Journalism and Bias in the Gaming Industry

[Meshugger]

 

Nah, it's more like GG is 2+2=4 and aGG is 2+2=5. But i know it is difficult to comprehend that in a world where nothing is right and there has to be two sides with no truth what so ever.

 

I confess, I actually have no clue what you mean.

 

 

Touché!

 

(no really, how can anyone be for corruption and against creative freedom? that's what aGG is) 

Edited September 16, 2015 by Meshugger

[Bartimaeus]

Touché!

 

(no really, how can anyone be for corruption and against creative freedom? that's what aGG is)

What are you even talking about?

Edited September 16, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Meshugger]

 

Touché!

 

(no really, how can anyone be for corruption and against creative freedom? that's what aGG is)

What are you even talking about?

 

 

I don't know how to say it more clearer. Since the beginning aGG has been for corruption in the video-games industry and against creative freedom. What's there not to understand?

[Amentep]

Well arguably aGG is against "harassment of women and minorities online" and believes GG is a hate group designed to silence women and minorities.

Arguably GG is against "unethical behavior in journalism" and believes aGG is a hate group designed to protect unethical journalists by using women and minorities as shields against criticism of their unethical behavior.

The problem is that aGG and GG both have harassed and attempted to silence everyone who is critical or it and/or sides with the other side - women and men, majorities and minorities, sexual orientations of all kind.

 

I guess that makes both side's true primary focus "winning" in any way possible, no matter how hypocritically?

[Keyrock]

So are we just supposed to turn a blind eye to pedophilia because it falls outside the bounds of journalistic ethics?  Nah, that's cool, go ahead and **** kids since it has nothing to do with journalism.  I don't limit my own scope to just 1 topic.  That fact that this person allegedly engaged in acts of pedophilia has nothing to do with GG, outside of it being someone who has in the past publicly and very aggressively attacked GG, making it tangentially related.  I don't see a problem with pointing out someone's hypocrisy and alleged wrongdoing so long as it is supported by credible evidence, especially given said person't highly vocal admonishment of others in the past.  Yes, reporting said evidence to the proper authorities is also something that should, and hopefully already has been done, given that pedophilia is very much illegal.  There's really no need to say "hey, I'm calling the poilce" you just need to do it.

 

I will say that pointing out the evidence and saying "Damn, this is ****ed up if it's true" and contacting the authorities is the extent of what I personally would consider appropriate.  Any threats and repeated harassment go well beyond those bounds IMHO and I condemn those actions and kindly ask those people to stop.

Edited September 16, 2015 by Keyrock

[Bartimaeus]

I don't know how to say it more clearer. Since the beginning aGG has been for corruption in the video-games industry and against creative freedom. What's there not to understand?

I'm not sure how that or your last few posts relate to the current controversy about Sarah Nyberg (which the post you quoted, Amentep's, was almost entirely about (e): or at least relating to, I guess I should say (/edit)), but O.K., I guess.

Edited September 16, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Bartimaeus]

So are we just supposed to turn a blind eye to pedophilia because it falls outside the bounds of journalistic ethics?  Nah, that's cool, go ahead and **** kids since it has nothing to do with journalism.  I don't limit my own scope to just 1 topic.  That fact that this person allegedly engaged in acts of pedophilia has nothing to do with GG, outside of it being someone who has in the past publicly and very aggressively attacked GG, making it tangentially related.  I don't see a problem with pointing out someone's hypocrisy and alleged wrongdoing so long as it is supported by credible evidence, especially given said person't highly vocal admonishment of others in the past.  Yes, reporting said evidence to the proper authorities is also something that should, and hopefully already has been done.  There's really no need to say "hey, I'm calling the poilce" you just need to do it.

 

I will say that pointing out the evidence and saying "Damn, this is ****ed up if it's true" and contacting the authorities is the extent of what I personally would consider appropriate.  Any threats and repeated harassment go well beyond those bounds IMHO and I condemn those actions and kindly ask those people to stop.

Of course not. But the issue with her character has very little to do with actual GamerGate, and everything to do with...just that: her character. So why does it seem like GamerGate is acting like she's the Devil incarnate and that the entire anti-GG movement is lesser because of it? Isn't that exactly what anti-GG has done to GG when there have been less than savory individuals involved with GG...like that guy from just a few days ago that was pretending to be anti-GG, and was instructing people how to make bombs or whatever? Why are we still involved in this kind of nonsense? Express your disgust with the person as it relates to *that* actual issue (instead of something completely unrelated, i.e. GG), and the people whom are defending her, and move on.

Edited September 16, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Amentep]

So are we just supposed to turn a blind eye to pedophilia because it falls outside the bounds of journalistic ethics?

Who is arguing that? I hear there are police officers and that they're actually really useful in getting the laws of the land enforced. And I hear that sometimes, journalists actually work with law enforcement to cover stories where they've uncovered criminal acts.

 

That fact that this person allegedly engaged in acts of pedophilia has nothing to do with GG, outside of it being someone who has in the past publicly and very aggressively attacked GG, making it tangentially related.

So you think Milo would have investigated 7-12 year old chatlogs of just anyone?  'Cause if so I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of people who were 22 in 2005 quaking in their boots now.

 

I don't see a problem with pointing out someone's hypocrisy and alleged wrongdoing so long as it is supported by credible evidence, especially given said person't highly vocal admonishment of others in the past.

Neither do I. However there's not a lot of credible evidence on display.  Even with that, I can understand how the story might be considered news but I've found the reporting incomplete and highly reliant on assuming that criminal activity has taken place (because, why bring in the police and risk having them determine nothing actionable happened)

 

Yes, reporting said evidence to the proper authorities is also something that should, and hopefully already has been done. There's really no need to say "hey, I'm calling the poilce" you just need to do it.

If you're writing an article, there actually is a really good reason to report its been done because not doing so is leaving facts out of the story and also presents unproven ideas as facts.  People read these articles and assume that crimes did happen and have acted accordingly.

 

I will say that pointing out the evidence and saying "Damn, this is ****ed up if it's true" and contacting the authorities is the extent of what I personally would consider appropriate.  Any threats and repeated harassment go well beyond those bounds IMHO and I condemn those actions and kindly ask those people to stop.

 

The harassment since these articles has been vile.  And since we're talking about ethical journalism, by not going that extra step to work with police to determine that something did/didn't happen I think the articles have been irresponsible IMO and encouraged the threats and harrassment.  YMMV.

Edited September 16, 2015 by Amentep

[Keyrock]

Of course not. But the issue with her character has very little to do with actual GamerGate, and everything to do with...just that: her character. So why does it seem like GamerGate is acting like she's the Devil incarnate and that the entire anti-GG movement is lesser because of it? Isn't that exactly what anti-GG has done to GG when there have been less than savory individuals involved with GG...like that guy from just a few days ago that was pretending to be anti-GG, and was instructing people how to make bombs or whatever? Why are we still involved in this kind of nonsense? Express your disgust with the person as it relates to *that* actual issue (instead of something completely unrelated, i.e. GG), and the people whom are defending her, and move on.

 

Oh, I agree with that.  Sarah Nyberg allegedly being a pedophile doesn't necessarily make anyone also in aGG a pedophile.  On the other hand when you put together evidence that Sarah Nyberg is a hypocrite, Anita Sarkeesian is a hypocrite, Brianna Wu is a hypocrite (also completely crazy), Jonathan Macintosh is a hypocrite, Arthur Chu is a hypocrite, Ian Miles-Cheon will switch sides at the drop of a hat and is a hypocrite, it's a little difficult not to sense a pattern forming, and I see nothing wrong with pointing out said pattern.

[Bartimaeus]

So you think Milo would have investigated 7-12 year old chatlogs of just anyone?  'Cause if so I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of people who were 22 in 2005 quaking in their boots now.

This entire thing stinks of slimy politics. Dig up everything a person has ever been involved with, latch onto anything juicy sounding regardless of the actual evidence (note: I'm not actually necessarily placing a value on the evidence in this specific case - just that it hasn't really mattered for these controversies), regardless of what it's about or how it relates to their job or cause or anything else, and demonize them and make sure that everyone will know them for that controversy for the rest of their lives. It's what politics has devolved to, and it's what GG and anti-GG have been doing to each other for some time now, it feels like. It's why even though I lean towards the ideals of GG, I'm never gonna get personally involved with this crap or definitively support anyone involved either way. When something becomes as dirty and flagrantly stupid as politics have become, nobody wins.

Edited September 16, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Sakai]

The harassment since these articles has been vile.  And since we're talking about ethical journalism, by not going that extra step to work with police to determine that something did/didn't happen I think the articles have been irresponsible IMO and encouraged the threats and harrassment.  YMMV.

I would say they are more than simply irresponsible. Milo knows exactly what he's doing, and this whole situation is not really about pedophilia, Nyberg, or her alleged victims. It's about outrage and clicks, pure and simple. And maybe a bit of politics.

[Bartimaeus]

Oh, I agree with that.  Sarah Nyberg allegedly being a pedophile doesn't necessarily make anyone also in aGG a pedophile.  On the other hand when you put together evidence that Sarah Nyberg is a hypocrite, Anita Sarkeesian is a hypocrite, Brianna Wu is a hypocrite (also completely crazy), Jonathan Macintosh is a hypocrite, Arthur Chu is a hypocrite, Ian Miles-Cheon will switch sides at the drop of a hat and is a hypocrite, it's a little difficult not to sense a pattern forming, and I see nothing wrong with pointing out said pattern.

Again, I don't necessarily disagree with you. Most people around here have been relatively tame...besides maybe a few (...regardless of what side they're on), so I'm not really so concerned about that.

[Keyrock]

 

I would say they are more than simply irresponsible. Milo knows exactly what he's doing, and this whole situation is not really about pedophilia, Nyberg, or her alleged victims. It's about outrage and clicks, pure and simple. And maybe a bit of politics.

 

That part I definitely agree with.  Milo and Breitbart have always been opportunists.  I've only seen Breitbart as an "ally" in that we happen to have a common "enemy" in certain radical "feminists" trying to push an agenda on the world of gaming.  I have no doubt whatsoever that Milo, or anyone else at Breitbart, for that matter, would sell Gamers out in an instant if it furthered their own goals.

[Fighter]

Maybe because I am not an "edgelord" but the stuff in her logs doesn't come off as a joke. But I am also not the police or a mind reader. However I don't think it is a reasonable expectation to think that anyone who had discovered this should just shut up and never bring it up. Because victimhood privileges or something. You can't expect this not to be an issue.

 

If the story about her computer never being actually confiscated is true it would give some credence to "I was making it all up" story.

 

Speaking of police. There isn't necessarily anything strictly illegal that she can be prosecuted for. Especially if the family doesn't want to go through with it.

 

The reaction to all this from the sj clique is pretty telling however as usual. These are the type of people who would push to destroy lives and careers for the flimsiest of "sexist" remarks. They would certainly never let anyone from gamergate of the hook. They still rant at gamergate about childporn on 8chan that has nothing to do with gamergate.

 

Not to mention the desperate attempts to claim gamergate made everything up when it was always clear it wasn't fake. As usual nothing to do with fairness or objectivity, just the sacred narrative that cannot be questioned.

 

And finally in regards to Sarah's edgy and fringe behavior, regardless if she was genuine or not. It would be telling that she ended up a SJW. She would just have evolved to a currently permissible form of "edgelord" trolling. To where instead of white supremacy (as she did in the logs) you can now crap on people for "my soggy knees" and it's perfectly safe.

 

PS. Milo and Breitbart are situational allies. Plus he is an actual amusing edgelord.

 

PSS. Regarding gamergate and agg being the same. I think GG overall has a far greater capacity to criticize itself than they do. I think one would have far more luck in getting gamergaters to admit wrong doing on their end -- even if they aren't ready to drop everything to save the damsels.

[Amentep]

Maybe because I am not an "edgelord" but the stuff in her logs doesn't come off as a joke. But I am also not the police or a mind reader.

Neither am I. However I do know that on the internet all women have 34DDs and all men had 2 foot long penors if they want them. The idea that someone posting **** when they think they're anonymous isn't new to the internet.  At one point the magic of the internet was that you were who you wanted to be.  Want to be a villain?  Be a villain.  Want to be a nice girl?  Be a nice girl.  Want to like dwarves?  GO DWARFS GO!

 

Didn't actually matter if you weren't a villain, weren't a girl or hated dwarves.

 

However I don't think it is a reasonable expectation to think that anyone who had discovered this should just shut up and never bring it up.

 

Neither do I.  Once discovered I'd expect responsible journalism to take place.  Fair, balanced, well sourced and, yeah, in the case of uncovering potential criminal activity some contact with the police.

 

Speaking of police. There isn't necessarily anything strictly illegal that she can be prosecuted for.

 

Actually if she distributed child porn (which has been one of the accusations) the family has no say in it.

 

It may also be out of the statute of limitations for prosecution based on the state even if something had happened that was actionable. I just find it lacking that the article doesn't even present pursing legal review (as they present the evidence as true) as an option in the articles.

 

Not to mention the desperate attempts to claim gamergate made everything up when it was always clear it wasn't fake. As usual nothing to do with fairness or objectivity, just the sacred narrative that cannot be questioned.

 

Yeah the reaction there is kind of sad. Not unexpected since aGG and GG tend to have a "look at the source then look at the information" approach to filtering information.

 

PS. Milo and Breitbart are situational allies. Plus he is an actual amusing edgelord.

 

Situational allies are a dodgy proposition.  I can't help but think one that has the potential to come back and haunt.

Edited September 16, 2015 by Amentep

[Malcador]

No bad tactics, just bad targets for some I guess. This whole affair is rather fun to watch, shame everyone involved can't burn

Edited September 16, 2015 by Malcador

[Fighter]

Neither am I. However I do know that on the internet all women have 34DDs and all men had 2 foot long penors if they want them. The idea that someone posting **** when they think they're anonymous isn't new to the internet.  At one point the magic of the internet was that you were who you wanted to be.  Want to be a villain?  Be a villain.  Want to be a nice girl?  Be a nice girl.  Want to like dwarves?  GO DWARFS GO!

 

Didn't actually matter if you weren't a villain, weren't a girl or hated dwarves.

 

Well wanting a big P or big DDs are rather conventional and the appeal understandable. Roleplaying a pedophile is way deeper down the rabbit hole.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I have no idea what's going on here.

[Amentep]

 

Neither am I. However I do know that on the internet all women have 34DDs and all men had 2 foot long penors if they want them. The idea that someone posting **** when they think they're anonymous isn't new to the internet.  At one point the magic of the internet was that you were who you wanted to be.  Want to be a villain?  Be a villain.  Want to be a nice girl?  Be a nice girl.  Want to like dwarves?  GO DWARFS GO!

 

Didn't actually matter if you weren't a villain, weren't a girl or hated dwarves.

 

Well wanting a big P or big DDs are rather conventional and the appeal understandable. Roleplaying a pedophile is way deeper down the rabbit hole.

 

 

Sure it is, not saying it isn't.  I'm just saying because its out there doesn't make it true (or false).  There's a lot more investigation needed to determine that, if warranted.

[Malcador]

I have no idea what's going on here.

Me neither really, apparently some weirdo played being a pedophile for the lulz and now is catching fire for it ?

[Oerwinde]

Is Nyberg the one who posted a bunch of cp to 8chan then reported it claiming 8chan hosted cp in order to discredit it?

[Nonek]

As a father my protective instincts automatically kick in around such issues, however the alleged perpetrator must be given the benefit of the doubt, must be treated as innocent until proven guilty and the police must be trusted (however hard that seems) to do their jobs: Investigate any wrongdoing, and if finding a case is warranted hand over their findings to the courts so that the abuser may be prosecuted and removed from decent society.

 

However the victims (if any) must first be given adequate counselling and better homes where they are protected from such abuse and taught that it is both immoral and wrong, and they should not stand for it. All too often such crimes make abusers out of their victims, it is truly a circle of hatred and sickness that must be ended at all costs.

 

Edit: If the accused is found innocent and they were just jokes then we as proponents of free speech must accept their rights to make such jokes, just as they must accept that some people are not going to find abuse of minors humorous and call in the authorities when they hear them. Of course if the individual went anywhere near my children, innocent or not, i'd put my fist through their face, but I think that's a given.

Edited September 16, 2015 by Nonek

[aluminiumtrioxid]

PSS. Regarding gamergate and agg being the same. I think GG overall has a far greater capacity to criticize itself than they do. I think one would have far more luck in getting gamergaters to admit wrong doing on their end -- even if they aren't ready to drop everything to save the damsels.

 

I'd be somewhat more ready to accept that theory if I actually saw examples of it happening.

[Meshugger]

Well arguably aGG is against "harassment of women and minorities online" and believes GG is a hate group designed to silence women and minorities.

 

Arguably GG is against "unethical behavior in journalism" and believes aGG is a hate group designed to protect unethical journalists by using women and minorities as shields against criticism of their unethical behavior.

 

The problem is that aGG and GG both have harassed and attempted to silence everyone who is critical or it and/or sides with the other side - women and men, majorities and minorities, sexual orientations of all kind.

 

I guess that makes both side's true primary focus "winning" in any way possible, no matter how hypocritically?

 

None those claims have been proven in any way. Same bull**** that has been thrown since day one when every discussion about the Zoe post was banned on Reddit, 4chan and all major gaming forums because "muh harassment!". The moment GG has to prove that it is not any "ism" it has lost, not only because it is impossible to prove a negative, but because the it's existence depends on the taste of people most offended. It's simply submission.   

 

What is funny however, is that Sarah Nyberg has spent the last year accusing 8chan for hosting child porn, GG being a of bunch White Power racists and misogynists. How she is exposed as the very thing she accused GG of being is just hysterical. "Character assassination", "harassment", my ass.

 

Sorry for being fired up.

[Fighter]

I'd be somewhat more ready to accept that theory if I actually saw examples of it happening.

 

I've seen by this time hundreds probably. The entire hashtag was once completely filled with people condemning harassment. The other side on the other hand has a real problem accepting that the "progressives" or *gasp* feminists are capable of such.

 

It is most especially visible in sjw infested media where they think "progressive" sh** doesn't stink. Where you will never see anything outside the approved victim narrative that has the approved victim and perpetrator.