Leaving aside any "whose side has more toxic people on it" concerns (a difficult thing to measure in any case), there's a few things put forth by pro-GG people that have pretty much unsold me on them.
Starting at the beginning, kind of. The continued presentation of the events with Quinn as being particularly important just don't hold together for me. Even taking it all at face value it'd be the journalistic corruption equivalent of jaywalking. When it's a free game that said journalist never did any particular writing about?
I thought NYS actually came quite a bit later. ... In internet time anyway. At least where I was, those articles came, got discussed, I mentioned how crap I thought most of them were, then the discussion petered out and dropped off well before NYS came up.
Still think those articles were crap. If you're really opposed to people defining "gamer" as excluding non-straight white males, having a headline that goes "Yes Tsunami, I agree with you" to people pushing that definition seems pretty damn silly.
I'm gonna need some convincing that anyone in any internet conflict ever has been effective at policing that kind of stuff.
Okay, here's the big one. This is a massive loss for anyone who cares about journalistic ethics. Journalists being afraid to write anything their advertisers might not like has to be some kind of platonic ideal of corruption.
Somewhere around here though I've got a screenshot of someone identifying as pro-GG saying without a hint of sarcasm what amounted to "an ethical journalist is one who stays bought". I really can't get behind that.
Yeah, it should be pretty easy to avoid by just not going into the GG specific thread*. Even in VGO I haven't seen it come up very often anyplace else (and when it has, people have been redirected there). I don't think I've even seen it come up in Other Media.
*At one point there was a second thread in Tancency, but it seems to have been abandoned. Was kind of redundant anyway.
RPG.net has over twice the population (going by active members) of the town I live in. There's plenty of room to avoid things.
-Morgan.
Tennie Wrote:Basically, a few months ago an ex-husband of a game developer named Zoe Quinn wrote up a bunch of posts claiming that quinn had been sleeping with several people, including at least one game journalist. Said journalist was one of those who later gave the developer's game a high ranking. The claims smacked of corruption in game journalism.
Starting at the beginning, kind of. The continued presentation of the events with Quinn as being particularly important just don't hold together for me. Even taking it all at face value it'd be the journalistic corruption equivalent of jaywalking. When it's a free game that said journalist never did any particular writing about?
Quote:Then, on August 28, a series of articles appeared on a number of games journalism sites, all of them claiming that "gamers" were pretty much every negative nerd stereotype that you could think of, and that that "demographic" was being "killed" by increasing diversity among people who play games. This riled up a LOT of gamers, many of whom are indeed diverse, as they were pretty much being slimed unfairly by the media. This led to the hashtag "#NotYourShield" in an effort to prove that the media was actually attacking a stereotype that had long been incorrect.
I thought NYS actually came quite a bit later. ... In internet time anyway. At least where I was, those articles came, got discussed, I mentioned how crap I thought most of them were, then the discussion petered out and dropped off well before NYS came up.
Still think those articles were crap. If you're really opposed to people defining "gamer" as excluding non-straight white males, having a headline that goes "Yes Tsunami, I agree with you" to people pushing that definition seems pretty damn silly.
Quote:Interestingly, many on the pro-GG side have actually been policing this kind of stuff more effectively than those on the anti-GG side.
I'm gonna need some convincing that anyone in any internet conflict ever has been effective at policing that kind of stuff.
Quote:In the meantime, despite all the stuff tossed at GG, it's made some strides. They managed to convince a number of companies to pull their advertisements from Gawker Media, which owns the publications that ran the original batch of "gamers are dead" articles. And yet, the fight doesn't seem to be over, not by a long shot.
Okay, here's the big one. This is a massive loss for anyone who cares about journalistic ethics. Journalists being afraid to write anything their advertisers might not like has to be some kind of platonic ideal of corruption.
Somewhere around here though I've got a screenshot of someone identifying as pro-GG saying without a hint of sarcasm what amounted to "an ethical journalist is one who stays bought". I really can't get behind that.
Bob Schroeck Wrote:And unless gamergate has infected every thread, it should be easy enough to stay away from it while reading the stuff you want to.
Yeah, it should be pretty easy to avoid by just not going into the GG specific thread*. Even in VGO I haven't seen it come up very often anyplace else (and when it has, people have been redirected there). I don't think I've even seen it come up in Other Media.
*At one point there was a second thread in Tancency, but it seems to have been abandoned. Was kind of redundant anyway.
RPG.net has over twice the population (going by active members) of the town I live in. There's plenty of room to avoid things.
-Morgan.