The big Phil Fish, Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian discussion thread

K.O.Kiki

Still catching up on all the hilarity.

BMMachine

I wouldn't call myself a gamer. I don't like other people doing that either. I'm me.

If you do call yourself a gamer, ask why you do that.

COYVB

BMMachine wrote: »

If you do call yourself a gamer, ask why you do that.

I assume it would be because they play video games.

The "gamer" thing, and its new super negative connotations, are of relevance to just a tiny percentage of people who play video games. Again, like a point I made yesterday, there are some very important thing to remember:

1) The fraction of people who play games who actually go online to talk about it in any great detail is tiny
2) Most people who play games don't care about any of this nonsense
3) Most people, full stop, don't care about games
4) The "gaming people" you think are super famous, are not. Nobody cares about them
5) "Major" news in gaming is of no interest to the rest of the world for the most part

So, in summation, who cares if someone calls themself a gamer? The only people who associate anything with that term beyond "someone who plays games" are the video game equivalent to the people who complain about minor inconsistencies in comic books.

Wanna know why game journalism is rubbish? It's because the people who tend to read, and comment on, gaming articles are, for the most part, ignorant, obnoxious dickheads that think the businesses that create products owe them something

wes

gizmo wrote: »

Well all I can say is that I, as gamer and someone who reads Kotaku, never felt in the least bit offended when they spoke disparagingly of gamers and the people involved in the campaign of abuse. If you felt insulted then you have my sympathies.

Your missing my point, it wasn't just Kotaku, it was 10 other sites, in an act of collusion all having a go at once. There is no way, that they just decided to write basically the same thing.

gizmo wrote: »

To be honest, I can't see how the diversity issue could be used to distract from corruption. They're completely separate issues, both of which are worthy of debate.

Its pretty simple actually, as there claiming that people are against diversity, as opposed to actually discussing what people are accusing them of.

Diversity is a worthy debate, and its something that I fully support in gaming, movies, tv etc. I disagree with the way certain gaming media outlets are using this topic to distract from there corruption.

gizmo wrote: »

In the case of the latter though, could you outline specific examples where evidence exists of genuine corruption? So far I've seen the story of Patricia Hernandez writing articles portraying games made by friends of hers in a positive light. Any other demonstrable examples?

You have been reading the thread right? The accusations against Nathan Grayson were completely ignored until people kept bringing it up. Even if he is innocent of wrong doing, ignoring the topic like it was done, is an example of a clique of people protecting there own.

Also, Patricia Hernandez, still has her job, as Leigh Alexandar, both who if they worked for actually journalism outfits, would have been fired, but as we have clearly seen the gaming media is a mockery of journalism.

Highly selective reporting on abuse, funding the people they are reporting, which to be fair to Kotaku, they have now stopped, but the fact that they needed to stop, clearly shows that there was an issue. Polygon however are still going to allow it, which is hugely problematic imho, and mean that they can't be trusted at all, for example Ben Kuchera was giving Zoe Quinn money via Patreon while writing positive articles on her.

gizmo wrote: »

The issue here being, some of them are friends with the developers. Therefore, possible conflict of interest aside, it makes sense that they'll report on the abuse received by both those developers and others but not by strangers on the internet. After all, they're gaming journalists.

Your dismissal of the hypocrisy here is rather stunning. So they will happily report on abuse for the buddies, but not other people, who took the piss out of them, or 10 year old kids being threatened when they took part in the debate.

Sorry, but I can't be quite so blase about them ignoring abuse, and only reporting on abuse that lets them paint a one sided picture to make themselves out to be the good guys. They are happy to report on abuse, when it suits them, but ignore it when it shows there side in a bad light. These guys are journalists, and they are a insult to real journalists.

gizmo wrote: »

Again, specific examples of behaviour on twitter giving a conflicting view of the demographic they're referring to would be useful. Just because Leigh Alexander had a go at Adam Baldwin, for instance, doesn't mean she secretly hates all gamers and is referring to them rather than those involved in the abuse.

You can go to twitter yourself and watch the **** storm yourself.

BTW, the fact that Leigh Alexandar still has a job, is another example of what is wrong with gaming media. If a actual journalist said something like, on a twitter account they use for there job, they would be fired. The fact she still has a job is just another of the crass unprofessional and quite frankly amateur nature of the games media.

gizmo wrote: »

Alas a summary which I simply can't agree with based on not only the lack of solid evidence but also the definition of corrupt.

I disagree, more than enough there to show how corruption, collusion, hypocrisy, and the amateur nature of so many so called game "journalists".

Timmyctc

e_e wrote: »

A few years down the line when you look up the meaning of "cluster****" you will be directed to this whole debacle.

Tbh it wont. Because no one outside a small percentage of people who play games actually give a flying toss :P

johnny_ultimate

As far as I'm concerned Leigh Alexander has a long and impressive resume of excellent criticism behind her.

I find demands to have her fired (although fired from what I'm not sure, since she has published for many publications) over a Twitter joke - a misjudged one, truth be told - a little extreme.

And heaven forbid a publication actually substantially investigates the claims against their writers before deciding official comment or action is necessary.

I'm not saying all the parties who have been accused of various things over the last weeks are completely innocent or the accusations totally unfounded. But the evidence is too lacking for someone to lose their job over a kangaroo court organised on forums and social media sites.

wes

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I find demands to have her fired (although fired from what I'm not sure, since she has published for many publications) over a Twitter joke - a misjudged one, truth be told - a little extreme.

Insulting people on twitter get people fired all the time. I see no reason why a games "journalist" should be exempt from that.

kunst nugget

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

As far as I'm concerned Leigh Alexander has a long and impressive resume of excellent criticism behind her.

I find demands to have her fired (although fired from what I'm not sure, since she has published for many publications) over a Twitter joke - a misjudged one, truth be told - a little extreme.

The battle lines are drawn and people on both sides are using whatever ammo they can to show the have the upper hand morally while it becomes more and more apparent everyone is standing knee deep in poo.

Twitter is like a parasite that feeds off storms in teacups and then blows them out of all proportion until they have major real life consequences for those caught in the eye of the storm. A heinous bit of social media imo.

Shiminay

Wow, really? She makes one joke, with her personal, non-work social media account about someone who has weighed in on a discussion with (apparently) very little actual knowledge of what's going on and who is, simply put, a fundamentalist Christian right wing bigot (and therefore hates women because fundamental Christianity is 100% incompatible with the notion that women are actually people) and she deserves to lose her job?

Meanwhile Adam Baldwin who actively hates and fears women, gay people, and who knows what else is above reproach?

BMMachine

wes wrote: »

Insulting people on twitter get people fired all the time. I see no reason why a games "journalist" should be exempt from that.

I see no reason why twitter should be taken so seriously as to mess with peoples professional career. A bunch of morons all getting their knickers in a twist over something that barely matters. "fire her" because of twitter, jesus, get real and stop jumping on the bandwagon.

edit - is this a case of "well if that bad 'rule' of people getting fired because of twitter happens to someone else then the bad 'rule' should apply to everyone?" Yes, lets just let the morons, the dribblers, the reactionaries and all those others with low standards drag us down to maintain the 'norm'

This is EXACTLY what I was talking about earlier in the thread as regards the "accepted line". It's bullshit and standards shouldn't be lowered to make people happy or more comfortable about such non-issues

wes

Shiminay wrote: »

Wow, really? She makes one joke, with her personal, non-work social media account about someone who has weighed in on a discussion with (apparently) very little actual knowledge of what's going on and who is, simply put, a fundamentalist Christian right wing bigot (and therefore hates women because fundamental Christianity is 100% incompatible with the notion that women are actually people) and she deserves to lose her job?

Meanwhile Adam Baldwin who actively hates and fears women, gay people, and who knows what else is above reproach?

Who said he was above reproach? Also, accusations against Baldwin seem to be untrue, if you read the update story:

http://www.themarysue.com/video-game-harassment-zoe-quinn-anita-sarkeesian/

So, the guy is a Christian, so that make it ok for people insult him? People have been fire for saying far less on twitter.

BTW, Leigh Alexandar, twitter links to her website and list who she works for....

BMMachine

wes wrote: »

People have been fire for saying far less on twitter.

yes and do you think thats a good thing or a bad thing?

wes

BMMachine wrote: »

I see no reason why twitter should be taken so seriously as to mess with peoples professional career. A bunch of morons all getting their knickers in a twist over something that barely matters. "fire her" because of twitter, jesus, get real and stop jumping on the bandwagon.

edit - is this a case of "well if that bad 'rule' of people getting fired because of twitter happens to someone else then the bad 'rule' should apply to everyone?" Yes, lets just let the morons, the dribblers, the reactionaries and all those others with low standards drag us down to maintain the 'norm'

This is EXACTLY what I was talking about earlier in the thread as regards the "accepted line". It's bullshit and standards shouldn't be lowered to make people happy or more comfortable about such non-issues

Sorry, but we live in a world, where saying stuff on twitter is taken seriously, and let not pretend otherwise. If you say stupid **** on twitter you can lose your job or go to jail. I fail to see how attacking people on twitter is ok all of a sudden. So lets get real, the reality of the world, is that saying stupid **** online can get you in trouble. If you claim to be a professional and decide to go posting stupid stuff, then you should accept that could back fire on you.

wes

BMMachine wrote: »

yes and do you think thats a good thing or a bad thing?

Depends on what was said really. Sometimes its stupid, and other time justified. I still stand by my statement, if this was some other outlet, we would be seeing someone losing there job, or issuing an apology and it speaks to the generally unprofessional nature of the games "journalism".

I think we should expect a better standard from someone claiming to be journalist imho.

BMMachine

wes wrote: »

Sorry, but we live in a world, where saying stuff on twitter is taken seriously, and let not pretend otherwise. If you say stupid **** on twitter you can lose your job or go to jail. I fail to see how attacking people on twitter is ok all of a sudden. So lets get real, the reality of the world, is that saying stupid **** online can get you in trouble. If you claim to be a professional and decide to go posting stupid stuff, then you should accept that could back fire on you.

im trying to find what she actually said before going further. It's harder than it looks

wes

BMMachine wrote: »

im trying to find what she actually said before going further. It's harder than it looks

Here you go:

BMMachine

you want her fired for THAT? seriously? like, really really?

She dared make fun of a Baldwin?! NOT A BALDWIN!!!
get some f**king perspective before you demand people to be fired for twitter comments. Too plugged in by the looks of it. "oh we live in a world where this happens so it has to happen." Get some standards worth a damn before making demands far above your station.

gizmo

wes wrote: »

Your missing my point, it wasn't just Kotaku, it was 10 other sites, in an act of collusion all having a go at once. There is no way, that they just decided to write basically the same thing.

Of course there is, the majority of them published stories about it for precisely the same reason, increased click-through rates. Some individual journalists would have written about it because they feel it's a topic worth discussing, regardless of what side they're on, while others may have done so because they have personal experience of some of the things being spoken about.

wes wrote: »

Its pretty simple actually, as there claiming that people are against diversity, as opposed to actually discussing what people are accusing them of.

Diversity is a worthy debate, and its something that I fully support in gaming, movies, tv etc. I disagree with the way certain gaming media outlets are using this topic to distract from there corruption.

From what I can see they're doing both to a certain extent. I'm intrigued as to what exactly you want them to discuss though. For instance, should Polygon be writing an article about Patricia Hernandez knowing Anna Anthropy personally and then writing about it? I mean, the facts are there, it was a public twitter conversation and she wrote articles about Analogue. What does this alone prove about the wider industry in general?

wes wrote: »

You have been reading the thread right? The accusations against Nathan Grayson were completely ignored until people kept bringing it up. Even if he is innocent of wrong doing, ignoring the topic like it was done, is an example of a clique of people protecting there own.

It was not ignored, Stephen Totilo commented on it here publicly nearly two weeks ago. One can safely assume the conversation happened before then. Of course it later transpired that the "evidence" against him was incorrect so ultimately they were right in not conducting some kind of witch hunt against him at the behest of angry people on the internet.

wes wrote: »

Also, Patricia Hernandez, still has her job, as Leigh Alexandar, both who if they worked for actually journalism outfits, would have been fired, but as we have clearly seen the gaming media is a mockery of journalism.

You want these people fired? Seriously? While I would have expected Hernandez to either recuse herself from writing the story or at least being up front about her relationship with Love, nothing she actually said was incorrect about the game. If she had misrepresented the game or shilled it in a more underhanded manner then maybe look at termination but calling for either her or Alexander's head based on the articles written thus far seems way over the top.

wes wrote: »

Highly selective reporting on abuse, funding the people they are reporting, which to be fair to Kotaku, they have now stopped, but the fact that they needed to stop, clearly shows that there was an issue. Polygon however are still going to allow it, which is hugely problematic imho, and mean that they can't be trusted at all, for example Ben Kuchera was giving Zoe Quinn money via Patreon while writing positive articles on her.

The best way I can address this is as such. I see absolutely no problem with games journalists supporting developers or studios via Patreon, Kickstarter, Indiegogo or any other service. To assume automatic bias because you like someone's work and want to see more of it is again, a gross over reaction imo. By all means highlight it in any piece you write about the game but to actually stop them from writing about (or backing) such projects or people seems extremely unfair given their nature.

wes wrote: »

Your dismissal of the hypocrisy here is rather stunning. So they will happily report on abuse for the buddies, but not other people, who took the piss out of them, or 10 year old kids being threatened when they took part in the debate.

Sorry, but I can't be quite so blase about them ignoring abuse, and only reporting on abuse that lets them paint a one sided picture to make themselves out to be the good guys. They are happy to report on abuse, when it suits them, but ignore it when it shows there side in a bad light. These guys are journalists, and they are a insult to real journalists.

No, I'm saying it's within their remit as games journalists to report on abuse of people in the industry. Likewise if people in the industry insult other people, whether they are inside or outside, then by all means comment on that too. As you said, it's important to cover from both sides. It is, however, ludicrous to presume they can report on every bit of abuse which has occurred either during this debate or apart from apart from it. This is especially true when dealing with the anonymous nature of the internet. I mean, in the case of the 10 year old kid, outside of that imgur link, is there any more legitimate information or evidence available on the incident?

wes wrote: »

You can go to twitter yourself and watch the **** storm yourself.

BTW, the fact that Leigh Alexandar still has a job, is another example of what is wrong with gaming media. If a actual journalist said something like, on a twitter account they use for there job, they would be fired. The fact she still has a job is just another of the crass unprofessional and quite frankly amateur nature of the games media.

I have been following it and the evidence I'm looking from you is unfortunately pretty thin on the ground. If I find it I'll happily change my stance on the matter though.

As for Alexander, who exactly would fire her, she's a freelance journalist after all.

Retr0gamer

If you are going to be a washed up crackhead, expect to be called a washed up crackhead from time to time.

wes

BMMachine wrote: »

you want her fired for THAT? seriously? like, really really?

She dared make fun of a Baldwin?! NOT A BALDWIN!!!
get some f**king perspective before you demand people to be fired for twitter comments. Too plugged in by the looks of it. "oh we live in a world where this happens so it has to happen." Get some standards worth a damn before making demands far above your station.

"Above my station", pretty much sums up the attitude of those defending the complete lack of professionalism in the gaming media.

How dare a lowly peasant dare disagree with our mighty gaming journalist over lords. How dare I have an opinion that is different to yours.

Good job showing what you think of the rest of us lowly mortals.......

BMMachine

Sorry, but its just this accepted line thing. You think its acceptable for someone to lose their job and mess up their life for a pretty throwaway comment about a millionaire actor who has no business in this whole thing? If people think that that is the accepted standard for how people should act then either one of two things is happening: they have their head in the clouds or there is a self serving motivation behind it. That motivation is probably some form of mental victory for someone who needs it because they are having an online argument/debate with someone else that disagrees with them. Low standards.

BMMachine

wes wrote: »

"Above my station", pretty much sums up the attitude of those defending the complete lack of professionalism in the gaming media.

How dare a lowly peasant dare disagree with our mighty gaming journalist over lords. How dare I have an opinion that is different to yours.

Good job showing what you think of the rest of us lowly mortals.......

Thats where we differ. You think she was showing a "complete lack of professionalism". I don't.
My reasons for not are that it doesn't affect her articles, her opinions, her ability or anything remotely to do with her job. What it does show is some wit and panache. It also shows that a lot of vocal people should be completely ignored as what they are saying isn't worth a damn and it should be people with perspective making these judgement calls, not angry people on the internet seeking mental victories.

kunst nugget

wes wrote: »

"Above my station", pretty much sums up the attitude of those defending the complete lack of professionalism in the gaming media.

How dare a lowly peasant dare disagree with our mighty gaming journalist over lords. How dare I have an opinion that is different to yours.

Good job showing what you think of the rest of us lowly mortals.......

This really is a load of nonsense and nothing that has been revealed about the ethics of game journalism would suggest that it is in anyway more corrupt than any other branch of specialised reporting.

The fact of the matter is the people that are pushing the notion of game journalism having an agenda are the guys running youtube channels who have their own agenda. More views and subscriptions to their channels means more money for them.

super_furry

wes wrote: »

"Above my station", pretty much sums up the attitude of those defending the complete lack of professionalism in the gaming media.

How dare a lowly peasant dare disagree with our mighty gaming journalist over lords. How dare I have an opinion that is different to yours.

Good job showing what you think of the rest of us lowly mortals.......

Do you really honestly believe she should be fired for a twitter quip about Adam Baldwin?

wes

gizmo wrote: »

From what I can see they're doing both to a certain extent. I'm intrigued as to what exactly you want them to discuss though. For instance, should Polygon be writing an article about Patricia Hernandez knowing Anna Anthropy personally and then writing about it? I mean, the facts are there, it was a public twitter conversation and she wrote articles about Analogue. What does this alone prove about the wider industry in general?

It was not ignored, Stephen Totilo commented on it here publicly nearly two weeks ago.

So the information was publicly available and the editor didn't say a thing until well after the article was published. How exactly is that not a problem?

gizmo wrote: »

One can safely assume the conversation happened before then. Of course it later transpired that the "evidence" against him was incorrect so ultimately they were right in not conducting some kind of witch hunt against him at the behest of angry people on the internet.

Kotaku have happily posted accusations against individuals based on posts on the Internet in the past. So at the very least the accusation should have been acknowledged as opposed to be flat out ignored. Something simple, like we are looking into the accusation. The only reason there was a comment was due to them being asked repeatedly. Surely, the common sense thing to was you know address the accusation, as opposed to brushing it under the carpet, seeing as Kotaku have posted stories on accusations against other people based on posts on the Internet, but when its one of there own, its a different story.

gizmo wrote: »

You want these people fired? Seriously? While I would have expected Hernandez to either recuse herself from writing the story or at least being up front about her relationship with Love, nothing she actually said was incorrect about the game. If she had misrepresented the game or shilled it in a more underhanded manner then maybe look at termination but calling for either her or Alexander's head based on the articles written thus far seems way over the top.

If "journalist" are posting positive articles from there friends, then yes they should potential lose there jobs, but you know what I give gaming media to much credit. Its amateur hour for many outlets it seems.

gizmo wrote: »

The best way I can address this is as such. I see absolutely no problem with games journalists supporting developers or studios via Patreon, Kickstarter, Indiegogo or any other service. To assume automatic bias because you like someone's work and want to see more of it is again, a gross over reaction imo. By all means highlight it in any piece you write about the game but to actually stop them from writing about (or backing) such projects or people seems extremely unfair given their nature.

There is a world of difference between liking someones working, and you know funding them. Sorry, but it is fundamental conflict on interest to be reporting on people you fund, that a huge issue.

gizmo wrote: »

No, I'm saying it's within their remit as games journalists to report on abuse of people in the industry. Likewise if people in the industry insult other people, whether they are inside or outside, then by all means comment on that too. As you said, it's important to cover from both sides. It is, however, ludicrous to presume they can report on every bit of abuse which has occurred either during this debate or apart from apart from it. This is especially true when dealing with the anonymous nature of the internet. I mean, in the case of the 10 year old kid, outside of that imgur link, is there any more legitimate information or evidence available on the incident?

The names are blocked out, so impossible to find out. To be fair its best to ignore that case, as I can't verify the details.

Also, the 2nd case that I mentioned is by a youtuber who comments on games, and yet no comment on that case at all, by these outlets. Strikes me as very odd, seeing as there remit is posting gaming news, and surely abuse of youtuber who talks about games falls into that, seeing as these sites have been emailed about this, and yet last I checked no reports on it.

gizmo wrote: »

I have been following it and the evidence I'm looking from you is unfortunately pretty thin on the ground. If I find it I'll happily change my stance on the matter though.

I think 10 article posted within 2 days of one another kind of proves my point of an organized effort amongst some of the games media......

wes

BMMachine wrote: »

Sorry, but its just this accepted line thing.

Ok, I went overboard in regards to Leigh Alexandar, but her comments hardly paints her as professional, or paints her industry in a good light, now does it.

BMMachine wrote: »

You think its acceptable for someone to lose their job and mess up their life for a pretty throwaway comment about a millionaire actor who has no business in this whole thing?

Sorry, you accuse me of acting "above my station", and now you get to decide who can and cannot comment on this topic all of a sudden? Hypocritical much.

All, the guy did was retweet a video, that how his involvement started.

I take you also feel that Joss Whedon and William Gibson, have no business tweeting Anita Sarkesian's video, right? Would it be ok for people to call them crack heads as well? Do you think that would go down well for any individual work in the media?

BMMachine wrote: »

If people think that that is the accepted standard for how people should act then either one of two things is happening: they have their head in the clouds or there is a self serving motivation behind it. That motivation is probably some form of mental victory for someone who needs it because they are having an online argument/debate with someone else that disagrees with them. Low standards.

So calling people crack heads is not an example of low standards? I would consider name calling low standards.

As for disagreeing, well a lowly peasant like me shouldn't have dared disagree with such a great person, who apparently thinks he can say who can and can't get involved talking about stuff on twitter.

wes

kunst nugget wrote: »

This really is a load of nonsense and nothing that has been revealed about the ethics of game journalism would suggest that it is in anyway more corrupt than any other branch of specialised reporting.

The fact of the matter is the people that are pushing the notion of game journalism having an agenda are the guys running youtube channels who have their own agenda. More views and subscriptions to their channels means more money for them.

You can easily say the exact same about the video game sites who are involved in this. More clicks more money etc.

BMMachine

wes wrote:

Ok, I went overboard in regards to Leigh Alexandar, but her comments hardly paints her as professional, or paints her industry in a good light, now does it.

To me, it paints it in the same light as a person making a joke about someone. It has no effect on the industry at all. #biggerpicture

wes wrote:

Sorry, you accuse me of acting "above my station", and now you get to decide who can and cannot comment on this topic all of a sudden? Hypocritical much.

you were making a demand of a company to terminate another persons employment. I'm not saying who can or cannot comment on twitter - what I am saying is who cares what Adam Baldwin thinks about gaming journalism Theres a difference, he can comment away as long as it isn't demanding something stupid to happen to someone else. #context

wes wrote:

I take you also feel that Joss Whedon and William Gibson, have no business tweeting Anita Sarkesian's video, right? Would it be ok for people to call them crack head as well? Do you think that would go down well for any individual work in the media?

I don't care what Joss Whedon and William Gibson think or do. If a joke is funny about them, I will laugh. If its a crap joke, I will cringe. Either way, it matters not. #perspective

wes wrote:

So calling people crack heads is not an example of low standards? I would consider name calling low standards.

As for disagreeing, well a lowly peasant like me shouldn't have dared disagree with such a great person, who apparently thinks he can say who can and can't get involved talking about stuff on twitter.

Calling people crackheads in a joke on the internet will either be funny, or it won't. See the laugh/cringe bit above? Apply it here.
If your opinion is easily dissected and shown up as having no actual weight to it then don't come crying at me with your sarcasm. #betteryourself

johnny_ultimate

For such a heated thread we've had a surprisingly reasonable and respectable discussion here. Things are getting a bit personal now so please tone it back, don't want to add a nasty tone to what has been a great example of a civilised debate. Thanks.

kunst nugget

wes wrote: »

You can easily say the exact same about the video game sites who are involved in this. More clicks more money etc.

Exactly, but the youtubers aren't being attacked about their lack of ethics, are they. They're presenting themselves as purveyors of truth and justice, the same as the sites are doing but with extra conspiracy theory and added 'little guy fighting the power' vim and vigour.