I had my say on this, I truly, truly did. But the more I see how people who are only asking for a reasoned debate are being treated, how the truth is being bent to force a particular narrative, the more angry I've gotten. I would post the "Mad as Hell" clip, but I think one movie reference video is good enough.
So this article came out on Badass Digest. I read it, researched it, and found it was more opinionated crap. So I decided to actually engage the believers of the other side. Ho boy, what fun this morning was. It resulted in Badass themselves banning me.
And for what? I have no idea. I never hurled an insult, never mistreated anyone, and did leave two sarcastic comments. One was for a one liner about "Asshole Custard's last stand," and the other was for a video of a hippopotamus fart. Yea, lovely discussion indeed.
This is the biggest issue in Gamer's Gate: The cessation of discussion. This black-or-white, right-or-wrong, terrorist-or-saint mentality that has polarized the debate this far. If you are pro-GG, expect to be muted and belittled because you are a "manbaby." Insults will be the normal way the you are treated. Or is that even correct?
You see the blog post is obviously from a hard-line supporter, someone whose opinion is beyond reproach, and the vocal minority (yes, minority) are over there still attacking me. I can see the comments via email just fine, and most of them are turning to how I am a horrible person, how they are right and I am wrong even in the face of facts.
So, since anyone on the Internet can have a voice, here's my reply to some of these supporters.
To pretty much anyone attempting to elicit some form of rage-filled reply: You can stop. I can't reply to you there anyway. Besides, you'd never get the response you want because, again, this is about video games at the end of the day. Both fringe sides need to be silenced so that the middle ground can debate and discuss this to improve gaming as a space for all.
In reply to this:
SecretAgentHulkYou've got the facts (the CNN bit sounds fishy but that's neither here nor there), but you refuse to connect the dots. Sarkeesian is known *only* for critiquing video games. A massive hate group masking as an ethical inquiry has repeatedly threatened her in the past two months. She gets another death threat for an event where she will talk about games again.
Connect the f***ing dots.
The threat never states her talk by name. It could very well almost be a form letter to any feminist speaking anywhere. It references the Montreal Massacre, a horrible act of depravity, but yet aside from that, there's no other direct references to her outside of her name. The reality is this could even be a form letter bot spitting these out to any feminist speaking anywhere.
It would also make a lot of sense why the FBI would write it off so quickly, especially if this form letter has been used before and for other people. It never mentions her videos, gaming, or anything. It's so generic that it makes me think that it's nothing but a scripted automailer harassing any and all feminists based on some spider crawling the web.
In reply to this:
gundehttp://seriouspony.com/trouble...Seems like this is what we're dealing with here, someone mightily pissed that some people are getting "undeserved" attention.
gundePlease give some evidence for gaming media not following the "well established FTC guidelines for disclosure of bias."
gundeSince you didn't reply to my polite request for evidence of the gaming media not abiding by the FTC regulations, I'm going to call you a poopy poop-face!
First, I would love to have replied, but Badass removed my ability to do so. Second, I actually retweeted that story myself. It's a disgrace and, since I am now on home turf so I can just swear as I normally would, fucking appalling. Those involved should be outed, arrested, and tossed in with real criminals where they can be... re-educated... as how people should behave in polite society. Honestly, I think most of these internet badass trolls would shit themselves in fear if they actually had to spend any real time around real badasses.
Finally, for proof of FTC guideline violation, see anyone who took the Mordor deal without disclaimer. Or Battlefield 4. Or any deal. What about the Dorito Pope? I mean, this is just too easy. The FTC guidelines state that you must advise of any relationship between yourself and any product you review or promote. For example, I am an affiliate of NoScope glasses. If I review them, I must first disclose that I am an affiliate of them, and would receive compensation for any pairs sold via my affiliate links.
I did exactly that in a video I made.
Now, most gaming sites don't always receive direct money. Often, they promote games to continue a good relationship with a company in order to receive future preferential treatment. For example, see this "article" by IGN for FFXIV: GotY. Now, this is just the re-release of a press release, not a news story. So, first, it should feature that statement. Second, it didn't really win any Game of the Year this year, unless you count one small gaming site calling it "Mainstream Game of the Year". Maybe they didn't want the extra M.
In reality, the term Game of the Year has become the catch-all term for a game that includes all the DLC content available... yet it doesn't match THAT distinction either. You see, the base game and this edition are the same as far as the game goes. There has been no paid DLC or expansions released as yet, all the content that has been released is free and included with the base package.
So, this is a bold-face lie, it's promotion because SE knows GotY editions sell better than standard due to the assumption by the consumer that they are getting more value for their dollar. IGN didn't do a bit of research, tossed a few platitudes around the game, a couple old article links and BAM, a promotional item now becomes a "news story".
There's obvious violation of the FTC guidelines here because they need to state that this is an article to promote, not review or even educate, about this product. While they didn't receive a direct dollar amount (one would hope) for doing this, it is intended to curry favour with SE so that they continue to get exclusive content from them.
To this:
luci_ferNo. Not you personally.
No one is saying you personally have insulted or threatened.
But your movement has. Either indirectly (by disseminating rumour, conspiracy theory and misinformation about individuals fuelling further harassment) or directly (by deliberately driving people out and then celebrating - Jenn Frank for example. And yes, #we're wi nning #g amergate #thedominoes are falling).
Additionally, an influential voice in your movement, RogueStar was in the channel originally stirring up abuse against Zoe Quinn personally, wanting to crack her email, has authored various 'operations' that your movement has then carried out.
I really don't see how, then, you could stand by your movement as 'not a hate group' and try and represent it as a few bad apples that spoiling the bunch. The apples were spoilt from the beginning.
Personally, if I really needed apples, I would buy fresh ones at this point.
9:36 a.m., Thursday Oct. 16
Since these are long (and I actually respect this poster's civil tone), let's take these separately.
If you read the replies, you'd be hard pressed that they aren't saying it's me who did this. Hell, I just got accused by the article's author of sending the death threat. No, really. I was discussing this via Twitter, suggested that, since Sarkeesian never received the threat directly, she cannot confirm its source so easily as her tweet states. And then the author tweets this:
https://twitter.com/devincf/status/522758445066240002
I personally have stayed out of it because of how others like you feel. You see black and white, right and wrong. The truth is not that easy. The truth is that there has been a segment of people trying to direct hate at any female journalist and developer they can, and have done so without any sort of banner or rallying cry. This has been an issue long before GG, and sadly likely long after. Until some accountability comes into play, there's little we can do with it.
And since GG is just a hashtag, not a website, professional organization, or anything else where we can control the membership, then yes, sadly some will claim to act in the name of GG. Just like terrorists claim to act in the name of Islam. Just like Crusaders acted in the name of God. The extremists will always be there, and should be rightly feared. They should also be rooted out and removed from society for a time until they can learn their actions have consequences.
And you point to a single person, RogueStar. I have never spoken with, never read anything by, nor even associated with that person. Yet, you group him in with me because he claims to represent GG. See, this is the problem. A very vocal minority are becoming the face of a large group, just like Sarkeesian has become the face of feminism in gaming. They are vocal, they are representative of ideals some in the group hold to, but others denounce. The difference here, and it is important, is that RogueStar should be called to account for any criminal actions he is stating need to happen. Uttering threats is unacceptable.
Sarkeesian has done nothing more than air her beliefs. She has not called for people to be hacked, to run people off of the Internet, or do anything of the sort. No, all she has done is wanted to put her viewpoint out there.
I stand by the concept of ethics needing to return to journalism, all journalism. If we can start with the small corner of the world that is gaming, great. But I'd like to see less Glenn Becks holding sway over public opinion. I'd rather people think for themselves than be told what to think by those with vested interested in them believing in what they are selling.
luci_fer...yes, but most gaming journalism is, actually, reviewing or previewing games.
which is entirely subjective. all reviews are, by nature, opinion pieces. pretending they are objective is where corruption can come in, because you can just pay for high scores.
Which are then aggregated and effect sales.
GG's calls for reviews to be entirely objective and unbiased are absurd, as you'd be left with either a descriptive sentence on content "this is a shooting game where I shoot people" (that can't comment on quality at all, as this is subjective) or a technical feature about frame rates.
Your movement appears, at this moment, to have an issue with polygon for being the only review to grade Bayonetta 2 on sexualization. Because this is not objective. Because this is opinion.
But anything based on your experience of media IS opinion, by default.
You're swimming the wrong way if you're equating subjectivity with corruption.
I have no issues with subjective reviews. What I take issue with is when those subjective reviews abuse the readers' trust by not revealing bias. Look at TotalBiscuit as a great example. He lays all biases, both personal and professional, out there on every video and article. He lets you know where he stands, provides a divide between objective and subjective criticism, and does his best to ensure his audience is aware of this.
The same cannot be said of all media outlets. Polygon is so well known that it was expected to take points off Bayonetta 2. And again, a group claiming to be within GG is wanting this. That's the problem. There is no club house, no way to exclude those who want these other items from just rolling it into the larger discussion. It's much like the 99% movement. At first, there were people there who truly believed in the movement. In the end, so many people just bandwagon hopped that the core message got lost.
It's why, at first, I said #GamersGate needed to die. It's been polluted, stained forever by the people who use it to hide behind, to cowardly attack those online they have some person agenda against. But I see now that, if we relent, and let the other side write the history of this, they will gain greater influence in the industry, and will cause no end of issue. They will (and have) censored debate. They will (and have) use major outlets to pass off rumor and conjecture as fact. They will (and have) become the new harassers. And that won't be good for anyone.
No comments:
Post a Comment