Journalistic Integrity in the gaming press is shot

[MikeChipshop Member]

"Journalistic integrity" hehe

[spenser.d]

Right, because Sarkeesian needs the attention created by fake threats. It's the gamergate supporters who are the true victims here, yadda yadda yadda.

Give me a break.

The original point of gamergate - not that it was ever valid in the first place - has long been debunked. What it is about now is a bunch of predominantly male 'hardcore gamers' feeling butthurt and circle jerking on 8chan, from where the garbage spills onto the rest of the internet.

What you fail to see is how the gaming landscape is changing. Why would game publishers keep pandering to pimply-faced youth in their early 20s anymore?

I agree. This whole ordeal actually makes me embarrassed to call myself a gamer. I'd rather not be lumped in with that crowd right now.

[spaceelf]

I agree. This whole ordeal actually makes me embarrassed to call myself a gamer. I'd rather not be lumped in with that crowd right now.

Meh.  I am a gamer.  That doesn't mean I'm automatically some part of a huge group....it just means I play games.

 

I'm never really surprised by people being asshats, but I was surprised this thing got as ridiculous as it did.

[spenser.d]

Meh.  I am a gamer.  That doesn't mean I'm automatically some part of a huge group....it just means I play games.

 

I'm never really surprised by people being asshats, but I was surprised this thing got as ridiculous as it did.

 

Not to you or me perhaps, but to everyone outside looking in, you're part of a group. Don't get me wrong, it doesn't affect me, it's just generally embarassing

[compl3x]

I agree. This whole ordeal actually makes me embarrassed to call myself a gamer. I'd rather not be lumped in with that crowd right now.

 

 

I'm a gamer in the same way my dad is a gardener or somebody who plays golf is a golfer. Pretentious #######, many of them gaming "journalists", tried to turn it into some over-arching philosophy. Then those same "journalists" decided that the term had to die and wrote nonsensical articles about the death of the term gamer. 

 

Criticising unethical behaviour in the gaming press is fine, but the thing that makes me totally suss is that there have been ample opportunities in the past to have this conversation and no one seemed all that interested. However, once there was a sensational story, naturally involving a woman and sex, people pronounced themselves ethical arbiters of this interest and went on a psychotic crusade.

 

The journalists who wrote stupid articles about the death of the gamer or word gamer or whatever were cynically trying to flip this controversy for easy page hits, instead they got hit. The people who cynically used an entirely valid issue, game journalisism ethics, to further their women-hate & incoherent conspiracy theories are scumbags.

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

I read this on another website as an argument for the existence of GamerGate...

 

If pimping your girlfriend's games with no disclosure isn't corrupt journalism then what is?

Corrupt journalism would be something along the lines of an outlet not reporting something to do with a political figure because they have taken contributions from a lobbyist to keep their mouth shut.

 

A person that writes about video games for a living and does not disclose they dated someone? That imho is a huge who really cares.

 

In fact I will go as far as saying the entire video game journalism industry overall is one of the more pointless out there.

Video games are something that is meant to bring enjoyment to others. Let them detach from reality for a couple of hours and lose themselves in virtual worlds.

 

Yet here is just a snippet of headlines I was able to grab from 4 different video game websites ja few days ago?

• Six typical reactions to losing an online match.

• What would Super Smash Brothers look like with Disney Characters?

• Far Cry 4 length and Pokemon Details

• Screaming, running evidence of Pewdiepie's popularity and why that matters

 

I think people get the point I am trying to make. 

Are these the types of stories that are really important to living ones life even if you do play video games?

 

Perhaps for those of you who are younger and aspire to make video games and do nothing but play video games, these stories are your world. Your everything. And if I offend you with what I am saying, my apologies.

But as a 40 year old who has in fact played video games since the late 70?s, I cannot help but think that video game journalism and journalists are a virus. Viruses need to be eradicated as soon as they can be.

I will take it one step further and say they are responsible for taking my favorite hobby and damn near destroying it.

 

Do not get me wrong, I love video game developers, artists, producers, and anyone of the hundreds of thousands of creative individuals that are responsible for bringing me video games. They have my utmost respect.

 

But the journalists who report on the video game industry? They are a huge ######ing joke. And I am sure most of them are great people. In fact I can say a lot of them come off as very sincere and respectful individuals.

 

It is just their profession holds about as much importance to me as Harvey Weinstein from TMZ. Meaning I think the world can easily exist without them, and I actually believe the world would better off if they did not exist. They have to create something out of nothing to make their exsitence relevant.

 

Video game journalism should really just be the three following subjects.

• Game Announcement
• Game Preview
• Game Review

 

Quite frankly the fact they need to make something out of nothing to justify their existence gets deeper than just video games, and is a huge problem with our current society overall. Thanks to the internet and the on demand and instant availability of "news," topics that mean little to nothing in the grand scheme of life are now treated with reverence. This is very toxic for all involved.

 

All of the above is why I consider GamerGate a huge joke.

Video game journalists are corrupt? They have bias? Companies pay for reviews? The list goes on and on.

My singular response to these claims is So What. What they tend to report on i truly irrelevant to begin with.

 

Take a step back. Really take a step back. And realize that none of this matters.

What does matter is the enjoyment and the experience you get while playing video games. Playing them.

And for those responsible for making the games themselves. They find enjoyment out of creating them and sharing their talents with the rest of the world.

 

Everything else is irrelevant.

[Athernar]

Right, because Sarkeesian needs the attention created by fake threats. It's the gamergate supporters who are the true victims here, yadda yadda yadda.

 

Give me a break.

 

The original point of gamergate - not that it was ever valid in the first place - has long been debunked. What it is about now is a bunch of predominantly male 'hardcore gamers' feeling butthurt and circle jerking on 8chan, from where the garbage spills onto the rest of the internet. 

 

What you fail to see is how the gaming landscape is changing. Why would game publishers keep pandering to pimply-faced youth in their early 20s anymore? 

 

The only circlejerking going on is from people like you who systematically erase abuse when it doesn't fit your bigoted agendas.

 

Where is the focus on the doxxing, harassment, death and rape threats received by women who dare support gamergate like ggfeminist? Or how about how Boogie2988 was harassed and body shamed?

 

Or even how about Social Justice circles are actively shutting down and shunning people that expose emotional abusers?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_UKErD0uGQ

 

At this point, if you oppose gamergate you are complicit with the abuse and harassment of women. Because after all if you're going to tar people with a single brush, you don't get to complain when it's your turn to be brushed.

[compl3x]

The only circlejerking going on is from people like you who systematically erase abuse when it doesn't fit your bigoted agendas.

 

Where is the focus on the doxxing, harassment, death and rape threats received by women who dare support gamergate like ggfeminist? Or how about how Boogie2955 was harassed and body shamed?

 

Or even how about Social Justice circles are actively shutting down and shunning people that expose emotional abusers?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_UKErD0uGQ

 

 

So your argument is that both sides are as bad as each other? Your argument reminds me of religious people who, instead of addressing issues within their own faith, just point to the wrongdoing of members of other faiths.

 

Person 1: "Muslims should really do more to deal with terrorism"

Muslim: "Catholics have been covering up the sexual abuse of children in the Church for years! They are monsters!"

Person 1: "True, but what has that go to do with the issue of Islamic-motivated terrorism?"

 

 

The problem with this issue is that the alleged motivation for all of this is valid, the oozing hatred that we've since seen seems to suggest there is more going on than people who are frustrated with unethical behaviour. Throw in the fact that gaming has seen its fair share of hostility towards women in the gaming biz and it's hard to think this doesn't have a deeper connection with misogyny and sexism.

[Athernar]

So your argument is that both sides are as bad as each other? Your argument reminds me of religious people who, instead of addressing issues within their own faith, just point to the wrongdoing of members of other faiths.

 

Person 1: "Muslims should really do more to deal with terrorism"

Muslim: "Catholics have been covering up the sexual abuse of children in the Church for years! They are monsters!"

Person 1: "True, but what has that go to do with the issue of Islamic-motivated terrorism?"

 

 

The problem with this issue is that the alleged motivation for all of this is valid, the oozing hatred that we've since seen seems to suggest there is more going on than people who are frustrated with unethical behaviour. Throw in the fact that gaming has seen its fair share of hostility towards women in the gaming biz and it's hard to think this doesn't have a deeper connection with misogyny and sexism.

 

Not at all, anti-gamergate is far more bigoted than what they allege gamergate is.

 

Did you know for example that gamergate tracked down the Brazilian journalist that was responsible for sending the death threats to Anita Sarkeesian and mass-reported him to the FBI?

 

No, you probably didn't because of the active silencing and smear campaigns ongoing by anti-gamergate. And what do we see from journalists on the anti-gamergate side? Advocacy of bullying:

[spenser.d]

The only circlejerking going on is from people like you who systematically erase abuse when it doesn't fit your bigoted agendas.

 

Where is the focus on the doxxing, harassment, death and rape threats received by women who dare support gamergate like ggfeminist? Or how about how Boogie2988 was harassed and body shamed?

 

Or even how about Social Justice circles are actively shutting down and shunning people that expose emotional abusers?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_UKErD0uGQ

 

At this point, if you oppose gamergate you are complicit with the abuse and harassment of women. Because after all if you're going to tar people with a single brush, you don't get to complain when it's your turn to be brushed.

 

I think you have it backwards. As long as people perceive those who are sending threats as supporters of gamergate, than supporting it is to be complicit in it (or to just be ignorant of public views). You can't argue otherwise just because you want it to be otherwise.

[Athernar]

I think you have it backwards. As long as people perceive those who are sending threats as supporters of gamergate, than supporting it is to be complicit in it (or to just be ignorant of public views). You can't argue otherwise just because you want it to be otherwise.

 

I don't care about what the mainstream perception is, especially when that perception is being directly manipulated by one side.

 

The narrative is the greater gamergate movement is "tainted" by the actions of a few trolls - if that is to be the case then anti-gamergate is equally tainted by those who do the same on the other side.

[compl3x]

Not at all, anti-gamergate is far more bigoted than what they allege gamergate is.

 

Did you know for example that gamergate tracked down the Brazilian journalist that was responsible for sending the death threats to Anita Sarkeesian and mass-reported him to the FBI?

 

No, you probably didn't because of the active silencing and smear campaigns ongoing by anti-gamergate. And what do we see from journalists on the anti-gamergate side? Advocacy of bullying:

 

 

 

Or they are not doing a particularly good job at expressing the positive things they are doing.

 

The idea anyone is being "silenced" on the internet is absurd. The internet is the one place you can't silence bloody anyone.

 

There is also the issue over the naming. GamerGate? Let's take the most overused suffix in the English language out for another use. But that's neither here nor there.

[Athernar]

Or they are not doing a particularly good job at expressing the positive things they are doing.

 

Or maybe, there is an organised collusion between certain journalists and other figures that use accusations of misogyny to browbeat and threaten neutral parties into echoing spoonfed talking points and refusing to cover incidents that don't fit their narrative or agenda.

 

The idea anyone is being "silenced" on the internet is absurd. The internet is the one place you can't silence bloody anyone.

 

Unfortunately for you both sides of the gamergate fiasco think you're wrong, as anti- certainly liked to claim they were being silenced when Intel pulled ads from Gamasutra over Leigh Alexander's hatespeech.

 

There is also the issue over the naming. GamerGate? Let's take the most overused suffix in the English language out for another use. But that's neither here nor there.

 

So why bring it up in the first place?

[compl3x]

 

Unfortunately for you both sides of the gamergate fiasco think you're wrong, as anti- certainly liked to claim they were being silenced when Intel pulled ads from Gamasutra over Leigh Alexander's hatespeech.

 

 

 

Then both sides are either stupid or are suffering from conspiratorial thinking.

 

 

 

So why bring it up in the first place?

 

The overuse of the suffix -gate annoys me.

[Athernar]

Then both sides are either stupid or are suffering from conspiratorial thinking.

 

So your argument is that both sides are as bad as each other? ;)

 

Realistically, you're being far too literal with your concept of what constitutes "silencing", this thread itself is proof of how significantly media controls the narrative and what they want people to see.

[Anthony Tosie Veteran]

Not at all, anti-gamergate is far more bigoted than what they allege gamergate is.

 

Did you know for example that gamergate tracked down the Brazilian journalist that was responsible for sending the death threats to Anita Sarkeesian and mass-reported him to the FBI?

 

No, you probably didn't because of the active silencing and smear campaigns ongoing by anti-gamergate. And what do we see from journalists on the anti-gamergate side? Advocacy of bullying:

A. Biddle was being facetious. I don't know how much more obvious that could be.

B. Biddle is an editor for a different website owned by the same network. He's not a Kotaku editor.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

I don't care about what the mainstream perception is, especially when that perception is being directly manipulated by one side.

...

The mainstream perception of GamerGate is being directly driven by the supporters of it who think it's perfectly normal to send death and rape threats to women who disagree with them as if it's a normal form of discourse.

Don't like people talking about all the death and rape threats? Don't be associated with a movement that uses them as a core part of their "arguments".

Edit: remember that the "ethics" complaints are bordering between nonsense and baseless, any actual issues were dealt with months ago when they got bought to attention (Like a few journalists donating money to devs via Kickstarter and the like)

[Athernar]

A. Biddle was being facetious. I don't know how much more obvious that could be.

B. Biddle is an editor for a different website owned by the same network. He's not a Kotaku editor.

 

Oh look, it's the same old tired "they were just joking/trolling" cop out.

 

The mainstream perception of GamerGate is being directly driven by the supporters of it who think it's perfectly normal to send death and rape threats to women who disagree with them as if it's a normal form of discourse.

Don't like people talking about all the death and rape threats? Don't be associated with a movement that uses them as a core part of their "arguments".

Edit: remember that the "ethics" complaints are bordering between nonsense and baseless, any actual issues were dealt with months ago when they got bought to attention (Like a few journalists donating money to devs via Kickstarter and the like)

 

And yet you're perfectly okay with sending rape and death threats to women that support gamergate.

[simplezz]

There's a disturbing amount of censorship going on with this story. Almost as if higher up's don't want to discuss the topic of journalistic ethics. It's like the irrational fear of being called a racist has spread to misogyny. Even the mere utterance of the word is enough to make men everywhere cower and become obsequious. Suggesting that if a man doesn't openly condemn the idea, he is somehow complicit.

[Athernar]

There's a disturbing amount of censorship going on with this story. Almost as if higher up's don't want to discuss the topic of journalistic ethics. It's like the irrational fear of being called a racist has spread to misogyny. Even the mere utterance of the word is enough to make men everywhere cower and become obsequious. Suggesting that if a man doesn't openly condemn the idea, he is somehow complicit.

 

Hit the nail on the head.

 

It's funny really, one person in particular that has felt the effects of this is none other than Brad Wardell of Stardock, who has commented on issues like Kotaku's and others smear campaign against him in addition to other gamergate topics.

 

Just a thought too but, considering Brad is an admin/(co-?)owner of Neowin, one has to wonder if that constitutes enough "association" for certain other staff in opposition to step down as a matter of integrity.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

...

And yet you're perfectly okay with sending rape and death threats to women that support gamergate.

This is a pretty ham fisted way of trying to change the subject, I never said anything of the kind and you've just made that up.

I'm actually entirely against sending death or rape threats (Or any type of threat actually) to anybody regardless of their stance on anything. Just because I don't like "GamerGate" or what it stands for doesn't mean you have to make up claims about me personally.

[trag3dy]

This is a pretty ham fisted way of trying to change the subject, I never said anything of the kind and you've just made that up.

I'm actually entirely against sending death or rape threats (Or any type of threat actually) to anybody regardless of their stance on anything. Just because I don't like "GamerGate" or what it stands for doesn't mean you have to make up claims about me personally.

 

Which is exactly what's happening to those who take the side of gamergate... and that was his point I'm pretty sure. It had nothing to do with you personally.

[Athernar]

This is a pretty ham fisted way of trying to change the subject, I never said anything of the kind and you've just made that up.

I'm actually entirely against sending death or rape threats (Or any type of threat actually) to anybody regardless of their stance on anything. Just because I don't like "GamerGate" or what it stands for doesn't mean you have to make up claims about me personally.

 

It's not changing the subject at all, nor is it made up. I'm just using your own narrative and position against you.

 

You seem to like making pretty definitive claims about the "core of gamergate" alongside a large dollop of "guilt by association". Considering how naturally open and thus weak that association is, it's not really that much of a leap (if at all) to lump you in with the "core of anti-gamergate" and derive that you support the harassment of people. To use your own words against you, if you don't like being associated with death and rape threats, don't associate with anti-gamergate by echoing their talking points.

[compl3x]

Honest question:  has the initial allegation against Quinn been corroborated? As far as I can tell from the Wiki entry on GamerGate it hasn't.

[HawkMan]

This is a pretty ham fisted way of trying to change the subject, I never said anything of the kind and you've just made that up.

I'm actually entirely against sending death or rape threats (Or any type of threat actually) to anybody regardless of their stance on anything. Just because I don't like "GamerGate" or what it stands for doesn't mean you have to make up claims about me personally.

 

 

What do you think it stands for ? GamerGate isn't about what the small group of tweeners at 8chan is doing by spreading hate and threats. They are just idiots trying to ride the gamergate, while they don't really represent anythign about gamergate.

 

either way, after seeing how the media handles this, I'm more and more in support of GG regardless. Just look at polygon and the Verge and their coverage, they don't have ONE not a SINGLE story about the gamergate side, what they want and stand for, they haven't tried interviewing a SINGLE person. All their claims about what gamergate is comes from two claims, the stupid Quinn crap(whihc was before GG anyway, though it helped start the "movement") and Threats against mainly Sarkeesian.

 

on the other hand, if Sarkeesian farts, then they write an article about it, and at the same time even if she isn't talking about GG and threats against here in whatever they're writing about her, they threw in several paragraphs about how bad GamerGate is and how they're torturing her. 

 

Polygon used to be my gamer news goto, but during this I have lost all respect for them, they have show they have no journalistic integrity, they have shown that their so called journalists aren't even pretending to be journalists. They're covering a "major" case wich any serious news organization would know means they HAVE to cover both sides, they're not even pretending to cover the gamergate side. They're not saying anything negative about Sarkeesian.  They're not pointing out how she's lying and fabricating evidence in her anti game videos, They're not covering how she directly said she's not a gamer, yet bases all all anti video game videos on being a gamer. 

 

Look at their latest Editors not on gamergate again, it was a bunch of crap about how they have journalistic integrity and only covering sarkeesians plight is the right thing to to,  it's like I didn't read the document he quoted himself in the article. 

 

 

So what do you think gamergate is about. it's Certainly not about anything you'll read about in any of the major gaming news sites, since they're to busy painting it black and claiming GG is all about wanting to kill and rape women in games, because that's what Sarkeesian says, and whatever she says is correct.