Sections

Zoe Quinn calls for big companies to speak out on GamerGate

"It's so fundamental, otherwise this is going to keep happening"

Depression Quest developer Zoe Quinn has called for the industry's biggest companies to speak up about the controversial GamerGate movement.

A blog post by an ex-boyfriend of Quinn's is widely regarded as a catalyst for GamerGate, a social media hashtag claimed by some to promote concerns about ethics in games journalism, but that ultimately became synonymous with online harassment and misogyny.

Speaking with the BBC at Nottingham GameCity, Quinn expressed her frustration at the reticence of the most influential companies in the industry to take a stance on the issue, even after the GamerGate hashtag was used as a cover for targeted abuse and threats of extreme violence.

"The fact that so much of the responsibility is offloaded to the people most harmed by it is frustrating"

Zoe Quinn

"The fact that so much of the responsibility is offloaded to the people most harmed by it, when someone in a much safer position than I am can stand up and condemn it, is frustrating," she said.

"When people that are prominent in the industry can stand up and say 'I'm part of games, I love games, this hate mob doesn't speak for me, this is not welcome in games', it has the twofold effect of making it less damaging to those that this can hurt, and it does something to repair this horrible misrepresentation of this medium that so many of us love.

"Condemning them and saying they do not speak for games - it's so fundamental, otherwise this is going to keep happening."

Certainly, The New York Times reported that Electronic Arts, Activision Blizzard and Take-Two all declined to comment for an article on the matter, and Fortune only managed to get Ubisoft to go on the record that, "harassment, bullying and threats are wrong and have to stop."

It is worth noting that Ubisoft's statement was largely in support of the ESA's stance on GamerGate. Given that the ESA represents virtually all of the industry's major players, it could be argued that its one statement speaks for all parties. Conversely, it could also be argued that the ESA's statement is a convenient excuse for silence on the part of companies that do not wish to upset any part of their audience.

In any case, Quinn doesn't see the industry's response as good enough. "We need everybody to stand-up and condemn it," she said, "and not in this milquetoast 'harassment is bad you guys' way - because they don't think that what they're doing is harassment."

Interestingly, Quinn did suggest that there are "real concerns" about ethics in games journalism, but from the very beginning the GamerGate movement focused on the wrong area - on "the people with the least power in the industry."

"Nobody's talking about the relationship between the major publishers and the press," Quinn continued, advising those with actual concerns to abandon the irrevocably tarnished GamerGate hashtag.

"Many of the real concerns that people should have about ethics in games journalism have been completely ignored."

More stories

First Games Industry Africa Awards winners announced

Kiro'o Games wins team of the year and three more categories including Most Impactful Mobile Game

By Jeffrey Rousseau

Report: 53% of game writers have experienced or seen bullying at work

The Writer's Guild of Great Britain also says that 48% of writers have had burnout or stress-related illness

By Jeffrey Rousseau

Latest comments (41)

which started as a social media hashtag to promote concerns about ethics in games journalism,
Sigh, can you guys not keep repeating this? The hashtag was started by Adam Baldwin as a way to smear and harass Quinn. It has never had anything more than an extremely tangential relation to 'concerns about ethics in games journalism' except as a convenient figleaf of an excuse to perpetutate itself. It has been about harassment from tweet one.

I agree with Zoe, more publishers and studios need to take a strong, unambiguous stance against GamerGate. This mess needs to stop.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Jessica Hyland on 30th October 2014 12:48pm

22Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Chris Payne Managing Director & Founder, Quantum Soup Studios7 years ago
It's satisfying to see the continued harassment of ZQ and AS has indeed resulted in mainstream attention - in the form of almost universal condemnation of Gamergate. I guess most of the big studios don't see a net benefit in risking alienating their core market to embrace a larger one - which sadly makes sense since so many of the big studios are still catering primarily to that core market :(

I'd love to see the major publishers make a positive statement though, and watch the 8chan harassers try to boycott the entire industry :)

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Chris Payne on 30th October 2014 12:58pm

9Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Matthew Handrahan European Deputy Editor, GamesIndustry.biz7 years ago
Hi Jess. I've altered the wording of that sentence. I was trying to describe the contradictory stances of those who gathered behind that term, but tripped over my own laces due to a pretty busy morning.
9Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Show all comments (41)
Morville O'Driscoll Blogger & Critic 7 years ago
It would be interesting if even one company spoke out against it: Valve. Valve has an easy-in to the debate after the recent death-threat tweets, and has such reach. Okay, the console-harassers won't be hit by a statement of theirs, but a news-post on Steam? That would have nothing but a positive effect, I think.

Sadly, I don't think it'll happen.
Conversely, it could also be argued that the ESA's statement is a convenient excuse for silence on the part of companies that do not wish to upset any part of their audience.
It would help if companies even referred to this statement - a no-comment/comment of "The ESA's statement has our full support." I don't think even that has happened, though I'm willing to be corrected on it.
2Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Matthew Handrahan European Deputy Editor, GamesIndustry.biz7 years ago
Morville: Ubisoft has done that, yeah. I alluded to it in the article, but it probably wasn't clear enough. Ubi's statement to Fortune was effectively, "We agree with what the ESA said - harassment is bad and has to stop." Other companies contacted for their take wouldn't even go that far.
2Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Morville O'Driscoll Blogger & Critic 7 years ago
Ah, yeah... I read that, then completely blanked it. Thanks. :)
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Matthew Handrahan European Deputy Editor, GamesIndustry.biz7 years ago
A ringing endorsement of my work ;)
5Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Nick McCrea Gentleman, Pocket Starship7 years ago
There is very little chance that anyone, with anything serious to lose, will speak out for or against anything, other than very safe statements of condemning the most obviously unacceptable aspects of behaviour, and only then if pushed into it. The upper echelons of the large publishers will do almost anything not to be embroiled in this. There is no winning at this point, only losing. The absolutists on either side have caused that; neutrals are running for cover.

I also think it is a fundamental miscalculation to think that further proclamations declaiming anyone will do anything, other than retrench positions further. If people feel they need to take a moral stand, that's one thing; but rationally I don't think that further condemnation is going to make one single iota of difference.

It will die, eventually, but every time someone visible pokes their head up and says 'everyone in gamergate is a racist / nazi / misogynist / stooge', you've set the clock back on this ending another month.
26Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Aleksi Ranta Category Management Project Manager 7 years ago
" I don't think that further condemnation is going to make one single iota of difference."
The UN condemning the torture and murder of civilians in Syria, no effect.
The US/UN/EU condemning all nuclear tests and horrific human suffering in North Korea. No effect.
Big Companies condemning GamerGate. I see no way it will make a difference.

Call me a sad and overly negative man but this is the world we live in.
3Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Nick McCrea Gentleman, Pocket Starship7 years ago
I just think the moral argument for condemnation needs to be separated from the utilitarian. Some of the motivation for calling for 'visible condemnation' is for a moral stance, regardless of effectiveness, and that's absolutely fine and proper, and you can agree or disagree depending on how you view things.

But if your basis for more condemnation is that it will end it; I respectfully disagree. It's just rationally unsound- the gamergate narrative is now about how 'powerful' voices in the industry are trying to dictate the terms of the debate, and about how they have no 'official' voices. This feeds right into their narrative, accurate or not. This siege mentality is contributing to the movement's appeal. Is that not obvious?

If the goal is genuinely to get this to end, and not simply to get the major actors to declare for you in the 'war', then the only tactic I see working is time, and a cessation of the broad brush attempts at public shaming that so far have done nothing except drive people into one camp or the other.
9Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Andreia Quinta Photographer 7 years ago
Honestly as a big company/publisher I wouldn't want to touch this subject with a 3 meter pole for pretty obvious reasons already stated above.
We know large companies don't endorse any kind of abuse , descrimination and harassment, of course not, as if they would go public even if they did, so why state the obvious and risk agro from certain demographics. We know what the moral stand is already.
13Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Morville O'Driscoll Blogger & Critic 7 years ago
I think something has to be said for supporting fellow professionals, and a public acknowledgement of how abhorrent some behaviour is (from both sides) would perhaps serve as a wake-up-call for some people. (Wishful thinking, I know, but... :) )

In addition, I wonder how long it'll be before some in the pro-movement start using the silence of major companies as a rallying-call? I think something similar has already occured with a smaller company, which sent-out a strongly worded condemnation of GG afterwards.
1Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Jan Goh Programmer, Ubisoft Montreal7 years ago
I think words are important. I think a big company saying, "Gamergate is a movement started in bad faith and continuing to act in bad faith," would resonate. It wouldn't convince the people involved in gamergate directly--those mainly responsible for the bad behaviour absolutely can't be reasoned with--but I think it's important to say all the same. If nothing else, it eliminates any real or perceived leverage that the #gg people have. If Ubisoft were to say that they were against GamerGate, any threat of boycott would be meaningless--the statement implicitly declares that it's better to be moral than to kowtow to a small segment of angry actors. They have SOME money, but the real market is much broader than just the people that are loud and threatening.

I'm happy to personally and publicly declare that I think that #gg is a tainted movement, but my individual voice is very small. My employer's voice would be much more meaningful.
13Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Jacob Riis Communication Director, Nordic Game Program7 years ago
FYI, the Swedish games industry has responded to the GG debate by establishing Diversi.nu. 50 company exec's, from DICE, Ubisoft Massive, Mojang, Avalanche, Starbreeze etc, have signed an open letter which was published in one of Sweden's largest newspapers. Read it here: http://diversi.nu/sexism-has-no-place-in-the-world-of-gaming/
13Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Anthony Gowland Director, Ant Workshop7 years ago
Are men not allowed to have their story told because we should "man up"?
A result of the expectations set by a patriarchal society. If only there was a group of people trying to correct that.
22Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Michael Revis Freelance Writer 7 years ago
It has never had anything more than an extremely tangential relation to 'concerns about ethics in games journalism' except as a convenient figleaf of an excuse to perpetutate itself. It has been about harassment from tweet one.
This is what people who have never done actual research on the issue actually believe.
7Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Tom Keresztes Programmer 7 years ago
“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....”
(Chomsky)

Edited 2 times. Last edit by Tom Keresztes on 30th October 2014 5:40pm

6Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Patrick Heyer Story Contributor 7 years ago
I fear that Barrie is on to something that is (involuntarily?) kept out of the discussion - it's how "the media" likes to focus on stories with a female victim, "fighting" for them and their plight, reinforcing a bad stereotype, while showing a severe disinterest in the stuff happening outside. It's all about Zoe or Anita, but there's so much other bad stuff happening around these two that gets drown out by the outcry on autopilot.

When a harassing post on Twitter contains a GG-hashtag, it becomes "indicative of GG's true purpose", however when some game journos promote bullying and anti-GG folk harass on Twitter, it's "just jokes" or "what they deserve"- that's the double standard happening in the reporting and the public perception. Talk to proper social justice advocates and they will tell you that the whole debate is derailing what social justice is about and the people hopping on the bandwagon are actively hurting their cause (see this wonderful article explaining the problem: http://theflounce.com/harassment-abuse-apologism-sanitizing-abuse-social-justice-spheres/).

Sure it might be "the right thing to do", but without actually understanding what you're "fighting" for (and adjusting your own behavior accordingly) you open yourself (and your cause) up to criticism. I don't care what side people are on - when they behave like idiots, they are idiots. And there have been too many idiots on both sides to be able to "pick a side" without severe reservations (which is why not picking a side is the "only winning move").
27Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
James Berg Games User Researcher 7 years ago
Caveat: Views are my own, don't represent EA, etc

I'd like to see the larger companies say something about it publicly, not because I think it'd effect the folks already involved, but it would give context for those NOT involved. Watching Anita's interview with Colbert, it was painful because gamers in general were getting painted with the old, tired brush of screaming children. Having industry heavyweights stand up and say "This behaviour doesn't represent us" would be a helpful mainstream-media message, not necessarily a helpful gamer-media message. The past-reason folks are going to view that as further proof that "The Man" is holding them down, but extreme folks on both sides don't need further encouragement to keep doing what they're doing, so no harm done there, imo.
6Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
James Berg Games User Researcher 7 years ago
@Barrie, thanks for the link. This whole thing is like Youtube comments spilling over into normal reality :(
1Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Jan Goh Programmer, Ubisoft Montreal7 years ago
@Patrick It's a false dichotomy. It's not 'gamergate vs. other-named-group', it's 'gamergate vs. everyone else'.

To pick a more concrete example, just because you're against Republicans, it doesn't make you a Democrat. It just makes you against Republicans.

Just because you're against GamerGate doesn't make you on any specific side, it just means you're not with GamerGate. GamerGate is toxic waste right now. Even if you believe that it all started with good intentions and was a HUGE misunderstanding, it's insane to associate yourself with GamerGate now--it's an implicit defence of the harassment that is obvious and abundant.
8Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Patrick Heyer Story Contributor 7 years ago
I'd really like this to be true - I do! But I feel that in the current climate any statement against one group will be held as confirmation for the other group.

To use your example: If I'd come out against Republicans, the Democrats would try to use my statement as endorsement of their side and their opinion, even though I wouldn't (and couldn't) endorse the Democrats with a clear conscience (edit: to avoid any confusion, this is just using both parties as token groups - if I'd be American I'd be highly confused who to vote for at all..).

But there's a simple solution - being for or against the actual issue (without regards to which party is on that specific bandwagon). Which brings me back to my statement about idiots:

I don't care who harasses or bullies and for whatever reason! It needs to stop - I don't care who the victim is. I'd be totally fine if that's the message that we as an industry give. No matter if it's Anita, Boogie2988, the "common gamer" or the "common nerd" (and all four are targets of harassment and bullying online).

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Patrick Heyer on 30th October 2014 7:03pm

10Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Robert Mac-Donald Game Designer, Lethe Games7 years ago
And here's the other side of the argument

http://youtu.be/45H25Sc6fig
2Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
David Canela Game & Audio Designer 7 years ago
The appropriate thing to do is to drop labels and hashtags and instead discuss, support or condemn behaviors. I.e. stop trying to define gamergaters, instead, focus on how fucking wrong it is to harass people just because their opinions differ from yours. Bonus: you won't have to have tedious discussions about "but the other side did it, too!"

I saw the colbert bit, it's sad how deeply the gamer stereotypes are still rooted. Unfortunately, bashing feminists/gamers/whomever gives many people some primitive satisfaction, but it doesn't fix a thing.

but that's all a bit off-topic...I agree the industry taking a public stand is a nice show of support for the victim and a worthy PR effort to protect the (I believe) majority of gamers from being painted with the same brush. even if it likely won't stop a single harasser.
7Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Brad McGraw QA Tester 7 years ago
* "Nobody's talking about the relationship between the major publishers and the press," Quinn continued, advising those with actual concerns to abandon the irrevocably tarnished GamerGate hashtag. "Many of the real concerns that people should have about ethics in games journalism have been completely ignored." *

There is a reason for this. Its because the gaming media really doesn't want to talk about it. There are very real and valid concerns over ethics and game journalism (and both sides agree on this), but people are confusing the issue all the time, and the media likes it this way. Its a red herring by the press to keep the topic on women and harassment. Zoe even mixes the issue up saying people should avoid the #GamerGate.

There are TWO issues being talked about. Harassment of women in the gaming industry and what are video game companies doing to bring more women into the industry (and sadly this whole brouhaha is scaring many young girls and women away from the industry), and the second is ethics in gaming journalism.

There was an excellent talk between Total Biscuit and Stephen Totilo of Kotaku (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpmIrWqEUUU) and I thought that Totilo had a lot of good points, but he also admitted there is a huge grey area when deciding "sources" become "friends". Its a massive valid point, but its been seen that the line gets crossed far too much. And is it really too much to ask that transparency happen? That's all it takes for this mess to go away, yet anytime this is brought up its always 'misogynist and harassment of women'.

#Gamergate does NOT equal harassment of women, in fact the vast majority of tweets about #gamergate are either neutral or positive (look at the Newsweek article for that proof, even though they apparently are bad at math). Yes there are a few assholes out there on both sides doing harassment, and also a 3rd group just trying to mess with BOTH sides because they like creating problems for other people. BOTH sides have some excellent people and some excellent points about BOTH issues being talked about. But lets keep them separate. Lets deal with both, but not put the two of them together.

Also, can we please drop the 'politics of left vs right' on this? I am a Canadian Liberal, which in the US means I'm so far left I'm communist and I support the ethics in game journalism issue and also that we need more women in the gaming industry and that bullying and harassment of everybody needs to stop.

Sorry for the rant.
7Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Marty Howe Director, Figurehead Studios7 years ago
We know large companies don't endorse any kind of abuse , descrimination and harassment, of course not.

True. It all goes on behind closed doors, at every company in existence.

If you're reading this, and you're at a company, you've no doubt done it also (collectively laughed at someone, made fun of someones nationality, even as a joke, bullying etc)

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Marty Howe on 31st October 2014 12:14am

0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Bonnie Patterson Narrative Designer, Writer 7 years ago
As Jessica says, Gamergate didn't get around to mentioning their concerns for gaming journalism ethics until they realized they couldn't hurt Quinn's career as long as people could see their attacks for the misogyny they were. And while some people with sincere concerns may have joined the movement since then, they still seem only concerned about women who have slept with someone, and about not the numerous male journalists and developers who not have only interesting financial connections but also input into their coverage.

The people who became Gamergate were all about attacking women for a long time before they decided to hide it under ethical concerns, and anyone with legitimate concerns who joined it has been utterly misled.

But actually, it's never been about ethics in gaming journalism - it's the same people who went after Jade Raymond, Jennifer Hepler, Anita Saarkesian now going after Zoe Quinn and Brianna Wu. They know nothing about journalism (newsflash: Journalists have to talk to developers, sometimes talking causes friendships and more - there's no evidence whatsoever that this created biased copy in any of the cases they're targeting - in fact, in the case of Zoe Quinn and Nathan Grayson, it didn't create any copy at all!). Developing relationships with your likely sources is essential, as is your ability to separate yourself from it.

"Ethics in gaming journalism" is nothing more than an effort to lipgloss legitimacy onto Gamergate's witchhunt. And speaking as a gamer, these people DO NOT represent me.

Edited 2 times. Last edit by Bonnie Patterson on 31st October 2014 12:32am

10Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Adam Campbell Product Manager, Azoomee7 years ago
Honestly as a big company/publisher I wouldn't want to touch this subject with a 3 meter pole for pretty obvious reasons already stated above.
I see what you mean but I feel there comes a point when we have to say enough is enough.

Its the classic situation where we can abhor and condemn such campaigns and behaviours in private, or in our minds but not on a big stage where it would have the most influence.

I would like to see big statements from big companies.

Edited 2 times. Last edit by Adam Campbell on 31st October 2014 10:21pm

6Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Brendan Sinclair Managing Editor, GamesIndustry.biz7 years ago
Brad: "Is it really too much to ask that transparency happen? That's all it takes for this mess to go away, yet anytime this is brought up its always 'misogynist and harassment of women'."

No, it's not too much to ask. And that's why all of the legitimate conflicts (and I would say, some irrelevant "conflicts") were disclosed on articles within days of the issue being brought up. Some sites updated their policies to specifically mention Patreon or Kickstarter. Others merely pointed to their own existing policies. And hopefully now some of the writers who made questionable decisions on disclosure will think better of it the next time an issue comes up. So yeah, GamerGate achieved everything it was ever going to achieve on the journalistic ethics front within a few days of this whole mess starting, and the press reacted to and addressed the legitimate concerns. So why has this continued dragging out for months, as if those complaints were completely ignored? Why do so many people point to progressive or feminist attitudes as the evidence of unethical behavior or corruption? Why are GamerGaters trying to use advertiser pressure to influence editorial decisions when that's the oldest and I would say most severe example of unethical behavior in gaming media? Given that the press has already done that one thing that you say would be all it takes for this mess to go away, what else can we do? Because right now, if we were trying to appease GamerGate, I think the most obvious course of action would be to stop covering anything but AAA games for the core market and to not even consider covering anything to do with race or gender representations in games.
5Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Otakar Schon Technology editor, Economia7 years ago
here we go again. I would love everyone to stand against bullying. not just bullying against Quinn and Sarkeesian, not just bullying form the antiGG crowd towards gamers but against all bullying. Bullying is sick IRL and even wors in the anonymity of the internet. Yet there is still just one side of the story being told with two women being presented as victims.

There are virtually no articles about harassment comming from the other side, no sories about how US media went on silent mode when Kingdom Come alpha was made available to kickstarter backers just because of Dan Vavra;s proGG stance... thats pure politics in gaming journalism and the only proof we need to have an argument that GG is about games and gaming journalism betraying its readers putting political agenda above the interrests of their readers

and then we have another facet of GG which is the push od feministic mobement to alter core male oriented games. I dont see any group of men pushing authors of romance novells to make their heroes more balanced in terms of handsomeness, intelligence and wealth. And what about wedding shows? HOw comes there is like 20:1 ratio of female dresses compared to mens suits? Outrage!
5Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Morville O'Driscoll Blogger & Critic 7 years ago
and then we have another facet of GG which is the push of feministic movement to alter core male oriented games.
Evidence for this? I know the pro-GG movement is all about ethics and standards and accuracy in reporting, so there must be some clear-cut evidence of a "feministic movement to alter core male oriented games", otherwise it would've been debunked ages ago.

Right?

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Morville O'Driscoll on 31st October 2014 3:44pm

3Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Otakar Schon Technology editor, Economia7 years ago
I love your sarcasmus but it somehow doesnt work on me. If you look at what Anita is doing, its clear. The last time she repeated her mission was on COlbert Report this week. And I guess this attempt to take away somehing from games is making some male gamers angry and vocal about it using GamerGate hashtag.

My example with romance novels and wedding shows may humor you as much as you want, yet your reply just strenghtens my point. Games are about money as much as gaming industry is.

The fact is, wedding shows focused on women are ok, as are romance novels with perfect male heroes. As are violent and sex infused games targeted at men and marketed under the righ rating so nobody buys offensive content without prior warning.

Now considering you just cherrypicked these two points I take it the other points including the Kingdom Come coverage are valid. Thank you
2Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Michael Revis Freelance Writer 7 years ago
"Ethics in gaming journalism" is nothing more than an effort to lipgloss legitimacy onto Gamergate's witchhunt. And speaking as a gamer, these people DO NOT represent me.
Jesus christ would it kill people to actually do research before opening their mouths trying to talk about something they clearly don't understand?

GamerGate has always been about trying to promote ethics in gaming journalism. It's because of a select few online trolls hiding behind their computer screens that everyone just focuses on the threats and misogyny instead.
4Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Morville O'Driscoll Blogger & Critic 7 years ago
The fact is, wedding shows focused on women are ok, as are romance novels with perfect male heroes.
Oh. You were being serious? Right... Okay.

Wedding shows focus on women due to a number of reasons, not many of them good. Some of them include "selling the perfect life", "being all he wants" and "if you show him you're pure and attractive, he'll love you forever". That men aren't sold these fantasies should show you how one-sided it is, playing on women's lack-of-confidence and "thing of male desirability". Then of course you have the fact that there's only so many ways you can cut a suit, whereas there's many many different styles of wedding dress (believe me, I've seen quite a few already. :p ). So we have the twin-points of negativity and economics.

Romance novels with perfect male heroes? Perhaps the fact that there is, almost literally, a different type of novel for every type of person out there shows that people don't have an issue with the representation of perfection, as long as they aren't talked down to, and have products that value them as customers. (Interesting to note here that many of today's romance/erotica are unashamedly written by women, for women).

In fact, this point actually shows that GG really is a bunch of whiny-man-babies when it comes to "violent and sex infused games targeted at men" - there's plenty of books that are shockingly badly written with sex and violence, and they sit quite happily next to the "quality" material. There's no reason to think that gaming would be any different, in time.
The last time she repeated her mission was on Colbert Report this week.
The only vaguely relevant thing I can see is:
They’re actually responding to the fact that we’re saying gaming can no longer be this little boy’s club any more.
Which is not a "feministic movement to alter core male oriented games".
Now considering you just cherrypicked these two points I take it the other points including the Kingdom Come coverage are valid. Thank you
If I may, this sums-up GG in a way I never could. Thanks.

(Anita Sarkeesian quote taken from here: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:0JK90jcEmisJ:www.gamefaqs.com/boards/261-politics/70453610%3Fpage%3D1+&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a (Google Cache due to the thread being deleted?))
5Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Morville O'Driscoll Blogger & Critic 7 years ago
@ Michael
It's because of a select few online trolls hiding behind their computer screens that everyone just focuses on the threats and misogyny instead.
So, you know what - disown the gg hashtag, and move to something that can't be co-opted by trolls. There was a #gamesethics hashtag, I think it was, not long ago. It's not like that can be misinterpreted as mysoginistic, is it?
0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Bonnie Patterson Narrative Designer, Writer 7 years ago
@Michael Revis

I say what I say because I've watching this stuff as it happens, and reading all of it. And I do mean all of it. If there were concerns about ethics in game journalism at the start, then you were well and truly outshouted by these "select few online trolls" who "don't care what happens so long as Zoe Quinn gets hers." The woman had been under attack for weeks before there was any mention of it.

Even now, while members of gamergate are very keen to stand back and say "Well, I'm not doing that" regarding the attacks, what you aren't saying is that what they're doing is WRONG. Stand up and condemn, rather than just sitting there and going "Yeah, he doesn't represent me." Condemn misogyny, rather than claiming it's not happening, not misogyny or tinfoil hatting people harrassing themselves! But you might want to check the reddit and 8 chan discussion boards used by Gaters, because they are crawling with hate for a conspiracy of lurking feminists and "SJWs" out to ruin their lives with the weapons of political correctness.

If you are a completely separate movement to the people who have been deluging abuse over every woman who says "We could be a bit less shit to women in gaming, you know" , then starting with their target, the article that was never written and the conspiracy that never happened, while they were attacking... was a ludicrously bad move.

The mentions of journalistic ethics are pretty thin on the ground. But when they do come up, some of the demands I've seen are ridiculous. Was it the editor of RPS that gaters were demanding release confidential documents? They cannot and will not release employee disclosures because they're none of your business.

When you have a complaint, you take it to the editor privately and if nothing happens, you take it to IPSO or to court, where confidential matters can be dealt with in manners that don't break the law. It seems to me that nobody bothered to try the normal, offline approach of asking politely first.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Bonnie Patterson on 31st October 2014 6:00pm

8Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Robin Clarke Producer, AppyNation Ltd7 years ago
It's because of a select few online trolls hiding behind their computer screens that everyone just focuses on the threats and misogyny instead.
A 'few bad apples', yeah? Like, say, Adam Baldwin, Michael Cernovich, Milo Yiannopolous, "Mr. Fart", "InternetAristocrat", in fact all of the people with any kind of public profile connected to the 'movement'? Jog on.

It's pretty disappointing to see people in the industry (or at least, wanting to present themselves as part of the industry) still trying to argue that the angry mob that has been stalking, harassing and generally being a blight on the lives of a growing number of our peers is just misunderstood. Nobody gets to decide what a structureless mob intent on mischief is really "about", it can only be judged on its words and actions.

Starting a new hashtag won't help. If anyone seriously wants to investigate journalistic ethics, they need to act like adults and form an organisation whose goals can be agreed upon and whose actions can be held to account. Nobody is obliged to waste their time paying attention to incoherent screamed demands and threats.

Perhaps GI should just close comments on stories like this, as they seem to just act as a bright light for the clueless to smash their heads into. It can't be fun to moderate - it certainly isn't in the slightest bit edifying to read.
7Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
James Brightman Editor, North America, GamesIndustry.biz7 years ago
Robin, at this point, this thread is starting to spin out of control. So I am indeed closing it.
3Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Nick McCrea Gentleman, Pocket Starship7 years ago
Can we reply to comments and circumvent the thread close?

It appears we can!

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Nick McCrea on 31st October 2014 7:33pm

0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
Nick McCrea Gentleman, Pocket Starship7 years ago
Consider this a bug report! :)

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Nick McCrea on 31st October 2014 7:36pm

0Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply
James Brightman Editor, North America, GamesIndustry.biz7 years ago
Nick, yes unfortunately. I've already brought it to the attention of our tech team!
2Sign inorRegisterto rate and reply

Sign in to contribute

Need an account? Register now.