Support NeoGAF

[bigbaldwolf86]

When you put it like that, do you really think there's no qualified game writers in the world available to form even 70-30 or 60-40 jury with people who aren't white males?

Who knows. I'm sure these sites have picked the most qualified people and as others have said, maybe other women or non white males turned it down or don't have enough experience.

There are factors that we just don't know.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

That isn't forced diversity, though. Forced diversity would be if you forced a company to higher someone, purely based on the ethnicity, in order to have a more diverse set of employees.

Its forced because you are forcing the HR department to include people they normally would not which in turn is going to lead to the hiring of people that they normally would not.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

I've seen enough opinions in this thread to know some people do in fact, believe that having a large majority of a specific race or gender will not produce diverse results.

Since when is making blanket statements about a race or sex not considered racist or sexist?

It will produce results but it will produce results skewed towards a specific demographic.

While statistics can be used for racism and sexism, observations of demographics isn't inherently racist or sexist.

It's good that you mention the word "world". Is there any list of outlets that have judges on there? Do they even invite any European ones outside of the UK? I'm guessing Japanese experts are out of the question as well. Including those territories would probably solve non gender diversity a lot and probably give a whole lot of female candidates as well.

Otherwise, they should just call it the American (suburbian) Game Awards if it's just the US with an occasional Brit in it.

Don't americans call every one of their sports championships "World Series"?

 

[Lime]

It's good that you mention the word "world". Is there any list of outlets that have judges on there? Do they even invite any European ones outside of the UK? I'm guessing Japanese experts are out of the question as well. Including those territories would probably solve non gender diversity a lot and probably give a whole lot of female candidates as well.

Otherwise, they should just call it the American (suburbian) Game Awards if it's just the US with an occasional Brit in it.

Countries like Germany, the UK, Mexico, Japan, and Australia are represented in the jury.

 

[aeolist]

Who knows. I'm sure these sites have picked the most qualified people and as others have said, maybe other women or non white males turned it down or don't have enough experience.

There are factors that we just don't know.

how much experience do you need to tick some boxes on a GOTY voting sheet?

 

[TBiddy]

Its forced because you are forcing the HR department to include people they normally would not which in turn is going to lead to the hiring of people that they normally would not.

That's not how I see it. But I guess we'll have to disagree on what the definition of 'forced diversity' is.

 

[cerulily]

Who knows. I'm sure these sites have picked the most qualified people and as others have said, maybe other women or non white males turned it down or don't have enough experience.

There are factors that we just don't know.

in before AAA mainstream sweeps the awards. It's just so hard to get that kind of experience these days.

 

[Gormless Noodle]

Countries like Germany, the UK, Mexico, Japan, and Australia are represented in the jury.

And yet there's still only 4 non whites in there? I find this whole thing pretty bizarre. Thanks for the info though, I'm actually surprised they're included.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

That's not how I see it. But I guess we'll have to disagree on what the definition of 'forced diversity' is.

I'm just not sure what your interpretation is. Its going to lead to the exact same thing. A more diverse panelwill hire more diversely by nature . If its policy that no hiring occurs with minorities in the group to decide how is that not forced opposed to a quota? Of which they wont hire until they find a qualified individual of whatever gender/race they want?

There is no such thing as forced diversity. What exists is accepted bias homogenity. You wouldn't need any of these practices if white males did the diversifying themselves because they cared honestly. But ots been shown over and over again that they dont so I dont get why pushing things to how thy would be if the body in power werent so horrible at at picking others is a problem.

 

[Jotaka]

It's good that you mention the word "world". Is there any list of outlets that have judges on there? Do they even invite any European ones outside of the UK? I'm guessing Japanese experts are out of the question as well. Including those territories would probably solve non gender diversity a lot and probably give a whole lot of female candidates as well.

Otherwise, they should just call it the American (suburbian) Game Awards if it's just the US with an occasional Brit in it.

I'm excluding eSports Advisory Panel because I don't have idea what that means.


USA - 16
UK - 2
Italy - 1
Canada - 1
France 2
Australia - 1
Mexico - 1
Span - 1
Brazil - 1
Germany - 1
Japan - 1


including the eSports Advisory Panel
USA - 23
UK - 4
Italy - 1
Canada - 1
France 2
Australia - 1
Mexico - 1
Span - 1
Brazil - 1
Germany - 1
Japan - 1

 

[Sumio Mondo]

Surprised so many people think these awards are that important anyway, it's the game trailers/announcements I will be watching it for.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

yeah this. people saying TGA didn't do anything wrong are missing the fact that they specified the outlets that would provide jury members, all of whom are overwhelmingly male.

there's plenty of women in the space if you take a half-step outside the usual set of gamespot/ign/giant bomb, and it would be stupid to suggest that they're less qualified just because they don't work for the right publications.

I've been trying to frame this in a way I more understand, and as I'm only a few years out of college, to me it seems similar to hiring and recruiting. You have companies who tell their recruiters to look towards Ivy league schools, because the common knowledge is that these schools will provide the best of the best. The issue is that while thats generally true, they make the mistaken assumption that those places are the ONLY ones where you can find such people. And even worse, instead of actually holding open interview sessions for anyone at those schools interested the recruiter simply asks schools to send their "most qualified" student. So we arrive at a situation like with the GA.

So, how do companies actually combat the first (because the second is mostly unique to the GA) problem? Well by broadening their search to extend to not only the best of the best schools. I don't know much about games journalism, but is experience paramount? For instance in tech industry (the one I'm in) experience is usually correlated with skill, but it's not the only indicator. Is it possible to get people at other publications that have been in games journalism for years? I dunno.

I do wonder what the numbers would look like if they'd basically just opened the pool to those publications and then allowed anyone in them to apply as opposed to having them send a rep. I actually think while it would be more work, that would have been the best way to go about it.

 

[razoftblend]

You guys are making a big deal out of essentially nothing. It's like how people have abused Article 9 to force a 50/50 split in college sports clubs. Men's clubs were removed to bring down their numbers because even though there are more women in college than men, there wasn't enough interest in female sports.

Outlets choose who to send as a juror, so let them. There's always going to be someone there abusing their power/ position, but that's a d!ck move on everyone regardless of gender.

This is not a government-controlled system; it's an independent business, which is why they have ads and celebrities presenting games. It is not charity.

 

[Sonicbug]

There is a funny dimension to this though, which is that the publications self-select the person they're sending to judge. So they basically all selected men and are now outraged at that fact.

This. This is what I'm seeing. The onus is on the publications or websites in question on how they want to be represented. Also, whose to say the judges aren't taking into account their entire staffs input on these awards? Hell, most of these outlets probably haven't even chosen their real game of the year yet, Giantbomb sure hasn't.

The worse part is perhaps the eSports panel or whatever.

In the back on my mind I keep remember that until last year this was the same game awards ceremony that was a laughable, face palm worthy doritos fueled nightmare. They wanted it to become the Oscars of gaming, so guess what? You get the same problems the Oscars has, an overwhelmingly old white male jury with a few token foreigners.

At the end of the day it's just a stupid popularity contest and glorified commercial. Is there a technical Game Awards yet? Because everyone knows that's where the real awards are given out.

 

[partyphone]

Its forced because you are forcing the HR department to include people they normally would not which in turn is going to lead to the hiring of people that they normally would not.

is the weight of history and the status quo also not a force? if people aren't pushed to change they tend to do the same old familiar thing. and increased diversity is not change for the sake of change. it's a positive, progressive change. white men aren't the only people who matter.

 

[swit]

BAFTA (aka the only game award show that matters) selects jury like this:

The Jury

Each jury will comprise of industry practitioners across a range of developers and publishers, and will be chaired by a member of the BAFTA Games Committee.

It is our aim for each jury to be balanced in age and experience, and with a track record of achievement in the field. No juror will be permitted to sit on the jury if he/she has had any direct association with a short-listed game. Chairs are also mindful of the diversity of the jury, and jurors will not be exclusively from one discipline.

After discussion, the jury will then select the nominations and winner by secret ballot.

edit: More details how it all works there: http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/how-do-they-decide-who-gets-to-win-a-video-game-bafta-anyway/0111850

 

[Spring-Loaded]

BAFTA (aka the only game award show that matters) selects jury like this:

Makes sense. Crazy to me that some people can't (refuse to?) see the benefit of diversity.

 

[massoluk]

Countries like Germany, the UK, Mexico, Japan, and Australia are represented in the jury.

A total of one Asian, and none to represent China or South Korea, the incredibly large videogame markets.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

is the weight of history and the status quo also not a force? if people aren't pushed to change they tend to do the same old familiar thing. and increased diversity is not change for the sake of change. it's a positive, progressive change. white men aren't the only people who matter.

You should read the full discussion. You are informing the wrong person.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

Where's the outrage though? The only ones who have actually commented on this are: 1. Killscreen, 2. Polygon, 3. The Guardian. All 3 have made their stance accordingly.

Otherwise, everyone else is being silent and not talking about it and doing white dude business as usual

I think he was commenting on the fact that all the publications speaking up on this sent males for judges, yet are lambasting the GA/the others for doing the same.

For example, why didn't Keith Stuart recommend a female journalist at The Guardian instead of his "hollow" denouncement of just sitting out and not doing anything to improve the ratio (well, I guess if there's only 31 now he did his part...) It's a classic pot calling the kettle black where they only see the problem afterwards and act like they themselves weren't complicit in it. Polygon, ironically, made the best choice.

Basically while you can blame the GA for their lazy selection process for judges, the publications have no one to blame, but themselves for the gender skew

 

[Carcetti]

Who knows. I'm sure these sites have picked the most qualified people and as others have said, maybe other women or non white males turned it down or don't have enough experience.

There are factors that we just don't know.

I rather suspect it's more of a question of not looking outside the mainstream sites and writers. Granted, I'm from the Europe, but I've met Lots of women writing about games.

 

[Gormless Noodle]

I'm excluding eSports Advisory Panel because I don't have idea what that means.


USA - 16
UK - 2
Italy - 1
Canada - 1
France 2
Australia - 1
Mexico - 1
Span - 1
Brazil - 1
Germany - 1
Japan - 1


including the eSports Advisory Panel
USA - 23
UK - 4
Italy - 1
Canada - 1
France 2
Australia - 1
Mexico - 1
Span - 1
Brazil - 1
Germany - 1
Japan - 1

Thanks a lot for the list. I'm surprised they have that many countries on there.

Also kind of hilarious that this >probably< means that if there's 4 non white jurors on the panel, the US outlets sent a grand total of 0 non white jurors , with a margin of error of about 2. And then we haven't even gotten to the gender topic yet.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

I think he was commenting on the fact that all the publications speaking up on this sent males for judges, yet are lambasting the GA/the others for doing the same.

For example, why didn't Keith Stuart recommend a female journalist at The Guardian instead of his "hollow" denouncement of just sitting out and not doing anything to improve the ratio (well, I guess if there's only 31 now he did his part...) It's a classic pot calling the kettle black where they only see the problem afterwards and act like they themselves weren't complicit in it. Polygon, ironically, made the best choice.

Basically while you can blame the GA for their lazy selection process for judges, the publications have no one to blame, but themselves for the gender skew

You're saying everyone's responsible and everyone should be doing something about this? I agree

 

[partyphone]

You should read the full discussion. You are informing the wrong person.

that's fine. my intention wasn't to lecture them in particular.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

Makes sense. Crazy to me that some people can't (refuse to?) see the benefit of diversity.

When a power structure benefits you tou arent going to do things that will make it hurt your chances. Its no secret that people saying we should "encourage" more women to get into the field as opposed to allowing more women already in the field into male dominated roles and let their exposure as well as those women themselves encourage other women says it all. One of them requires men to sacrafice NOW, the other is an enpty suggestion which requires no responsibility.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

that's fine. my intention wasn't to lecture them in particular.

I agree. I just findnit crazy that 1 woman and 31 males is not problematic to people. Like how?

 

[aeolist]

I've been trying to frame this in a way I more understand, and as I'm only a few years out of college, to me it seems similar to hiring and recruiting. You have companies who tell their recruiters to look towards Ivy league schools, because the common knowledge is that these schools will provide the best of the best. The issue is that while thats generally true, they make the mistaken assumption that those places are the ONLY ones where you can find such people. And even worse, instead of actually holding open interview sessions for anyone at those schools interested the recruiter simply asks schools to send their "most qualified" student. So we arrive at a situation like with the GA.

So, how do companies actually combat the first (because the second is mostly unique to the GA) problem? Well by broadening their search to extend to not only the best of the best schools. I don't know much about games journalism, but is experience paramount? For instance in tech industry (the one I'm in) experience is usually correlated with skill, but it's not the only indicator. Is it possible to get people at other publications that have been in games journalism for years? I dunno.

I do wonder what the numbers would look like if they'd basically just opened the pool to those publications and then allowed anyone in them to apply as opposed to having them send a rep. I actually think while it would be more work, that would have been the best way to go about it.

intel has had to deal with this with their diversity initiative: http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2015/08/12/intel-diversity-hiring-doubled/31490141/

they had to go out of their usual comfort zone and recruit from places they hadn't considered before but the candidates were there and they're meeting goals so far

 

[igordennis]

I agree. I just findnit crazy that 1 woman and 31 males is not problematic to people. Like how?

Qualifications breh, qualifications.

 

[finalflame]

Not everything in the world needs to be about equal representation. If the list of qualified individuals for the award judging consists of 31 males and 1 female, then that's just how it is. We don't need to incentivize more women to become qualified game critics if that's not what they want to do.

If, however, there are an equally number of qualified women, then it would only make sense to put them on the panel. I believe the organization in question would know this better than randoms on an internet forum.

The age of political correctness, affirmative action, and manufactured outrage we're living in is getting quite tiresome.

 

[silvermember]

Its forced because you are forcing the HR department to include people they normally would not which in turn is going to lead to the hiring of people that they normally would not.

Even if it is forced diversity so freaking what?

History has shown that sometimes forcing diversity is necessary. Which is why President Kennedy had to resort to seizing control of the national guard to force some schools to let minorities.

So yes, it is force diversity and that is perfectly OK. People tend to subconsciously hire people who are similar to themselves. This makes diversity very difficult unless someone goes out of their comfort zone.

The only bad aspect of force diversity would be if they hired unqualified applicants just to meet the quota. Since there is no evidence that it happening in this particular instance or in most instances, that is perfectly OK with me.

Not everything in the world needs to be about equal representation. If the list of qualified individuals for the award judging consists of 31 males and 1 female, then that's just how it is. We don't need to incentivize more women to become qualified game critics if that's not what they want to do.

If, however, there are an equally number of qualified women, then it would only make sense to put them on the panel. I believe the organization in question would know this better than randoms on an internet forum.

The age of political correctness, affirmative action, and manufactured outrage we're living in is getting quite tiresome.

It must be nice living in a world were discrimination due to attributes you have no control over doesn't exist. Obviously you might not care but the BOLD section of your post says a lot about you than you know.

 

[jmood88]

Surprised so many people think these awards are that important anyway, it's the game trailers/announcements I will be watching it for.

It's not that the awards are all that important, it's about how we have yet another big gaming event where a large segment of the population that plays games is ignored and excluded from all decision-making.

 

[aeolist]

Not everything in the world needs to be about equal representation. If the list of qualified individuals for the award judging consists of 31 males and 1 female, then that's just how it is. We don't need to incentivize more women to become qualified game critics if that's not what they want to do.

If, however, there are an equally number of qualified women, then it would only make sense to put them on the panel. I believe the organization in question would know this better than randoms on an internet forum.

The age of political correctness, affirmative action, and manufactured outrage we're living in is getting quite tiresome.

the just world fallacy in action. everyone involved is knowledgeable and good, opportunity is equal, therefore the unequal result is totally fine.

 

[Keihart]

What a fricking joke. I could not give two flocks about the gender of a jury but instead their credentials, making any kind of diversity a quota is ridiculous and against equality.

Edit: lets add one of each color and age too, and in couples like if was an ark...jeez.

 

[silvermember]

What a fricking joke. I could not give two flocks about the gender of a jury but instead their credentials, making any kind of diversity a quota is ridiculous and against equality.

Edit: lets add one of each color and age too, and in couples like if was an ark...jeez.

Diversity of opinion is actually a good thing in almost every facet in life. It brings in a new prospective. There has never been a good reason why diversity of opinion is not a good thing.

Nobody here is claiming that they should bring unqualified reviewers just to be more diverse. But you cannot argue that they aren't more than 2 qualified women in the review business. Just to add, this is simply a pattern that has existed for some time.

If someone doesn't complain about something things never change. Obviously, from your response it probably doesn't affect you in any meaningful way in life, but to some of us it is the reality.

 

[Briarios]

The gender inequity thing here is terrible. However, what is even more of a joke is that people think you actually need some level of qualifications to judge these awards and that -- somehow -- the men from these organizations were more "qualified." It's a bullshit argument. Anyone who plays games has a valid opinion for judging the awards - they simply rewarded the men on their staff over women. That's really what this is for the voting panel, something additional to add to their resume.

So, the next time a panel is chosen for something a you look at the members past experiences, remember the system that allowed them to get those experiences was rigged.

 

[partyphone]

What a fricking joke. I could not give two flocks about the gender of a jury but instead their credentials, making any kind of diversity a quota is ridiculous and against equality.

Edit: lets add one of each color and age too, and in couples like if was an ark...jeez.

why stop there? how abut one member for each of the 32 known genders.

 

[jmood88]

What a fricking joke. I could not give two flocks about the gender of a jury but instead their credentials, making any kind of diversity a quota is ridiculous and against equality.

Edit: lets add one of each color and age too, and in couples like if was an ark...jeez.

People keep making the undefined "credentials/qualifications" argument without explaining exactly what they're talking about.

 

[Kuraudo]

What a fricking joke. I could not give two flocks about the gender of a jury but instead their credentials, making any kind of diversity a quota is ridiculous and against equality.

Edit: lets add one of each color and age too, and in couples like if was an ark...jeez.

Okay, so what credentials do you base your jury on?

Bear in mind that this jury is going to be judging the quality of videogames, a task that often comes down to subjective opinion and that many of the games they're judging will appeal to different genders or different cultures. If a game appeals primarily to a white anglo saxon male audience, don't you think that having a jury made up solely of white anglosaxon males might unfairly sway the vote away from other, equally worthy games whose only shortcoming is that they appeal to an unrepresented audience?

It's not the credentials of each specific jury member that matters, it's the credentials of the jury as a whole. And a lack of diversity in that jury makes it very unlikely they can accurately pick the the single best game for the majority of people.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

Even if it is forced diversity so freaking what?

I've been arguing this point since the beginning. It would be appreciated if you read the conversation before jumping in. I was explaining a situation where implimenting strict policy for diverse hiring was beneficial and similar to a quota.

If this comes across as ggressive its not suppose to. This is just the second time someone took that post out of context. Its annoying.

 

[Keihart]

Okay, so what credentials do you base your jury on?

Bear in mind that this jury is going to be judging the quality of videogames, a task that often comes down to subjective opinion and that many of the games they're judging will appeal to different genders or different cultures. If a game appeals primarily to a white anglo saxon male audience, don't you think that having a jury made up solely of white anglosaxon males might unfairly sway the vote away from other, equally worthy games whose only shortcoming is that they appeal to an unrepresented audience?

It's not the credentials of each specific jury member that matters, it's the credentials of the jury as a whole. And a lack of diversity in that jury makes it very unlikely they can accurately pick the the single best game for the majority of people.

Wait, so only mens in the age of 29 can represent my opinion? a woman doesn't represent me because i am a men? didn't knew about that, i have no qualms in making an indian gay woman president or jury for that matter, because that's not something that really should matter.

 

[The Mad Draklor]

Wait, so only mens in the age of 29 can represent my opinion? a woman doesn't represent me because i am a men? didn't knew about that, i have no qualms in making an indian gay woman president or jury for that matter, because that's not something that really should matter.

Yeah, the person's background doesn't matter to me as long as he/she has the necessary skills to be a good juror.

Meritocracy > Quotas

 

[DSix]

When you need a jury of experts, you hire experts, quotas don't matter.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

Yeah, the person's background doesn't matter to me as long as he/she has the necessary skills to be a good juror.

Meritocracy > Quotas

So its not an issue that in virtually every industry meritocracy is majoeity white males? That's not strange at all?

 

[Kuraudo]

Wait, so only mens in the age of 29 can represent my opinion? a woman doesn't represent me because i am a men? didn't knew about that, i have no qualms in making an indian gay woman president or jury for that matter, because that's not something that really should matter.

Picking a president is completely different than picking a jury, as in that instance it absolutely comes down to individual credentials. The whole point of a jury is to have a number of diverse opinions and one way to encourage that is to actually have people from diverse backgrounds.

 

[Mael]

Yeah, the person's background doesn't matter to me as long as he/she has the necessary skills to be a good juror.

Meritocracy > Quotas

When you need a jury of experts, you hire experts, quotas don't matter.

If we're selecting the team that will control the department of Homeland Security, sure.
For this, what is the specific of the skillsets required that would end up with this type of ratio?

 

[Keihart]

Picking a president is completely different than picking a jury, as in that instance it absolutely comes down to individual credentials. The whole point of a jury is to have a number of diverse opinions and one way to encourage that is to actually have people from diverse backgrounds.

The only background that i would care in a game's jury, is their game tastes, wich don't have anything to do with gender. I have no idea what criteria they used for that panel, but i think that claiming that womans should be included just because, is making the gender a disservice.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

The only background that i would care in a game's jury, is their game tastes, wich don't have anything to do with gender. I have no idea what criteria they used for that panel, but i think claiming that womans should be included just because, is making the gender a disservice.

Can you actually prove that?

 

[Architechnophile]

Because they designed the entire selection procedure. I don't think there's any reason to think they deliberately designed it to favour homogeneity, and I am absolutely not ascribing malicious intent to their approach, but when designing the selection process they gave little/no thought to diversity, and ended up with a panel overwhelmingly full of white men.

Geoff Keighley is not the global head of the patriarchy, he is just a man who is very much part of the establishment, for whom diversity is way way down the list of priorities when assembling a judging panel for his awards ceremony/advertising party.

He is framing TGA as a celebration of gaming's cultural significance. His words. It would seem that he does not consider having diverse representation within TGA as being important to the cultural significance of the medium. I disagree with this, and it seems at least a couple of the judges he chose disagree with this too.

Edit: Also after getting the shortlist of candidates back from the publications, they seemingly had no thought process before publishing them. Many people would have thought "Hmm. This list is overwhelmingly full of white men, perhaps I should contact one of the huge number of qualified women or non-white people in the field that I did not invite to participate yet". Even if somehow they only know white men (which I entirely reject), there's any number of ways to solicit suggestions for people who could expand the diversity of the panel.

No one put a gun to Keighley's head and forced him to accept the initial shortlist as the only possible range of judges.

*nodding*

 

[Keihart]

Can you actually prove that?

can you prove otherwise?

 

[Mael]

The only background that i would care in a game's jury, is their game tastes, wich don't have anything to do with gender. I have no idea what criteria they used for that panel, but i think claiming that womans should be included just because, is making the gender a disservice.

Oh my!
Care to share the data you base this on that would run totally counter to all the information we have out there?