Support NeoGAF

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

I'm sure #GamerGate will turn on Milo any day now.

Nah

If anything, this reads like he's saying the targets of Gaters are just making it up

In other words bullshit as usual from him

 

[Neoriceisgood]

So today I've seen Zoe mention on Twitter that she's still getting awful phone calls. Some assholes claim she's faking it, so she uploads a recording of one of these calls and they still claim that it's fake. These same people want her to prove it by posting the phone number for everyone to see, despite this particular phone call coming from a kid.
I've seen FilmCrit Hulk of all people consider leaving Twitter because gamergate is depressingly toxic. He honestly believes that gamergate is one of the most toxic discussions he's ever engaged in online, and I find myself agreeing with him.

If she'd give the kid's phone number they'll just put that on the Zoe Quinn shitlist;

"revealed the phone number of an innocent child to her audience for being pro #GG".

 

[SirPainsalot]

This has probably been talked to death already, but what is everyone's opinion on the whole GameJournoPros thing? Ignoring Breitbart's editorializing, it's really interesting to read through some of the stuff that was said there with ethics in mind. This interview with Greg Lisby, a lawyer who's an expert in ethics in relation to journalism, is a great watch. In it, he basically says that journalists walk a very fine line when having colleagues/other industry contacts as personal friends. It makes me a little bit uneasy reading through the GameJournoPro thing because stuff like it is definitely muddying the waters between friendship and colleague contact. Not to mention all the forms of conflicts of interest and bias that come from it.

Anyway, just an observation I made. What is everyone else's thoughts?

 

[The Technomancer]

So today I've seen Zoe mention on Twitter that she's still getting awful phone calls. Some assholes claim she's faking it, so she uploads a recording of one of these calls and they still claim that it's fake. These same people want her to prove it by posting the phone number for everyone to see, despite this particular phone call coming from a kid.
I've seen FilmCrit Hulk of all people consider leaving Twitter because gamergate is depressingly toxic. He honestly believes that gamergate is one of the most toxic discussions he's ever engaged in online, and I find myself agreeing with him.

And in this thread, I've been seeing the same damn points being brought up again and again (Why the fuck are we still talking about Leigh Alexander's article!?), with "facts" being regurgitated that never had any basis in reality over a month ago.

I think I'm done reading about gamergate or participating in gamergate stuff (not that I posted here too much in the first place). It's just become far too frustrating, exhausting and anxiety inducing for me at this point,although I doubt I'll be able to completely avoid reading about it since a lot of people I follow on Twitter are pretty vocal about it.
At the very least, I did get some benefit from gamergate. It's a bit ironic, but this whole mess has actually lead me to having greater respect for a large number of game journalists. I even discovered a couple of writers that I had never heard of before thanks to this (MHWilliams, for example).

It also finally convinced me to play Depression Quest, which did help me out a bit.

But yea for now, I'm done reading/participating in gamergate discussions.

Fucking christ, I hadn't even noticed FCH getting pulled into it. I wonder if we'll get a good essay from him on the topic though

 

[tranciful]

This has probably been talked to death already, but what is everyone's opinion on the whole GameJournoPros thing? Ignoring Breitbart's editorializing, it's really interesting to read through some of the stuff that was said there with ethics in mind. This interview with Greg Lisby, a lawyer who's an expert in ethics in relation to journalism, is a great watch. In it, he basically says that journalists walk a very fine line when having colleagues/other industry contacts as personal friends. It makes me a little bit uneasy reading through the GameJournoPro thing because stuff like it is definitely muddying the waters between friendship and colleague contact. Not to mention all the forms of conflicts of interest and bias that come from it.

Anyway, just an observation I made. What is everyone else's thoughts?

It has been talked to death already. The lawyer doesn't distinguish between news journalism and enthusiast press. Read the medium piece linked in the OP if you want to have a better understanding of that.

 

[The Librarian]

• Study – 63% of women polled report being harassed while gaming online: http://blog.pricecharting.com/2012/09/emilyami-sexism-in-video-games-study.html
• There’s No Comparing Male and Female Harassment Online: http://time.com/3305466/male-female-harassment-online/
• Race-swap: http://www.onthemedia.org/story/31-race-swap-experiment/
• For women on the Internet, it doesn't get better: http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/it-doesnt-get-better-women-internet/
• Reactions to a woman’s voice in an FPS game: http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/WaiY...eactions_to_a_womans_voice_in_an_FPS_game.php
• Why Women Aren’t Welcome on the Internet: http://www.psmag.com/navigation/health-and-behavior/women-arent-welcome-internet-72170/
• The Celebrity Nude Photo Leak Is Just Another Form of Online Harassment of Women: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/09/nude-celeb-leak-online-harassment-of-women.html

And on and on and on and on. There are soooo much evidence that if you're not White, if you're not male, if you're not heterosexual, you have it pretty fucking sweet in comparison to those who aren't. This shouldn't be up to debate and you should be aware by now of this *fact*.

To put a more personal point to this, when Bungie announced on Twitter that they'd be adding an opt-in for voice chat, I thanked them on Twitter because I was a girl, and this would help with me not getting harassed. I quickly got two replies directed towards me: one called me a skunk, the other told me the only good thing about me was my voice.

There was a third message, but I don't really remember what it was. Crazy that one simple message causes hate.

 

[NickFire]

It has been talked to death already. The lawyer doesn't distinguish between news journalism and enthusiast press. Read the medium piece linked in the OP if you want to have a better understanding of that.

No, no, no, no. Brushing over ethical issues by changing the phrase "games journalism" to "enthusiastic press" is simply a diversionary argument that the gaming press is corrupt but it's ok as games don't matter like non-gaming news.

 

[zeldablue]

WB is taking down videos by that which didn't sign the brand deals which is far worse than just offering brand deals. Either way there's no pitchfork at WB because 1) By now everyone already know how AAA games work and they know more than to listen to reviews for AAA games, 2) Shadow of Mordor is obviously a pretty good game and you don't need reviews to figure that out, 3) Even AAA companies treat their customers with more respect and professionalism than what some of the indies/journalists are doing ATM. I have never seen EA, Capcom or Activision attacking their own customers, no matter what that's dished to them. And you can't say that they haven't receive a terrifying amount of hate.

Wasn't there a call of duty dev who got threatened after nerfing a weapon? Didn't he lash back out and call his audience some naughty words of disgust?

Game devs do this all the time, though I'm sure they try to stay silent even after their families are threatened.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

No, no, no, no. Brushing over ethical issues by changing the phrase "games journalism" to "enthusiastic press" is simply a diversionary argument that the gaming press is corrupt but it's ok as games don't matter like non-gaming news.

This is a very weird interpretation of that post.

 

[RicoTheMad]

Not 'cultural identity', 'cultural identity based on consumption'. You misread Williams' post, so: you misunderstood it, and: resultingly, you had a problem with it.

Kinda funny how the above misunderstanding effectively holds up a tiny mirror that wholly reflects the entire palaver around the Alexander article.

However the identity comes to be, whether its by being born into it, adopting it by choice or otherwise, it doesn't matter. How does that matter in any way at all?

If I could press a button to change the color of my skin, doing so willingly, is it all of the sudden ok for people to attack me for being "X skin color"?

Sorry, but you don't just get to dismiss my points and then try to make some bold statement when you intentionally choose to be obtuse about the conversation.

But alas, if you so desire, please continue "fighting the good fight" of defending people from oppression by trying to oppress others. That's a great cause, we should simply bash everyone we disagree with, because clearly, they must be horrible human beings to disagree with us. That's how you inspire change in others, by beating them mercilessly in to the ground.

Quick, someone get us some Boxers and MMA fighters so we can get this civil rights movement on the fast track. Just have them beat up whoever we think is the bad guy.

 

[Lalalandia]

You are on NeoGAF. Is it ok for people to hold you responsible for what everyone on the site says at any time?

NeoGAF is a place not a movement so it's not a great analogy but I'll bite. If NeoGAF kept backing a campaign whose sole achievements have been harassing women out of the industry I would be out of here in a flash.

Generalizations are the root of racism, misogyny, and all of the things people claim to be fighting in this thing. Yet I see people using them to attack their opposition on both sides of the fence. The problem being, you can't claim to be for a movement, when you are no better than the people you claim to be fighting if you're saying things like "all gamers are X".

People seem awfully quick to forget that a civil rights movement is the fight for equality and individualism. That applies for everyone, including the people you don't like, despite how much you may dislike them.

False equivalence is false. An identity defined by consumption of goods is no identity at all. Even if it was an identity where is the oppression GG is fighting against for it's 'civil rights'?

Regarding your comments about the game: Sorry, but last time I checked, you, like everyone else, are free to play the games you want to play (except on consoles, where Sex is a big no-no apparently). Just like you can have your art games, others can have their violent games that are just for fun. If you choose to belittle games you don't feel are "artsy enough" like you do, then perhaps consider that you are being very hypocritical considering art has many types of art and facets to it, just like video games.

You have paintings that's depictions of battles. Images of strong warriors decked in combat gear or regalia. You have paintings of nude men and women, you have abstract art, etc.

So Shadows Of Mordor is arguably just as much art as Depression Quest. So what's your beef with it, exactly? If it isn't your cup of tea leave it be, it's pointless to slander a game the developers clearly put good thought and design into, not to mention years of their life (which is quite a bit more than a game like Depression Quest takes to make) just to try to further whatever flimsy point you're trying to make about games being art.

Games are art. Who cares if someone doesn't believe you? Will that stop them from being art all of the sudden?

On the other hand, I do care about people belittling other types of games that focus on fun and gameplay because they don't fit their personal definition of "art" to further their own silly agendas.

For the record I plan on buying and fully enjoying SoM and I never claimed it was not art. However it is exactly the same tired formula other games have already provided with sole exception of the Nemesis system (which last gen owners aren't even getting).

My point is that in return for not challenging any aspect of gamers expectations about what a game is it's getting a free pass despite the corrupt practises of it's marketing team. While a game that does challenge the boundaries of the art form has it's creator hounded from her home over bullshit.

 

[RicoTheMad]

The quality of the game is irrelevant. There's no claims of conspiracy here. We're talking about a publisher only allowing pre-release access to journalists that agree to not talk negatively about the game.

To quote TotalBiscuit:



If #GG is about journalist corruption, these brand deals are a lot more relevant to that concern than the bullshit #GG has been obsessing over. It highlights that #GG has been incredibly disingenuous about what their concerns and goals are. They intentionally try to mislead people into thinking it's about corruption when it is plainly about other things.

I was not aware that WB was blocking only certain people, but I've been disconnected for about a week so I only just got back online. If that's the case then yeah, people are right to complain. They should be called out for it regardless of game quality. I thought the DMCA was universally being applied.

Just don't forget that GamerGate is a group of lots of different people so there's probably quite a few voices who don't like that practice and may just be buried under some other drama. Such is the internet. Everyone has a voice but they can't all be heard over the shouting.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

No, no, no, no. Brushing over ethical issues by changing the phrase "games journalism" to "enthusiastic press" is simply a diversionary argument that the gaming press is corrupt but it's ok as games don't matter like non-gaming news.

I just need to know how many people you need to see harassed on your quest for ethics before you'll feel satisfied

I need to get some estimates on doctor bills

 

[SwissLion]

However the identity comes to be, whether its by being born into it, adopting it by choice or otherwise, it doesn't matter. How does that matter in any way at all?

If I could press a button to change the color of my skin, doing so willingly, is it all of the sudden ok for people to attack me for being "X skin color"?

Sorry, but you don't just get to dismiss my points and then try to make some bold statement when you intentionally choose to be obtuse about the conversation.

But alas, if you so desire, please continue "fighting the good fight" of defending people from oppression by trying to oppress others. That's a great cause, we should simply bash everyone we disagree with, because clearly, they must be horrible human beings to disagree with us. That's how you inspire change in others, by beating them mercilessly in to the ground.

Quick, someone get us some Boxers and MMA fighters so we can get this civil rights movement on the fast track. Just have them beat up whoever we think is the bad guy.

"These two things are not equal and shouldn't really be compared, it's simplistic and ignorant" continues to not mean "Oppressing [X Group] is totally okay."

People are going to start assuming your wilfully ignoring what people are saying, because nobody is saying the things you're railing against.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

However the identity comes to be, whether its by being born into it, adopting it by choice or otherwise, it doesn't matter. How does that matter in any way at all?

Comparing an article "attacking" "gamers" to racism is an incredible stretch, no matter how you put it.

 

[Mesoian]

Do people here actually support Leigh's article?

Yes. That article is excellent.

Did it get you mad? Good. Stop letting fuckwads paint the thing you enjoy with harassment and abuse. Speak out against the people committing the crimes instead of the person who had to throw it in your face.

I'm sure #GamerGate will turn on Milo any day now.

This is...an amazing statement.

 

[TheBryanJZX90]

To all the people mad about"gamers are dead," did you care about the things Milo wrote that were 100% more insulting? Why or why not? Are criticisms from someone in the same group as you like Leigh easier or harder to take than criticisms from outside that group like Milo?

 

[stupei]

snip

You're engaging in a spot of 'what-aboutery' here. I'm saying 'This article is divisive and poorly written.' You reply, 'Well, what about all these misogynists, what are we going to do about them, why don't we put our focus there?' The fact that there's work to be done there doesn't excuse the shitty article, that's all I'm saying.

And Intel have every right to pull advertising if they feel a website is publishing shitty, stereotyping articles that offend the many decent people who identify as gamers. Like me, I'm sure they're all for diversity in gaming and anti the gamergaters. But regarding this specific article, that's not the issue at hand.

No, I'm not. I'm talking about what the article is actually about.

As SwissLion already pointed out quite well here, you're ignoring a considerable amount of the content in the article if you focus only on the descriptions of the more negative or stereotyped elements of gaming.

This is what the rest of the world knows about your industry -- this, and headlines about billion-dollar war simulators or those junkies with the touchscreen candies. That’s it. You should absolutely be better than this.

By saying that people could perhaps read the article and feel inspired to do and be better, I am not engaging in "what-aboutery." I am quite literally talking about the actual content of what was said in the article.

I think this is actually a bad way to argue this since men do get attacked(see the CoD guy who got death threats because they changed shotguns). The difference is in the volume and intensity of the harassment. on average women see it way more frequently and in much lager numbers then men.

I find it interesting that Phil Fish was hated for such a long time and so passionately and yet none of the detractors who seemed to utterly loathe him ever doxxed him until he spoke out in defense of a woman.

 

[Teremap]

Do you think the reaction to LA would've been as numerous if she titled it "(Some) Gamers Can Do Bad Things" and then proceed to specifically talk about whomever did the bad things and how bad the effects were? I could agree with the "actual reason" making her the target of more severe ire or worse by a few individuals, but what she did make made for a much bigger target in my opinion.

And assuming you follow her work often, does a lot of her work resemble the Gamers are Over article?

Part of the whole point of writing an article like that is to make it compelling in some way, and that title sounds the very opposite of compelling.

Frankly, I don't buy that her abrasive language makes her responsible for the outsized reaction in any way. That's ALL on the people reading the piece. Tone policing is nonsensical, especially in light of similar articles criticizing other media that don't receive anywhere near the same backlash.

Spoiler

why is it always anime avatars with the shitty replies

 

[SirPainsalot]

It has been talked to death already. The lawyer doesn't distinguish between news journalism and enthusiast press. Read the medium piece linked in the OP if you want to have a better understanding of that.

Why shouldn't they be held to the same standards?

 

[tranciful]

Why shouldn't they be held to the same standards?

Did you read the medium article?

 

[SirPainsalot]

Did you read the medium article?

Yes, still doesn't give a sufficient answer my question.

 

[tranciful]

Yes, still doesn't give a sufficient answer my question.

There are, however, significant distinctions that need to be made, and virtually no one I spoke to made them. More than once, I was pointed to the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics or the “10 Absolutes of Reuters Journalism” as a baseline for reform. Some of the standards we find in those are applicable across the board — bans on plagiarism, for example. Others are not.

To understand why, it’s necessary to acknowledge another distinction. Those codes were written primarily to uphold the reliability of news reportage, but not everything published in the gaming press is news reportage. Even stories that look like news aren’t always news. That’s because, historically, games journalism grew out of what’s called the enthusiast press — meaning that it was (and still is) written primarily by gaming enthusiasts, for other gaming enthusiasts.

It’s possible to see that distinction a bit more clearly if you compare the way games have traditionally been written about in a venue like, say, the New York Times, versus the way they usually covered in gaming magazines. Even when they weren’t being downright skeptical, non-enthusiast publishers tended to be at least agnostic about the value of games in general. When you write for an enthusiast press, though, you’ve already thrown out some measure of objectivity, since it’s assumed that you and your reader already agree that games are worth your time, money and interest.

Its origins as an enthusiast press have left a deep impress on the industry. A current events reporter for Reuters may sneak into a war zone to get the unvarnished truth, but that isn’t how enthusiast presses work. They rely for most of their information on the companies whose products they cover. Most of the news stories you read on your favorite gaming site are based on press releases. The interviews wouldn’t be possible if the site hadn’t maintained an amicable relationship with the publisher. The juicy tidbits that weren’t meant to be revealed so early are typically the result of writers and developers chumming it up at expos and conferences.

“Corruption” probably isn’t the right word for all of that. It isn’t like gaming magazines and sites started out with the standards endorsed by the SPJ and Reuters, but lost sight of their values over time. All along, chumminess with the makers of video games has been the cost of access to the information you’ve demanded as a gamer. That isn’t a recent development, and if you’ve been supporting the gaming press up until now, then you’ve been complicit in supporting those relationship, whether you realized it or not.

And if you really think it through, you probably don’t want that to change entirely. After all, as gamers — which is to say, as enthusiasts — most of us enjoy the anticipation that’s created when a gaming site reports what they’ve learned about an upcoming release, even when that report is based on a press release. You cannot avoid or dissolve the relationships that make those reports possible, save at the cost of losing that coverage.

All the same, some gaming publications have, over the last several years, made a concerted effort to include more investigative journalism. You can usually distinguish it from news based on press releases by the fact that investigative journalism usually makes someone look bad. Which is how we should want it — that freedom to make someone look bad when they’ve done bad is what the codes and standards you pointed me to were written to protect. If you want that sort of coverage (and ask youself, do I want it? — maybe you don’t) then it makes sense to insist on more traditional journalistic standards. But because this is still a relatively new approach for the gaming press, doing so is less about decrying corruption than it is about encouraging the industry to grow.

Growth will mean insisting upon the distinction between serious investigative journalism and the sort of enthusiast reporting that has traditionally passed for gaming news. If you’re promoting #GamerGate because you like the way the gaming press covered games before writers starting investigating topics like labor exploitation and the gender divide, then you may want to stop insisting on higher journalistic standards. If those standards are important to you, then you’ll have to tolerate those sorts of articles, even when you don’t like the light they cast on gaming. As William Randolph Hearst famously said, “News is something somebody doesn’t want printed; all else is advertising.”

The same goes for the third tier (after enthusiast and investigative reporting) of the gaming press: criticism. As much as, or maybe even more than, reporting, many of you told me that you wanted to ensure that game reviews remain objective. Depending on what you mean by “objective,” that may not be possible, but I think we can all agree that, at the very least, reviews should be relatively unbiased by the author’s relationship to the people or companies whose games they review.

At the same time, many of you told me that you wanted to see less social criticism in those reviews. If you really think that through, you’ll see that you can’t have it both ways. There’s a deep contradiction imbedded in the notion that, on the one hand, writers shouldn’t be beholden to developers when they review a game, and that, on the other hand, they should avoid criticisms they feel are relevant. Most game publishers don’t want to be criticized for the social prejudices they may have worked into their games. As such, the simple fact that a writer or editor would be willing to publish a social criticism ought to be treated as evidence that the venue is maintaining some independence from the industry on which it reports. Even when it doesn’t interest you, even when you disagree with what’s been said— even if, as some of you expressed, you feel personally affronted on the game’s behalf — you ought to welcome such criticism as a check on the sort of cozy developer/press relationship you’ve called corrupt.

What part of this do you disagree with?

 

[Mesoian]

Part of the whole point of writing an article like that is to make it compelling in some way, and that title sounds the very opposite of compelling.

Quite. Titling your article "Fuck you and all you stand for" may be inflamatory and misleading, but it pretty much means you're going to read that god damn article. One of the big problems about speaking out about this stuff is that the average person, the average gamer, who doesn't scream racial epithets over the internet at people for little reason look at things written about the abuse or the things surrounding it and say, "well i'm not like that, so this doesn't apply to me," but then still want to wear this badge of being a gamer with pride. And it's like, wake up. The people who are calling themselves gamers are giving you a bad name. They are dragging your reputation through the mud. And maybe you don't care and maybe you don't want to be defined by the things you buy, and that's fine, but to then pretend to have a blind eye to all this shit, all of the dumb hyprocracy that people are spouting because "HOW DARE SHE!"...

Sometimes we need a little sensationalism to get people to actually look at something.

Of course the flipside of that is people don't actually read the article and still go "HOW DARE SHE" and we end up...well...here.

 

[SwissLion]

To all the people mad about"gamers are dead," did you care about the things Milo wrote that were 100% more insulting? Why or why not? Are criticisms from someone in the same group as you like Leigh easier or harder to take than criticisms from outside that group like Milo?

A lot of people here seem to be more the "I strongly disagreed with the article, but I'm not gonna go to war about it."

Which I'm pretty much fine with. Like whatever. Gonna try to explain my perspective but not much else.

And even within the deep confines of Gamergate valley, lots of people kinda hate Milo.

I'd still be interested to hear from anyone who doesn't, by the way.

Like it seems like the strangest movement to align itself so closely with probably one of the least ethical or integrity-based journalists around at the moment.

 

[MHWilliams]

Sorry, but this is extremely wrong.

As a Hispanic born and raised in South America who moved to the US, who has most definitely experienced discrimination right to my face, I very much completely disagree with the idea that racial identity is somehow not equatable to cultural identity.

It is *not* ok to attack people for their individual beliefs or religion, culture, hobbies, skin color, sex, or any of the above. Live and let live. There is no Totem Pole or pyramid with different levels of discrimination. Discrimination is discrimination, period. It is the applying of generalizations to a broad group of individuals, usually with a negative connotation.

You do not push other people down to raise yourself up.

If you wish to build your personal identity around "gamer" to the point that an editorial makes you angry, you can be my guest, sir. At any point, I can quite readily put down the "gamer" identity. It is not a part of me to the point that my personal self-worth is tied up in it. I play games. I love games. It is my livelihood. But in response to someone saying disparaging things about things I enjoy? Shit, I'm a big anime, comic, and tokusatsu fan. That's the life. I simply correct them and move on. It's a part of my identity, it is not who I am.

If you perceive Alexander's article as attack against who you are as a person, then by all means, carry on. I do not see it as such and I certainly could not establish the same ire to such a cause as if someone said "black people are thugs". One is who I am, the other is a mere title I can take on and off at will.

And I disagreed with this in what manner? Did I personally do anything against Gamasutra, a gamedev site that I, as a developer, use? I really don't see your point, you must be attaching someone else's actions to me, for reasons unknown to me.

There is an entire movement ostensibly galvanized and angered, supposedly by this editorial. Certainly, the live and let live portion of your argument would say "ignore that article and its writer, there's more out there that appeals to me."

No, no, no, no. Brushing over ethical issues by changing the phrase "games journalism" to "enthusiastic press" is simply a diversionary argument that the gaming press is corrupt but it's ok as games don't matter like non-gaming news.

How do you get from "games media walks a fine line" to "corrupt"?

However the identity comes to be, whether its by being born into it, adopting it by choice or otherwise, it doesn't matter. How does that matter in any way at all?

If I could press a button to change the color of my skin, doing so willingly, is it all of the sudden ok for people to attack me for being "X skin color"?

Sorry, but you don't just get to dismiss my points and then try to make some bold statement when you intentionally choose to be obtuse about the conversation.

But alas, if you so desire, please continue "fighting the good fight" of defending people from oppression by trying to oppress others. That's a great cause, we should simply bash everyone we disagree with, because clearly, they must be horrible human beings to disagree with us. That's how you inspire change in others, by beating them mercilessly in to the ground.

Quick, someone get us some Boxers and MMA fighters so we can get this civil rights movement on the fast track. Just have them beat up whoever we think is the bad guy.

You have two bits of different ideas here. Those in favor of the status quo are the ones being catered to by most products. You call it oppression, but certain demographics hold the cards within our industry. Now the bashing part, I agree with. You should be civil. I certainly have over-and-over, called Leigh's article quite incendiary. But oppression? Hah? No.

 

[NickFire]

I just need to know how many people you need to see harassed on your quest for ethics before you'll feel satisfied

I need to get some estimates on doctor bills

I don't need to see anyone harassed to expect that the people in the games media should have some semblance of journalistic integrity when they put out articles they know will be relied upon by the readers for information.

You have literally just equated my belief that the games industry is important enough to argue the gaming press should not be relieved of journalistic integrity with advocacy for harassment. If you don't believe the industry has enough value to warrant ethical press coverage, may I ask why you find it interesting enough to join a message board for gaming enthusiasts?

 

[tranciful]

If you don't believe the industry has enough value to warrant ethical press coverage

Nobody here, that I'm aware of, argued that. That's not what the medium article argues, either.

 

[Mesoian]

You have literally just equated my belief that the games industry is important enough to argue the gaming press should not be relieved of journalistic integrity with advocacy for harassment.

Because this is what the gamergate argument is about. Basically everything else that people have tried to claim it's about has been a redherring to try and validate calls for abuse against people who speak out about social issues in video games.

So much has happened in the past 3 weeks when it comes to games journalism, and yet where is the focus of attention? I mean come on man. Everything surrounding the Destiny reviews alone should have been a complete shitstorm with these people.

But no, Leigh Alexander's month old article is still what's wrong with the enthusiast press.

Okay.

 

[NickFire]

Nobody here, that I'm aware of, argued that. That's not what the medium article argues, either.

Read the post I quoted. Because I don't agree we should be labeling the games media "enthusiastic press" as a pass for ethical issues, I was asked how many medical bills and some other nonsense.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

Read the post I quoted. Because I don't agree we should be labeling the games media "enthusiastic press" as a pass for ethical issues, I was asked how many medical bills and some other nonsense.

That's a strawman argument, nobody said that.

 

[BrittonPeele]

This has probably been talked to death already, but what is everyone's opinion on the whole GameJournoPros thing? Ignoring Breitbart's editorializing, it's really interesting to read through some of the stuff that was said there with ethics in mind. This interview with Greg Lisby, a lawyer who's an expert in ethics in relation to journalism, is a great watch. In it, he basically says that journalists walk a very fine line when having colleagues/other industry contacts as personal friends. It makes me a little bit uneasy reading through the GameJournoPro thing because stuff like it is definitely muddying the waters between friendship and colleague contact. Not to mention all the forms of conflicts of interest and bias that come from it.

Anyway, just an observation I made. What is everyone else's thoughts?

Hi, I'm in (was in?) GameJournoPros. The topic has been discussed to death, with both myself and others chiming in about it.

Here's one of the main things you should know: "Press Clubs" have existed for well over a hundred years. The Denver Press Club claims to be the first one in America, having been founded in 1877. But if you Google "[Major city near you] press club," you'll almost certainly find one that many of your local newspaper and TV journalists are part of.

Maybe GameJournoPros should have been more public about its existence in the same way that those press clubs are (though it wasn't some huge secret. You know how I found out about it back in 2012? Twitter), but that's all it is. A press club. It's a collection of people in the same industry talking about issues related to that industry. Issues like adblock, embargoes, dealing with stingy PR...

Journalists know each other. Sometimes a coworker/friend at one outlet will move to another outlet. Sometimes people just get to know each other by covering the same events at the same times. There are no journalistic ethics rules against this.

Furthermore, press clubs are neither illegal or unethical. My bosses knew about GameJournoPros and that I was in it. They have no problem with it.

You could say that there's a worry about such a group being or becoming an echo-chamber, and I actually do think that's a fair concern. But here's the thing with writers: Most of them tend to disagree with each other. A lot. You could see some of that in the e-mails Breitbart has leaked, but it's been even more heated than that. Heck, we can't even agree on if review scores are a good thing or not.

If you want to find corruption in the games press, go ahead. Scrutinize ad deals, question free gifts/travel, make noise if a site seems to bow to pressure from advertisers (like in the oft-cited Jeff Gerstmann example). But a mailing list full of journalists isn't the corruption you're hoping to find.

 

[SirPainsalot]

What part do you disagree with?

Oh shit, was reading the wrong article. My bad.

Regardless, I read it and they still should be held to similar standards. Take something like Cigar Aficionado for example as enthusiastic press that have good ethical standards. They've run of the most respected magazines in the business and have been running for over 20 years and have had no scandals in all those years. You don't see them pushing agendas or writing articles about "smokers are over", they just write about cigars and sports which is the entire point of their enthusiast press magazine.

 

[Lalalandia]

Read the post I quoted. Because I don't agree we should be labeling the games media "enthusiastic press" as a pass for ethical issues, I was asked how many medical bills and some other nonsense.

There is a distintion and it is real because the focus of the two things is different. 'Hard' news journalism seeks to establish objective facts and the reasons for them being that way (i.e. 'the roads are full of potholes because the road budget was spent on Cristal'). Enthusiast press like Variety, film magazines, and other hobby focused outlets are more focused on what will happen. We don't go to Kotaku, USGamer or Eurogamer for objective facts, we go there for subjective reviews (there is no other kind) and info on upcoming titles, none of which is conducive to the stand off nature of 'hard' news.

Knowing what will happen requires cultivating links and being close to developers and publishers. In the countless threads on here discussing actual ethical flare ups we've had MHWilliams and JSchrier both offer detailed thoughts on how to avoid the 'soft corruption' of friendships and human relationships affecting their coverage. Note that even 'hard' news sites struggle with the need to cultivate contacts, witness the almost uniformly uncritical nature of crime reporting or the constant suspicion of political journalists of being on the 'other team'.

 

[BetaTeaser]

Oh shit, was reading the wrong article. My bad.

Regardless, I read it and they still should be held to similar standards. Take something like Cigar Aficionado for example as enthusiastic press that have good ethical standards. They've run of the most respected magazines in the business and have been running for over 20 years and have had no scandals in all those years. You don't see them pushing agendas or writing articles about "smokers are over", they just write about cigars and sports which is the entire point of their enthusiast press magazine.

But how are women represented in it?

 

[tranciful]

Oh shit, was reading the wrong article. My bad.

Regardless, I read it and they still should be held to similar standards. Take something like Cigar Aficionado for example as enthusiastic press that have good ethical standards. They've run of the most respected magazines in the business and have been running for over 20 years and have had no scandals in all those years. You don't see them pushing agendas or writing articles about "smokers are over", they just write about cigars and sports which is the entire point of their enthusiast press magazine.

.

All the same, some gaming publications have, over the last several years, made a concerted effort to include more investigative journalism. You can usually distinguish it from news based on press releases by the fact that investigative journalism usually makes someone look bad. Which is how we should want it — that freedom to make someone look bad when they’ve done bad is what the codes and standards you pointed me to were written to protect. If you want that sort of coverage (and ask youself, do I want it? — maybe you don’t) then it makes sense to insist on more traditional journalistic standards. But because this is still a relatively new approach for the gaming press, doing so is less about decrying corruption than it is about encouraging the industry to grow.

Growth will mean insisting upon the distinction between serious investigative journalism and the sort of enthusiast reporting that has traditionally passed for gaming news. If you’re promoting #GamerGate because you like the way the gaming press covered games before writers starting investigating topics like labor exploitation and the gender divide, then you may want to stop insisting on higher journalistic standards. If those standards are important to you, then you’ll have to tolerate those sorts of articles, even when you don’t like the light they cast on gaming. As William Randolph Hearst famously said, “News is something somebody doesn’t want printed; all else is advertising.”

...

At the same time, many of you told me that you wanted to see less social criticism in those reviews. If you really think that through, you’ll see that you can’t have it both ways. There’s a deep contradiction imbedded in the notion that, on the one hand, writers shouldn’t be beholden to developers when they review a game, and that, on the other hand, they should avoid criticisms they feel are relevant. Most game publishers don’t want to be criticized for the social prejudices they may have worked into their games. As such, the simple fact that a writer or editor would be willing to publish a social criticism ought to be treated as evidence that the venue is maintaining some independence from the industry on which it reports. Even when it doesn’t interest you, even when you disagree with what’s been said— even if, as some of you expressed, you feel personally affronted on the game’s behalf — you ought to welcome such criticism as a check on the sort of cozy developer/press relationship you’ve called corrupt.

 

[dLMN8R]

Yikes, this thread sure spiraled out since I looked at it last night.

Hi, I'm in (was in?) GameJournoPros. The topic has been discussed to death, with both myself and others chiming in about it.

Here's one of the main things you should know: "Press Clubs" have existed for well over a hundred years. The Denver Press Club claims to be the first one in America, having been founded in 1877. But if you Google "[Major city near you] press club," you'll almost certainly find one that many of your local newspaper and TV journalists are part of.

Maybe GameJournoPros should have been more public about its existence in the same way that those press clubs are (though it wasn't some huge secret. You know how I found out about it back in 2012? Twitter), but that's all it is. A press club. It's a collection of people in the same industry talking about issues related to that industry. Issues like adblock, embargoes, dealing with stingy PR...

Journalists know each other. Sometimes a coworker/friend at one outlet will move to another outlet. Sometimes people just get to know each other by covering the same events at the same times. There are no journalistic ethics rules against this.

Furthermore, press clubs are neither illegal or unethical. My bosses knew about GameJournoPros and that I was in it. They have no problem with it.

You could say that there's a worry about such a group being or becoming an echo-chamber, and I actually do think that's a fair concern. But here's the thing with writers: Most of them tend to disagree with each other. A lot. You could see some of that in the e-mails Breitbart has leaked, but it's been even more heated than that. Heck, we can't even agree on if review scores are a good thing or not.

If you want to find corruption in the games press, go ahead. Scrutinize ad deals, question free gifts/travel, make noise if a site seems to bow to pressure from advertisers (like in the oft-cited Jeff Gerstmann example). But a mailing list full of journalists isn't the corruption you're hoping to find.

It's another example of what I was saying a few pages back:

One of the biggest problems in general with the most active enthusiasts of generally-geeky culture is that they only consume media from that particular and extremely narrow slice of genre.

It's one of the reasons why games writing is so awful most of the time - most games writers grew up playing games and not reading much that has nothing to do with games. It's why so much games journalism is awful as well - because many tend to just write about games and not become great writers that can write something interesting about any topic.

It's only fitting that those who so personally identify themselves with the "gamer" persona - to the point that they'll viciously attack anyone who dare call them out - are not at all familiar with how journalism, reporting, criticism etc. work in the real world outside of gaming.

So concerned with ensuring that their media is considered "art", so unready to accept what that identification really means. So upset when they aren't validated by Ebert and other renowned critics, so unfamiliar with the kinds of personal relationships people like Ebert had with the people who created what he wrote about.

GamerGaters are so busy hyperventilating about conspiracy theories that they left no time to actually explore how real journalism works in the real world.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

Oh shit, was reading the wrong article. My bad.

Regardless, I read it and they still should be held to similar standards. Take something like Cigar Aficionado for example as enthusiastic press that have good ethical standards. They've run of the most respected magazines in the business and have been running for over 20 years and have had no scandals in all those years. You don't see them pushing agendas or writing articles about "smokers are over", they just write about cigars and sports which is the entire point of their enthusiast press magazine.

This again? What "agenda" is pushed by the corrupt gaming press? Feminism?

 

[SirPainsalot]

Hi, I'm in (was in?) GameJournoPros. The topic has been discussed to death, with both myself and others chiming in about it.

Here's one of the main things you should know: "Press Clubs" have existed for well over a hundred years. The Denver Press Club claims to be the first one in America, having been founded in 1877. But if you Google "[Major city near you] press club," you'll almost certainly find one that many of your local newspaper and TV journalists are part of.

Maybe GameJournoPros should have been more public about its existence in the same way that those press clubs are (though it wasn't some huge secret. You know how I found out about it back in 2012? Twitter), but that's all it is. A press club. It's a collection of people in the same industry talking about issues related to that industry. Issues like adblock, embargoes, dealing with stingy PR...

Journalists know each other. Sometimes a coworker/friend at one outlet will move to another outlet. Sometimes people just get to know each other by covering the same events at the same times. There are no journalistic ethics rules against this.

Furthermore, press clubs are neither illegal or unethical. My bosses knew about GameJournoPros and that I was in it. They have no problem with it.

You could say that there's a worry about such a group being or becoming an echo-chamber, and I actually do think that's a fair concern. But here's the thing with writers: Most of them tend to disagree with each other. A lot. You could see some of that in the e-mails Breitbart has leaked, but it's been even more heated than that. Heck, we can't even agree on if review scores are a good thing or not.

If you want to find corruption in the games press, go ahead. Scrutinize ad deals, question free gifts/travel, make noise if a site seems to bow to pressure from advertisers (like in the oft-cited Jeff Gerstmann example). But a mailing list full of journalists isn't the corruption you're hoping to find.

Fair points, there's nothing inherently wrong with press clubs. However, it becomes suspect when various journalists/writers from across various websites are writing the same articles with the exact same narrative in each, about how "gamers are over", and are all released with the same time frame. I'm not trying to say anyone of some grand conspiracy, leave that to the idiots on youtube, but you have to admit it's perfectly responsible for people to become suspect in this case.

 

[Teremap]

Just popping in to say that the harassment one of my friends is dealing with daily from people using the gamergate/ethics tags has started to make her physically ill

Thanks for all of your hard work exposing corruption

To put a more personal point to this, when Bungie announced on Twitter that they'd be adding an opt-in for voice chat, I thanked them on Twitter because I was a girl, and this would help with me not getting harassed. I quickly got two replies directed towards me: one called me a skunk, the other told me the only good thing about me was my voice.

There was a third message, but I don't really remember what it was. Crazy that one simple message causes hate.

This is really the takeaway I get from all of this.

As incendiary as Leigh's article may have been, the response proved it was actually needed, and unfortunately a lot of folks seem to have taken it the wrong way. We NEED more people speaking out against this sort of absolutely disgusting behavior; we NEED that social pressure forcing people to question themselves and think about what they're actually doing.

Instead we get all this bullshit about "journalistic corruption" and tone policing that's very explicitly being abused to draw attention away from the extremely obvious cases of abuse occurring all over the internet and the physical world. It is astonishingly abhorrent behavior and I will not refrain to badmouth anyone who allows this shit to happen without ever speaking out about it or even supporting it by blaming the victims. Believe it or not, being silent makes you a part of the problem. Take a stand against this shit, please. Not just the entire gaming landscape, but the internet and the world at large would benefit hugely from more positive participation.

 

[TheBryanJZX90]

Oh shit, was reading the wrong article. My bad.

Regardless, I read it and they still should be held to similar standards. Take something like Cigar Aficionado for example as enthusiastic press that have good ethical standards. They've run of the most respected magazines in the business and have been running for over 20 years and have had no scandals in all those years. You don't see them pushing agendas or writing articles about "smokers are over", they just write about cigars and sports which is the entire point of their enthusiast press magazine.

So ethics = not "pushing agendas" = not writing opinions you disagree with?

 

[Lalalandia]

Oh shit, was reading the wrong article. My bad.

Regardless, I read it and they still should be held to similar standards. Take something like Cigar Aficionado for example as enthusiastic press that have good ethical standards. They've run of the most respected magazines in the business and have been running for over 20 years and have had no scandals in all those years. You don't see them pushing agendas or writing articles about "smokers are over", they just write about cigars and sports which is the entire point of their enthusiast press magazine.

Do they have to report on fast breaking cigar news? Is there a new cigar jam I should know about? What indie cigars are on the rise?

Or less facetiously where do they get their cigars? Do they pay? Do their reviewers get free boxes of Habanos? Do they get brought on press trips to the lovely warm places that cigars are made in? Are their expenses paid? I have to ask as there is no ethics policy on their site and none of the reviews I read listed any of those details.

 

[Orayn]

This again? What "agenda" is pushed by the corrupt gaming press? Feminism?

Opinions have a magical way of becoming insidious agendas to people who disagree with them, it seems.

 

[SirPainsalot]

So ethics = not "pushing agendas" = not writing opinions you disagree with?

Yes that's called an op-ed writers job. Game journalists are not op ed writers, leave for that the editorial pages. You shouldn't go between the two, you can't be both a journalist and an op-ed writer at the same time, that's why you don't see people like Brian Williams writing pieces about the middle east. It's not that I disagree with these pieces, I love reading stuff from different points of view, it's because the line between the two is so murky and shouldn't be crossed.

 

[FoneBone]

Oh shit, was reading the wrong article. My bad.

Regardless, I read it and they still should be held to similar standards. Take something like Cigar Aficionado for example as enthusiastic press that have good ethical standards. They've run of the most respected magazines in the business and have been running for over 20 years and have had no scandals in all those years. You don't see them pushing agendas or writing articles about "smokers are over", they just write about cigars and sports which is the entire point of their enthusiast press magazine.

I won't claim to be hugely familiar with that publication, but do you really think reviewing cigars is equivalent to reviewing media?

 

[NickFire]

That's a strawman argument, nobody said that.

I simply do not believe the label enthusiastic press is being used today for any reason other than to avoid the ethics of other journalists. The industry is billions of dollars a year larger than the glory days for Nintendo Power, and gaming is now enjoyed by far more people than in 1985.

But whether my belief is sound or not, expressing that belief is not a cry for harassment against anyone in the industry, which it was equated to by the person who asked me for a medical bill tally. As someone who agrees that the harassment is horrible and not justifiable for any reason, I find it incredibly sad that some of the people most vocal about how horrible it is will say such nasty things about anyone who dares speak their mind if they don't follow a certain script.

 

[Orayn]

Yes that's called an op-ed writers job. Game journalists are not op ed writers, leave for that the editorial pages. You shouldn't go between the two, you can't be both a journalist and an op-ed writer at the same time, that's why you don't see people like Brian Williams writing pieces about the middle east. It's not that I disagree with these pieces, I love reading stuff from different points of view, it's because the line between the two is so murky and shouldn't be crossed.

So what you're telling me is that there's no room for people to share their subjective opinions in a field that primarily consists of people sharing subjective opinions?

 

[SirPainsalot]

Do they have to report on fast breaking cigar news? Is there a new cigar jam I should know about? What indie cigars are on the rise?

Or less facetiously where do they get their cigars? Do they pay? Do their reviewers get free boxes of Habanos? Do they get brought on press trips to the lovely warm places that cigars are made in? Are their expenses paid? I have to ask as there is no ethics policy on their site and none of the reviews I read listed any of those details.

That may be true, but magazines like this don't have major scandals like GamerGate. Cigar fantastics are just enthusiastic as gamers, if they were doing anything unethical we would have heard about it by now

 

[BetaTeaser]

I'm really curious why no games journalist has ever gone on to become a news journalist (at least as far as I can recall).

I wonder if that's something Patrick will pursue when Giantbomb ends, or even before.

Maybe that's why he's been pushing social issues more?

 

[TheBryanJZX90]

Yes that's called an op-ed writers job. Game journalists are not op ed writers, leave for that the editorial pages. You shouldn't go between the two, you can't be both a journalist and an op-ed writer at the same time, that's why you don't see people like Brian Williams writing piece about the middle east with his own personal opinion. It's not that I disagree with it, I love reading pieces from different points of view, it's because the line between the two is so murky and shouldn't be crossed.

Ridiculous. It should and it does get crossed every single day. Videogames are not news. Do you know what videogame news would be? "Game A was released for console Y today. Publisher B expects it will sell 1,000,000 copies." Everything after that is an opinion. Reviews? Opinion. Previews? Opinion. Talking about an old game? Well it already came out, so all that's left is opinion. That's why videogame journalism is an enthusiast press, because almost everything written about games is opinion.