in its quest to achieve true equality anti-GG has in fact alienated an important demographic and created this environment where people have become intransigent on both sides. Anita and others mean well but I fail to see how attacking white, male gamers is actually helpful in the long term

 

So maybe you guys think GG is about "ethics " amongst gaming journalists but for me that is just a distraction and for many people this is just  a way to articulate there frustration ...but lets be honest isn't the real frustration this perceived invective and attack on white gamers from certain quarters? And I get that, who wants to be told they are bigots when in fact they definitely aren't 

 

So words like " harassment" actually are very relevant to the core debate we see as much of the protest from white, male gamers is a manifestation of understandable frustration at being told  " you guys are the problem because you are opposed to transformation " 

 

I hope this makes sense

[Amentep]

 

The idea that the internet is just a cesspool and that's the way life and human nature are seems incredibly cynical and short sided.  Humanity has a long history of making social progress.  I'm certainly not saying the internet is going to change quickly, but we are barely into a second generation of regular internet users.  This is the first generation to have access at all times to social media.  It will change drastically as we move forward.

 

I didn't say it couldn't change. Right now, however, it's just the way it is and it's been steadily getting worse over the last ten years. It's going to take a major paradigm shift to change that and I don't see that happening any time soon. Certainly not within the next ten years.

 

In my opinion it really hasn't been getting worse. The same kind of stuff that's happening now was happening in the early 1990s.

 

What has happened is that more people have gotten online and with more public ways to cause and address issues it has led to a larger number of the same problems. I suspect (and would cheerfully admit I'm wrong if someone has data to disabuse me of the notion) that the percentage (people affected vs total population) hasn't actually changed though.

[Meshugger]

Happy one year GG! 

 

http://spectator.org/articles/63898/happy-anniversary-gamergate-love-adam-baldwin

[Nonek]

 

In my opinion it really hasn't been getting worse. The same kind of stuff that's happening now was happening in the early 1990s.

 

What has happened is that more people have gotten online and with more public ways to cause and address issues it has led to a larger number of the same problems. I suspect (and would cheerfully admit I'm wrong if someone has data to disabuse me of the notion) that the percentage (people affected vs total population) hasn't actually changed though.

 

 

This is probably very true, however there is also the factor of those whom take being offended and supposedly harassed as a professional vocation: For instance there was a fun run I sponsored recently where the fathers of terminally ill children dressed in drag and had a little fun raising money, so that their little ones had a better time before they passed away. This was condemned as a hate movement by a transgender charity, grieving fathers trying to ease their childrens suffering and taking a little break with a harmless activity that has been carried out in England for centuries, simplified into an attack on trans-whatever people. There was no understanding, no reason and no thought of dialogue, just a rude condemnation. Utterly moronic.

 

This is what lies at the heart of this I think, a total lack of empathy, a selfish determination to be righteous and the victim which SJFs fetishise. When those whom play games were attacked by the Gamers are Dead articles we did not cry victim or harassment, as we are not simpletons who are looking for an easy answer, we knew that this was a counterattack (based on the old adage,) and that the press were desperately trying to cover up their own misdeeds, which were legion. They knew that we were right, that they were ethically compromised, and that their profession was unfit for purpose as it remains.

 

Of course you still have idiots whom state that ethics are not important for journalism covering a multi billion dollar industry, but the sheer stupidity of that statement does not really need to be pointed out, and only a simpleton believe it. There is not one simple answer, as it is not a simple matter, but on the whole Gamergate is still campaigning for ethical reform, a fit for purpose press and respect for consumers rather than fashionable demonisation by hipster SJFs.

 

In my opinion, of course.

[Hurlshort]

 

Of course you still have idiots whom state that ethics are not important for journalism covering a multi billion dollar industry, but the sheer stupidity of that statement does not really need to be pointed out, and only a simpleton believe it. 

 

 

I think it is a bit more complex than that.  I have a problem with the idea that every yahoo with a website or a youtube channel is a professional journalist.  I take the industry very seriously, but the people who play and review games are rarely deserving of such status.  

 

If you want me to point to a journalist I take seriously when it comes to the game industry, I am going to point to a guy like David Kushner.

 

I used to read Gamasutra pretty regularly, so they were about the only one I was disappointed in when this whole gamergate stuff came to light.  They used to be a pretty decent source of information about the actual industry, instead of reviewing games.  I have no idea what happened to them.

[Meshugger]

I used to read Gamasutra pretty regularly, so they were about the only one I was disappointed in when this whole gamergate stuff came to light.  They used to be a pretty decent source of information about the actual industry, instead of reviewing games.  I have no idea what happened to them.

 

 

The got the prime directive and acted accordingly. That's what happened.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

I used to read Gamasutra pretty regularly, so they were about the only one I was disappointed in when this whole gamergate stuff came to light.  They used to be a pretty decent source of information about the actual industry, instead of reviewing games.  I have no idea what happened to them.

Because it's easier to write about popular controversial topics in a partisan and shallow way than to do in depth analysis of issues. For example, an op-ed crusading against cheesecake art in comic books or a review of Before All-New Mighty Superior Avengers Dark, Inc of the Galaxy #1 takes much less effort than a comparison of real prices of single issues and real page rates for artists filled with data and graphs. I blame the financial model behind online journalism for this as it encourages getting views rather than content and it's quite depressing to see the likes of Guardian and Breitbart columnists with masturbatory blogs being considered the journalists of today.

[Hurlshort]

I'm not sure about the Guardian, but Breitbart just looks like another gossip rag to me.  

 

 

I should probably add that I haven't actively read Gamasutra in about a decade.  I find I get all the gaming industry news I need from you fine fellows.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I'm not sure about the Guardian, but Breitbart just looks like another gossip rag to me.

 

 

The Guardian has increasingly become dominated by opinion pieces from what I can tell. Perhaps I'm being uncharitable, but I find most opinion pieces to not be worth reading.

[Nonek]

 

 

Of course you still have idiots whom state that ethics are not important for journalism covering a multi billion dollar industry, but the sheer stupidity of that statement does not really need to be pointed out, and only a simpleton believe it. 

 

 

I think it is a bit more complex than that.  I have a problem with the idea that every yahoo with a website or a youtube channel is a professional journalist.  I take the industry very seriously, but the people who play and review games are rarely deserving of such status.  

 

If you want me to point to a journalist I take seriously when it comes to the game industry, I am going to point to a guy like David Kushner.

 

I used to read Gamasutra pretty regularly, so they were about the only one I was disappointed in when this whole gamergate stuff came to light.  They used to be a pretty decent source of information about the actual industry, instead of reviewing games.  I have no idea what happened to them.

 

 

I'm of a similar attitude, even those with journalism degrees are generally not undertaking the work they are supposed to, as i've said before the industry needs overhauling and an Ombudsman. At the moment it's a joke.

 

On the subject of Gamasutra, at least its non professional blogs sometimes have legitimately interesting and in depth subject matter (though I have to wait for the archived version,) such as Mr Felipe Pepe's articles on the curation of the games industry. Or rather the lack of it.

[GhoulishVisage]

Another article with Mr Chmielars:

A Game Developer’s Year with #GamerGate: The Ugly, the Bad, and the Good

[Zoraptor]

 

I'm not sure about the Guardian, but Breitbart just looks like another gossip rag to me.

 

 

The Guardian has increasingly become dominated by opinion pieces from what I can tell. Perhaps I'm being uncharitable, but I find most opinion pieces to not be worth reading.

 

 

Their actual news is still mostly the same as it was, their 'lifsetyle' and 'tceh' sections have become infested with sjw doupleplusgoodthink though. Those get a lot of hits from the pro/ anti sides as examples of doubleplusgood/ doubleplusungood think as opposed to who will be Ed Milliband's replacement or Boris Johnson's latest zany antics.

 

I'm of a similar attitude, even those with journalism degrees are generally not undertaking the work they are supposed to, as i've said before the industry needs overhauling and an Ombudsman. At the moment it's a joke.

 

An ombudsman? Good luck getting a supra-national ombudsman going, as that is what would be needed- especially for games journalism. And most bloggers and the like can hide behind 'opinion' and being Schrodinger's Journalists- if they want embiggening they're journalists, if they want to hide from consequences they're bloggers or just stating an opinion with their free speech rights.

 

Unfortunately good journalism doesn't sell as well as bad journalism does, hence used toilet paper like the Daily Fail or The Scum being the highest selling brit papers. It's not surprising that most media is following their example, it's cheap and easy and financially viable to write sensationalist tripe, actual journalism is hard and may piss off powerful people to boot.

 

To call it donation trolling is charitable

 

I'm  charitable guy, just the other day I gave some Belgians panhandling on the internet some spare change. And you never know, something eventually may come from CON, apart from dropping to lower case.

[Fighter]

Another article with Mr Chmielars:

 

A Game Developer’s Year with #GamerGate: The Ugly, the Bad, and the Good

 

This needs to be quoted for all anti-harassment warriors to see:

 

 

A few months ago, WAM, a “North American nonprofit dedicated to building a robust, effective, inclusive movement for gender justice in media”, published their report on harassment. In that report, they linked 0,66% of GamerGate accounts they analyzed to harassment. Which is basically even less than a random sample of the Internet.

 

(Their methodology: they took various sources, among them 10K #GamerGate accounts from the GG auto-blocker. They found that 12% of all 538 harassers from all sources came from #GamerGate. In other words, 65 GG accounts out of nearly 10K GG accounts could be described as harassers.

 

EDIT: Also just for the heck of it. Vintage Cheong perfectly encapsulating the comically blatant schizophrenia of some of these social warriors:

 

 

Some time later after learning of the unapproved opinions of the author...

 

Edited August 27, 2015 by Fighter

[licketysplit]

^Lol, what a tool.

[Blarghagh]

Wow, there's hard numbers that GG is less bad than the rest of the internet? I'm surprised considering I did catch some **** from GG and some of it was rather nasty smelling too.

[GhoulishVisage]

Yeah, there's quite a few ***holes in GG.

Maybe not the army of woman-eating Hitler-clones they're painted as, but still a bunch of unpleasant twats.

Luckily they're largely outnumbered by rather pleasant, reasonable people, but given that the ***holes tend to jump down people's throats for little reasons they can give a rather unpleasant flavor to things.

Edited August 28, 2015 by GhoulishVisage