GamerGate's Image Problem

[irishda]

Well.. Thanks.

However your attempts at derailing discussion by complimenting me is not going to win you many favors. Personally I'm not going to pretend that I've read all hundreds pages of the discussion, however I'm more of an escapistuser than I'm a.. Whatever it is people supporting gamergate calls themselves. I'd like to think you are aswell, so please respect our website and act with some civility when engaging in debate!

There is no need to be condescending towards me.

It's not a little adorable though that you cut out the part of my sentence that supported my claim. That's either you trying to lie to other people or lie to yourself, which hold that butter train I thought is what you WANTED to be fighting against. Now, your claim that you haven't read the discussion flies nicely in the face of your earlier quote from JUST UP THE PAGE

To be honest, just look at the main thread. You'll be hard pressed to find 800 Posts about Zoe Quinn, let alone 800 posts of people 'obsessing graphically' over her, which you'd have to should you want your argument to hold water.

Bold claim for a guy who's more of an escapist user than a pro-gamergate person who hasn't read through the thread. Plus your insistence that you're not REALLY a supporter of gamergate, despite the fact that you only agree with them on everything and are willing to argue with other forum users about it, is a nice touch as well. Again, I'm not sure if you're lying to me because you think I'm an idiot, or you're lying to yourself because you don't want to believe it. Either way it betrays a lack of respect for everyone involved, and makes me wonder why I shouldn't continue acting condescending towards the pro-gamergate crowd.

 

[Nikolaz72]

Snip

I don't really take people insulting me too seriously.

Really if you want to be taken seriously you should just stay level headed and act with civility towards the people whom you wish to have a debate with. I didn't mean to insult you and I'm sorry if it came across that way.

 

[NinjaDeathSlap]

The problem was not that she was given good press or no press, the problem was how long it took to get an actual investigation into the issue, the behavior and attitudes of many journalists in shutting down any and all conversation about possible wrongdoing and the tactical and systematic censorship of discussion of possible wrongdoing.

Yeah, he didn't write for her. Doesn't mean he couldn't have used his networking to help get her story covered about the whole wizardchan thing, among a plethora of other possible issues that would suggest conflict of interest. Sure, could be nothing at all between the 5 guys she had relationships with that promoted her career. That still doesn't excuse the complete lack of accountability or professionalism in how the gaming press handled and continues to handle the situation.

I've said it before, had they simply released a story about it, said they were investigating and went that path, they would have had egg on their face, been laughed at a little and then no one would care. But no, they had to try to shame people for daring to ask about what certainly could have been a conflict of interest (remember, since no investigation had been done at the time, no one knew). That is why gamergate formed, not because some dev of a game had sex, but because the implications raised about the credibility of the sites covering her was met with total and abject hostility.

As far as this goes, I actually agree with you. While I'm not sure I'd accuse the motives of the press of trying to silence discussion to defend their buddies in the biz, it was a shoddy and knee-jerk response, that did highlight some problems in how some game journalists had come to view their role in the industry. Also, it gave the impression to a lot of people who had been wanting to know what was what, that there was no smoke without fire, and they really should have seen that coming.

Now, that's not me saying that they should have released reports into it until they actually had something of substance to report. Otherwise, they would just have been being the game industry equivalent of TMZ or Hello! Magazine (for the UK), neither of which are paragons of the touted journalistic integrity. However, when people were asking what was happening, they should have let it known they were looking into it, rather than ignoring it and actively trying to shut down the discussion. On that much, I believe GamerGate was right to take offence and campaign for better treatment.

However, there's a problem with you saying on this thread what any of this is and isn't 'about', while gamergate remains a nebulous movement with little agreed direction and no command structure, because then anyone who also claims to represent GamerGate can come along and start spewing crap, and for it to be taken as equally representative. I mean, we have people in this thread right now still trying to hang their arguments on what a conniving, abusive ***** they believe Quinn to be, while in the same breath claiming that they are the real victims of personal attacks.

You, personally, sound like you've got a level head on your shoulders, even if I still don't agree with your stance. However, in the context of everything that is happening around what you're saying, surely you can understand what it is about GamerGate that a lot of us don't have time for, and why were unconvinced by any one person trying to tell us what this is or isn't about?

All movements in history, no matter where they came from or what they stood for, that are remembered for making any kind of real progress, did so because they had leaders. The importance of leaders is that, when someone from the outside wants to get perspective on a movement and discuss their motives/aims, be they a government, a media outlet, or an ordinary citizen like me, they have people they know they can go to who are understood as being representative of at least the major thrust of said movement, and have some tangible control over where that movement goes next. You can talk to a person. You can talk to a small group of people, but you can't talk to thousands of people at once, who's voices all carry an equal amount of weight, because they will always contradict each-other and drown each-other out, because people, even when united by something like GamerGate, remain individuals with their own perspectives and priorities.

If GamerGate can't take control of it's own voice, and make sure it's conveying one, distinct message, then people like me will continue to be left in the dark as to what you really want.

 

[Akjosch]

I'm not sure GamerGate has any need for "image fixing". So we're seen as arseholes and worse? No problem for me. A lot of people I admire were major arseholes - people like Winston Churchill and George S. Patton.

Call me names. Smear me with insults. I don't give a damn, hell I might even gleefully agree to some of them, as long as I'm right.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

One thing I really have to wonder about the whole "gamer gate debacle" is why is this news or even an issue? Video games are products packaged, advertised and sold like any other product, like all products the majority of the media surrounding it is bought off, it is MEANT to be advertising and that is what it is. It is not some " lets keep this pure and honest" reviewing going on, hell with all the forum bots these days and marketers paid to only put out positive reviews on products, why would anyone think this to be a"thing" at all? People seriously think there is integrity in journalism for ANY product on the market today? Look at beauty magazines and websites, those product endorsements are paid for by the companies that make the products, those companies that make the products pay to make the magazines and websites. This goes for every product on the market, but you don't see angry mobs forming to stop " shampoo gate" or "automotive gate" because people write positive reviews for money.

I am probably as hardcore a gamer you can find, but not for a minute of my life did I think that gaming websites were not bought off and brought to me by the companies who make the games for the sole purpose of advertising those games to try and make me want to throw money at them. Why would I ever think otherwise?

Gamer gate's " Image" problem is due to a few things here a couple of which are, but not limited to:
1) It is no ones business who sleeps with who in gaming, it comes across as an unhealthy obsession when people become irate because someone slept with someone and they wrote nice things about them.

2)Did anyone really think that the vast majority of gaming sites would have even existed if it weren't for game developers paying for their existence? Of course they pay people to say good things about their products, that is how they get people to buy them, even when they make ones that are garbage. People calling for integrity in game journalism.. why would game journalism be any different than any other product journalism from lipstick, to vacuum cleaners? It is what it is. It just makes people seem gullible to think that this hasn't always been happening when it comes to product advertising, or that it will cease to happen.

EDIT: The funny thing is most people are not irate about people being paid to write positive reviews, but are irate because they used their influence to promote agendas.. how is that any worse than being paid to write positive reviews? It is unethical to push agendas, but it is ethical to be bought off by industry and write opinions you may not agree with? hmmm... Silliness

 

[Verlander]

The image won't improve, because people are slapping Vivian James as an avatar and going out into the wild wild web, and spewing sexist, racist nonsense.

Separate the argument about journalistic ethics and the discussion about representation in video games (and retire Vivian), and you'll be off to a good start.

 

[kyp275]

Of course, could the "censoring" be the standard deletion one sees whenever a group of angry gamers start talking about a woman who makes them mad? No, it's probably far safer to assume she frequently has sex with mods and editors and janitors and writers and advertisers, etc., etc. And that this horde of people aren't professional enough to separate their work and sex lives, so they've all been tamed by her magic vagina.

I have no idea why the movement has an image problem.

Sure, but then please do also delete all mentions and references of "news" and "journalists" from those sites and writers at the same time. It's one thing to exercise editorial discretion when choosing not to report something because of the public's interest, it's another when you start squelching legitimate discussions because you don't like how it got started.

These people have no moral high ground to preach from when they had no problem presenting allegations as facts before. FFS, actual news outlet like CNN would still use terms like "alleged" for murderers caught red-handed like the Aurora shooter, while these so-called gaming journalists didn't even pause to collect their $200 as they ran all over each other past Go to drag Brad Wardell's name through the mud based on nothing more than an allegation.

And before you even try, I don't give two ****s about who's screwing who, as far as I'm concerned those two can go out and have week-long swinger orgy - not my business, don't care.

What pissed me and many others off, is the double standard non-response across the board for the major outlets combined with the holier-than-thou, you're all basement neckbeard white misogynistic nerds lololol attitude.

But please, do tell me how that's actually true, that I'm just a misogynist nerd who hates women and want women out of gaming (oops, better go tell half of my MMO static to stop playing games), and a racist for hiding behind minorities (better go to the social security office and change my race to white, and give them the memo that Asians are officially white as of last week).

Frankly, all you have to do is read that recent email dump. People like Greg Tito, Ryan Smith, and Mike Futter acted as real journalists should. The ilks like Ben Kuchera? Not so much. If you want to act like the Fox News/MSNBC of the gaming press, at least have the courage to admit it like RPS.

 

[Mr. Omega]

You know, I was willing to at least give the benefit of the doubt to the more sincere members. I could try to overlook the unfortunate origins. The unfortunate context surrounding their mascot. The fact that they are focusing on indies instead of the blatant problems in the AAA market. The fact that accusations of "bias" and "corruption" have been thrown around whenever a review gamers disagree with come out for years now. And I could I could even try to look beyond the financial support of Aurini, as hard as that was to overlook.

But they claim to be a movement about integrity in journalism and their primary source... is Breitbart, a site best known for its blatant breaching of ethics. That was the straw that broke the camels back. I tried to ignore it the first time, but the latest development proves that this is not a one-time thing. Got rid of any sympathy I had for them.

Gamergate is beyond saving at this point.

 

[Aineko]

You know, I was willing to at least give the benefit of the doubt to the more sincere members. I could try to overlook the unfortunate origins. The unfortunate context surrounding their mascot. The fact that they are focusing on indies instead of the blatant problems in the AAA market. The fact that accusations of "bias" and "corruption" have been thrown around whenever a review gamers disagree with come out for years now. And I could I could even try to look beyond the financial support of Aurini, as hard as that was to overlook.

But they claim to be a movement about integrity in journalism and their primary source... is Breitbart, a site best known for its blatant breaching of ethics. That was the straw that broke the camels back. I tried to ignore it the first time, but the latest development proves that this is not a one-time thing. Got rid of any sympathy I had for them. Gamergate is beyond saving at this point.

The email thread was posted in its entirety. Participants in the list have verified its authenticity, directly and indirectly. It is accurate and contextualised. Why are you casting doubts on it by attacking the messenger? Why does the revelation of truthful facts upset you?

 

[RexMundane]

You know, I was willing to at least give the benefit of the doubt to the more sincere members. I could try to overlook the unfortunate origins. The unfortunate context surrounding their mascot. The fact that they are focusing on indies instead of the blatant problems in the AAA market. The fact that accusations of "bias" and "corruption" have been thrown around whenever a review gamers disagree with come out for years now. And I could I could even try to look beyond the financial support of Aurini, as hard as that was to overlook.

But they claim to be a movement about integrity in journalism and their primary source... is Breitbart. That was the straw that broke the camels back. I tried to ignore it the first time, but the latest development proves that this is not a one-time thing. Got rid of any sympathy I had for them. Gamergate is beyond saving at this point.

It's a plain case of them being blind to the problems of Breitbart generally and Milo specifically, just because they're on their side in this. I was in the megathread talking to this last night, about the incident last Thursday when Milo misrepresented the SFPD's statement on the most recent Sarkeesian death threats, how the Police Rep. said they personally couldn't find the record of it yet, and he interpreted that as positive confirmation that she never contacted them. He went public with a lack of evidence on his part without bothering to verify or get further comment from the people involved, basically instigating the mob against Sarkeesian again, and threw himself a self-congratulatory party on 4chan for his bravery and wisdom, before having to retract it within 24 hours, avoiding using the hashtag to do so. I even provided the direct quotes:

SFPD: "I've researched for this incident and thus far unable to locate any information of this alleged incident."
M.Y.: "SFPD has confirmed to me that it received no complaint from Anita Sarkeesian in August, as she claims"

And the response was fairly consistently that the SFPD is at fault for poor organization, that Milo's the innocent victim in this confusion, and besides his behavior has otherwise been exemplary, at the same time they praise him for every insult lobbed directly ad ZQ or AS. And besides, I remember it differently, and that's what's important.

And these are the people fighting for more rigorous journalistic standards.

 

[RexMundane]

The sad fact is that when people defend gaming journalism, they defend these attitudes. They gloss over the very real problem not just in gaming but society.

When they defend these attitudes, they normalize it. They normalize polarization. They normalize racism. They normalize the disconnect between third world suffering and our "suffering."

When they normalize it, the media thinks its okay and spreads hate and apathy that trickles down into culture. Our culture.

Then they immediately turn around and say no minority can ever be angry that them. Ever. Then they turn back around and call gamers racist. They gloss over diversity instead of celebrate it because hate gets them money. hate gets them reputation points.

THAT is why people are so angry. This wouldn't have blown up if we didn't know how intolerant game journalism was. They disregard and insult minorities. They bully cancer patients, the disabled, and transpeople. They even bully other women.

That despite all their rhetoric, game journalism is just as toxic if not more so than normal gamers. Just as exclusive. Just as racially one sided as the stereotype used to suggest for gamers.

But no one wants to admit gaming journalism has a problem as long as a famous figurehead and his buddies get things for free is allowed to be hateful. The journalists created a mailing list to censor any dissent so they can keep getting free things. To censor people to brow beat them into doing what they want.

Even Boogie admitted to being strong armed by these people.

I am disgusted that anyone would gloss over these issues and not call for journalistic reform. Instead they run off about American political allegiances, movement "origins," and more ego inflating chest thumping as if it fucking matters.

None of that matters anymore. We have a bigger problem.

and lets not even GET into the scam journalists set up or the charity those journalists killed so they could steal from good natured people. This is ignoring the first outrage that spawned Gamergate. Nor the fact that the agenda they push regards colleges as oppressive and wants to do away with scientific peer review.

Make no mistake, this is bigger than just 2 women. This is bigger than sex. This is a long running issue in gaming that goes all the way into society.

People run back to "its all gamer hate" because its simple. Its simpler to "fix" and ignore. Its what people WANT to believe so they don't have to reform the entire industry.

That they still have famous mouthpieces at their back. That someone powerful is looking out for them.

But the truth of the matter is the industry is very sick and needs reform across the board. No one cares for consumers. Especially reviews, which can kill the industry like it did in the 1980s.

Who will spend 60$ on a game with no trust worthy reviews? No one.

And that should scare each and every person who plays games ever.

I do hate to be glib, but this looks a lot like what you might call a Gish Gallop; an attempt to overwhelm debate with numerous vaguely-stated small arguments and exaggerated emotional pleas, and as such it reads more like a manifesto than an actual substantive argument. It's not really persuasive, it's just badgering.

To the point of the thread and GG's image problem? You might want to avoid calling everyone who doesn't agree with you "disgusting," implying they're all racist bullies, and using self-aggrandizing language threatening that, if you're not appeased, it will "kill the industry."

 

[RexMundane]

The sad fact is that when people defend gaming journalism, they defend these attitudes. They gloss over the very real problem not just in gaming but society.

When they defend these attitudes, they normalize it. They normalize polarization. They normalize racism. They normalize the disconnect between third world suffering and our "suffering."

When they normalize it, the media thinks its okay and spreads hate and apathy that trickles down into culture. Our culture.

Then they immediately turn around and say no minority can ever be angry that them. Ever. Then they turn back around and call gamers racist. They gloss over diversity instead of celebrate it because hate gets them money. hate gets them reputation points.

THAT is why people are so angry. This wouldn't have blown up if we didn't know how intolerant game journalism was. They disregard and insult minorities. They bully cancer patients, the disabled, and transpeople. They even bully other women.

That despite all their rhetoric, game journalism is just as toxic if not more so than normal gamers. Just as exclusive. Just as racially one sided as the stereotype used to suggest for gamers.

But no one wants to admit gaming journalism has a problem as long as a famous figurehead and his buddies get things for free is allowed to be hateful. The journalists created a mailing list to censor any dissent so they can keep getting free things. To censor people to brow beat them into doing what they want.

Even Boogie admitted to being strong armed by these people.

I am disgusted that anyone would gloss over these issues and not call for journalistic reform. Instead they run off about American political allegiances, movement "origins," and more ego inflating chest thumping as if it fucking matters.

None of that matters anymore. We have a bigger problem.

and lets not even GET into the scam journalists set up or the charity those journalists killed so they could steal from good natured people. This is ignoring the first outrage that spawned Gamergate. Nor the fact that the agenda they push regards colleges as oppressive and wants to do away with scientific peer review.

Make no mistake, this is bigger than just 2 women. This is bigger than sex. This is a long running issue in gaming that goes all the way into society.

People run back to "its all gamer hate" because its simple. Its simpler to "fix" and ignore. Its what people WANT to believe so they don't have to reform the entire industry.

That they still have famous mouthpieces at their back. That someone powerful is looking out for them.

But the truth of the matter is the industry is very sick and needs reform across the board. No one cares for consumers. Especially reviews, which can kill the industry like it did in the 1980s.

Who will spend 60$ on a game with no trust worthy reviews? No one.

And that should scare each and every person who plays games ever.

I do hate to be glib, but this looks a lot like what you might call a Gish Gallop; an attempt to overwhelm debate with numerous vaguely-stated small arguments and exaggerated emotional pleas, and as such it reads more like a manifesto than an actual substantive argument. It's not really persuasive, it's just badgering.

To the point of the thread and GG's image problem? You might want to avoid calling everyone who doesn't agree with you "disgusting," implying they're all racist bullies, and using self-aggrandizing language threatening that, if you're not appeased, it will "kill the industry."

Thats the issue right there:

Look at these journalists doing bad things, where is the outrage?

OMG LOOK AT THAT.

It ignores the original point. It ignores anything of value using red herrings. How can we fight intolerance if people want to look the other way every single fucking time?

I said that people's willingness to look the other way was disgusting. That we let gaming journalists get away with things that normal journalists WOULD NEVER get away with. I said that gamers didn't want to do any actual effort to reform gaming because its a "lost cause" or because some mouthpiece has been saying what they were thinking for years.

I have been saying this for weeks.

And this isn't exaggerated outrage, this is real outrage. That despite saying how they will "fight for diversity" so I can play as someone of my own race, they turn back around and try to dictate what all minorities should feel. They brow beat minorities into towing the line.

That against all their rhetoric, they lied so they can build reputation and look cool.

Well that isn't going to fly. You can still not like gamergate and still call out unethical actions.

But somehow people create imaginary party lines because of reasons.
Its somehow either "journalists are fine" or "omg misogyny!"

Its a false dichotomy that you are pushing.

I didn't mention party lines or politics, or minorities or misogyny or intolerance. I didn't say your outrage was un-real. I didn't say that modern game journalism is fine as-is. To the topic of the thread on "Gamergate's Image Problem," I was trying, civilly as I could, to indicate that the kind of accusatory, unfocused accusations and paranoid behavior exhibited in that post, and the fact that it is not uncommon within the movement, is to the detriment of whatever "good" they might accomplish.

To your tangential issues about the "bad things" the journalists were doing? Aside from having to point out Sessler quit games journalism a while ago precisely because he didn't want to deal with the amount of abuse he was getting (Links: Kotaku [http://kotaku.com/memories-of-my-16-year-career-in-video-games-1580581507], and Archive.today mirror [https://archive.today/0hPUo]), I am unconvinced that they are as bad as you say, or are indicative of any further rot beyond the revelation that people in the middle of a protracted twitter argument tend to say things they, on reflection, shouldn't. To which point, many have apologized, and the ones who haven't, I can see why they'd refuse to give an inch of vindication to the worst of the harassers. Beyond that, if I'm reading the "earth-shattering" emails correctly, the bad behavior seems to be saying further bad things in emails, and arranging a show of sympathy to victims of online harassment which, I have to tell you, I don't perceive as evil. And it's your job to try to convince people that it is, and returning back to the thread topic, that's why the movement has to deal with its image problem.

 

[The9thEcho]

Changing the name is one of the worst things you could do at this point. It's a tactic anti-#GamerGate tried with #GameEthics, where they tried to splinter you into different groups, cause in-fighting, and control the conversation. You'd be feeding right into their bullshit willingly, and risk killing this whole thing in the process.

Besides, you already have enough momentum on Twitter that when a giant like 4chan fell and split it's attention on getting it's boards back and finding a new base and regrouping, it skyrocketed #GG to it's highest point. Getting more people's attention in the process. No need to waste that.

Secondly, the sad truth is: there is no removing the "misogynist" or harassers. Just like there is no removing the crazies on the anti-GG side. You call them out when you see it. You tell them to be civil, fair, and focus on ethics and corruption; and give credit to journalists that agree. You keep taking screenshots of how horrible anti-GGs are. Keep engaging people on social media. Call advertisers. Boycott sites and give suggestions on "good" ones that allow discussion. Share images. Do your own individual streams and encourage bigger streamers on our side to help out by joining yours or doing their own. Keep doing what you've been doing basically. That's the best you can do. And it's been amazing so far.

Focusing on "image" is setting yourself up to fail. You don't have the outlets they do, you're not as sympathetic, you have no individual face on this movement(and you shouldn't). These people are extremists for the most part, the whole idea of this "movement" is tainted in their eyes; they want it dead. They'll never let up on those points. Simple as that. It's a waste of time putting in resources to "repairing your image".

You should push the point of how sad it is that gamers felt the need to turn to hard-right conservatives, who aren't involved in the industry, for fairness. That the journalists you're supposed to trust were clearly colluding with eachother in private(The googlegroup is password protected, right?) to push a narrative and censorship. Any honest journalist, regardless of political stance, will look at that and see instantly that there is something very wrong here.

edit: I totally misread the op, but I'll leave this up anyways. =/

 

[kyp275]

ZOMG! Leigh Alexander tweeted an Irish drinking joke! Adam Sessler employed some unflattering hyperbole! It's the story of the century!

Funny thing is, if it's some random anom posting those kind of jokes under the GG tag, you'd be one of the first one to say "LOOK! RACISTS! BIGOTS! I TOLD YOU SO!!!!"

Beyond that, if I'm reading the "earth-shattering" emails correctly, the bad behavior seems to be saying further bad things in emails, and arranging a show of sympathy to victims of online harassment which, I have to tell you, I don't perceive as evil. And it's your job to try to convince people that it is, and returning back to the thread topic, that's why the movement has to deal with its image problem.

Evil? no. Wrong? yes, because they're crossing a professional boundary that they should not be.