Home » All » Ethics In Games Journalism Sounds Ridiculous – It Isn’t
trust

Ethics In Games Journalism Sounds Ridiculous – It Isn’t

trust

The following is an opinion piece by guest writer Jimmy Adeco. It does not necessarily reflect the views of GamesNosh and its staff.

When the GamerGate movement began defining its focus as being about “ethics in games journalism” they inevitably invited the mockery and dismissiveness such a highfalutin turn of phrase deserved. Stephen Colbert merely had to utter the words out loud to elicit a laugh from his studio audience, before quickly comparing games journalism to TMZ’s gossip-level nonsense.

Using the term ‘ethics’ outside of academia is a pretty sure sign of pretension at the best of times, invoking as it does heavy questions about morality and the principles by which people should live. Describing whether some scruffy dude on the west coast gives the latest Assassin’s Creed game a 7 or a 7.5 as ‘journalism’ borders on the surreal. In short, it’s a term that feels too self-regarding and pompous to be used for mere games; to be something people should care about.

As ridiculous as it sounds however, it is accurate, and what it describes is important; and there are two very big reasons why.

ACU_DLC_5-Windmill_Perch_Logo

It’s about consumer advocacy

There are billions of dollars being pumped into gaming. People are spending more on gaming than movies and music combined, making it one of the fastest growing industries of the past 10 years. There’s a heck of a lot at stake in the gaming industry on a purely financial level.

Despite this, the most overwhelming sentiment about games journalism is: Who cares? Who could possibly give a shit about those by-the-numbers review scores and editorials posted on some ad-ridden site?

Well, EA cares. Ubisoft cares. Activision cares. Every developer with a financial investment in their game cares.

They care about whether that scruffy dude wakes up feeling like their game is a 7 or an 8, because that translates into millions of dollars of profit or loss to them. They care about whether he’s invested in their marketing campaign and approaches their game with the right ‘mindset’. They care if he has a full understanding of the mechanics before he even gets the game. They care if he’s the kind of guy willing to downplay flaws. Because what looks like an inept, limp-dicked dork to us, is worth his weight in gold to these large corporations. They need him to translate their stuffy boardroom visions into something innocent and authentic enough for gamers to ingest.

It’s in the interests of many publishers to have games journalists who are easily-swayed (but convinced they’re not); to have journalists be at the beck and call of PR messengers (whilst thinking they’re actually ‘in the loop’); and to have them possess more than a little sense of superiority and separation from grass-roots gamers.

AC Unity

After all, just look at all that journalists have done for them already. Over the past 10 years gamers have endured a barrage of hostile anti-consumer practices invented by the industry like evermore complex torture devices for our wallets. From over-priced DLC to games that were broken upon release. From games that were virtually unplayable on certain consoles to products built around the concept of micro-transactions.

Yet during the industry’s great push for larger profits games journalists could hardly care to represent the interests of consumers. At no point was the industry taken to task for pushing the boundaries of consumer tolerance, even though they possessed the powerful tools of review scores and coverage. A good journalist would never have let an immensely buggy game like Assassin’s Creed: Unity achieve a 7 out of 10 score. A good journalist would have saved PS3 users many headaches by outlining Skyrim’s problems on the system. A good journalist would have been on the ball about Halo: The Master Chief Collection’s problems before it sold like hotcakes.

Instead, it was the gaming community themselves who had to fight for consumer rights. Galvanised by YouTubers, and brought together on open platforms like forums and twitter they pushed Microsoft away from their always-online dystopia. Likewise, it was a community outrage (a sometimes overly-aggressive one) that forced Bioware to address their lazy, written-on-a-napkin ending to the Mass Effect trilogy, while journalists mumbled out a half-baked ‘sense of entitlement’ narrative.

GamerGate was a long time coming, and as much as detractors focus on the self-proclaimed victims, it was never really about them. The attitudes and actions of their social clique were merely the catalyst for a discontent that had been brewing for years.

Ethics In Games Journalism

It’s about artistic development

The phrase ‘games are a young medium’, isn’t really accurate, but the sentiment of games evolving and diversifying is undeniable. Whilst movies deal with many of the same themes and stylistic tones they were addressing 20 years ago; and while books are still written and distributed within genres much as they always have been (there are exceptions to this of course); games are vibrant and rich with constantly different, new, innovative experiences.

In an artform that extends from Papers, Please to Street Fighter; by way of GTA, adult visual novels, Candy Crush and Portal; occasionally diverging into choose your own adventures, MMOs, and JRPGs; the only problem with the term ‘gamer’ is that it’s too loose-fitting.

Even more importantly, the potential for games as an artform only seems to have been mildly tapped. In the past few years alone we’ve seen good virtual reality become a reality, Kickstarter projects of every shape and size come to fruition, and the slow plod of mobile gaming developing into something more than ported flash games. This year alone will likely see the invention of whole new game mechanics, of original themes being invited into gaming, of more boundaries being pushed.

huniepop_screenshot_7_by_huniepot-d8dtl8m

Such an awesome and exciting artform deserves insightful, intelligent, and responsible critics.

Roger Ebert was not the world’s most famous critic just because he was a good one; he earned his rep by being there during the period of New Hollywood, playing a contributing role and providing a potent counterpoint as greats like Scorcese, Kubrick, Ford Coppola, and Scott created their most iconic works. The early 20th Century’s constant flux of art movements was tempered and shaped by critics who were as smart and as opinionated as the artists themselves. Music writers played integral roles in the creation and development of that artform’s aesthetics, subcultures, and mythologies.

Where is our equivalent in games journalism?

There’s an irony here at best – hypocrisy at worst – that the same outlets decrying the current state of gender and minority representations in games are the same ones who for years never sincerely analysed and deconstructed games for falling into a pattern of being sausage fests with similar mechanics and scenarios. Yet the same journalists who gobbled up whatever was presented to them in ad-filled packaging, ignorant of the dubious politics and pandering themes are now claiming a moral high ground in which they recognise so many flaws.

Where were the opinionated critiques on triple A gaming’s lack of diversity back then? Where were the impassioned calls for more nuanced gameplay beyond violence back then? Where are the low scores that were given to games as a result of their tired themes and manipulative tropes? I’m sure there were some, possibly sidled conveniently between a regurgitated press release and a trailer. (And where, incidentally, is all the diversity, of both opinion and culture, within the games media itself? Is there a group more unnecessarily homogenous than games journalists?)

If there are problems with sexism, racism, and ‘toxicity’ within games, then a lot of the fault lies with the journalists, who did as little as possible to analyse, consider, and discuss games as properly as they deserved to be. Now we’re left with an arrogant scene of critics desperately trying to play catch-up and feign their opinions of games and gaming culture as something academic.

GamersDead

It’s about the power of words
If, in 2015, sites like Gamespot, IGN, and Eurogamer should decide to hand every flight simulator a 10 out of 10 rating, then you can bet that 2016 would be a ‘Year of the Flight Simulator’.

That kind of influence, over consumer decisions amounting to millions of dollars, and over the artistic growth of the most exciting medium of our time, is powerful. Too powerful to be held by a few people who seem to be having a lovely time maintaining the status quo.

We need fiercely intelligent critics willing to shred apart games – regardless of status – in the name of making them better. Ones who aren’t afraid of reactions from gamers and developers alike. We need articulate, principled voices to fight for our corner as consumers, just as much as they fight for the artistic rights of developers. We need a diverse group of journalists who represent gaming cultures from around the world, with enough wit to diffuse arbitrary arguments, enough talent to offer readers whole new perspectives, enough love for games that they can present thought-provoking ideas. Finally, we need writers who themselves can handle criticism, and won’t declare the death of a culture just for disagreeing with their politics.

But for now, I’ll just settle with some ethics.

About Guest Contributor

Check Also

Tekken 7 Release Date

Tekken 7 Release Date and Deluxe Edition Revealed

About Latest Posts Guest Contributor Latest posts by Guest Contributor (see all) The Difference Between ...

Nintendo Switch Launch Games

Here’s All The Nintendo Switch Launch Games (and more!)

About Latest Posts Guest Contributor Latest posts by Guest Contributor (see all) The Difference Between ...

Nier Automata Demo

NieR Automata Demo Out Now on PS4

About Latest Posts Guest Contributor Latest posts by Guest Contributor (see all) The Difference Between ...

  • smartalec2001 .

    This lays it out so clearly that you wonder why everyone doesn’t think this way.

    • Silver Sparrow

      Quite!

      It is because of the gamergate hashtag that I found out about this site and I now enjoy reading opinion pieces it publishes, along with its critique of various games. An enjoyable read, thank you 🙂

      I wish people (on the web/forums/ideologicalfactions!) could discuss, debate and then disagree with all or parts of the given arguments. Perhaps the internet needs a dose of Port and Policy. Port is on the left.

      Cheers.

    • Phil Wright

      Well I’d say that it’s a little disingenuous to act like games journalism is one group of people who have always been the same group and should as such be accountable for the actions (or inactions) of people in the past is a bit silly, and I also think it’s foolish to say “Well, they never did before, so why do they care now?” Maybe they changed their mind. You should never use having never done right as an excuse to never do right in the future.

      he did raise some good points though. But as an artistic medium, do consumers have the right to demand a new ending for a game? Is that art or is that pandering? A lot of people love the South Park episode about keeping George Lucas away from remastering his own movies, but get mad at ME3 and demanded the ending get changed, they don’t seem to see any hypocrisy in that opinion.

      • TheNaiveCynic

        First bit, mostly agreed, though I would argue that while it’s likely they changed their mind, they show no factual basis that accompanies that, frankly, extreme shift of priorities. There’s never been a line of studied reasoning and their arguments generally don’t even hold up to basic logical reasoning. Gendered insults are bad because women don’t deserve to be called sluts? Fair enough, but you’re ignoring that the point of insults is to hurt, and so they must be customized to the target to work. It’s bad that you can run over hookers in GTA? You’re ignoring that in no way the game encourages you to do so, except for the fact that it follows logic in that after paying someone, they hold your money for a short time. There’s mass harassment in the industry? Show me more then your poster children, show me studies, please. They don’t.

        So on that basis, I feel it is appropriate to point out the oddity and the hypocrisy of the current ‘game journalist’ agenda being espoused in the major online publications. It was never a point before, and there’s STILL no factual basis for it to be a point, as far as the journalists or any researches and inquiries have shown us – Even the anecdotal evidence makes it extremely odd as to why they’re pushing the ideological propaganda as hard as they are.

        On the ending demand VS artistic freedom bit; The SP episode actually agrees with the ME3 situation (Both disagree with the owner/creator of the topic’s right to do as they please in the face of consumer demands), so that might have been a minor misstatement – As for the rest, it’s still an interesting topic and debate.

        On the one hand – Yes, game designers absolutely have the right to design whatever they want, however they want it. And I do mean, absolutely.

        On the other; It’s the game journalists job to inform us of the things we may want to purchase. In the case of Mass Effect 3, the ending was, frankly, not what they had promised in any way. It was simple, straightforward and certainly not indicative of the overall progression mechanics (or maybe it was – Shooting options instead of dialogue options clearly marked.) It would have been the game journos job to point this out – Ideally pre-launch or shortly after launch – and call the devs out on this blatant discrepancy between the devs promises (An ending like you’ve never seen before, truly deserving of the franchise), and reality (a simple choice and a cutscene holding damn-near no previous decisions into account). So while the devs had the right to make it, it was also marketed with dishonesty, and those who are supposed to pick out the dishonesty even went as far as to stand by the deceit.

        People also have a right to demand certain things from an artist – To hold expectations, and to be upset when the expectations aren’t met. To expect the artist to live up to the promises he’s made about the art he’s making you pay for. They do not have the right to hold a gun to the artists head and say “Make this this way, or I’ll kill you.” They do have the right to say “If you don’t fix this, I certainly won’t buy any of your art in the future.” or even to demand their money back if the art was sold on a false premise.

        • Phil Wright

          I think the SP episode can be looked at in different ways. I think of it that the work was created, and that once it was created it entered the cultural understanding and shouldn’t be changed, not by the pressure of the viewer (or in this case the player). ME3’s ending was without a doubt crappy, but the question then becomes whether or not it’s acceptable artistically to change to fit someone else’s idea of what is good.

          If I make a book, and that book is ultimately shitty, that’s life, the book I wrote was shitty and that’s the life I have to live with, but I’m certainly not going to change something I view as an artistic statement because someone else thinks they deserved a better one. Being willing to do this, in my mind, removes all idea of the game being art at all, because what you were saying was so willingly reshaped to fit what people wanted. It then becomes a product.

          Games journalism is completely fraudulent. I think just about everyone has known that for a lot longer than #gamergate, and nobody ever quite put it all in one place until then. They’ve essentially been a mouth pieces for the companies that ultimately pay the bills for some time, and it’s just recently that we’ve all gotten on the same page about it. It was pretty predictable really, factual game analysis is being done by youtubers and lets plays for free, so the value of that content has gone down tremendously. To maintain interest in their websites, they’ve increasingly resorted to editorializing articles to gather support. I can’t stand the moralizing though, the concept that their vision is so ultimately pure and wonderful that it cannot allow anyone else to have their vision, even if the two could coexist.

        • A Real Libertarian

          On the ending demand VS artistic freedom bit; The SP episode actually agrees with the ME3 situation (Both disagree with the owner/creator of the topic’s right to do as they please in the face of consumer demands)

          The devs wanted to do a different ending, the publisher said “no” and pushed it out the door before it was ready.

          That’s why the last third of ME3 looks like it just fell apart.

          • TheNaiveCynic

            That makes a lot more sense…

      • smartalec2001 .

        I think the case of ME3 was as much about function as form. The ending-as-written may or may not have been poor, but I think the thing that everyone was hit by was how formulaic and uninteractive it was, despite – and this is the important thing – interviews insisting otherwise. It’s a consumer advocacy thing: BioWare had to be told that they fell short. If you don’t tell companies that, they’ll never try to improve.

        So yes, we have the right to demand. We don’t have the right to be heard or answered, and it’s to BW’s credit that they did answer. But we always, always have the right to demand better.

        • Phil Wright

          I have no problem with people trashing the ending or saying “Do not buy ME3, the ending is terrible.” I just wonder about the nature of video games as an artform, if the art can be changed to suit the desires of the players.

          There’s a part of me that thinks “who’s to say that someone won’t eventually appreciate this game, perhaps we are robbing people of something of value. Perhaps the value was not immediately apparent.”

          It’s a deeply complicated issue to me, and I feel like most games journalists kind of sidestepped any of the more nuanced issues.

  • Casey Snow

    Ethics in games journalism is important, but if I had to choose between corrupt journalism, and the menace of gamergate… I’d go with the journalists, corrupt or not, every time.

    • Jake Martinez

      This is comment is laughable in it’s hyperbole. If GamerGate is a “menace” it’s one of the most ineffectual “menaces” in the history of the world. It has not managed to drive a single female game developer out of the industry (the opposite actually, as it has provided financial and material support to female indie devs to get their games published) nor has it harmed anyone, or caused any sort of legal issue. In fact, it’s just an amorphous hashtag. That’s all.

      Instead what has managed to happen is that several journalists have had to put disclaimers on their work. Incidents of plagiarism have been outed and apologized for. Several websites have added journalistic ethics or practices that were not present before. In fact, it almost appears that the effects of “GamerGate” have been *exactly what everyone in GamerGate keeps stating* – reform in gaming journalism.

      It’s the height of insanity to sit here and claim that GamerGate is a menace when you cannot point to a single incident of any sort of violence on behalf of a GamerGate supporter towards anyone in the industry, yet there is a veritable laundry list of charitable organizations that have benefited from GamerGate support and the artifacts of actual material change to the journalism industry.

      • A Real Libertarian

        If GamerGate is a “menace” it’s one of the most ineffectual “menaces” in the history of the world.

        Well, that depends.

        The Allies were pretty damn menacing to the fascists in WWII.
        Woodward & Bernstein were menacing to the Nixon Administration.
        And we’re extremely menacing to the crooked journos and SJW bigots making up the enemy.

      • Casey Snow

        Wait… so on one hand you say “it’s just an amorphous hashtag” and then later on you ask me to point out an incident of violence on behalf of a gamergate supporter….

        Which is it? An amorphous hashtag or an agency of some kind with identifiable supporters?

        • destroy_all_monsters

          Anyone that considers GG to be a “menace” or a problem to be solved is a bigot full stop.

          If I have to choose between the blatant misandry and evil identity politics and a group of people who actually are inclusive of quiltbag types instead of pretending they’re acting in our interests I know which one I’d pick.

          Isn’t it funny how modern-day “social justice” has exactly nothing in common with the civil rights movement?

          • Casey Snow

            lol #killallmen

          • A Real Libertarian

            GamerGate: Anyone that considers GG to be a “menace” or a problem to be solved is a bigot full stop.

            If I have to choose between the blatant misandry and evil identity
            politics and a group of people who actually are inclusive of quiltbag
            types instead of pretending they’re acting in our interests I know which one I’d pick.

            Isn’t it funny how modern-day “social justice” has exactly nothing in common with the civil rights movement?

            AntiGamer:lol #killallmen

            Ladies and Gentlemen…

            The two sides in this issue.

          • Casey Snow

            How can there be two sides when all men are dead?

          • A Real Libertarian

            How can there be two sides when all men are dead?

            “How can there be two sides when all Jews are dead?”
            – Hitler

          • Casey Snow

            “How is it that I can talk when I’m dead?”
            -Hitler

          • A Real Libertarian

            “But Hitler is dead!”
            – Casey Snow on why he’s different from Hitler when someone points out the similarities in belief.

          • Casey Snow

            “The person I disagree with is no different than Hitler!”
            – Every Dumbfuck on the Internet

          • A Real Libertarian

            “Only a Dumbfuck would think my support of genocide makes me like Hitler!”
            – Casey Snow on Godwin’s Law.

          • Casey Snow

            “I am so bored of Hitler.”
            -Godwin

            “I am so bored of Godwin.”
            -Casey Snow

            “HITLERHITLERHITLHLITERLHLTERLTHITLER!!!!”
            -A Real Libertarian

          • A Real Libertarian

            If you don’t want to be compared to Hitler, don’t gleefully support genocide.

            – A Real Libertarian

          • Casey Snow

            lol #killallmen

          • A Real Libertarian

            If you don’t want to be compared to Hitler, don’t gleefully support genocide.

            – A Real Libertarian

            lol #killallmen

            – Casey Snow

          • Casey Snow

            #killalllibertarians

          • A Real Libertarian

            #killalllibertarians

            – Casey Snow on how to win debates.

    • TheNaiveCynic

      I find this statement to be absurd at the very least. Let me explain why.

      Are you not saying that, regardless of the situation, when faced with the decision to support either journalists or a vilified group that has in fact as a group, committed no wrongs, you would support the journalists in all cases regardless of their level of corruption and their willingness to state outright lie as fact, to promote scams as honest endeavors and to polarize communities against themselves?

      Let’s get to the insanity of that position.

      On the one end, you have “Gamergate”, which you call a ‘menace’. I would ask you on what grounds you conclude it is in fact a menace, when the hashtag as a whole or even a majority of the people gathering under its banner, have not committed any sort of damages that go above or beyond the legal rights of a consumer – But who have been hampered and vilified for nothing more than gathering under the outcry for “Ethical/honest games journalism” on one end of the spectrum, and “Keep your identity politics out of our community” on the other, and have at the very worst, shown disgust and outrage over outright lies and patterns of nepotism and abuse through the form of sending messages over the internet.

      On the other, you have the journalists – People responsible for investigative reporting of their chosen fields, people in a position of informative authority who are frankly as by the nature of their job, expected to report on the truth and hold the capability to separate their personal feelings from the things they report on, and are expected to report factually after significant inquiry.

      Frankly, if any of the above expectations can be seen in the games journalists of the major publications, you must have very odd eyes, for I am not even seeing a hint of awareness on their parts when it comes to the responsibilities of a journalist of any stripe.

      What you have instead of what you’d expect, is a group of people who are guilty of an undeniable pattern of nepotism, collusion of their message, a complete lack of research and understanding of their field and audience, who engage in intimidation tactics to get their point across when their point itself does not even hold up to basic scrutiny. Who are willing to promote actual scams, who are willing to ignore actual deception, and who are willing to even defend anti-consumer lies so long as they can preach their identity-politics despite there being no actual basis on their claims with regard to their personal politics and feelings, based on actual research done by the very people that seek to prove them right in their concerns.

      And that’s not even discussing the near-cultist following these journalists and their peers have, and the actual damage,the “Swatting” and doxxing, the people they’ve had fired for simply having an opinion in an unrelated field, the damage of the various scams, the image problems they’re causing with the factual deception and intellectual dishonesty they espouse, and the damage they might be doing to the tech industry as a whole by using factually inaccurate bullshit to scare women away from it.

      In what universe does it make sense to stand by those journalists?

      • Casey Snow

        http://imgur.com/a/Aekdn

        Your group is scum.

        • TheNaiveCynic

          So because of a statistically insignificant portion of the movement are rude bastards, the entire movement has no point, should just clear up and GTFO into silence?

          What if I applied that line of thinking to race? nationality? species? Your line of reasoning is bigoted, though I agree that a good portion of the people in the images you linked are scummy and/or trolls who clearly just needed an excuse to throw bile.

          Further – You said menace. This implies a physical threat to society as a whole, or at the very least individuals. What you linked to provide yourself the moral highground, is insults – By and large aimed towards people who frankly have done everything that would get people in any reasonable position not only fired from their occupation, but also vilified by their community and even their families. Instead, their people are raising them to the skies as pillars of the community on the sheer basis of victimhood, without any merit-based valuation.

          I agree the people you linked are in large part using overly insulting language. I do not agree that this is in any way reflective of the actions, words or arguments of a statistically relevant portion of gamergate, and as such to use it to judge gamergate as a whole is flawed at best, outright vile at worst.

          Based on your other replies tho, 7/10 troll would respond again.

          • Casey Snow

            Hey, it’s not my fault that you let that insignificant portion of the movement sink the whole thing. I had nothing to do with it.

            You can fight for journalistic ethics all you want, but you better shed the hashtag when you do because nobody will take you seriously when you throw the word “gamergate” around.

            You can use the word menace any way you want, I suppose. That they are clogging up the internet with asinine and/or sexist bullshit is basically how I meant it.

            You ask, “What if I applied that line of thinking to race? nationality? species?” Well, yeah… that would make you bigoted.

            Good thing that gamergate is not a race, nationality, or a species, or I would be bigoted, too!

            So… tell… what is a tolerable percentage of sexists to be involved in your cause? I am really curious to know… lol

          • TheNaiveCynic

            kek

            >You let the insignificant portion sink the whole thing, I had nothing to do with it
            False, as you just now tried to play that off as representative of the whole thing. Further, it’s not a case of letting, it’s a case of it being an effective strategy employed by the press. Propaganda 101.

            >You better shed the hashtag
            Yeah no, it’ll just be “a derivative of -Gate”.

            >You can use menace any way you want I suppose
            Stop reinventing words, it has a definition. In your use, its a terminological descriptor, and in such cases the definition is: “Something likely to cause injury, damage, etc.” Stop raping the english language.

            >Menace = clogging up the internet with asinine and/or sexist bullshit
            First off; Gendered insults are as sexist as gendered bathrooms. They serve their purpose better if they take physiology and state of mind into account, yet they’re accessible in equal measure to everyone.

            Second; Clogging up the internet? Only appropriate response is lol.

            I’ll give you asinine though, but that’s irrelevant to quite literally everything of significance.

            >If I applied this line of reasoning to race, nationality, species, it would make me bigoted
            It’s still bigoted as well as ignorant to religion, to ideology, to social class, to activist group.

            >What is a tolerable percentage of sexists to be involved in your cause?
            You’ve yet to establish it’s actual sexism (which you seem to mean as misogyny), and while I wouldn’t call it tolerable (then the answer’d be 0%), it’s also not worth commenting about or holding against any group unless it’s a larger amount then society at large – Which no study has managed to prove, though the opposite (less sexism/hate, more diversity then western countries and/or the opposition of GG) has been shown in a few basic analyses.

            So to answer the underlying concept of your final question, the ‘tolerable’, where tolerable is to be understood as normal or otherwise unremarkable, is a level of sexism apparent in western societies (US, UK, Australia, New Zealand, france, belgium, the netherlands, germany, denmark, norway, sweden).

          • Casey Snow

            That “insignificant” portion that you describe sank it. You can piss and moan about how that might not be fair, but that’s how it went. Nobody is going to give credence to gamergate now. It’ll endure, sure. Sort of like how Myspace endures as something ineffectual and meaningless to 99.99% of the population. GG had its chance, and you failed to police your own. Thems the breaks, kid.

            You can go on and on about your pet theory on how gendered insults are like bathrooms or whatever the fuck that was. Nobody shares your point of view. If more people did, it would pose a problem worth my attention, but as it stands… have fun with it. I wouldn’t bring it up during a first date, if I were you.

            Does “raping the English language” constitute a reinvention of the word “rape”?

            And whether or not those tweets felt as if they were likely to cause injury or not isn’t up to us: it’s upon the recipients of those sexists tweets to decide. I will yield to their authority on the matter of “menace”… not to you, and not to the fucking dictionary.

            Is gamergate a religion then? I guess they do tend to worship any public figure who grants them even the slightest bit of positive attention. I guess if I am bigoted against the gamergate religion… I can live with that. Guilty as charged.

            What do you mean “yet to establish it’s actual sexism?” I have established it… to myself. Oh, lol, you meant that I need to establish it for YOU. Well, you’re shit out of luck there. If you’re unconvinced of the seixsm involved in those tweets representing gamergate, that’s your failure. And it is the accumulation of little failures such as yourself who have amounted to the colossal failure that gamergate was.

            There is no tolerable level of sexism in countries, either Western or Eastern, and this is evidenced by the fact that people of all nations rise up to confront sexism, to overthrow the power structures that allow it to persist. No such effort exists within gamergate.

            Which was a pity, you know? There were some things in games journalism that could have done with fixing, but gators decided to just fuck around instead.

          • dsadsada

            “GG had its chance, and you failed to police your own”
            What is the GG Harassment Patrol that was created by supporters of GG and by the way, also work in defense of people who are anti-GG including someone like Sarkeesian. We police our kind and keep discussion as civil as possible. I certainly don’t see anything even resembling that on the anti side.

            “I will yield to their authority on the matter of “menace”… not to you, and not to the fucking dictionary.”
            By that logic, potato is a number. The dictionary exists because people need a standard to understand the meaning of words. Otherwise a person can say “pork blue format can airplane horseshoe” and no one would have any right to complain when they don’t understand that the person meant “pass the salt” and that would be stupid. Inconceivably stupid. Words evolve but not on a whim. If it could, I could claim you’re harassing me right now and I’d be correct. Which is stupid.

            “No such effort exists within gamergate.”

            See Gamergate Harassment Patrol.

          • Casey Snow

            Funny, I’ve been TOLD about this legendary “GG Harassment Patrol” all the time, but not once in all my anti-gg trolling have I ever witnessed as single of of those blessed Valkyries of yours in action.

            I’m sure that there are a handful of people who do some things sometimes, but man did they drop the ball. Gators invoke their name all time to cover their ass though… so… ‘mission accomplished’, I guess.

            And you are right, I don’t adhere to dictionaries: dictionaries adhere to people, not the other way around. I could say “purple monkey dishwasher” when what I really mean is to say “pass the salt”, but no one would understand me. But if I call gamergate a “menace”, it gets substantially more traction. I guess that’s what happens when you’ve fucked up as bad as GG. You don’t see it that way? Well, I ain’t surprised, but that means precisely fuck-all to me.

          • “Funny, I’ve been TOLD about this legendary “GG Harassment Patrol” all the time, but not once in all my anti-gg trolling have I ever witnessed as single of of those blessed Valkyries of yours in action.”
            You and I both know that’s bullcrap, because if you were as vigilant as you said you were, you would definitely have seen some these “Valkyries”. I’m guessing to you, if you don’t see it, it doesn’t exist. A five second Google search will take care of that. Or wait, you’re a troll – research doesn’t sit too well with you.

            You’re chock full of fallacies. Tell me, exactly where did GG exactly “fuck up”? Like every other movement, there will be radicals/extremists, none of which represent the movement as a whole. Or wait, is any movement with the “-ism” suffix somehow different?

            “And you are right, I don’t adhere to dictionaries: dictionaries adhere to people, not the other way around. I could say “purple monkey dishwasher” when what I really mean is to say “pass the salt”, but no one would understand me. But if I call gamergate a “menace”, it gets substantially more traction. I guess that’s what happens when you’ve fucked up as bad as GG. You don’t see it that way? Well, I ain’t surprised, but that means precisely fuck-all to me.”
            I wonder why that is? Makes me question why you’re even here – oh, wait. You obviously have nothing else better to do than to go from site to site, spreading misinformation – please take your conformist, bigoted views and go back to your bridge.

          • Casey Snow

            I granted, in my earlier post, that they may exist. But the ratio between GG Patrol “saves” and GG Patrol invocations for political purposes is 100 to 1.

            Fallacies, fallacies, fallacies. Gators keep throwing that word out like it means something in this situation, and it doesn’t.

            Correct me if I am wrong here, but gamergate wants to, I don’t know… ACCOMPLISH things, right? To do that it needs to convince people. It needs to convince the masses, and it needs to convince those in power since change comes about from the work of both. If gamergate is anything like this, guess what… gamergate is political. And in politics, whining about fallacies doesn’t mean shit. This “debate” in the United States over climate change would be over in a millisecond if logic and rationality reigned, but they don’t.

            Now, don’t get me wrong: gamergate does not have logic and rationality on its side, but it could have made up for that with decent politics. God, did it fuck up PR badly though…

            So that is why I intentionally flaunt “guilt by association” being applicable in the case of gamergate. Is it logically sound? No. But politically, it works, and it works because gamergate cannot hide its fucking rotten core.

          • dsadsada
          • Casey Snow

            Let’s unpack what you have here:

            Link 1:

            -I did not see any credit given to gamergate.
            -IGN having a code of ethics published does not necessarily mean that ethics won’t be breached. We haven’t advanced much here. A magazine throws a bone, and you put that bone up on a monument?
            – “IGN’s editorial and sales team are entirely separate!” (source: IGN)

            Link 2:
            -I did not see any credit given to gamergate.
            -This is an investigation, not a result. Don’t party just yet.

            Link 3:
            -I did not see any credit given to gamergate.
            -Gawker already disclosed these sorts of things. Now they are just telling you that they do… hurray!
            -I went through the Privacy Policy line-by-line, and nearly every bullet point denotes a ‘clarification’, not an actual systematic change.

            Link 4: (Really? All one source… you need to broaden your mind.)
            -Once again, NO CREDIT GIVEN TO GAMERGATE!
            -The article’s own evidence admits that the FTC “…were already planning on updating our Endorsement Guide FAQs to address various issues…” and also “number of complaints won’t necessarily affect our analysis of whether the FTC Act has been violated”… so much for sea-lioning.
            -It’s a FAQ! It’s not an actual policy change.
            -I followed the link to KiA, and there is no evidence that this really came from someone in the FTC.

            But… okay… some of these are nit-picks. If I were generous (and I mean really fucking generous…) and I granted you every single one of these points, this is a pretty weak game you’re playing compared to the cultural shift instigated by SJWs. I mean, for fucks sake, if THAT is the best you can do, gamergate is playing Pong while Anita Sarkeesian is playing Civilization 5. If this is “Gamergate’s Greatest Hits” compilation, it’d go in the bargin bin in its first week out.

          • dsadsada

            As far as no attribute to GG for any of your points, the reason any of those actions were taken were because GG supporters continued to badger each of those organizations into action. That doesn’t necessarily mean that they added the hashtag to their emails either or that the organizations are going to drop GG by name.

            A public code of ethics allows the users to take the individual writer to task. It allows its readers to know what to expect from the site and allows them to justly and appropriately respond when they feel a breach had been made. Putting aside whether legal action can be taken, a site cannot exist without its users. If the breach is made and no action is taken, users can no longer trust the site and stop giving it traffic. If legal action can be taken, that’s even better.

            Gawker UPDATED their policies, not disclosed them for the first time. The title says overhaul, not release.

            While the FTC were planning on updating their Endorsement Guide FAQs, by saying “many complaints about undisclosed affiliate links has made it clear that the FAQs need to address that specific practice”, it means they hadn’t considered addressing that from the start. Otherwise their wording would have said they would emphasize, not address. While the number of complaints won’t automatically affect anything, simply having the guidelines laid out that addresses user concerns allows the users to appropriately judge whether or not a work complies. Likewise, the number of complaints will still cause heads to turn as stated “we do strive to be responsive when we see a pattern of complaints in our database, and certainly we saw a pattern here”.

            As far as being from a single source, it’s like you’re asking for those unethical journalists to report on unethical journalism? The only journalist I’m aware of who’s done anything is Breitbart. Smaller sites like this, Techraptor and nichegamer do have the occasional article but their primary focus is still on gaming news. Since I don’t participate on things like Kotaku in Action, I just get my news on the latest happenings there. At the least, Billy adds links to back up what’s being reported in his blog entries.

            GG asks for better ethical practices in gaming journalism and things such as policies and disclosing of personal relations between the developers and journalists is the tangible way to achieve them. And it’s clear enough that we are achieving them, slowly but surely.

            As far as Sarkeesian, I really never cared for her. To my understanding, what she has done is caused the industry to be more aware of the portrayal of women in games. But from what I’ve heard even before GG was a thing, her research simply doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. She also offers no solutions and doesn’t produce enough well researched content to justify the amount of donations she asks for. Assuming that’s right, lighting a match and leaving others to carry the torch isn’t the same as waking a giant and stirring it into the action you wanted out of it.

          • Casey Snow

            “As far as no attribute to GG for any of your points, the reason any of those actions were taken were because GG supporters continued to badger each of those organizations into action. That doesn’t necessarily mean that they added the hashtag to their emails either or that the organizations are going to drop GG by name.”

            So what you are saying here is that if a group gets together and e-mails a company and they don’t use the hashtag, it was certainly gamergate at work. But if a group gets together to harass Anita, Zoe, and Briana suddenly you need the hashtag for proof of gamergate? Sorry, but you can’t have it both ways. Either gamergate must be accountable for its failures, or it cannot be accountable for its “successes”.

            It has been six months now, and gamergate has shot itself in the foot again and again when it comes to taking writers to task. And why writers, anyway when the real problem is the economic influence that the AAA developers have themselves on the publication as the whole. Quit using writers as scapegoats. That is why I was criticizing this alleged “victory” of gamergate- it doesn’t solve anything at all. It’s a propaganda victory more than anything. I mean, sheesh, we have laws about everything and that doesn’t stop people from breaking them. Is it important that everyone understand these laws? Absolutely. But GG has done very little as a media watchdog group to see that these rules are enforced.

            Your lack of sources is problematic because you take so much on faith when you limit your worldview. That is why you accept this e-mail from the FTC as authentic when only a very few, very biased, people are touting it. Gamergates rally against “bias” in journalism, but they are more than willing to accept a ton of bias when it confirms their worldview.

            Which brings me to my last point: the point that I begin this whole internet debate with and that no one can seem to justify. The has not been a demonstrable harm to the corruption currently at play in games journalism. Corruption might be bad in itself, but it has not translated into real harms. I read the above article and you know what? The problem is with developers, not the journalism. What is a problem more than corrupt journalists, and more than the greedy developers is internet hatred. I would be happy to live in the world of game, journalistic warts and all, if we could get internet misogyny under control. Gamergate has not been effective enough to justify the amount of hatred that it has brought out.

          • dsadsada

            If it happens around the time a lot of people are saying things like “send emails to this group regarding this thing” which happened a lot before those changes took place, it’s easy enough to say the two are related. Much the same way Intel pulled out their advertising from Gamasutra. http://techraptor.net/content/gamasutra-intel . Gawker updating their policies was a domino reaction after the FTC heard the consumer’s complaints and addressed their concerns.

            With regards to being accountable for its failures, there’s this. http://theralphretort.com/kingofpol-wild-ride-comes-to-a-close/ Speaking of, that’s another site that talks a lot about the ongoings in GG. I forgot about that until just now.

            As far as the AAA developers go, their marketing departments are supposed to sell their product so it’s kind of expected that they would do whatever it takes to get a good impression, even lying such as in cases where stage demos are actually just pre-recorded videos. But considering it’s possible to sue for false advertising apparently, I suppose that’s why developers aren’t particularly a target. Simply not buying their product is also the most efficient way to hurt them.

            Likewise, the best way to hurt journalists is to not give them traffic. Sites such as Polygon and Kotaku lost a lot of readership. Gamasutra in particular lost a big advertising partner.

            But its the job of journalists to not only report what the developers are selling, but to also point out when companies are trying to cheat their customers out of their money. GG exists because consumers are dissatisfied to say the least at how anti-consumer their (previously) main sources of information have been. Frankly, the journalists have even more power than the developers as well since good or bad press can make or break a product’s sales. Not to mention individual developer’s bonuses being tied to the game’s metacritic score. This is mostly a problem within the company but something journalists can easily take advantage of in order to enjoy some special perks. And if they give a bad product a good review, the consumers will suffer.

            Take Assassin’s Creed Unity as a hypothetical example. I wasn’t really following it but if in the situation where journalists praise the game and rate it highly without disclosing any of the painfully obvious bugs in the game, naturally the consumer is going to suffer. And if the initial sales are high because of that, decision making suits will just get it in their head that releasing a bad product not nearly ready enough to be released is OK. It’s not. Don’t forget that consumers still need to earn their money just as much as anyone else. That money becomes very limited for luxuries once you’re done paying the bills. I doubt you would be OK with feeling like you got cheated out of your hard earned money either. Again before you forget, that could have been avoided if the journalists had warned consumers of the bugs. People expect companies to want to make money. People expect journalists to be vigilant towards exposing the truth.

            This is not even talking about the Game Journo Pros list as a whole who among other things essentially blacklisted Allistair Pinsof from the industry for wanting to report on a donation scam.

            My lack of sources is a problem I suppose. You’re not talking to the most involved person in GG so sadly it can’t be helped. Somebody else can do that if anyone’s even still following all this.

            As for demonstrable harm, there are a good few:
            Inability to separate personal morals from objective quality means products are not being judged on their quality as an actual game (also known as being unprofessional. Look at http://christian-gaming.com/ for how to do it right).
            Collusion between journalists via the Game Journo Pros wherein agendas, political or otherwise, are being pushed (especially visible in…).
            The whole Allistair Pinsof thing.

            I can agree with you in that hatred is rarely ever productive. It can give a push but that’s it. But that goes for both sides. You can’t convincingly claim hatred is a problem while reveling in it yourself. That’s entirely hypocritical. As for myself, I hate corrupt journalism and the people who proliferate it. As I already said, I don’t care for people like Sarkeesian so my support for GG has nothing to do with misogyny. Generalizing an entire group is also disingenuous and is in itself a form of hatred.

          • Casey Snow

            The last time I went to Ralph Retort, they were doing a “story” about how Randi Harper is much heavier than her twitter avatar lets on. I’m not about that.

            And the Intel thing back-fired on GG. Not only did they reinstate their ads, but they also went public with a multi-million dollar effort to increase diversity in tech, in partnership with GG.

            What does GG’s 8chan do in response? Get gamergate to flood Intel’s event’s hashtag with propaganda trying to portray J. McIntosh as an anti-Semite over tweets that he made years ago critical of Israel. Does this not strike you as a group that would be rather difficult for neutral parties to sympathize with? Can’t you see how GG kinda screwed the pooch with hysterical PR moves like that?

            As a result, the faults that you find with games journalism that need to be solved cannot be done so if anyone has any connection to the gamergate hashtag: it is only a hindrance without a single identifiable advantage to it.

            So I am not painting GG has all harassers, I am saying that they have ALREADY BEEN PAINTED in that way. Whatever I say in this comments thread has no bearing on whether or not GG is being defamed because the damage has already been done. That’s why I don’t have time for “b-b-but guilt by association fallacy!” It is a deliberate ignorance of the current situation of gamergate to even bother with calling out that fallacy. Whether or not it is a fallacy is irrelevant since the allegation has stuck.

            The brick wall that I keep smashing my head against with everyone in this comments section is that they think that either I or the world itself cares about reasoned debate. Sorry, but that’s naive. This is Real Politic here, and it’s the only game in town.

          • dsadsada

            Yeah, I’m pretty sure I don’t visit Ralph Retort much these days for the same reason. I was specifically trying to find that KoP story which I thought was on oneangrygamer so that’s how I ended up back on Ralph Retort.

            Also, I believe you meant that Intel partnered with FF, not GG. I was tempted to make a joke about that actually. Anyway, what Intel did was pure PR and can’t be blamed for that. They received a lot of letters of complaints and so pulled the ads. But then they were faced with being labeled a misogynistic company if they kept it up, furthermore they were being labeled by large publications at that who could influence people completely detached from this entire debacle. Again, they can’t be blamed for their actions and many pro-GG were disappointed but otherwise understanding. A far cry from anti-GG which labels anybody who wants to remain neutral to the issue as being .

            And if anything, people refusing quiet logic is itself a problem. There are some who actually stop to look at what’s going on and come up with their own conclusions such as this http://nichegamer.net/2014/12/adrian-chmielarz-interview-gamergate-vitriol-and-saying-enough-is-enough/ where Adrian admitted to initially buying into what the media said about it. He changed his mind specifically because of reasoned debate from the pro-GG side combined with the mindless hate from the anti-GG side. “It was also their total contempt for anyone who disagrees with their views. Contempt supported with some of the most vile tweets I have ever seen on Twitter.”

            I myself didn’t even know what was going on until cracked.com started releasing articles condemning the movement. Reasoned debate from the pro-side is what drew me in to investigate further and what eventually lead me to wanting to offer my support. There have been plenty of times outside of GG when somebody on my side of an argument rattled on about unnecessary things like name calling that made me momentarily drop the argument and reprimand him. And I feel no differently within GG.

            As for the tag being a hindrance, yeah probably. But since the journalists are the ones who slandered us in the first place, letting this consumer revolt achieve its goals while retaining the tag would show the power of the consumers to me. Not just for this industry, but potentially in any other. Besides, we’re gamers. Being stubborn and trying again and again until we win is in our nature.

            Also, if stuck allegations means that people should stop investigating, then wrongfully accused convicts would never have been exonerated. People like Clarence Elkins or Adrian Thomas. Or heck, we’d be thinking that the people who died during the Salem Witch Trials deserved it.

            Another quote from Adrian in that nichegamer interview, “To see anyone still holding on to the “bunch of misogynists” narrative is deeply unsettling to me. Anyone who ever voted or cares about politics knows that certain feeling when your party loses and you see someone you really dislike win the election. It’s the feeling of dread, of hope lost. I feel the same way whenever I read someone talking about Gamergate as a “bunch of misogynists”.

          • Articuno76

            “So what you are saying here is that if a group gets together and
            e-mails a company and they don’t use the hashtag, it was certainly
            gamergate at work. But if a group gets together to harass Anita, Zoe,
            and Briana suddenly you need the hashtag for proof of gamergate? Sorry,
            but you can’t have it both ways. Either gamergate must be accountable
            for its failures, or it cannot be accountable for its “successes”.”

            That’s not unreasonable at all.

            I’m pro-GG and have never used the hashtag. Heck, barely use Twitter at all. You need to understand this is about philosophies more than it is about centralised movements.

            GG exists, even if you don’t call it that. And it also doesn’t exist even when you do.

          • bryoneill11

            Anita HAS ALL THE FUCKING PRESS with her. Gamergate is just regular people with no agenda at all. ITS A REVOLUTION from average people for average people revealing against journalists and corporations. I will always side with the people!!!

          • A Real Libertarian

            It needs to convince the masses, and it needs to convince those in power since change comes about from the work of both.

            And guess what?
            GamerGate keeps growing (It’s only 300 extremists! It’s only 15,000 extremists! It’s only 200,000 extremists!)

            And guess what else?

            Leaving aside the FTC, FBI, IRS, and every other alphabet agency in the USA and other countries, leaving aside the sites that responded to our demands, leaving aside the firings of AntiGamer leaders.

            No, change does not require those in power to accept it.

            History is riddled with the bones of Tyrants who thought they were untouchable.

            Guess what they thought of those that would overthrow them?

            So that is why I intentionally flaunt “guilt by association” being applicable in the case of gamergate. Is it logically sound? No. But politically, it works, and it works because gamergate cannot hide its fucking rotten core.

            “My evidence of GamerGate’s evil isn’t logically sound, but it is politically effective, and it works because it shows GamerGate to be evil.”

            Ladies and Gentlemen, if you’ve ever wondered how doublethink works in the real world, here you have it!

            And your people honestly wonder why you’re failing when your tactics are this:

            http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/856/669/16e.jpg

          • Casey Snow

            Man… even if there were 200,000 of you guys that would still be pretty insignificant. For one thing, I don’t know whose ass you are pulling that number out of, but even if I granted it to you, it’d still be a rather pathetic sliver of gamers as a whole.

            You’re a fucking LOUD sliver though: you got that part of politics down, at least. The problem is, that when you were loud enough to have an actual chance at getting the world’s attention, you squandered it on petty conspiracies about Zoe Quinn and this whole ludicrous tangent about Anita Sarkeesian that should never have been involved.

          • “I granted, in my earlier post, that they may exist. But the ratio between GG Patrol “saves” and GG Patrol invocations for political purposes is 100 to 1.”
            You and I both know what you meant by your earlier comment – the fact that since you don’t see this “Harassment Patrol”, that it doesn’t exist. Don’t patronize me. Which brings me to my second point:

            “Fallacies, fallacies, fallacies. Gators keep throwing that word out like it means something in this situation, and it doesn’t.”

            Fallacy – the use of poor, or invalid, reasoning for the construction of an argument. It’s actually the perfect word to describe this situation. I’ve already pointed out earlier why your arguments lack validity, hence fallacy. I’m not a “Gator”, either – just someone interested in gaming.

            “Correct me if I am wrong here, but gamergate wants to, I don’t know… ACCOMPLISH things, right? To do that it needs to convince people. It needs to convince the masses, and it needs to convince those in power since change comes about from the work of both. If gamergate is anything like this, guess what… gamergate is political. And in politics, whining about fallacies doesn’t mean shit. This “debate” in the United States over climate change would be over in a millisecond if logic and rationality reigned, but they don’t.”
            Well, you’re wrong – from my point of view, Gamergate has accomplished a lot. A lot of gaming sites have changed their policies (even though many believe it isn’t about ethics), they helped fund a “game jam” to get women into the industry, among other things. Which brings me to my next point:

            “Now, don’t get me wrong: gamergate does not have logic and rationality on its side, but it could have made up for that with decent politics. God, did it fuck up PR badly though…”
            The thing is, media tends to focus on the negative side of things – and trolls like you aren’t helping. The worst are the ones who take the name of Gamergate and harass/threaten people and such, adding fuel to the propaganda fire. Logic and rationality mean nothing if people don’t think for themselves. Like I said before, it takes 5 seconds to do a Google search.

            So that is why I intentionally flaunt “guilt by association” being applicable in the case of gamergate. Is it logically sound? No. But politically, it works, and it works because gamergate cannot hide its fucking rotten core.

            By nature, this argument is ridiculous – I’ve already pointed out how other movements have their radicals/extremists/trolls. You yourself even admit that it’s not ‘logically sound’, so why are you following it? If you can’t figure out why that is, then you’re already a lost cause.

          • dsadsada

            I don’t use twitter (seriously 150 characters? How the hell do people put up with that?) but from what I understand, their primary purpose is to handle particularly large problems like persistent death threats and doxxing. If you have done neither and engaged as you have up til now on this article, I doubt that you would see them since somebody would have to report you to them first. And many on the GG side are anti-censorship as well so it’s doubtful if anyone would report you simply for disagreeing.

            Or if you meant that you were expecting something to happen to someone you were arguing with, it depends entirely on their post such as if death threats or doxxing was involved. Doubtful. You can google “Gamergate Harassment Patrol” and that should give you results related to that group. I highly doubt you’re going to do that though or you’re going to cherrypick without addressing most of the relevant results that point to who they are, what they do, and what they have accomplished.

            And again, saying that you’re not going to adhere to dictionaries is tantamount to embracing ignorance.

          • Casey Snow

            It’s ignorance to think that some book of definitions is what separates a person from ignorance. Ignorance is embodied in facile simplifications like what you just said.

          • dsadsada

            A book created to compile and standardize society’s understandings of words within its language. But that was always an aside. The main point was with clarifications on the GG Harassment Patrol which you have clearly chosen to ignore.

          • A Real Libertarian

            dsadsada: And again, saying that you’re not going to adhere to dictionaries is tantamount to embracing ignorance.

            You: It’s ignorance to think that some book of definitions is what separates a person from ignorance. Ignorance is embodied in facile simplifications like what you just said.

            Lewis Carroll: “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
            “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
            “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”

            You know how pride precedes disaster, and an arrogant attitude heralds a fall?

            Well you SJWs have set yourselves up for an orbital drop at this point.

          • Articuno76

            “Hey, it’s not my fault that you let that insignificant portion of the
            movement sink the whole thing. I had nothing to do with it.”

            The press were directly responsible for creating an reinforcing that term. The term Gamergate must endure because it points towards the first point where the press lashed out at their audience (gamers).

            To abandon the term “gamer”gate is to disassociate the press from their action against gamers. And that’s not acceptable. They MUST be held responsible for their willful malignification of the gamer.

            Why should we be directly responsible for the intentional, willful and malignant association the press is creating? Isn’t the onus on the press to i) stop it and ii) undo it?

    • bryoneill11

      wow just wow, the most ignorant comment I’ve read in my entire life. You should write for Kotaku or Polygon, good fit.

  • Invin

    Good article! Thankyou. I don’t care what people say about Gamergate; a consumer revolt was brewing for a long time with “journalists” demonizing their own audience and trying to force identity politics into everything via corruption and censorship. People got sick of it and they’re calling out the corruption and demanding better standards. It’s been messy, but it was going to happen sooner or later.

  • Jake Wilson

    Best article I’ve ever read! I’ve had an unsettling feeling about sites like IGN and Gamespot for a while now. When Ni No Kuni didn’t receive any 10/10s it was the beginning of the end for me!

  • dsadsada

    …I need a good flight simulator. My dad loves that stuff and since I just built a gaming PC, I could go grab a joystick, find a good game, and let him have fun. It’s rare to see him with a childish smile these days. It’s only when he sees his grandson that he has it now and I want to see him enjoying himself even just half as much even when my nephew isn’t around…

    Huh? Oh right, great article. Advocacy for consumers and advancement of quality within the industry is exactly the reason I support GG. Most people seem to just stop with ethics in journalism and everyone else, neutral or anti, just takes that at face value without understanding the greater implications as to why that’s important. Glad to see you highlighting the facts.

  • destroy_all_monsters

    This is so solid. Next time I have to explain GG I’m linking this. Good job Stephen and thank you.

  • Michael Goutman

    Fantastic article. Bravo.

  • Kyle LondonArsenault

    oooh, this is going to be linked in my game reviews article!

  • William Burr

    I keep waiting for everyone involved to figure it out. There is no games journalism, and never has been. There is only PR and advocacy. Every entity that provides review is also dependent on advertising revenue. It is huge conflict of interest, but so obviously blatant for so very long that the players involved don’t even consider “ethics” to be in play.

  • Mr0303

    Great article!

    No one would consider the journalists’ ethics such a big problem if they weren’t as influential as they are. Even if we remove their competency and honesty from the equation lots of developers have their bonuses tied to Metacritic (which I find horrendous).

    That being said Colbert can sod off.

  • C G Saturation

    I’m still hoping that Gamergate will reduce the huge amount of nepotism and cronyism going on in the entire gaming industry. Gaming journalism is just one aspect reflecting the kind of attitude that’s become increasingly common in the industry nowadays.

  • Sevuz

    Great article. You nailed it perfectly.

  • ArlethaSpivey2

    Well-timed discussion . Coincidentally , if one requires to combine PDF or PNG files , my colleagues found text here http://goo.gl/X66FgD

Copyright © GamesNosh 2014-2015