Journalism and the attack on Gamers

gaming "journalism" is the pits. like the armpits, and death pits of olde. it makes me laugh on my ass, sorry, like a woman cheated on a man that sucks..... BUT SHE MADE A BAD VIDEO GAME??!!?!?! STOP THE FUCKING PRESSES LITERALLY WHO GIVES A SHIT ABOUT EBOLA LETS GET THIS DEVIOUS SLUT

---------- Post added 31st Aug 2014 at 02:17 PM ----------

she had sex for good reviews of her bad indie game no one played, im sure rockstar is crying about THE INJUSTICE while throwing a couple hundred thou at ign and shit because everyone uses game review sites these days (no one uses game reviews this days. maybe kids?? parents???)



i dont mean to sound charged gaming ~culture~ is just really odd and unaware and i like it

---------- Post added 31st Aug 2014 at 02:18 PM ----------

Gaming under attack. Ddos? No..... A woman......... Had sex........ With review man...................

 

Can you please explain more about this? I'm having a really difficult time understanding what your rhetorical purpose is here.

I am listening to the Jayd3Fox video now, and I am in awe, of course. Feminists are humans just like everybody else, and they make grave moral errors just like everybody else in moments of weakness, like extreme anger. Slut-shaming and suicide encouragement are very anti-feminist, actually. I'm sure that it happened; I mean, I have no reason to doubt what she says. However, it's very out of line and inconsistent with feminist principles. (Of course, after condemning suicide encouragement from feminists, Jayd3Fox then proceeds to do it herself, in the same video, multiple times. So that just goes to my point: I don't think she means anything by it, other than that she's communicating her hurt and anger to us.)

I'm just really not down with what I think you're doing here...

 

Gamegate: Corruption in Video Game Journalism

 

So, I am still having a lot of difficulty understanding what's going on. Zoe goes along and sleeps with some journalists. Unethical move, okay... What's the Anita angle in all this? What is the point of any of this coverage of the scandal?

To me, the idea seems to be that Zoe did a legitimately bad thing, gamers called her out; in response, gamers got accused of sexism, incorrectly. Ergo, what? Seriously?

Can nobody ever criticize bad behavior in some gamers?

I find it completely puzzling. Why are we talking about an attack on gamers rather than talking about the regularity with which some gamers attack everyone else? I have been a gamer for pretty much forever, and I have had sexist behavior directed at me almost all the time by someone at least a couple times daily, and it's been very hurtful. So I don't exactly have a lot of sympathy that now gamers as a whole feel under attack when some of them have in fact been utterly inhumane. They've almost never let the rest of us in or made us feel at home. We've been unsafe, and outsiders amongst outsiders.

Also, the Gamers Revolt article is seriously annoying. This is a picture caption from it: "Zoe Quinn created this chart to reflect “the comments on any article a woman writes or is featured by on a major gaming website”, objectifying a core audience of gamers in the process. It’s apparently also a drinking game." (Emphasis added)

Why the hell is it okay for Derek Strickland to say that??? How is pointing out something that's true about some gamers, and true about what some women experience "objectifying a core audience of gamers"? This is what I mean when I say that the point seems to be that marginalized gamers like me aren't ever allowed to criticize sexist gamers.

 

Just as a counterpoint here's what Kotaku had to say about it - http://kotaku.com/in-recent-days-ive-been-asked-several-times-about-a-pos-1624707346

I did have a long rant about the way certain women are treated in gaming, including Quinn. But then I found someone from the Guardian had put it much better than I did, with a lot more added sarcasm - How to attack a woman who works in video gaming | Technology | theguardian.com

Gaming has a woman problem and as long as internet neck beard man children are running the show, it will continue to have a woman problem. That's the story here, not some conspiracy theorist bullshit.

EDIT: That being said I do think there's a worthwhile discussion to be had about gaming journo ethics and I do know multiple sites have voluntary codes of conduct. Problem is Quinngate is no longer about those ethics. This is about bullying a woman, who the aforementioned man children don't like, out of the industry all together.

 

I agree it's hypocrisy, and I'm not in favor of that behavior. Though as I mentioned, Jayd3Fox was rightly condemning suicide encouragement and then ended her video with some suicide encouragement herself. In my mind, though, it doesn't discredit her, because I'm willing to overlook something stated in a moment of human weakness and look at their overall criticism. If she has been treated in the manner claimed--and I am going to take what she says to be true, because I assume good faith from her--that is certainly evil, and anti-feminist as I said. However, as you'll see in my response below, there are things about this issue that I understand much much less.

Honestly, I don't think this is good enough, and it's an attempt to divert and silence criticism of sexism in parts of gaming communities. Marginalized gamers have never been allowed to criticize sexist gamers, ever. Gamers as a whole are fiercely anti-political. They just want to enjoy their games free of any criticism, even if they deserve it. As a gamer myself, I understand the history of why this is so. Mainstream news media pundits have been saying violent computer games contribute to crime, even though no evidence supports this. (In fact, on a related note, movies are more violent than ever, but our generation is the least violent in US history.) So I get that. We've been subjected to a lot of false, and unfair criticism.

Nevertheless, it is an unfortunate human frailty that we've allowed that experience to calcify a belief that we can never be criticized, and all criticisms made against us are made with malice. Most criticisms of gamers that I'm aware of come from other gamers. It's not really coming from the outside. It only comes along from the outside when there's a school shooting, honestly. They just find out whatever FPS the shooter played, and that's the media's demon for the next two weeks. And ultimately, nothing ever comes of it.

"Gamers say mean things to us" is not a shield. It's the truth. It's possible to have both conversations at once. I've already had the conversation. If women game developers are using sexual quid pro quo to get ahead, that's wrong. If the threat of pulling advertising revenue is getting game reviewers fired from publications, that's wrong. However, none of that invalidates that sexism in gaming communities exists, and is a persistent, under-discussed and unresolved problem.

Here's a question for you. When you said, "Also, of course there are some gamers saying mean things. They are getting beaten down, treated like crap, and verbally abused by people that they used to rely on as readers looking for info/reviews about the next game they should look into," what does that mean? When I first read it, it sounds horrifyingly like you're saying we can't criticize them, because they are "getting beaten down, treated like crap, and verbally abused." What would be an acceptable way to respond to these gamers, in your view?

I just don't see how to move forward with making gaming safer for everyone given what you've said. As far as it goes, it seems like we need to fix gaming journalism somehow, and then "just leave gamers alone." In other words, I'm not seeing how we're going to fix any problems by coming up with the proper condemnation of Zoe Quinn or corrupt publications and reviewers.

Marginalized gamers want some answers, too. Namely, when this whole scandal dies down, when and how can we return to the issue of how we feel battered by other gamers on a constant basis?

 

Okay, well, again, I'm addressing the issue that you raised, and I am participating in that in a meaningful way. In fact, I agreed with you on the major point raised. Are you feeling that I'm missing something, or is there something that you feel I have not acknowledged?

I have tried the approach you suggested multiple times with individual gamers when they behave this way towards me. It has been my almost universal experience--with only one exception, literally one--that when I ask people nicely to stop, they don't. They make their behavior even worse and incite others to join in.

 

First, I mean that I have applied the approach you mentioned in real time on game servers and on game forums. The approach has worked for me only once.

Second, I have never mentioned feminism any time I raise the issue of homophobic and sexist harrassment of gamers. Many gamers seem unwilling to discuss harrassment and tend to suggest that we're being "over-sensitive" and that we need to get over it.

 

Okay, so then how do I deal with them? I have already acknowledged they have a right to say whatever they want. I have just asked that they refrain from verbally abusive behavior. They refuse to do that and even turn up the heat.

Why can't I unwind, destress and enjoy myself without having to endure the verbal abuse? I game to escape that.

 

Alright. Time to return to our regularly scheduled program, I guess, since there's no solution to my problem...

I think one solution to the problem of pressures against reviewers honestly looking at their games could be if the fiduciary interest were somehow separated in the advertising revenue from particular interested parties. I think this could be accomplished through some kind of pooled income fund where publishers give X amount of money (roughly equally) between the most important publications, like PC Gamer, etc. That would prevent any particular publishing house from having major sway.

It's possible this may not happen without regulator intervention, but then again, the ESRB happened without regulator intervention.

 

Hi,

I'm not a gamer, but I have heard of some of the terrible things said especially to girls / women who join into predominantly male-dominated games, and I was just wondering: why are not all online comments logged, and then, if a particular member gets threatened or sexually harassed, all they need to do is contact the administrator, report who said what, and then admin can go and check the logs, verify it, and the offending member who made threats of rape or whatever can be banned from playing any longer. That would stop sexual and other harassment very quickly, would it not? I can't understand why this isn't already done, actually.