If You ask me, i want to good games, nothing more. In that regard i can see bad jurnalism hurting me, i can buy shitty game cause of it. I want this to stop. I dont care what hashtag something like this have i can support that.
Gamergate and video game journalism - Page 4
Forum Index > Closed |
Please don't go calling people racist, misogynists, or any combination therein. Don't start throwing around words like "white Knight" or SJW, these words are at this point used in a derogatory manner regarding this debate. You can discuss that these terms exist, but do not attribute them to any individual user or group of users on this website. Try to have a serious discussion about the topic at hand without resorting to personal attacks and we will all be the better for it. Breaking this rule will result in an automatic temp ban the length of which will depend on the comment you make. This thread started not so bad. It is getting worse. If you want to have this discussion on TL be respectful of your fellow users, we all live in the same house. Effective now: Page 21 October 18th 08:31 KST | ||
Silvanel
Poland4648 Posts
If You ask me, i want to good games, nothing more. In that regard i can see bad jurnalism hurting me, i can buy shitty game cause of it. I want this to stop. I dont care what hashtag something like this have i can support that. | ||
Gowerly
United Kingdom916 Posts
#GamerGate is this, #GamerGate is that. Some people DO want journalistic reform. Some people enjoy doxxing other users and sending death threats. I, as both a gamer and developer, would like to remove as much corruption from both sides of the dev/journo coin and remove as much of the "Old Boy's Club" mentality that's going on. It's detrimental to having a fair and open discussion on the content being produced. There were legitimate points raised by all of the talking. They were drowned out by a bunch of bullshit. As. Always. Then people focus on the bullshit and use it to further push the legitimate responses down because it's much easier to keep things the way they are. | ||
Jett.Jack.Alvir
Canada2250 Posts
On October 15 2014 20:11 Silvanel wrote: Up to this day i wasnt aware of such a thing as #GG. Its funny reading various people claiming that is thing A and others claiming its B. Does it really matter what is it about? Like WTF????? If You want to talk about honesty in gaming jurnalism talk about it, if You want to talk about feminism in gaming industry talk about it. How cares about this hashtag?I tell You whhat, i think that people how talk about #GG rather than actual issues only care about them monies. This hashtag is bringing drama and therfore money, so a lot of people want to post their opinion on this get viewers and cash out of it. If You really care about those issues You can easily discuss them without it. If You ask me, i want to good games, nothing more. In that regard i can see bad jurnalism hurting me, i can buy shitty game cause of it. I want this to stop. I dont care what hashtag something like this have i can support that. I was like you before today, and now I have started a discussion that I am unable to handle. I have learned what both sides have argued, and I don't like either side. But you are absolutely right about one thing, its all about the monies. No matter which side is right or wrong, this drama is bringing traffic to many websites. | ||
Jett.Jack.Alvir
Canada2250 Posts
On October 15 2014 20:14 Gowerly wrote: It's going back to labels, again. #GamerGate is this, #GamerGate is that. Some people DO want journalistic reform. Some people enjoy doxxing other users and sending death threats. I, as both a gamer and developer, would like to remove as much corruption from both sides of the dev/journo coin and remove as much of the "Old Boy's Club" mentality that's going on. It's detrimental to having a fair and open discussion on the content being produced. There were legitimate points raised by all of the talking. They were drowned out by a bunch of bullshit. As. Always. Then people focus on the bullshit and use it to further push the legitimate responses down because it's much easier to keep things the way they are. It is truly sad that so many has to label others on the other side of the fence. I am trying to wade through the bullshit to find the nuggets of honest truth. I don't think I will find it, but at least I tried. | ||
WakaDoDo
Sweden1183 Posts
On October 15 2014 19:23 SatedSC2 wrote: We need to go back to playing games and let it die. The games of the future will be made to fit what Quinn/Sarkeesian stand for. Thats what you will go back to playing if you keep quiet. On October 15 2014 20:32 adwodon wrote: So basically journalists need to get some professional standards and gamers need to pay them for it to prevent them being forced into the hands of businesses and advertisers who would pay their salaries... Think this is pretty spot on, good post. | ||
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
On October 15 2014 20:14 Gowerly wrote: #GamerGate is this, #GamerGate is that. Some people DO want journalistic reform. Some people enjoy doxxing other users and sending death threats. I'm sure some people do. The problem is, the discussion within Gamergate is almost never about "journalistic reform". If it was about "journalistic reform", one would expect them to talk about "journalistic reform" (whatever that means), rather than spending virtually all of their energy attacking "social justice warriors". | ||
kwizach
3658 Posts
On October 15 2014 19:45 paralleluniverse wrote: The OP is misinformed about Gamergate. I posted this on the MMO-Champion forum yesterday: As usual, a great post by paralleluniverse. Thanks. On October 15 2014 16:33 xM(Z wrote: after reading your post all i can think of is that female journalists/devs have an unfair advantage here. i mean, what are men supposed to do?; because i fail to see how offering handjobs would get them somewhere. ...and as usual, misogynistic rubbish by xM)Z. | ||
Jett.Jack.Alvir
Canada2250 Posts
On October 15 2014 20:23 kwizach wrote: As usual, a great post by paralleluniverse. Thanks. ...and as usual, misogynistic rubbish by xM)Z. Parallel's post did offer value, but is still as biased as xM)Z's "misogynistic rubbish". Not saying I agree with either of them, but just that they have their opinions. Calling another opinion rubbish because you don't agree is why this problem has expanded into the clusterfuck it is. We can't denounce another's opinion just because we don't agree with it. All that does is antagonize them into becoming more aggressive and really solves nothing. | ||
adwodon
United Kingdom592 Posts
'Gamers' seem to expect professional quality journalism in their interests without paying for it. Games journalists don't realise they are basically glorified hobbyists because there is no money in games journalism, there are no standards and no established ethics because they are hobbyists and no one cares about the integrity of hobbyists. So basically journalists need to get some professional standards and gamers need to pay them for it to prevent them being forced into the hands of businesses and advertisers who would pay their salaries... but whats actually happening is harassment and bullshit because no one understand the situation on the other side of the fence and we all just enjoy flinging shit. If you want professional journalism, look to the major publications which aren't hobbyist. WSJ, New Statesman, Guardian, Metro etc etc They have professional journalists and reviewers who will be controlled by an editor who doesn't have ties to the industry and will prevent their journalists attending 'press' events with shady practices. Otherwise you'd better understand that you're reading the opinions and reviews of hobbyists, which is not a bad thing but if they are getting a salary they aren't getting it from you, but from the people who's products they're reviewing thus creating a conflict of interest (as its a hobbyist publication so scope for ad revenue is limited). | ||
Jett.Jack.Alvir
Canada2250 Posts
On October 15 2014 20:21 WakaDoDo wrote: Ignoring the problem will certainly not solve it. It's about grabbing attention and increasing awareness to the general public that the review/gamesites have become utterly untrustworthy. We're not having a discussion with Quinn/Sarkeesian, we're spreading awareness. Because right now it's almost only their voices being heard in the media. The games of the future will be made to fit what Quinn/Sarkeesian stand for. Thats what you will go back to playing if you keep quiet. Your focus may be on game media news outlets become utterly untrustworthy, and raising awareness that the video game journalists might be coerced into writing favourable reviews, but you state "We're not having a discussion with Quinn/Sarkeesian" yet in the same post you advocate against what Quinn/Sarkeesian stand for. Your post confuses me. What does Quinn and Sarkeesian stand for? I kind of understand it, from the research and comments on this thread, but I would like to know your opinion more. | ||
Gowerly
United Kingdom916 Posts
On October 15 2014 20:23 paralleluniverse wrote: I'm sure some people do. The problem is, the discussion within Gamergate is almost never about "journalistic reform". If it was about "journalistic reform", one would expect them to talk about "journalistic reform" (whatever that means), rather than spending virtually all of their energy attacking "social justice warriors". Many did. Wrote the advertisers explaining what they found and that they expected more from them. In those instances, great. Some also went and sent death threats because they're super cool dudes, which was less great. | ||
Jett.Jack.Alvir
Canada2250 Posts
On October 15 2014 20:32 adwodon wrote: Gamergate is just the lack of understanding on both sides. 'Gamers' seem to expect professional quality journalism in their interests without paying for it. Games journalists don't realise they are basically glorified hobbyists because there is no money in games journalism, there are no standards and no established ethics because they are hobbyists and no one cares about the integrity of hobbyists. So basically journalists need to get some professional standards and gamers need to pay them for it to prevent them being forced into the hands of businesses and advertisers who would pay their salaries... but whats actually happening is harassment and bullshit because no one understand the situation on the other side of the fence and we all just enjoy flinging shit. If you want professional journalism, look to the major publications which aren't hobbyist. WSJ, New Statesman, Guardian, Metro etc etc They have professional journalists and reviewers who will be controlled by an editor who doesn't have ties to the industry and will prevent their journalists attending 'press' events with shady practices. Otherwise you'd better understand that you're reading the opinions and reviews of hobbyists, which is not a bad thing but if they are getting a salary they aren't getting it from you, but from the people who's products they're reviewing thus creating a conflict of interest (as its a hobbyist publication so scope for ad revenue is limited). Every time I reply to someone, another person chimes in and adds a bit more to the discussion. I agree gamergate is the lack of understanding, but I would take out the "just". That word implies it isn't that complicated, when in fact it is quite complicated. Beyond understanding, we need mutual respect to foster any meaningful discussions. But the problem is that any chance of mutual respect went out the window when trolls on the internet started harassing and threaten Quinn and others. Now understanding and respect is even harder to attain because the discussion has been tainted. | ||
Silvanel
Poland4648 Posts
I know right now is probably more of guarilla and wildwest in gaming jurnalism, but perhaps thats the way to go? Use jurnalism laws agaisnt dishonest jurnalism. | ||
kwizach
3658 Posts
On October 15 2014 20:31 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote: Parallel's post did offer value, but is still as biased as xM)Z's "misogynistic rubbish". Not saying I agree with either of them, but just that they have their opinions. Calling another opinion rubbish because you don't agree is why this problem has expanded into the clusterfuck it is. We can't denounce another's opinion just because we don't agree with it. All that does is antagonize them into becoming more aggressive and really solves nothing. 1. No, paralleluniverse's post is not "as biased" as xM)Z's post. paralleluniverse's post is a demonstration based on facts highlighting that GamerGate has clear sexist roots and treats the actors involved differently based on their gender. xM)Z's post is a completely misogynistic claim that women have an "unfair advantage" over men because they can offer sexual favours to men. Please do not attempt to equate the two. 2. No, calling another opinion rubbish because it is has literally nothing to do with "why this problem has expanded into the clusterfuck it is". Nothing. If someone made a blatantly racist comment and someone else called that statement rubbish, would you be arguing that racist statements can't be called rubbish? Is calling a racist or misogynistic statement "rubbish" the problem, or is the problem the racist or misogynistic statement in the first place? 3. We can absolutely denounce statements when they are racist, misogynistic, etc. Especially when the author of the statement has a history of misogynistic posts on these forums. | ||
Jett.Jack.Alvir
Canada2250 Posts
On October 15 2014 20:44 Silvanel wrote: I dont have interests in gaming jurnalism. But doesnt the same laws as normal jurnalism apply to it? You know laws of many countries cover it, and in most places You cant write baseless shit and disquise advertising as unbiased review. I know right now is probably more of guarilla and wildwest in gaming jurnalism, but perhaps thats the way to go? Use jurnalism laws agaisnt dishonest jurnalism. Yes laws do govern it in USA and Canada, but there needs to be undeniable proof before anything can happen, and I rather doubt the big boys would ever fess up to buying positive reviews. Its illegal, but it has to be enforced. Or It isn't illegal if you don't get caught. | ||
SatedSC2
England3012 Posts
| ||
Silvanel
Poland4648 Posts
| ||
WakaDoDo
Sweden1183 Posts
Your post confuses me. What does Quinn and Sarkeesian stand for? I kind of understand it, from the research and comments on this thread, but I would like to know your opinion more. That there is structural misogyni in all parts of video games and that this has real influence peoples everyday lives. On October 15 2014 20:43 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote: So basically journalists need to get some professional standards and gamers need to pay them for it to Beyond understanding, we need mutual respect to foster any meaningful discussions. But the problem is that any chance of mutual respect went out the window when trolls on the internet started harassing and threaten Quinn and others. Now understanding and respect is even harder to attain because the discussion has been tainted. There was never any chance of a real meaningful discussion through the internet. This is something I think we all have somewhat know. There can only be witch hunts or hastagspams, with the occasional factual video/text. Im gonna go on a limb and say that Quinn/Sarkeesian perhaps knew this better then we did. | ||
Ghostcom
Denmark4781 Posts
The best thing that can be said for this entire ordeal is how clear media manipulation has become. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/09/new-chat-logs-show-how-4chan-users-pushed-gamergate-into-the-national-spotlight/ It's like the manufactured voter fraud controversy in the US. Republican politicians stir up fears about voter fraud so they can pass restrictive voting laws, which disenfranchise certain groups. In actually, voter fraud is absurdly rare and doesn't make an impact in the US (although it does elsewhere.) Should gaming journalism be improved? Sure, why not (although I'm not sure entertainment media of any type has particularly high journalistic standards.) Does Quinn's game and the unfounded accusations around it warrant that discussion? No. Consider this: it's been openly known for over a decade that video games journalists are often bribed by publishers. We know for a fact that Jeff Gerstmann was fired for giving a low-scoring review, and we have dozens of confirmed cases of games journalists reviewing games, without playing any more than a couple hours of said game. None of this is new or surprising. The only differentiating factor right now is that there's a made up story about a woman taking advantage of men. | ||
| ||