Topic: Burden of the Silent Majority

[Triforce Hermit]

Most this has been on Twitter, tumblr posts, Youtube videos,

In other words, the places where the scum of the earth congregate, which is why I don't go to these sites.

Which explains a lot and makes me disregard any seriousness of this matter entirely.

[broodwars]

This is much I would say on this matter, but as I have gone on at length on this topic on Twitter and I intend to address this subject on the next NFR, I'll just leave it at this:  I believe the entire structure of the games media is corrupt, with a never-ending cycle of friends covering the games of friends with the goal of one day working alongside them. There is no investigative journalism, and I really do feel there's a deep-seeded hatred within the games press of their own audience. You hear the condescension in their podcasts, and you see it in their writing and how they relate to their readers.  It doesn't feel to me that the press represents us anymore as the valiant industry watch dogs they should be.  There is no critical analysis, no investigative journalism, and no courage to ask real, hard questions.

For instance, why has there been seemingly NO critical analysis of Anita Sarkeesian's work on the part of the games press. Why has it been up to the fans to do the critical analysis and fact-checking that you'd think paid, professional writers would be capable of doing? Even if you agree with her views, that doesn't mean her work is beyond approach. And I don't just mean issuing a vague "oh, and I agree with her on some points and disagree on others" statement.

Gaming has always had pricks, and what the "Gamer Gate" people have done in harassing members of the industry and gaming press is not and never will be right. That said, in my view the reason this story blew up as it did is because it shines a spotlight on an problem the press has let fester: the public doesn't trust them anymore.

[UncleBob]

[..]paid, professional writers[...]

I would be curious to know how many gaming websites actually have paid, professional writers.  I'm sure they exist, but I feel they're in the minority...

[marvel_moviefan_2012]

All I can say is while I hold a view that everyone is equal and should be treated that way, I think most of us come to this site to discuss video games. I think that should answer the question of what do we think. I am not the silent type though but I still think that is what many of us are thinking.

Ethics in the media is difficult question everyone has their own answer. You don't need a reminder of Journalism 101, we all know the choices a journalist has to make in order to get the story out. The ethical thing to do usually is protect your source, well it sounds like here the source, so breaking that rule automatically brings about it a certain stigma among journalists. I am not a paid gaming journalist but I work for a TV station I am in the newsroom, it is not easy making the choices we have to make. Because it is a highly stressful work environment we spend our downtime doing whatever we can to have fun and unwind, you know the same things everybody else does watch movies, drink beer, play video games, hang with friends.

If someone who is a journalist, paid or otherwise, is being professional they have no business exposing private information about anyone, ever under any circumstances. Remember Mario Brajuha who faces a federal subpeona and remained in prison for two years over protecting his source in an investigation that went national. This is a case study in ethics classes for all communications/journalism students so you should be familiar with it. I don't know the topic at hand just what I read in this thread but I know that if he exposed his source, he broke the "code" and should be publicly ostracized for that.

still as they say, at the end of the day most of us come here for video game news. I agree that there is a time and a place for any discussion. This is your site you have a right to put whatever you want, if a reader leaves because they think you broke their trust then you lost a reader you didn't need anyways. you stick to your guns and those who follow you will stand behind you. That is what this site has built up in my views, trust with the readers. No matter what the other sites are doing you do what you feel is right and we will back it up, at least I will because even if I disagree with what is being said I respect the writer who stands up for his or her own convictions. That is what journalism really is about taking a stand for something.

[Evan_B]

All joking aside, I believe that most video gaming media, specifically, media that is out of the developers' own hands, is a pretty terrible thing. I think that non-profit news sites, especially those that attempt to give opinionated articles ON GAMES, those that report news exclusively, and those that attempt to generate content based around games that is desirable, are the best types of websites that one can find, but I'll be damned if I've yet to find a website that does one of these things good enough. Hell, most try to to attempt all three and fail miserably.

Ultimately, I think my feelings can be best described as "disappointment" in regards to this whole ridiculous situation- I'm disappointed in people who would threaten harm and death over video games, I'm disappointed that it has become as big a deal as it has, and I'm disappointed that media sites can't just talk about GAMES anymore. Why does there have to be all this social equality ridiculousness layered atop things? Some argue that gender roles in gaming have effects on our youth, but a responsible parent would know what sort of game they were picking up for their child and decide whether or not they think is suitable or giving a message they agree with. Of course, there are plenty of people that buy video games as a distraction for their child, but that's when ten year olds are raised on Call of Duty and ultimately, they're not the sort of people who are out there shitposting about social justice. This is an issue of journalists and e-celebrities blowing their own importance and ideals way out of proportion and receiving proportional amounts of backlash because of it. That is disappointing to me, because I'd rather just hear about the games I want to play.

[Soren]

This is much I would say on this matter, but as I have gone on at length on this topic on Twitter and I intend to address this subject on the next NFR, I'll just leave it at this:  I believe the entire structure of the games media is corrupt, with a never-ending cycle of friends covering the games of friends with the goal of one day working alongside them. There is no investigative journalism, and I really do feel there's a deep-seeded hatred within the games press of their own audience. You hear the condescension in their podcasts, and you see it in their writing and how they relate to their readers.  It doesn't feel to me that the press represents us anymore as the valiant industry watch dogs they should be.  There is no critical analysis, no investigative journalism, and no courage to ask real, hard questions.

Are we really getting that from this movement, though? Exposing "corrupt" relationships between journalists and indie game devs seems like such a small bananas move. And it has led to having several good people outright quitting the industry who had nothing to do with the controversy. If we really want to hold the press' feet to the fire we would demand more stories like these:

http://kotaku.com/5986694/from-dream-to-disaster-the-story-of-aliens-colonial-marines
http://kotaku.com/5955223/what-went-wrong-with-silicon-knights-x-men-destiny
http://kotaku.com/investigation-a-video-game-studio-from-hell-511872642

instead of doing olympic gymnastics to figure out how we can get another journalist in bed with a game dev. (this example is specially ridiculous.)

Analytics don't lie. If investigative pieces really did move the needle you would be sure websites would be doing them more often. Some people in this thread have already demonstrated that they would rather get swallowed up by PR hype machines rather than ask their favorite website to be more accountable. "I just want to play video games and click on this link to read an "article" about the Destiny Perfume. Oh well played, Xbox!"


Most websites are terrible. But if you know what you want and are not lured in by the stupidity, you can find something useful about almost all of them. Except GameSpot.

[pokepal148]

And for goodness sake, don't make an article for every single time someone like Phil Fish updates his twitter in an effort to create controversy. I honestly believe that the press reporting on everything he says is a big part of the reason he left the industry.

He's a guy who has an opinion, that's it. Move on, find something more noteworthy.

[Enner]

Most websites are terrible. But if you know what you want and are not lured in by the stupidity, you can find something useful about almost all of them. Except GameSpot.

Oi, Danny O'Dwyer and the rest of the video crew and hosts are doing good video work that I enjoy over that at GameSpot. There writing output has suffered due to recent layoffs, but the future is video for better of for worse.

This is much I would say on this matter, but as I have gone on at length on this topic on Twitter and I intend to address this subject on the next NFR, I'll just leave it at this:  I believe the entire structure of the games media is corrupt, with a never-ending cycle of friends covering the games of friends with the goal of one day working alongside them. There is no investigative journalism, and I really do feel there's a deep-seeded hatred within the games press of their own audience. You hear the condescension in their podcasts, and you see it in their writing and how they relate to their readers.  It doesn't feel to me that the press represents us anymore as the valiant industry watch dogs they should be.  There is no critical analysis, no investigative journalism, and no courage to ask real, hard questions.

For instance, why has there been seemingly NO critical analysis of Anita Sarkeesian's work on the part of the games press. Why has it been up to the fans to do the critical analysis and fact-checking that you'd think paid, professional writers would be capable of doing? Even if you agree with her views, that doesn't mean her work is beyond approach. And I don't just mean issuing a vague "oh, and I agree with her on some points and disagree on others" statement.

Gaming has always had pricks, and what the "Gamer Gate" people have done in harassing members of the industry and gaming press is not and never will be right. That said, in my view the reason this story blew up as it did is because it shines a spotlight on an problem the press has let fester: the public doesn't trust them anymore.

I think you desire an enthusiast press that has never existed for any other arts, entertainment, or consumer product sector (to my limited knowledge) and probably can't exist in press for consumer products.

As for deep-seeded hatred and condescension, that seems to me whatever outlets and authors you focus on or whatever articles that have stuck to your memory. With the video game writers and people I follow, I have never gotten the sense that they hated or severely looked down upon their audience.

To the specific point on Sarkeesians's work, what you propose sounds like making a review of a review which is something that feel is in poor tact and frowned upon in published writing. Sure, that's what happens in university research, but I have rarely seen it in op/eds for pop culture products. I think the games press lets Sarkeesian's videos stand on their own and trust the audience to come to their own thoughts and conclusions in a respectful manner. Or maybe some of them don't care about the videos or their line of thinking and just let the videos exist peacefully out of their minds.

[Enner]

I think you desire an enthusiast press that has never existed for any other arts, entertainment, or consumer product sector (to my limited knowledge) and probably can't exist in press for consumer products.

Shot my mouth their. And it was only after that I started to think of Apple, Foxconn, clothing, and sweatshops.

Any serious issues in the video games industry dealing with workers rights and what not are rarities. The video games press can only do so much and seem to rely on anonymous leaks or independent surveys for such things. It doesn't help that these sorts of issues are deep inside-baseball, are buried behind the latest trailer, and usually only pop up on focused sites like gamesindustry.biz or Gamasutura (or some scandal-esque headline on a Gawker website).

In quite possibly one of my more naive moments brought by sleep deprivation: These are mostly people making and writing about fun and/or emotionally engaging things while also scratching a living or a profit. While there are serious questions to be asked about these fun things, generally I don't see why they and (eventually) we can't be friendly. With the further expansion of social networks and the great critical equalizer of video and streaming, I envision a video games future where the walls between consumer, press, developer, and even publisher are blurred to be nearly non-existent and that it will work out fine and happily. Yes, recent events spit on that thought, but I can kinda see it as growing pains.

[Enner]

As this article relates to the harassment & misogyny side of the events, it is critically important that this Storify is ready by as many as possible:
https://storify.com/strictmachine/gameovergate

The short story: these are the lengths a small group of people will go through in order attack, harass, and manipulate in order to further a cause they believe in. This is a part of the internet social reality that we now live in.

[broodwars]

To the specific point on Sarkeesians's work, what you propose sounds like making a review of a review which is something that feel is in poor tact and frowned upon in published writing. Sure, that's what happens in university research, but I have rarely seen it in op/eds for pop culture products. I think the games press lets Sarkeesian's videos stand on their own and trust the audience to come to their own thoughts and conclusions in a respectful manner. Or maybe some of them don't care about the videos or their line of thinking and just let the videos exist peacefully out of their minds.

My problem with this argument is that Sarkeesian doesn't present these videos as just another series of reviews on the internet. They are meant to be academic-style critiques on the history and evolution of gaming culture. If that wasn't clear just watching the videos, it's right there in her stretch goals on her kickstarter page: "Tropes vs Women in Video Games Classroom Curriculum". This is meant to be part of a teaching tool used to discuss and instruct people outside our industry on our industry.  Sorry, but in the academic world, when you release a paper on a particular subject, it is discussed; debated; and critiqued by your peers. And I'm sorry, but I were to release an academic paper with as many holes; lack of proper sourcing; flagrant mis-use of words ("misogyny"); and fondness of blanket, unsupported statements as Sarkeesian has in her videos, I'd be the laughing stock of the academic world.  When a politician goes up and makes a speech, you have journalists racing around the clock to fact-check and critique their arguments, because it is their duty to present the truth to their audience.

It would be one thing if Sarkeesian just released her videos, the internet talked about it, and that was that. But no, instead websites like Joystiq or Polygon take great pleasure in posting an article about her latest video, say absolutely nothing about their views of the content (yet treat it as "important"), and then call out anyone who disagrees with her work as misogynist.I really wonder if they're afraid of the backlash from the cult of Sarkeesian if any site actually took a stand and seriously examined their work. If gaming culture is to grow and evolve, we owe it to ourselves to critique and examine works such as Sarkeesian's, even if we agree with them. That's how the discussion happens, and that's how we better ourselves.

My issue with this whole controversy is that both sides will not accept that change needs to happen on both ends. Gaming culture in general (I accept that we on NWR are on the enlightened side of that spectrum just based on the fact that we can have this conversation calmly and rationally, without the moderators having to get involved) needs to accept that we need fresh blood. We need female perspective in our industry, alongside us on the controller; reporting for us in the media; and working to create the next great new idea in the development community. We can't accept or tolerate the casual racism of Xbox live, nor the overt sexism of 4chan (just as examples).

However, by the same token, the gaming media needs to be willing to acknowledge that they have become, circumstantially, the same sort of "hive mind" that they're fond of accusing their audience of being.  I'm not saying there's a malicious intent or overt conspiracy behind it. The talent that runs our favorite websites comes from an astonishingly small pool of experiences; backgrounds; and aspirations. Add in that people fairly frequently cross between the development and journalistic communities, and you have an astonishingly inbred gaming industry. So when you have the media circling the wagons around their friends in the development community (even to the extent of outright subsidizing their lifestyle through programs like Patreon) or someone like Sarkeesian without ANY critical explanation, it gives a very negative appearance when judged against the more "separation of church and state"-style journalistic integrity of other journalistic fields.

TL;DR Version: Both sides need to **** off and let us all get back to discussing games again. I'm tired of the in-fighting over something we all love.