Gamergate - OP updated 27 October

[KrazyK923]

While I'm completely against censorship, I'm not sure it's really fair to say "This sold less because of stupid retarded censorship."

[hrugner]

Agreed, it's difficult to interpret accurately, we'd need more comparable markets and more samples if nothing else. But it does look like censorship under the guise of localization isn't helping imports expand their audience. Almost as if people buy foreign games for an experience outside of their culture's typical productions.

[Beazy]

Cant believe this guys works at Bioware.
http://imgur.com/gallery/vKfZ8


It makes sense though. Bioware has been a pile of shit since the Star Wars MMO flopped.

[Deleted]

Cant believe this guys works at Bioware.
http://imgur.com/gallery/vKfZ8


It makes sense though. Bioware has been a pile of shit since the Star Wars MMO flopped.

When literally every tweet you make includes the words white people, you're racist.

[tehealadin]

When literally every tweet you make includes the words white people, you're racist.

No, they changed the rules, being prejudiced against people because of their skin colour isn't racism, being in power is. That way when they do it, it isn't bigoted.

[Strangebrew]

https://archive.is/zWLHt

Of course, “public opinion” online is hard to gauge, since it tends to be determined by the loudest and most persistent voices. If you can mobilize and engage even a fairly small number of people, you can create an impression of enough outrage to destabilize a business. As Gawker was imploding in the summer of 2015, a group of teenage *video-game enthusiasts was throwing gasoline on the already-raging fire. These were the Gamergaters.

Of all the enemies Gawker had made over the years — in New York media, in Silicon Valley, in Hollywood — none were more effective than the Gamergaters. Gamergate, a leaderless online movement dedicated to enforcing its own unique vision of “ethics in journalism,” had first taken up with Gawker Media the summer before, in 2014. Earlier that year, a writer for Kotaku had had a brief fling with a well-known video-game developer. In August, the developer’s ex-boyfriend, a 24-year-old computer programmer, wrote a 10,000-word blog post about her, spawning rumors that she’d traded sex for a positive review of her game on Kotaku. That no such review ever actually appeared on the site should tell you a lot about Gamergate’s relationship to the truth; that Gamergaters believe this is how sex works should tell you a lot about the Gamergate demographic. But none of the specifics of the story really mattered, because ultimately Kotaku was being targeted less for specific ethical violations than for its critical coverage of the portrayal of women and minorities in video games and the sexism of the gaming community. The teenagers behind Gamergate were young, obsessive, deeply resentful of women, and had no sense of social boundaries, and now they finally had a rallying cry —“Ethics in journalism!” — and a common enemy — or, really, enemies, among them the developer in question, Zoe Quinn, and feminist media critic Anita Sarkeesian, who became the object of both sustained harassment and violent threats.

That fall, Gamergate began waging a hugely annoying, and sometimes genuinely menacing, war against Kotaku. I personally came to the attention of Gamergate in October 2014, not for a fearless act of journalism, but because I was messing around on Twitter and I stepped in it. Sam Biddle, one of Gawker’s best and most notoriously aggressive writers, had tweeted that the lesson of Gamergate was that nerds should be bullied into submission; this in turn led to a flood of tweets and emails to me demanding that he be disciplined; I responded in a mode that seemed appropriate: I goaded and dismissed and largely treated the people complaining with a great deal of contempt and flippancy.

In retrospect: This was extremely stupid. Even in 2014, Twitter had already become a mechanism by which indiscreet people lost their jobs. Still, it was very difficult for me to believe that anyone genuinely thought that “pro-bullying” is a stance that anyone has ever adopted, or that Sam Biddle’s tweet was a statement in support of bullying. But what I believed, or didn’t believe, didn’t matter. I wasn’t messing around with irony-fluent trolls but with teenagers and college students who seemed unable or unwilling to understand context or sarcasm — exactly the kind of people who might actually believe that Sam Biddle would get a raise for bullying gamers (a myth that still floats around the various Gamergate communities).

More problematically, it would turn out, I was also, unconsciously, messing with the only group even less able to grapple with irony or context: brands. What I’d missed about Gamergate was that they were gamers — they had spent years developing a tolerance for highly repetitive tasks. Like, say, contacting major advertisers.
On Reddit, a campaign was launched to contact every advertiser Gamergaters could find on Gawker’s site — and not just the marketing departments of advertisers like Adobe and BMW, but specific executives. If you can bug a chief marketing officer, it doesn’t matter that your complaints are disingenuous: He just wants to stop being annoyed.
And so Gawker went into full-on crisis mode. Our chief revenue officer flew to Chicago to meet shaky clients; someone I hadn’t spoken with since high school Facebook-messaged me to let me know that her employer, L.L.Bean, a Gawker advertiser, was considering pulling its ads. Nick asked me to draft a non-apology apology — a clarification, basically, that we did not, institutionally, support bullying. Sam was compelled to tweet an apology. Joel, then the executive editor, published on Gawker, over the objections of the editors, another clarification. I then published, without Joel’s knowledge, an apology for the apology. Perhaps tellingly, it was the first time I’d ever really been confronted with the business side of Gawker besides small talk at parties.

Then it all went away. Gawker had taken a hit — thousands of dollars of advertising gone, at least. But in the weeks we’d been hemorrhaging advertisers and goodwill, stories in the New York Times and other outlets — the real media—and a segment on The Colbert Report made it clear that the Gamergaters were the bad guys in this case, not us. The sites went back to normal.
But of course it didn’t go away. Gamergate proved the power of well-organized reactionaries to threaten Gawker’s well-being. And when Gawker really went too far — far enough that even our regular defenders in the media wouldn’t step up to speak for us — Gamergate was there, in the background, turning every crisis up a notch or two and making continued existence impossible.

Even after Gawker's death they will still push the le gamergate mysoginist womyn hater narrative, how utterly not surprising at all.

[nextormento]

I guess the takeaway is gamers are not dead, Gawker is.
Arguing that GG was pivotal in their economic crisis is not new, but this article makes that point abundantly clear. Some might choose to wear that as a badge of honor.
The "resentful of women" bit is referenced but minimally explored. It focus a lot more on constructing GG as a financial menace, which, to other companies in the industry, is probably a more compelling argument than cultural virtues.

[NoiseTank13]

https://archive.is/zWLHt



Even after Gawker's death they will still push the le gamergate mysoginist womyn hater narrative, how utterly not surprising at all.

"Gamergate is an ineffectual, small, group of whining pissbabies who accomplished nothing."

"Gamergate killed Gawker."

Snrk.

[Elim Garak]

"Gamergate is an ineffectual, small, group of whining pissbabies who accomplished nothing."

"Gamergate killed Gawker."

Snrk.

"Gawker was the weakest of us, even wet paper could've taken it down"

[AsariCommando]

New Brad Glasgow piece debunking the myth that GamerGate is "right-wing" or "alt-right."

https://www.allthink.com/1588852

[Deleted]

https://archive.is/zWLHt



Even after Gawker's death they will still push the le gamergate mysoginist womyn hater narrative, how utterly not surprising at all.

I dont know how to feel about this anymore.

Is it sad because they still think they can get away with lies on fucking internet?
Is it pathethic that they actually attempt to do so?
Is it annoying that they somewhat succeded because when I make GG search on google first links I get reffer to their websites and articles which feed them "educated" people who dont go beyond first page of google search?

I guess every generation has insane ideologues who push their ideology above everything.
I'm (not) looking foward to what kind of bullshit future generations will have to deal when "progressives" will latch on new forms of media.

[dope_danny]

I dont know how to feel about this anymore.

Is it sad because they still think they can get away with lies on fucking internet?
Is it pathethic that they actually attempt to do so?
Is it annoying that they somewhat succeded because when I make GG search on google first links I get reffer to their websites and articles which feed them "educated" people who dont go beyond first page of google search?

I guess every generation has insane ideologues who push their ideology above everything.
I'm (not) looking foward to what kind of bullshit future generations will have to deal when "progressives" will latch on new forms of media.

I think Gawker was a timebomb regardless. You get a handful of 'blank studies' college drop out bloggers all giving their friends jobs and deciding "we are the thought police now" and actually having secret cabal conversations about "what do we make up to signal boost now?" to come up with shit like "gamers are dead, we are players now, and thats okay" -because "and thats okay" is their secret flag to let each other know this is the current "narrative push"- and that shit would never last. We are talking about people that think buzzwords like "signal boosting the right narrative" somehow makes you the hero when you are saying "lets lie and twist facts to suit our agendas". Implosion was inevitable with their burn the bridge and salt the earth business strategies.

I mean shit i remember a year or so ago some buddies from my college days that swallowed the nu-male coolaid were actually saying "DID I SHAVE HALF MY HEAD FOR NOTHING, WHAT ABOUT THE SISTERHOOD AND THE SUBURBAN GODESSES?!?" because Jezebels top story at the time was "Woman shits herself, how brave" and there isn't enough indoctrination in the world to cover that kind of stupid.

[tehealadin]

New Brad Glasgow piece debunking the myth that GamerGate is "right-wing" or "alt-right."

https://www.allthink.com/1588852

Nice piece. He seems balanced, has done some research to try and support his point. Certainly most GGers I have encountered, I would not call them right wing, and I am not surprised by the findings of his research, though the obvious criticism here is the numbers. His primary goal here seems to be balance. He acknowledges that there are some militant elements within GG which are just as bad as the "other", but also acknowledges that there is a lot of willful misrepresentation of GG. He is spot on with Milo. I like some of his stuff, but generally find him to be a bit of a cunt, who is turning into an even bigger cunt. I only ever read a Breitbart article if it is GG related, simply because I know that it won't be biased against GG. Now, I think the author of this article makes a good point- the BB articles on GG are not without bias, it is just in the other direction, they used GG and GG used them, BB wanted to slam the regressive left, GG wanted a large media group to publish their side of the story, because many, especially left leaning places, refused to do so.

[KrazyK923]

That's the great irony of GamerGate and the Left.

GamerGate only wanted a chance to tell their side of the story ALONGSIDE all the bullshit "gamergate is literal nazi hitler devil" pieces. But the left-wing places reporting on it were so utterly corrupt in their coverage, the only places that did were right wing.

And thus the narrative of "GG is right wing" is created.

I've always maintained my distaste for Milo and I'm glad more and more people are seeing what a piece of trash that human is. I'm embarrassed that he's gay like me, it feels almost like an insult against me.

[tehealadin]

Yea, and I know that this wasn't the initial shady gaming journalism complaints were about, but this is certainly an element of it and I think hammers home a point- journalism in this area has become heavily politicised in some areas, where "journalists" are forcing their own agendas, giving favourable coverage to those politically aligned with them, and demonising those who are not. This is not good journalism. It is corrupt journalism on an intellectual level.

I wonder how many who are pro GG are like me and feel a sense of betrayal from left wing journalism. I don't like labeling myself, on some issues I am right wing, some I am left wing, I don't look at an issue and think "what is the left wing way to see this?", I look at it on its own, form my own opinions, and then see where it lands on the spectrum. Overall, I am much more left wing than right. I hate that most of the left wing press decided to go down this route. It meant that if I wanted journalism to look at the other side of things, I had to go to right wing news outlets. Who don't actually care about games, or gamers, Milo certainly doesn't, it was a convenient vehicle to attack the regressive left, they aren't really pro GG, more anti regressive (which I don't think is a bad thing).

Anti GG articles don't necessarily bother me, of course we like to read about things that we agree with. I have read some anti GG articles that I thought were well written. My issue is that so many anti GG articles willfully push a particular narrative, mischaracterise the "other" and are so blatantly ideologically driven that it is painful to read. I think there is a discussion to be had about women in games. It is so difficult to have it with either raging anti feminists on the other side (I am regressive left, but I don't think I fall into the raging category, yet) and raging regressives on the other side. The good articles that were anti GG were ones that were calm and reasoned. They were so few sadly. I think there is a valid issue at the heart of this (in terms of women in games), but it has become so toxic, most just stay clear of any kind of discussion, and it is just left to those who want to scream, shout and point their finger. I think those who want to see more women in games, particularly development (which I think is the real issue) were damaged the most by many of these anti GG articles. As many reasonable people thought "fuck that, I don't want to engage with these people".

I think I also learned some stuff about myself, and tribalism. None of us are immune to it. My initial thoughts were "I thought the left were the good guys". Left wing journalism can agree, disagree, but be fucking balanced. I felt betrayed by their lack of balance. It wasn't that they pushed articles attacking GG, it was that there was nothing looking at the other side. No counter points. Naivety on my part I suppose. I didn't want to have to go to right wing outlets to get that balance, not that the articles were balanced, but their existence created balance (or at least a small measure). Then I thought "should it matter if they are right wing?". I suppose it is only now that I get the absurdity of putting people in boxes labelled left or right, I always tried not to, but clearly failed, otherwise I would have no issue with visiting Breitbart to read a GG article. It is difficult, but important to see people as people, not just the groups they might belong to.

[AsariCommando]

Very controversial video from TheQuQu on how he (and an anon) believe GamerGate should move forward. He reads the Titan post and offers his take on it. I disagree with a fair amount of it, but it's an interesting take.

[Gruffertus]

I don't know that he offers his take on it, other than he says at the top "this is incredibly important" - you can save yourself sometime by reading the original: https://archive.is/FO655#selection-685.0-688.0 - which is over a year old.

[Strangebrew]

aGG getting exposed again, this time with chat logs dating back to 2014, bropill posting them all over twitter.
My guess is Cheong leaked them as he was a part of those people back then, but changed because of the shit they pull.

https://sli.mg/a/GgUrrS
https://sli.mg/7kXc19
http://sli.mg/Hg5NbG


And as we already know, these people are all for harrasement, doxing and bullying as long it's the "right target's"
All proven by these chat logs.
Some pretty serious shit amongst the chat logs here.

And in other news, one of the more known GG names Geekbrat have passed away.
https://twitter.com/ProjectWombat/st...46315059113984

[unfilteredJW]

I wonder how many who are pro GG are like me and feel a sense of betrayal from left wing journalism. I don't like labeling myself, on some issues I am right wing, some I am left wing, I don't look at an issue and think "what is the left wing way to see this?", I look at it on its own, form my own opinions, and then see where it lands on the spectrum. Overall, I am much more left wing than right. I hate that most of the left wing press decided to go down this route. It meant that if I wanted journalism to look at the other side of things, I had to go to right wing news outlets. Who don't actually care about games, or gamers, Milo certainly doesn't, it was a convenient vehicle to attack the regressive left, they aren't really pro GG, more anti regressive (which I don't think is a bad thing).

This is what drew me to the whole dialogue. That and I represent artists for a living, and I've had to fight for things like allowing nudes to be shown in both my gallery and shows; being in the Bible Belt can make that sort of thing hard. I never liked the whole line of thinking that people can tell artists, in any genre or medium, what they should do with their art. To put it in the current nomenclature: I was fucking triggered.

I say this as someone that's incredibly liberal, and can be quite authoritarian in my views.

[tehealadin]

This is what drew me to the whole dialogue. That and I represent artists for a living, and I've had to fight for things like allowing nudes to be shown in both my gallery and shows; being in the Bible Belt can make that sort of thing hard. I never liked the whole line of thinking that people can tell artists, in any genre or medium, what they should do with their art. To put it in the current nomenclature: I was fucking triggered.

I say this as someone that's incredibly liberal, and can be quite authoritarian in my views.

I think we had been used to the right, especially the christian right, being the ones to do this. Now the far left has usurped them. And a great deal of mainstream left wing media is complicit. This saddens me.