Support NeoGAF

[ronaldthump]

You can't tell someone's story without them being apart of the story, this is 3rd party employees whom he may not even know. All we got wss 4 random sources on serious events they have no clue about. Did these workers even directly work with him?

well, that's on DB no? Makes serious allegations. Doesn't respond to requests for comments.


You also have these staff members on record talking about the office culture and how they take these things seriously.

"There definitely is not a culture of covering up bad behaviour,"

 

[LukasTaves]

It does put doubt on the claim that he was fired for reporting the sexual harassment as he might have been fired for writing that email.


Did that person also say that ND covered it up?

But he acknowledged he had a breakdown (likely the email), and the HR called him trying to learn why he had the breakdown, and when he allegedly told them about it the call was ended and he was terminated due his breakdown.

I mean, the new evidence doesn't discredit what he said before, just adds to it.

Though I would say even if what Ballard said was true, doesn't seem like there was a cover up in place. Imagine you having an employee attacking others, you try to resolve the situation and he tells you that he was sexually harassed an year ago, didn't tell to anyone and that now it got to him... Even if your intention was never to cover this shit up I think it's reasonable to believe the guy could be just looking for trouble and terminate him due the situation obviously only getting worse.

Not to victim blame him, but given how the situation played out I think he made it very hard to not to get fired, even though I can totally understand why he didn't told anyone before and how it starting eating him up.

 

[Bits N Pieces]

actually it tells us two things:

It tells us that no one has heard about this sexual harrassment story.

and that DB sent an email to everyone which probably made him look bad.




JS was looking to tell DB's story. But he was ignored. So I don't know where you got that from - that its a victim blaming article.

It tells us four employees out of hundreds didn't know about it.

I've done a mass email reply unintentionally in my work before, it wasn't a good look for me but I wasn't even reprimanded never mind an official warning or getting sacked.

Kotaku wanted to jump on this story as its hot news, David didn't want to speak to them (as stated by Kotaku themselves, repeatedly) so they just pumped out an article with no real substance or clarity that has simply muddied an already complicated story.

If I was David I wouldn't speak to Kotaku even if they paid me.

 

[Primethius]

It tells us four employees out of hundreds didn't know about it.

I've done a mass email reply unintentionally in my work before, it wasn't a good look for me but I wasn't even reprimanded never mind an official warning or getting sacked.

Kotaku wanted to jump on this story as its hot news, David didn't want to speak to them (as stated by Kotaku themselves, repeatedly) so they just pumped out an article with no real substance or clarity that has simply muddied an already complicated story.

If I was David I wouldn't speak to Kotaku even if they paid me.

Oh you've unintentionally done a mass hostile email directed towards one individual and gotten away with it?

Well I guess that solves everything. Clearly it's a useless detail here then.

 

[ronaldthump]

It tells us four employees out of hundreds didn't know about it.

I've done a mass email reply unintentionally in my work before, it wasn't a good look for me but I wasn't even reprimanded never mind an official warning or getting sacked.

Kotaku wanted to jump on this story as its hot news, David didn't want to speak to them (as stated by Kotaku themselves, repeatedly) so they just pumped out an article with no real substance or clarity that has simply muddied an already complicated story.

If I was David I wouldn't speak to Kotaku even if they paid me.

mass email =/= mass hostile email attacking someone else.

 

[Aurongel]

It tells us four employees out of hundreds didn't know about it.

I've done a mass email reply unintentionally in my work before, it wasn't a good look for me but I wasn't even reprimanded never mind an official warning or getting sacked.

Kotaku wanted to jump on this story as its hot news, David didn't want to speak to them (as stated by Kotaku themselves, repeatedly) so they just pumped out an article with no real substance or clarity that has simply muddied an already complicated story.

If I was David I wouldn't speak to Kotaku even if they paid me.

I believe Kotaku's implication was that the mass CC was done maliciously and not on accident as you and many others have unintentionally done. Being outwardly hostile to coworkers and letting everyone know it gives most HR departments all the ammo they need for termination, on top of it just being downright unprofessional.

 

[Yearsoflurking]

well, that's on DB no? Makes serious allegations. Doesn't respond to requests for comments.


You also have these staff members on record talking about the office culture and how they take these things seriously.

"There definitely is not a culture of covering up bad behaviour,"

Who is kotaku that he has to speak to them? he doesn't it's his story, its not theirs. They can write for clicks, they didn't live through the supposed pain that he did.

 

[MisterR]

mass email =/= mass hostile email attacking someone else.

Not to mention the article shows there wasn’t some culture of this stuff at ND.

 

[Vanillalite]

well, that's on DB no? Makes serious allegations. Doesn't respond to requests for comments.


You also have these staff members on record talking about the office culture and how they take these things seriously.

"There definitely is not a culture of covering up bad behaviour,"

Depends on if he's persuing legal avenues and his lawyers are telling him to shut up.

 

[Peroroncino]

To people saying he was fired due to his mental breakdown, you're probably right, it'd be a great reason for HR to fire him while looking 'good', however let's not forget that something like sexual harassment seems like a good enough trigger to cause said mental breakdown, and he didn't share it with his co-workers because he was probably ashamed, it's hard enough for a woman to come forward without being shamed and victim blamed, I'd wager it's even tougher for men to admit that, afraid of being ridiculed, you know, the whole 'pshhh, a man sexually harrased/asbued?' culture.

 

[Zeouterlimits]

I posted in the original thread, but my post was largely ignored. I apologize if this comes off snooty or pretentious, but I am an attorney who works on these type of cases regularly and I have worked on both sides of them - representing plaintiffs and defendants. Simply put - there are likely two, three or four individuals that know exactly what happened here. Speculations, accusations, assumptions, and all the chaos that has gone on in the numerous threads about this is foolish. My job often requires me to speculate on fact patterns like this - and trust me it is incredibly difficult/nearly impossible to do so accurately. None of us know what happened here. This also does not mean that anyone is lying as there are numerous situations where every single thing said about this matter on both sides is actually the truth.

For example - everything David Ballard said happened might have indeed happened - he may have been harassed in a completely inappropriate manner, complained about it, been terminated shortly thereafter, and contemporaneously with his termination he may have been presented with a proposed severance/release form, and is justified in his feelings that the termination was the result of his complaints. On the flip side - Naughty Dog/Sony may have had other employment related issues with Mr. Ballard for some time, been considering terminating him, then when on the eve of doing so received notice from him that he was harassed by a co-worker, conducted an inconclusive investigation about this, decided based on the prior employment issues they wanted to terminate Mr. Ballard, and then decided that due to his allegations the termination was going to look ill-willed (even if it was potentially not), was a "high-risk" termination, and thus their attorneys advised them to offer a severance to potentially resolve things before they led to litigation. If you think this sounds far-fetched, similar scenarios occur all-the-time at tons of companies (and if you want to boycott all of these companies, good luck to you).

Or, what actually happened might be totally different, and we have no idea what the truth is. The above is a speculation - which as I said before is foolish (and yes I understand the hypocrisy in then laying out a hypothetical explanation, but that was to illustrate my point).

Now, of course it is reasonable to post something like "well, if what Mr. Ballard said occurred actually happened, that is horrible and I feel for him" but people desperately need to keep themselves in check here - on both sides. And if the mental breakdown stuff now being tossed out is true - do you really want to be on a message board denigrating someone suffering from something like that? I would hope not.

A good post, quite measured and informative for me and hopefully others.

 

[ronaldthump]

Who is kotaku that he has to speak to them? he doesn't it's his story, its not theirs. They can write for clicks, they didn't live through the supposed pain that he did.

well, in that case. I don't think DB can be taken seriously.

It's bascially this now:

make accusations.
does not back up accusations

end of story.

Depends on if he's persuing legal avenues and his lawyers are telling him to shut up.

why would he suddenly have legal avenues? Some many people making baseless conjecturing when there facts that are present are very limited and there.

 

[Yearsoflurking]

Not to mention the article shows there wasn’t some culture of this stuff at ND.

The articles shows that 4 people at the company didn't go through that type of behavior; 4 people isn't a huge sample not that I believe it was the culture. One of the 4 could be the accused

 

[Eria]

I do believe DB's story but I also believe ND's story which is that most of the company (99% of the people) didn't know about that. Hell, even the employees who worked with him didn't know about that (or they are lying).

The next step that ND should be doing as a company is investigate this ASAP. The person who did that to DB should be fired at minimum.

 

[Yearsoflurking]

well, in that case. I don't think DB can be taken seriously.

It's bascially this now:

make accusations.
does not back up accusations

end of story.



why would he suddenly have legal avenues? Some many people making baseless conjecturing when there facts that are present are very limited and there.

Exactly why people don't come out. Thanks

 

[Par Score]

Boy. Some real winners in this thread.

Some of the attitudes on display to someone who suffered for their art, to someone who had a hand in some of the most beloved games on this forum, to someone who is clearly hurt, are despicable.

They're the sort of attitudes that keep the abused from speaking out, that keep people with mental health issues from being open about them.

It tells us four employees out of hundreds didn't know about it.

I've done a mass email reply unintentionally in my work before, it wasn't a good look for me but I wasn't even reprimanded never mind an official warning or getting sacked.

Kotaku wanted to jump on this story as its hot news, David didn't want to speak to them (as stated by Kotaku themselves, repeatedly) so they just pumped out an article with no real substance or clarity that has simply muddied an already complicated story.

If I was David I wouldn't speak to Kotaku even if they paid me.

Yeah, even if this wasn't intended as a hit piece (and Jason's usually a good dude so I'm sure it wasn't) it certainly does little to help.

 

[Bits N Pieces]

The mass email I sent wasn't hostile but it certainly want professional either and it went to everyone, MD, FD, CTO and everyone down from them. Even still, if that alone warrants getting sacked instantly (?) then ND does seem like a pretty crazy place to work.

I'm not saying one is wrong and one is right, merely this article has done fuck all with regards to insight and is heavily skewed against David, which im still trying to understand why it was published in the first place. Clicks aside.

 

[rjinaz]

I'll never regret taking what an alleged victim says at face value over a corporation or large entity. A company like this has the money, the lawyers, hell whole teams of people tasked at defending such claims. The victim is usually one person and usually has no resources other than social media to get them some notice, and nobody actually on their side outside of words of support.

The onus is on the company to refute the claims. The idea that I would need to eat crow for thinking somebody is telling the truth about sexual harassment is ridiculous.

I don't think this is over by any means, I'm just reacting to some of the posts in this thread.

 

[ronaldthump]

Exactly why people don't come out. Thanks

What exactly did he do? Make an accusation that can't be verified. And then nothing of it.

All the while dragging the reputation of 2 companies in the dirt.


Kotaku piece + Sony+ND's response have both failed to acknowledge what was alleged to have happene were even on record.

I'll never regret taking what an alleged victim says at face value over a corporation or large entity. A company like this has the money, the lawyers, hell whole teams of people tasked at defending such claims. The victim is usually one person and usually has no resources other than social media to get them some notice, and nobody actually on their side outside of words of support.

The onus is on the company to refute the claims. The idea that I would need to eat crow for thinking somebody is telling the truth about sexual harassment is ridiculous.

I don't think this is over by any means, I'm just reacting to some of the posts in this thread.

But sony/ND has refuted the claims

 

[Primethius]

The mass email I sent wasn't hostile but it certainly want professional either and it went to everyone, MD, FD, CTO and everyone down from them. Even still, if that alone warrants getting sacked instantly (?) then ND does seem like a pretty crazy place to work.

I'm not saying one is wrong and one is right, merely this article has done fuck all with regards to insight and is heavily skewed against David, which im still trying to understand why it was published in the first place. Clicks aside.

Because his initial allegations were more than just sexual harassment. This article gives details potentially regarding the rest of those allegations. So it's very easy to see why it was published.

ND is a crazy place to work for responding to a mass hostile email like that? Lots of places are like that. People don't generally like getting blasted company wide, especially if they don't think they've done anything wrong.

 

[Trup1aya]

Jason provided a new perspective on Ballards termination. That's important information.

I think the information is important. And so is how it's presented.

Jason is investigating the story. It's his job to present the facts of the matter and that's what he did to the best he could. Sadly, David's mental state is relevant to the story and it would seem even he thinks so because he was the one who first mentioned the mental breakdown himself. If you take that fact away you would question why an employee was fired for no reason, if you include the fact he sent a hostile email to the entire company it is not a stretch to believe nobody really questioned why he was let go. That is not to say sexual harassment didn't take place but it adds credibility to the idea Naughty Dog were unaware of it rather than takes away credibility of it never happening. The story also seems to confirm a change in Ballard's behaviour around the time he claims the harassment started which would indicate that he is telling the truth.

I'm just confused how you can expect a journalist to reveal the truth of what happened if he ignores certain facts about the situation. I have full sympathy for David having it play out like this publicly but we can't just pretend certain things didn't happen when they are part of what went down. If David's issues were unrelated to his allegations I would understand.

It DOESN'T lend credibility to the notion that ND was unaware. It lends credibility to the notion that 4 people at ND were unaware- without any information on why those 4 people would have been aware in the first place.

The fact that is mental state was an issue during his tenure isn't new news. He said he had a mental breakdown. he said the work environment was effected. He said that HR got involved In response to the work environment after the harrasment. And he said tha this is when he notified them that the source of his mental state was harassment. So the fact that 4 others saw his mental state deteriorate isn't new at all.

A reporter should report news when he actually has news to report. And he shouldn't present it in a way that throws the victim into additional scrutiny.

 

[Shari]

Well, Ballard's tweet suggests he was fired for bringing up his sexual harassment case to HR. And that the $20k offered was hush money directly related to sexual harassment. It is also equally, if not more, likely that Sony/ND decided to terminate David after the "mental breakdown" and during his exit interview he reported his sexual harassment. Sony probably already opted to offer him severance pay before he reported anything.

I'm sorry if it's lame to you that Jason is providing more info about the entire situation. This is a huge component to journalism and arguably the reason there are journalists.

I very much believe Ballard was harassed. But a lot of the response has been "Sony covered it up and offered hush money! Fuck Sony!". Which again, could be the case, but accurate reporting(I believe Jason is being accurate, he had three sources) and more information does not hurt this situation.

Sure thing.

Kotaku wanted to jump on this story as its hot news, David didn't want to speak to them (as stated by Kotaku themselves, repeatedly) so they just pumped out an article with no real substance or clarity that has simply muddied an already complicated story.

Glad I'm not the only one seeing this. And again we all think Jason is a good journalist, that doesn't mean everything he does is good.

 

[rjinaz]

What exactly did he do? Make an accusation that can't be verified. And then nothing of it.

All the while dragging the reputation of 2 companies in the dirt.


Kotaku piece + Sony+ND's response have both failed to acknowledge what was alleged to have happene were even on record.



But sony/ND has refuted the claims

Yes they have, I didn't say they didn't. Or at least it's the start of the process.

And I hardly think their reputation is in the dirt over this. What they may not sell a few thousand games from this? I mean come on. And, if this large company wanted to they could even sue for the hit to their reputation. Not that they likely would, but they could.

 

[Dr.Tentacle]

The mass email I sent wasn't hostile but it certainly want professional either and it went to everyone, MD, FD, CTO and everyone down from them. Even still, if that alone warrants getting sacked instantly (?) then ND does seem like a pretty crazy place to work.

I think it depends on the content of that hostile e-mail.

 

[Feorax]

The mass email I sent wasn't hostile but it certainly want professional either and it went to everyone, MD, FD, CTO and everyone down from them. Even still, if that alone warrants getting sacked instantly (?) then ND does seem like a pretty crazy place to work.

I'm not saying one is wrong and one is right, merely this article has done fuck all with regards to insight and is heavily skewed against David, which im still trying to understand why it was published in the first place. Clicks aside.

If you're deliberately sending a mass email that's hostile directed at one other individual, then that could quite easily be considered harassment, ironically enough.

Sexual harassment is a massive deal, but also are other forms of harassment in the workplace. You can't expect a company to view one as worth launching a full investigation over whilst another is simply just one of those things.

 

[ronaldthump]

Yes they have, I didn't say they didn't. Or at least it's the start of the process.

And I hardly think their reputation is in the dirt over this. What they may not sell a few thousand games from this? I mean come on. And, if this large company wanted to they could even sue for the hit to their reputation. Not that they likely would, but they could.

How is their reputation not in the dirt? This "sexual harrassement" thing is the most current thing in the socio-political space thanks to harvey weinstein.

 

[jroc74]

Oh you've unintentionally done a mass hostile email directed towards one individual and gotten away with it?

Well I guess that solves everything. Clearly it's a useless detail here then.

mass email =/= mass hostile email attacking someone else.

Yup.

My lil anecdote, the email the guy sent was probably considered racial.

I think they wanted to fire him, instead he got transferred.

 

[ronaldthump]

If you're deliberately sending a mass email that's hostile directed at one other individual, then that could quite easily be considered harassment, ironically enough.

Sexual harassment is a massive deal, but also are other forms of harassment in the workplace. You can't expect a company to view one as worth launching a full investigation over whilst another is simply just one of those things.

and especially when the email is evident and what they can see.

 

[Outrun]

Hmmmm not sounding good for Ballard

Apparently no one knew about Weinstein either...

A more thorough investigation is needed.

 

[rjinaz]

How is their reputation not in the dirt? This "sexual harrassement" thing is the most current thing in the socio-political space thanks to harvey weinstein.

At the moment people have opinions about it, but what does in the dirt even mean in your mind? Will people still be buying their games? What kind of effect will this have over all to the company? This company has plenty of PR resources. In the dirt in my mind means, ruined.

And again I'm not defending false claims. People that do that are in the wrong, if they did indeed do that. But, my point was, I'm always going to assume a victim is telling the truth in cases like this, it's really a David verses Goliath situation. In cases like this where it's one person vs a corporation anyway. If somebody was named then I more "waiting for the facts" view point is more warranted.

 

[Shock32]

How is their reputation not in the dirt? This "sexual harrassement" thing is the most current thing in the socio-political space thanks to harvey weinstein.

Their reputation isn't in the dirt until there's some actual evidence that makes this true.

 

[Bits N Pieces]

Because his initial allegations were more than just sexual harassment. This article gives details potentially regarding the rest of those allegations. So it's very easy to see why it was published.

ND is a crazy place to work for responding to a mass hostile email like that? Lots of places are like that. People don't generally like getting blasted company wide, especially if they don't think they've done anything wrong.

If you get sacked for sending a hostile mass email whilst on the verge of having a nervous breakdown then yeah, that does seem pretty crazy uncompassionate place to work.

And im sorry, but for me this article means fuck all apart from framing the debate that four anonymous employees of ND are painting, and they are anonymous through fear of damaging their careers even though nothing they say incriminates the company in any way.

I think there is a lot to debate here but if the focus is on an email over everything else, then im out. Peace and love, folks.

 

[mckmas8808]

This almost seems like a hit-piece against Ballard.

What's the point of including this in the article?

It speaks to his potential motivation. We really don't know if it even happened.

 

[Primethius]

If you get sacked for sending a hostile mass email whilst on the verge of having a nervous breakdown then yeah, that does seem pretty crazy uncompassionate place to work.

And im sorry, but for me this article means fuck all apart from framing the debate that four anonymous employees of ND are painting, and they are anonymous through fear of damaging their careers even though nothing they say incriminates the company in any way.

I think there is a lot to debate here but if the focus is on an email over everything else, then im out. Peace and love, folks.

Yea, given that it's a part of the article, I'm not sure why your surprised it's a focus of debate.

And sorry, having a mental breakdown doesn't excuse some unrelated third party getting potential harassment in the workplace.

 

[dcb2821]

Everyone that has their pitchforks out or assuming he lied now is the reason why victims don't come forward. ND may not have known, and the other employees may not have witnessed the harassment. Its very possible it happened when nobody else was around.

 

[Thorrgal]

Never said that was Jason's intention

Lol but you did

 

[RichiRamjag]

The articles shows that 4 people at the company didn't go through that type of behavior; 4 people isn't a huge sample not that I believe it was the culture. One of the 4 could be the accused

They supposed to get hot takes from everyone at ND? Some of you are just being silly now. If there is a general culture there that encourages this stuff, it doesn’t hurt to get some opinion on whether or not it’s regularly accepted behaviour or a trend at the company. It may not paint the entire picture, but at least it gives some insight to what’s going on over there. It’s ridiculous that some of you were probably baying for blood and would have taken any negative info as gospel, but you get a different picture and all of a sudden, no ones word is good enough and some of you keep low-key implying that Jason (of all people) would write a hit piece.

None of this be taken as fact either way and people shouldn’t be jumping the conclusions about the guy lying because of it as that isn’t fair to him by any means.

 

[The_Lump]

Kotaku: "Hot off the press, here's some inconsequential information for you to jump to conclusions from!".

Maybe they should keep quiet about it until an investigation can conclude by people who know what the shit they are talking about when it comes to abuse claims.

It speaks to his potential motivation. We really don't know if it even happened.

Exactly, it 'speaks to' establish a narrative against his credibility. Gaming journalists really have no business assessing an abuse claim, and neither do we (as gamers). This opportunistic article is disgusting.

 

[otakukidd]

If you get sacked for sending a hostile mass email whilst on the verge of having a nervous breakdown then yeah, that does seem pretty crazy uncompassionate place to work.

And im sorry, but for me this article means fuck all apart from framing the debate that four anonymous employees of ND are painting, and they are anonymous through fear of damaging their careers even though nothing they say incriminates the company in any way.

I think there is a lot to debate here but if the focus is on an email over everything else, then im out. Peace and love, folks.

Well they did try to give him a 20k dollar severance package.

 

[QuackkAttack]

Sure thing.

I know, I'm assuming! Both sides of the story are though.

Severance pay is a pretty common practice in my industry (Accounting), and game dev is a much more volatile industry, I'd assume it is also fairly common. Again, it is an assumption, 100%.

 

[KageMaru]

But sony/ND has refuted the claims

I saw it as them refuting they had record of the harassment, not refuting that the harassment occurred. The response was very carefully worded.

 

[sense]

The mass email I sent wasn't hostile but it certainly want professional either and it went to everyone, MD, FD, CTO and everyone down from them. Even still, if that alone warrants getting sacked instantly (?) then ND does seem like a pretty crazy place to work.

I'm not saying one is wrong and one is right, merely this article has done fuck all with regards to insight and is heavily skewed against David, which im still trying to understand why it was published in the first place. Clicks aside.

You are wrong in singling out nd, sending a mass hostile email in any big corporation, you will be shown the door 99 out of 100 Times. It leads to the feeling of an unsafe work environment for coworkers.

 

[Shock32]

You are wrong in singling out nd, sending a mass hostile email in any big corporation, you will be shown the door 99 out of 100 Times. It leads to the feeling of an unsafe work environment for coworkers.

Especially today's day and age. A hostile employee on the verge of a nervous breakdown allowed to continue working there, with access to the building. Who knows what could happen.

 

[jschreier]

Couple things:

1) People I spoke with knew Ballard well. I can't get into specifics because I don't want anyone to be identifiable, but I spoke with people who were close to him, not strangers from across the office.

2) While I always appreciate feedback, folks here need to understand that my job as a reporter is to get information and try to tell the whole story, not to pick a side. It's also my job to help use truth against power, and I really hope Ballard chooses to talk more because this story isn't completely told yet, but in this case I felt it was important to hear reactions from people who worked with him. I wanted to help unfold more of the story rather than copy-pasting some tweets and calling it a day.

(The posts about "clicks" are particularly laughable, and ignorant, because we would have gotten the highest number of clicks if we had leaped on the news immediately instead of taking the time to do reporting.)

I should also note that I chose not to report some of the things I heard about Ballard, either because they were not relevant or because I couldn't corroborate them with at least two people (which is generally my standard for reporting anything sensitive).

Anyway, this isn't over yet. I already have another interview set up with someone who knows more about what went down, and I am in touch with someone who posted in Kotaku's comments claiming that he too was sexually harassed at Naughty Dog. I will continue reporting and following this story, no matter which direction(s) it leads. And I will continue to be as sympathetic as possible to Ballard, as I would to anyone who alleged that horrible things happened to them.

 

[QuackkAttack]

Couple things:

1) People I spoke with knew Ballard well. I can't get into specifics because I don't want anyone to be identifiable, but I spoke with people who were close to him, not strangers from across the office.

2) While I always appreciate feedback, folks here need to understand that my job as a reporter is to get information and try to tell the whole story, not to pick a side. It's also my job to help use truth against power, and I really hope Ballard chooses to talk more because this story isn't completely told yet, but in this case I felt it was important to hear reactions from people who worked with him. I wanted to help unfold more of the story rather than copy-pasting some tweets and calling it a day.

(The posts about "clicks" are particularly laughable, and ignorant, because we would have gotten the highest number of clicks if we had leaped on the news immediately instead of taking the time to do reporting.)

I should also note that I chose not to report some of the things I heard about Ballard, either because they were not relevant or because I couldn't corroborate them with at least two people (which is generally my standard for reporting anything sensitive).

Anyway, this isn't over yet. I already have another interview set up with someone who knows more about what went down, and I am in touch with someone who posted in Kotaku's comments claiming that he too was sexually harassed at Naughty Dog. I will continue reporting and following this story, no matter which direction(s) it leads. And I will continue to be as sympathetic as possible to Ballard, as I would to anyone who alleged that horrible things happened to them.

Thank you for being thorough!

 

[Boke1879]

Kotaku: "Hot off the press, here's some inconsequential information for you to jump to conclusions from!".

Maybe they should keep quiet about it until an investigation can conclude by people who know what the shit they are talking about when it comes to abuse claims.



Exactly, it 'speaks to' establish a narrative against his credibility. Gaming journalists really have no business assessing an abuse claim, and neither do we (as gamers). This opportunistic article is disgusting.

Jason is doing what's a journalist should do. Providing information. He's not taking any sides. Merely providing information. More than what you'd what potentially get officially get from either side.

It doesn't discredit anything. It never says the harassment didn't happen. The employees didn't know and Ballard even says he came forward because people didn't know. Ballard said he had a breakdown. This article actually goves credence to that.

It just provides more info. If he sent a company wide email blasting another employee then that explains why HR got involved and most likely why he was let go.

Many in the previous thread offered a series of events of what most likely happened.

Ballard was harassed. He didn't tell anyone like most people don't. He kept it in for a while. He has a breakdown that draws the attention of HR. He mentions the reason is because he was harassed. He's then let go and offered severance pay.

If he never filed an official complaint then there would be no record. Both parties could be telling the truth.

 

[Danielsan]

I feel both sides need to lower their pitchforks until this thing has been properly investigated. Ballard's claims may very well be true, which at the very least should require Naughty Dog / Sony HR to investigate which employee(s) committed the harassment and take action accordingly. On the other hand, people would do well not to point fingers straight away as this may very well be a case of a disgruntled ex-employee slinging a story into the world to get "revenge".

 

[HonMirin]

Couple things:

1) People I spoke with knew Ballard well. I can't get into specifics because I don't want anyone to be identifiable, but I spoke with people who were close to him, not strangers from across the office.

2) While I always appreciate feedback, folks here need to understand that my job as a reporter is to get information and try to tell the whole story, not to pick a side. It's also my job to help use truth against power, and I really hope Ballard chooses to talk more because this story isn't completely told yet, but in this case I felt it was important to hear reactions from people who worked with him. I wanted to help unfold more of the story rather than copy-pasting some tweets and calling it a day.

(The posts about "clicks" are particularly laughable, and ignorant, because we would have gotten the highest number of clicks if we had leaped on the news immediately instead of taking the time to do reporting.)

I should also note that I chose not to report some of the things I heard about Ballard, either because they were not relevant or because I couldn't corroborate them with at least two people (which is generally my standard for reporting anything sensitive).

Anyway, this isn't over yet. I already have another interview set up with someone who knows more about what went down, and I am in touch with someone who posted in Kotaku's comments claiming that he too was sexually harassed at Naughty Dog. I will continue reporting and following this story, no matter which direction(s) it leads. And I will continue to be as sympathetic as possible to Ballard, as I would to anyone who alleged that horrible things happened to them.

Big respect to you, you Press Sneak Fuck! But in all seriousness, appreciate the reporting you're doing. Seems there is more to this initial story now it looks like another potential victim has come forward. Keep up the good work.

 

[mentallyinept]

stuff

Keep up the good work.

I look forward to your updates on this story.

 

[Kenzodielocke]

Couple things:

1) People I spoke with knew Ballard well. I can't get into specifics because I don't want anyone to be identifiable, but I spoke with people who were close to him, not strangers from across the office.

2) While I always appreciate feedback, folks here need to understand that my job as a reporter is to get information and try to tell the whole story, not to pick a side. It's also my job to help use truth against power, and I really hope Ballard chooses to talk more because this story isn't completely told yet, but in this case I felt it was important to hear reactions from people who worked with him. I wanted to help unfold more of the story rather than copy-pasting some tweets and calling it a day.

(The posts about "clicks" are particularly laughable, and ignorant, because we would have gotten the highest number of clicks if we had leaped on the news immediately instead of taking the time to do reporting.)

I should also note that I chose not to report some of the things I heard about Ballard, either because they were not relevant or because I couldn't corroborate them with at least two people (which is generally my standard for reporting anything sensitive).

Anyway, this isn't over yet. I already have another interview set up with someone who knows more about what went down, and I am in touch with someone who posted in Kotaku's comments claiming that he too was sexually harassed at Naughty Dog. I will continue reporting and following this story, no matter which direction(s) it leads. And I will continue to be as sympathetic as possible to Ballard, as I would to anyone who alleged that horrible things happened to them.

Thanks, will put this in the OP.