AirPlay is being planned in the open.
On Friday, I’l describe how this public GamerGate debate will work, and if your comments are caustic enough, we’ll change the rules.
Today, let me mostly agree with my critics. These are skeptical/critical comments from this blog, Reddit, and Twitter. If you have others, post them below and I’ll address them best I can…
AirPlay suffers from a “pre-conceived notion of identity.”
TRUE. Journalists struggle with this all the time. Humans are messy beings.
I’ve covered both a Democratic and Republican national convention, and even within those well-defined political parties, identity was difficult:
Radical liberals and conservatives often attack reporters for lumping them in with the “elitists” and “RINOs” in their own parties. But there’s simply no way to tell a story if you can’t summarize at least a little.
GamerGate isn’t a dues-paying organization, it’s a virtual movement. So identity might be impossible to present in a one-day debate. But I don’t believe “impossible” is a reason not to try.
“It’s not a win but a ridiculous compromise.”
HALF TRUE. AirPlay is a compromise to be sure. But you can’t tell if it’s “ridiculous” till it’s over.
If you want to persuade average citizens, you have to compromise. I’ve learned this in 25 years as a journalist…
Ignorant isn’t the same as stupid.
GamerGaters know the history of their crusade, but other smart people have barely or rarely heard of it. You can dismiss them for not knowing, or you can teach them. And just like in class, you can’t teach the entire course in one lesson.
At the end of AirPlay, GamerGaters might feel like only the surface was scratched, but for the newcomers, minds might be blown. At least mine has been over the past three days.
“The author has strong pre-conceived notions.”
TRUE. Don’t believe what you’ve been told: The fairest journalists aren’t objective.
They wade into a story with a “preconceived notion.” But — and this is key — they don’t give a crap about it. They aren’t married to it, and as soon as new facts disprove that notion, they toss it away like a used condom.
Why do that? Because journalists are always on deadline, and it’s quicker to knock down the “bad facts” to get to the right ones, rather than stumble in blankly and hunt for them.
In 72 hours, I’ve changed many of my “preconceived notions” of GamerGate. Because I was writing a personal blog instead of a professional story, I shared all those notions — and how they changed.
Regardless, none of those notions will affect AirPlay, because I’m just the moderator. Other people are going to do all the talking.
“It could be the vindication we need, or it could be another exercise in circle-jerking.”
HALF TRUE — because it might be neither. What’s so wonderful about face-to-face debates is that anything can happen.
You might think your side sucked, yet you attract new fans. You might think your side nailed it, yet newcomers yawn.
Here’s what makes me so happy about how things have gone so far:
More than 12,000 people have read these posts from an itinerant journalist who knew as much about GamerGate as Jesus Christ knew about air conditioning. Nearly 500 have commented — demanding a discussion on journalism ethics when SPJ can’t even get journalists to talk about the topic.
Who knows what’s going to happen with AirPlay. It could totally suck. I could totally screw it up and piss off all 12,000 people. But it won’t be boring, and that’s the most important thing.
I look forward to your long discussions about the people gamergate has attacked and how, the mob-fielded oppositional research, and how you feel this is all quite ethical and appropriate.
Since this isn’t much more than answering a few of the comments made on your last post (And believe me, those are only a small fraction of all the discussionsgoing on surounding it), I’d just like to say thank you for taking the time to talk to us. We’ve been trying to get debates going for 8 months, the other side haven’t been willing to talk. So I fear you might be a bit to right when you say ” SPJ can’t even get journalists to talk about the topic.”. I think your biggest problem might be assembling the opsosition.
I do hope that since it’s organised by the SPJ, they will be willing to actually take the discussion and that you can get some journos from the gaming press. Not going to suggest any here as plenty was suggested in the last topic, but I wish you good luck. And again, thank you!
Sounds interesting.
The only thing I want to say in all this, because I mostly just do videos and stuff, is that I wish people would look at how Grayson caused harm to Quinn. In my eyes, his low standards of disclosure(or failure to recuse himself if he didn’t think it was suitable to let people know there was a relationship of some sort) turned what shouldn’t have been in the public’s interest to know into something that was important for people to know as evidence and part of the appearance of impropriety he caused.
“Gamergaters” is a term usually used by gamergate detractors. A better way to refer to us is either ‘pro-gamergate’ or ‘gamergate supporter’.
Regardless, I’m looking forward to this. I’m excited.
I’m just curious if you can find any people that can represent anti-gamergate. These are media savvy people that know that their narrative will be shattered by a fair exposition of arguments. I hope it will happen, but I’m skeptical.
thx again for doing this. Only way we can ever get an issue resolved or any traction and discussion on these issues is from both side. A healthy discussion. thank you for trying to provide this.
It will be interesting to see who if anyone will be willing to debate against GamerGate. Typically the ideologically driven and the hopelessly corrupt don’t like venues where their assertions might be challenged or evidence demanded.
“More than 12,000 people have read these posts from an itinerant journalist who knew as much about GamerGate as Jesus Christ knew about air conditioning. Nearly 500 have commented — demanding a discussion on journalism ethics when SPJ can’t even get journalists to talk about the topic.”
^That right there should be a major sign of just how egregiously corrupt gaming journalists(and their defenders in the MSM) have become.
I live in the area and am wishing to know if the event itself will be open to the public or to non-members of the Society.
I’m just pleased there will be an opportunity for the community to voice concerns. I don’t much care about how this makes us look, if we pick up more great people to follow and talk with or drive some away, as long as the debate is on topic and doesn’t degrade into some accusation driven gender politics side show….
That’s what twitter is for.
“More than 12,000 people have read these posts from an itinerant journalist who knew as much about GamerGate as Jesus Christ knew about air conditioning. Nearly 500 have commented — demanding a discussion on journalism ethics when SPJ can’t even get journalists to talk about the topic.”
I think I can see part of your agenda here, and cannot say I disapprove. A big part of debate consists of the gaming audience asking about and at times demanding standards and accountability. We would be met with a dismissive, “Well this is how all media works, how do you expect the games media to have these standards?”
That is no excuse, and only reinforces the need for making awareness of ethical operations spread to more forms of media. There is an audience for a frank, upfront, and standards driven press when it comes to many arenas. It all raises too many inconvenient questions for many sides, though, so I feel that is at least partly a reason why so many would just rather avoid the discussion all together.
I’ve been around long enough to know most “news” organizations are kind of a joke. That does not stop me from seeking and giving patronage to sites that operate with a certain set of good standards and a nice track history. Others are too.
When the events that folks call “GamerGate” happened, the gaming audience finally found a media sphere they could effect. They couldn’t tell MSNBC or Fox anything and have them listen. People from large newspaper sites are not going to listen when gamers challenge the current status quo of scapegoating issues. But with gaming publications, gamers found something they COULD effect.
Having this discussion is important to me, because I feel that is all most gamers wanted anyway. To dicusses and address concerns they have with not just gaming journalism, but other spheres as well and to not be insulted and called a hate group for simply asking questions.
Anyway, thank you for working to get this together. I feel this is important for more reasons than one.
I’m very much on the fence with all of this, you have to understand that after a 8 month media blitz which is still going, with reporters from gaming sites taking a bomb scare to smear us or make out we made it up (despite the FBI confirming it)
I have to say that I’m a bit jaded. I have faith in people like Oliver Campbell to speak well not on our behalf but as someone who supports #GamerGates views on gaming (freedom of expression) and ethical reform.
Could you possibly comment on this: https://archive.is/WwFIf
Is SPJ allot like #GamerGate in the sense that just because one person acts in a certain way it doesn’t reflect your society as a whole? Or are this mans views on Milo shared by SPJ?
The reason I ask this is allot of respect Milo a great deal, we may disagree but if SPJ is asking for us to disown or tell him to leave, we won’t. In other words if we have to choose Milo or SPJ it will always be Milo.
I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to look beyond the spin and smear to foster discussion.
Hey man, we welcome legitimate criticism and neutrals so we appreciate the opportunity you are giving us.
We will have to get our ducks in a row and figure things out. Its clear not everyone feels the same way. A lot of people are pumped up about it and others are really skeptical.
Hopefully it all works out well.
Again, thanks!
ok I’m gonna pick on one section very deliberately. Is not objectivity in real life simply not letting your preconceived notions control you ? I mean it’s impossible to not having any it’s impossible to learn about anything without gaining any. It’s the act of not letting that be the end all be all that makes you objective is it not?
@ Raymond Eccleston
“It will be interesting to see who if anyone will be willing to debate against GamerGate. Typically the ideologically driven and the hopelessly corrupt don’t like venues where their assertions might be challenged or evidence demanded.”
There might be some parties who can’t really refuse without really losing face. For example, as I said in the previous comment section, the article “‘Gamers’ don’t have to be your audience. ‘Gamers’ are over.” on Gamasutra.com from August 28, 2014, which mostly contains insults, is one of the big reasons for this controversy. And Gamasutra is the biggest website for professional game developers. Given that this controversy very much affects game developers, can Gamasutra really decline participating in this panel?
I would really like to know how your mind was blown in three days. DETAIL I WANT TO HEAR YOUR STORY, your opinion on the matter is supremely relevant.
Thanks for giving the movement a fair shake unlike…. well, almost everyone, who would rather jump at our throats for being “evil mysoginists that are worse than ISIS and probably caused the holocaust”, even though just a bit of observation and civil discussion (see: talking to GG people without starting with “all you do is harass women you shitlords”) will prove that assumption wrong.
Also:
http://deepfreeze.it/
Let me tell you, reading “if your comments are caustic enough, we’ll change the rules” is a breath of fresh air in an increasingly stuffy room.
–
Here’s one concern I think is critical. GamerGate supporters are concerned/furious that games journalists are behaving unethically in their role as journalists. Whoever ends up at this event, they’ll be packing plenty of evidence of this unethical journalist behaviour, because that’s what GamerGate has been researching. But If the event turns into a prosecution of GamerGate’s behaviour, it will descend into mostly non-empirical arguments, repetitions of the prevailing narrative, and bitter sniping – not very productive.
Now, normally I wouldn’t worry that an organisation that concerns itself with the professionalism of journalists would ignore the misdeeds of *journalists* in favour of examining the misdeeds of a *hashtag*, but a common ploy of the besieged games journalist has been to hold GamerGate supporters to the standards we’ve demanded of them (even demanding we prove our desire for ethical journalism by *doing good journalism ourselves*).
An example would be Leigh Alexander’s blog post, “List of ethical concerns in video games (partial)”: http://leighalexander.net/list-of-ethical-concerns-in-video-games-partial/ . This kind of accusation runs on moon logic (“look at all these ethical concerns in the video game industry that us games journalists haven’t investigated! how dare you be mad at us for being unethical, you should instead be mad at games companies for being unethical in ways you don’t know about because we didn’t do our jobs!”). But because GamerGate is so closely tied to the ethics in games journalism issue, and because there’s so much confusion, and because there’s a pre-existing media narrative biased against it, it’s very possible to hide the moon logic with sloppy use of terms – making a criticism of unruly hashtag activists *feel* like it’s a valid counter-argument to criticisms of unethical journalism, when *actually* it’s an irrelevant deflection.
So, that would be my concern: that this trial of unethical journalism will be hijacked by the accused and turned into a trial of the methods of accusation and protest instead. The code of ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists applies to journalists; it doesn’t apply to a hashtag.
One of the most sustained criticisms of games journalists is they refuse to address ethical concerns about journalism, and instead choose to address the misogyny boogeyman of GamerGate. More than anything, *this* is what will blow the event up and piss off those 12,000 (although if you do righteously piss off GamerGate, expect more like 50,000: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=260KxcDTw0I&feature=youtu.be). Don’t let this discussion of ethics in journalism get sidetracked by social saboteurs like every other discussion has been. If that happens, GamerGate supporters will see you as exactly the same as all the other journalists we criticise (and really, would we be wrong?); that’s when the comments really will get caustic.
Thanks for taking on this enormous flaming hairball, and thanks once again for your refreshing writing style.
@yirex I’d say they can given that the person who wrote that doesn’t work their anymore
I’m very pleased that we’ve got someone like you who is quite open and straightforward about laying it out. I think between now and the debate itself, we’re going to be able to work through a lot of this and come to a really appreciated compromise about how to do this.
It’s only been a couple of days, but my faith in this turning out right is improving by the hour.
Please understand that much of the criticism has been triggered from people that have spent much of the last year being absolutely villified by the press for things they didn’t do, told they believe things that they don’t, and generally painted as the worst form of scum in the world. So they’re a bit edgy around journalists, and please understand that it isn’t personal. I’m sorry you have to deal with that, as you aren’t responsible for what these other people have done.
My concern right now is that you may have difficulty finding a significant voice for the anti-gamer side. GG folks love the idea of an honest debate, but we’ve seen the other side refuse to step out of their “safe spaces”. I’m worried that anyone you get will demand very biased ground rules if they will even talk to you at all. We’ve seen this sort of thing before where anyone that even suggests there is a debate to be had is villified and shunned.
And though you’ve probably heard it enough, thank you for giving us a fair hearing. Sadly, it’s been a rare thing.
This is exactly the kind of Professionalism A lot of people have been begging for. I wish you all the best and Hope a lot of good comes from this event!
You will need to do a lot of reading to even scratch the surface of what has been happening. The majority of the gaming press, their parent company’s affiliates and also the majority of the MSM give only the antiGG side, thus their perspective is very well covered. They are very transparent about their bias even when contacted to correct errors. They do not care that they are accusing a lot of innocent people of horrible things.
To get the proGG side of things, I suggest that you ask the people suggested as representatives for further information and evidence.
I too would love to read your story as Torrey suggested. And thank you for giving the movement a fair shake, we just want to raise our concerns without being called every hateful thing under the sun.
@Dustin geels
I know that Leigh Alexander left Gamasutra, but:
– Ethics in games journalism is a topic for Gamasutra, given that it really affects game developers if game journalists give preferential treatment to those game developers they’re friends with.
– Gamasutra has never distanced itself or apologized for the article’s insults or its consequences.
– Gamasutra’s Editor-In-Chief Kris Graft and the other editors seem to espouse a similar viewpoint, as far as I can tell. For example, in Kris Graft’s follow-up article “Losing our voices”, he wrote: “If video games don’t go in the direction where some of us want to steer them, we lose our will to speak at all.” I understand that to mean that yes, they’re activists and want to steer what games are made. Unusual – would a website for movie industry professionals do the same?
– Since the Gamergate controversy continues to affect game developers, can they really say “it’s not our business anymore because that article’s writer has left already”?
Mr Koretzky
Do you think you can elaborate on how the discussion will be had? Is this a multi-day event? Is it closed to only the invited representatives and the members of the SPJ, or can the general public attend?
What happens if people from anti-GamerGate refuse to show? Who are you consulting with for GamerGate’s opposition? I personally recommend anyone from the GameJournosPro group, particularly its creator, Kyle Orland. You should also get the EiC of Kotaku, Stephen Totillo (he holds a Masters of Journalism from Columbia University!).
Further, will you allow guest speakers to voice concerns of the state of gaming media, in addition to the panel discussion? If not, what if they prepared written statements for the panelists to deliver in lieu of them?
What sort of topics will be covered in the panel? Is this solely ethics, or are we going to be delving into ideology and agenda pushing?
I’m looking for clarification because we’d like to know as much as we can about this conference so that our representatives and potential guest speakers are as prepared as possible.
Also, you say your mind has been blown by what has been shown to you in the past 3 days. Have you shared what you’ve learned with your fellow board members? What are their thoughts? Have they changed their minds at all?
As always, thank you so much for wanting to hear us out. You are a great person for giving us a fair shake. Thank you.
Sincerely
Yet another leader.
Just being honest, no matter how this goes, some /pol/tards and my fellow faGGots will be upset with you. You’ll also probably have AyyTeam trolling the whole thing, and possibly the GNAA as well.
Meanwhile, aGGros, including both irrelevant Twitter users and possibly writers for publications like The Guardian, will blast you for trying to give a forum for abusers and harassers. Based on the #GGinDC meetup, there also might be bomb threats or other threats of violence. In this case, they might even try to false flag and claim it’s under the banner of #GamerGate.
I don’t think you should call the thing off at all, because I think this might be a good opportunity to start some de-escalation, I just don’t want you to be blindsided by what seems like an absurd level of hostility that might come your way.
Good luck.
One thing I think everyone in Gamergate will want is everything, not just the planning be open and archived. So Public streams of the planning as much as possible, archived chat logs, whatever.
But more importantly: public streaming and posting every second of the event to Youtube.
My biggest concern however, is getting people representing the anti-side that are wiling to sit down and talk. We’ve been trying for literally months. We’ve invited various antis into our spaces to talk and rarely have they accepted. Even rarer was anything approaching a basic level of respect for people they were talking to, they would often laugh with derision at valid complaints and then walk away. I don’t think I’ve seen a proper debate despite the months of attempts — the first attempt I remember was in September.
So given all that? I’m not confident this one will work either. I think it is more likely that Antis will dog pile you and call you terrible things and harass you for the crime of daring to give us a voice.
Don’t get me wrong, I hope it does – but I’ve been burned many times.
Thanks for having the courage to stick your head above the parapet and engage with the GamerGate movement.
As you may have already deduced, those who “support GamerGate” are diverse along many axes – nationality, gender, ethnicity, sexuality, age etc. I’d like to ask for forbearance and accommodation with respect to the latter – many supporters of GamerGate are teenagers and it is probably their first taste of activism with respect to something that they really care about. Their enthusiasm, in conjunction with their affinity and affiliation with various Internet subcultures can make them seem abrasive to those unfamiliar with the Internet beyond reading The Guardian and buying a few things on Amazon. They are good people. Their diligence in cataloging, archiving and broadcasting is wonderful to behold. Just because they don’t conform to “societal norms” (they have their own norms) and get a bit feisty now and then doesn’t mean they should be marginalised.
Anyway, enough rambling – I really hope you can pull this off and it opens some ears and eyes.
I second the motion to have the discussion recorded and ideally livestreamed. GG loved full documentation and we’ll disseminate the ever-loving shit out of that video no matter what.
I really appreciate you setting this up and I know that it will come with a lot of input from a very large and diverse group. I have noticed that a few of the younger members are very unclear on how formal debates work so there might be some confusion stemming from that too.
I would love to ask that, in the event of you being unable to get any journalists to the debate, that you find someone to play devil’s advocate.
I have mentioned before that I would love to see the worst offenders at the debate:
http://www.deepfreeze.it/journo.php?j=leigh_alexander
http://www.deepfreeze.it/journo.php?j=ben_kuchera
http://www.deepfreeze.it/journo.php?j=nathan_grayson
Thanks for taking the time to organise this, and good luck finding any GamerGate detractors willing to debate their issues in public.
Appreciate your time, also interested in your story re: the last 72 hours.
Interesting reading your points, thank you for sharing. There certainly was a lot of food for thought. Also, the game journos have come this far with no accountability, taking stabs and trying to ruin the reputations of those who have tried to be neutral or balanced (ala Mark Kern). Their narrative relies on them not debating and eliminating any dissent, and so I find it unlikely that they will join this debate unless there are any ramifications for not doing so. At least not the majors journos who have caused this, because it is essential to their narrative that they go unquestioned. They want to leverage strange, irrelevant accusations on those who question them, which seems ridiculous but because they’ve been in with the right crowd who jumped at the chance to courageously blame all of the ills of society on a faceless enemy, it has worked.
Thank you for presenting everyone with this opportunity. I know that ethics is a boring subject to many and I used to feel that way myself but now I find that I’m deeply interested in what is ethical, what isn’t, and where the line blurs between the two. This is an opportunity to demonstrate the importance of ethics in journalism to a younger generation and I can’t wait to see how it plays out.
It will be interesting thing to see for sure. I have no fear of facts nor have done anything wrong. Truth shall set us free #GamerGate
You are a rarity in this. Most would have listened to their colleagues. It would have been the easier thing to do. We appreciate it, truly.
It’s a worry that despite having plenty of evidence of ethical breaches coupled with the lack of evidence of the supposed mass wrongdoings of GamerGate the narrative that has been spun has worked to the extent that even the most of the spj don’t really want to hear us out. I’d have thought the spj would know how dangerous journalism without any code yet here we are. It’s hard in a lot of ways for us to not be annoyed, but we then remember what most people have read. It’s frustrating. The standards being applied to us then only to see our detractors getting away with murder. So many lies and empty shouts of harassment that have been proven to be nothing. In some cases plain fabricating them. We are not cold people. We are people who see the same individuals being the boy who cried wolf, who also happens to have a checkered past and are profiting financially massively from this. We question them and for this we are sexist. being a woman and or donning the cloak of feminism does not make any individuals free from criticism. I’d lay the claim of sexism at the door of those who refuse to hold these women to the same standards as they would any man making these claims. Also, criticism does not equate to harassment. I have been accused of this charge many a time for merely asking uncomfortable questions to those believing the unproven accusations about a consumer revolt. Rather than admit perhaps there’s more than meets the eyes or that they blindly believed without knowing , it’s we’re bad, that is it. It seems we’re finally reaping the benefits of the trigger warning happy, safe space, don’t you dare make me debate my position, we’re all winners who are always right because we feel it thus it’s real education system.
We’re simply consumers who had enough of the lies of people who have the reach of millions using that to abuse their position for their friends and personal politics.
GamerGate IS a consumer revolt. It started with games journalism who deflected the talk of corruption to that of sexism. In steps mainstream media who have repeated their claims verbatim for 8 months. Interviews and quotes for our side are rarely put into pieces because it clashes with the narrative. Sadly, factual reporting isn’t as juicy as a story pulling on the heartstrings of the nation and a convenient villain that takes all the blame who happens to be worse than ISIS supposedly. Life isn’t so black and white and neither is GamerGate.
To be honest, most of us are aware that there is corruption in most industries, we are not naive and journalism would be no different. What shocks us though is how even in our own hobby it’s so deeply embedded and how in our attempts to fix it we’ve been characterized as this terrible group. Why have we been met with such vociferous oppsition. The information you are being fed is by those we accuse of wrongdoing, yet it taken as gospel. Is it really that simple to lie and manipulate? To get away with doing your job poorly and unethically? And yes I’m aware you’re probably thinking there’s more nuance to this. Can so many journos who have reported on it in the same manner all gotten it wrong? I like to attribute a lot of what has happened to a few malicious characters and the majority being ignorant. a lot is probably laziness, deadlines and everyone else couldn’t have it so wrong. This is a near year long UVA but the people shouting this have been smeared. Nobody wants to associate with what we say in fear of being smeared too. I don’t think the discovered email list (gamesjournopros) of journos from both the mainstream and gaming media should be ignored where collusion occurred ala journolist. It’s all very hush hush.
Trolls have always existed online. You saw it with the hijacking of the spj hash tag. Yet you’d think with GamerGate this was a new thing with how everyone was so shocked that high profile people will get idiots online. Death threats does not win the argument being had. Westboro Baptist church doesn’t suddenly never have to defend its positions nor can they forever expect to defer to the threats they have received to win sympathy.
It seems everything a troll does is now GamerGate. The claims of gamergafte being evil actually drew some here thinking they had found kin. But the fact so many articles about GG are discussing the harassing and the death threats rather than what the majority discuss is criminally dishonest. Perhaps a passing mention in a condescending tone if we’re lucky. Heck many articles outright state it is a vocal minority doing the bad yet still till this day journalists laser in on and report on only them and ignore the majority of sensible, level headed individuals focused on ethical issues as well as this bizarre overt politicization of a largely apolitical industry. We hope by fixing the ethics we can stop the latter as it’s being mostly done via the platform of games journalism. Games by merit, not by political associations and friends Is what gamers want.
I’ve often heard this said and it really is true. If we cannot fix something as insignificant in the grand scale of things as games journalism then let’s all pack up and go home because society is truly screwed.
The most eye opening part of all of this is how rare people are willing to accept they MAY be wrong. Not even wrong but merely the possibility of it. Too many times I’ve had discussions with journalists who despite being provided with many facts contrary to their article, they ignore it. Emails go unanswered. They block you, they delete your comments that were leaving corrections with supporting links/evidence so others could be aware and then have the temerity to claim you were just a ‘troll’ telling lies before banning you. I guess all you have to do is label the person an unperson and it doesn’t matter if they’re actually fulfilling the preconceived notion in your head. It’s set so they must be playing some dastardly game with you! ‘Ha you evil gamers nearly fooled me with your polite questions. Be gone!’ Look up sea lioning if you want to see what stupidity looks like.
Being serious again, the internet has allowed us to communicate far more and we are no longer a passive audience as with the old media when it comes to news consumption. It’s tougher for journalists as you will be called out for any mistakes or misrepresentations yes, but I’d think only those with less than honorable intentions would object to being challenged or having a free comments section discussing the merits of the article without any heavy handed moderation. And it’d ensure journalists actually carry out some due diligence lest they get embarrassed. Though, perhaps I’m wrong here, I’m no journalist so there may be considerations i am oblivious to. I’d say this is perhaps another reason journos don’t really like us. They know if we catch wind of them, theyll be on our radar.
I’d also say the internet and the massive competition has lowered the standards of journalism and fact checking to an extremely worrying degree in a race to hit the scoop before Mr Joe blogger. I do wonder frequently when ready pieces if it has actually gone past anyone. It probably has which depresses me more. Clickbait is one of GamerGate’s biggest pet peeves and unsurprisingly Gawker Media have been one of the most disgustingly dishonest in this controversy and one of our biggest targets. Oh and I have mentioned narrative many times and this is the issue. A lot of these journalists are far left and sacrifice accuracy to further causes they believe in such as the Ellen Pao case. It doesn’t matter that she was losing the case or that with each revelation this picture of her as a woman fighting for women everywhere crumbled and in reality she was incredibly self serving… the media held her up as a champion who was unjustly treated.
This debacle has been raging for nearly a year yet there are still tens of thousands of us still here waiting to be met with journalists actually doing their job. Reporting both sides of the story with facts and a complete telling of events. Not narrative weaving, complete regurgitation of one side and leaving in the half truths that are the least damaging. This event AirPlay may be the catalyst for this, it may not, regardless we thank you Michael Koretzky for not ignoring it.
Another good post, if shorter than the others. I’ll be very interested to hear an accounting of how your preconceived notions were challenged in as little as 72 hrs. In the 8 months I’ve been following GG, my favorite stories are always of how people came to open their minds to the possibility of things not being as they seem.
I also look forward to details on how the event will be structured. I do have two suggestions
-Stream the event, save and post the videos on YouTube. Text transcripts would be preferable. Most people I know in GG are all about archiving and transparency, so, the more the better.
-Check out a new GG website. I haven’t been able to look at it in too much detail, but though it is still in its infancy and I have a few concerns/suggestions for improvmentI think it has great potential:
http://deepfreeze.it/
Thank you again for doing what you do!
I sent you several tweets late last night, but I encourage you to DM if you find the time. I work as a Producer for a very Larger LGBT Channel and have been a supporter of GamerGate from the start. We just want to see a better industry, despite what those for whom we have been asked to do their jobs properly, have labeled us.
I live in LA and see that your group has meetups all the time. I would very much like to sit down and have a professional conversation about this topic. =)
I have a degree in Business & Marketing so my interest in GG has been largely one of looking at the big picture for the impact on the industry, positive or negative. But also a moral question. Example: Is it ok to write positive articles about the person you’re living with & or dating etc.?
Thank you for being open-minded enough to give this a go.
I’m grateful you’re giving us this opportunity at all. If you’re half as fair as your posts lead me to believe you will be, I think this will be great. This looks like our best hope for ending GamerGate once and for all – and believe me, as willing as they are to carry on forever, most GGers want it to end.
If you haven’t seen it yet, as official a list as is possible in a headless organization is being built. We’re currently at the debate phase:
http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/3546kj/updated_spj_candidates_list_debate_time/
It probably won’t be finished until next week, but when it is we should have a consensus list about who should be on the panel, pre-filtered for availability. Hopefully this’ll make your life easier.
What is the format of the panel/debate? I don’t know if you’ll reply here but I think having a clear format and rules is important.
I don’t see how this can be looked at a compromise when just being able to debate anti-GG without them being able to hide behind a block or call their followers to derail the discussion is a win.
I just look forward to the opportunity to discuss this issue fairly; without media bias. I don’t know how it’ll turn out, but thank you for trying.
What specifically is the topic of this debate meant to be?
Journalistic ethics, pro or con?
Or
Is GamerGate about “ethical breaches in video-game journalism” or is it “a smokescreen for harassing women who want to assert themselves in the gaming industry and its culture”?