Bjorn Posted October 3, 2014 Yeah, TB just kept moving the goal post, jumping from point to point as each one weakened, ignoring everything that Remo kept asking. It was honestly an embarrassing exchange to read because of the weird shifting focus of TB. I will disagree with Remo on one thing though. Journalistic ethics still apply to opinion pieces, columns and editorials, though the application may be slightly relaxed. You're still expected to do things like not plagiarize, accurately quote sources (if used), disclose conflicts of interest, follow your publications ethical guidelines for anonymous sources, etc. The only part of the ethical code that gets dropped is that the piece is obviously biased, since it is usually making a persuasive argument, judgement or delivering some other kind of opinion. I know he's limited by Twitter character counts, but he made a pretty definitive statement that he didn't see how "journalist ethics" applied to opinion pieces. I'm assuming that Remo was likely just referring to the bullshit "ethics" that gaters rave about (hence the quote marks), but still, the journalist in me needed to correct that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted October 3, 2014 I will disagree with Remo on one thing though. Journalistic ethics still apply to opinion pieces, columns and editorials, though the application may be slightly relaxed. You're still expected to do things like not plagiarize, accurately quote sources (if used), disclose conflicts of interest, follow your publications ethical guidelines for anonymous sources, etc. The only part of the ethical code that gets dropped is that the piece is obviously biased, since it is usually making a persuasive argument, judgement or delivering some other kind of opinion. I know he's limited by Twitter character counts, but he made a pretty definitive statement that he didn't see how "journalist ethics" applied to opinion pieces. I'm assuming that Remo was likely just referring to the bullshit "ethics" that gaters rave about (hence the quote marks), but still, the journalist in me needed to correct that. Yeah, I know what you mean, but for #GamerGate, "journalistic ethics" means exclusively "not having an opinion about the subject of the article," which would make for the most terrible opinion piece ever, so I can understand caricaturing one's stance to highlight that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cowuponacow Posted October 3, 2014 "What ethics were breached?" - a question Chris asks regarding an opinion piece (Leigh's) that TB never, ever answers. Instead, TB just keeps saying something about past articles or some shit. To be fair, TB actually did answer that question. I can't figure out how to properly embed a Twitter-generated quote in this forum, but his response was, "the one where you misrepresent large portions of your demographic as wailing hyperconsumer misogynists." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BigJKO Posted October 3, 2014 Those "misrepresentations" came from quotes from Leigh Alexander. Hardly unethical to quote her opinions in a piece entirely about her and an article she wrote. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cowuponacow Posted October 3, 2014 I think what TB was implying to be unethical was Alexender's piece itself (e.g., the "'Gamers are over'" article). It's confusing; I think Chris misinterpreted one of TB's tweets, and TB then responded to the misinterpretation without clarifying his previous tweet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tiemachine Posted October 3, 2014 Only just read that article by Leigh. I'm not sure that conflating standing listlessly in queues and buying stuff with the kind of appalling behaviour women like Anita Sarkeesian (and indeed Leigh herself) have received is terrifically useful. Jack Thompson school of rhetoric, that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
osmosisch Posted October 3, 2014 Jack Thompson school of rhetoric, that.I'd not call that terifically useful either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tiemachine Posted October 3, 2014 Why not? I don't think anyone's really well served by being reduced to tropes. The things that have made me hopeful have generally involved taking the time to engage with people as individuals (despite some of the startling views they might have) like Jenni Goodchild has been doing for instance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted October 3, 2014 Why not? I don't think anyone's really well served by being reduced to tropes. The things that have made me hopeful have generally involved taking the time to engage with people as individuals (despite some of the startling views they might have) like Jenni Goodchild has been doing for instance. I think it's perfectly okay to write an opinion piece about how gamer culture seems to be suffused with this mix of anger and consumerism that isn't representative of most people that actually play games, if that's how Leigh Alexander really feels about it and a site is willing to publish it. It's only an opinion, after all. The strange thing to me is that so many people feel so threatened by how one person feels that they try to hurt and silence her, rather than just read something else. If Alexander's opinion of gamers is so dangerous and toxic, why haven't there been more (or any) efforts to engage her on those opinions in good faith? I mean, you certainly aren't, comparing one opinion piece by a niche journalist writing for an industry site to a years-long legal campaign by a lawyer to outlaw multiple games. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hermie Posted October 3, 2014 TB and a lot of LaterGaters seem to conflate the statement "Gaming has a misogyny problem" with "everyone who plays video games is a misogynist", and then they feel personally attacked instead of reflecting on it. Regarding that facebook thread that was posted some pages back, I was shocked to hear that it was supposed to be "proof" of the so-called SJWs ganging up on a GamerBater, given how crazy he gets by being argued calmly with. Especially the last part where he says "Leigh is like the antichrist to us". Why? Why can't she just be a person with an opinion that you disagree with? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
osmosisch Posted October 3, 2014 Why not? I don't think anyone's really well served by being reduced to tropes.That's why you doing so was not useful. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Roswell47 Posted October 3, 2014 Take a shot every time that biscuits guy says something about consumerism and then die from alcohol poisoning. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tiemachine Posted October 3, 2014 That's why you doing so was not useful. So it is useful to conflate people, "Queuing passionately for hours, at events around the world, to see the things that marketers want them to see..." With victimising and stalking people? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuperBiasedMan Posted October 3, 2014 I think the issue is really people not knowing what misogyny is. TB would be considered a misogynist, a lot of people would. But being a misogynist doesn't mean any conscious dislike of women or intent to oppress them. Misogyny is a subconscious process many people are subject to without realising, but they think it means a conscious effort. So they feel like they're being accused of a worse infraction than they're guilty of. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
osmosisch Posted October 3, 2014 I was talking about your post calling Leigh's article Jack Thompson-level of rhetoric. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tiemachine Posted October 3, 2014 I was talking about your post calling Leigh's article Jack Thompson-level of rhetoric. Except I didn't. I highlighted a specific - Leigh's conflating social awkward people with terrifying bullying specifically, osmosisch. To confirm, Leigh's championing of indie video games in particular as a low-barrier of entry, grass roots form of creative expression that brings in a plurality of voices is one of the main reasons I'm still interested in gaming. But that's why I was surprised at her opening descriptions, which seemed rather reductive. EDIT - Like my initial comment, I guess. I should have stuck the context above in my original post rather than barging in with a Thompson comparison. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Synnah Posted October 3, 2014 is well-made and interesting. Also gives a bit of insight into the main guys that are orchestrating these theories; I've tried watching their videos, but I usually don't last much longer than about 30 seconds. His next video is going to be about Christina Hoff Sommers' 'Sexism Doesn't Exist, Everything is Fine!' video, which should be great. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cyrix Posted October 3, 2014 LaterGaters Thank you, at least something that came out this whole mess made me smile. That Logic bomb video was quite good as well. It's always nice to be reminded of how easily anyone can be swayed by good rhetoric, even though he had a disclaimer at the beginning of the segment i was totally onboard with his fake conspiracy video by the end. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
osmosisch Posted October 3, 2014 EDIT - Like my initial comment, I guess. I should have stuck the context above in my original post rather than barging in with a Thompson comparison.There you go Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Denial Posted October 3, 2014 To be fair, TB actually did answer that question. I can't figure out how to properly embed a Twitter-generated quote in this forum, but his response was, "the one where you misrepresent large portions of your demographic as wailing hyperconsumer misogynists." That's a super weird answer though, right? Because being rude about "your demographic" (which, yeah, I don't think demographic means what GamerGate thinks it means - 18-25 year old core gamers are not the core demographic of Gamasutra, nor does Leigh Alexander belong to the 18-25 male core gamer demographic) is not an ethical issue. It is possibly an issue of editorial wisdom, or political expediency, but it isn't an issue of journalistic ethics. I mean, I guess if you feel anyone writing about games has an ethical obligation to be unswervingly positive about games and everyone who plays them, lest they provide ammunition for the mainstream media then that makes sense, but that feels almost like a self-reductio ad absurdum. However, this is just a restatement of "nobody in this argument has a common understanding of what 'ethics' means", really, which is already very clear. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
James Posted October 3, 2014 I was going to draw the Gerstmann comparison as somewhat ironic, but I decided that it was a different thing for advertisers to manipulate editorial for their own interests than it is for audience to lobby advertisers over editorial content aimed at them.* The Intel situation is still incredibly shitty and ridiculous, but it's not the neat mirror image I at first imagined. I'm so disappointed by Intel, though. Not that I ever had any particular respect for them, but I assumed that this at least would be beneath them. I'm sure there are way bigger ethical concerns for them. I'm sure they sell chips to all sorts of distasteful organisations, and probably their whole business depends on all sorts of shady manufacturing practices, but apparently some Internet complaints about a single misinterpreted opinion piece by a games journalist crosses some sort of a line for them. * I know Gamasutra is a niche publication and the majority of the lobbiers probably aren't in its intended audience, but it's publicly available and regardless doesn't have the same power dynamic as a company influencing the coverage of its own product. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bjorn Posted October 3, 2014 Intel actually consistently ranks as one of the most ethical companies in the world. Which, it's still a corporation, so take that with a grain of salt, but compared to a lot of tech companies they tend to try and be more thoughtful and ethical about the impacts of their business than a bunch of other companies. That's one of the things that makes the move more disappointing and surprising to me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Twig Posted October 3, 2014 I don't like how I keep coming into work and this thread is two pages longer every morning and it's just more and more sad sad sad shit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
twmac Posted October 3, 2014 Except I didn't. I highlighted a specific - Leigh's conflating social awkward people with terrifying bullying specifically, osmosisch. To confirm, Leigh's championing of indie video games in particular as a low-barrier of entry, grass roots form of creative expression that brings in a plurality of voices is one of the main reasons I'm still interested in gaming. But that's why I was surprised at her opening descriptions, which seemed rather reductive. EDIT - Like my initial comment, I guess. I should have stuck the context above in my original post rather than barging in with a Thompson comparison. Having just gone on to re-read the Leigh Alexander piece, you've omitted the 4-5 sentences in between those two parts that, rather than combining the two images illustrates the path from being a person who is, unquestioningly, passionately standing in line for a product they don't really know anything about to a person who unquestioningly, passionately argues on a topic that they don't really know anything about. I can see how some might read it 'these people, all these people, are the same' (in fact it seems to be the main problem in this entire debate similar to the uproar that occurred when women started pointing out that men raping women wasn't cool and men reacted by going 'ARE YOU SAYING ALL MEN ARE RAPISTS?') but for me it is drawing parallels in the mind set. That just me though, and what the hell do I know. I posted this piece in the Feminist thread a while back and people were kind of baffled by it. But the more I watch this stuff happening the more this article rings true: http://www.arcadianrhythms.com/2013/10/releasing-the-inner-man-child/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
James Posted October 3, 2014 Intel actually consistently ranks as one of the most ethical companies in the world. Which, it's still a corporation, so take that with a grain of salt, but compared to a lot of tech companies they tend to try and be more thoughtful and ethical about the impacts of their business than a bunch of other companies. That's one of the things that makes the move more disappointing and surprising to me.Well, that'll serve me right for making lazy assumptions about corporations. I had a nagging feeling it was dumb to post that without any research. I guess I'm dumb. Glad to hear that they're generally well-behaved; doubly disappointed that they caved to stupid pressure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites