"Ethics and Journalistic Integrity"

[Denial]

I think there's a lot of truth in that - there is a Tumblr purporting to record incidents of harassment against Gamergaters, in which the bar for harassment is set very low - to include harsh disagreement, mockery and blocking. It also has the usual GG problem of uncritically reproducing debunked or obviously fake information, of course.

 

One problem, of course, is that when GGers report harassment or threats, people don't generally phone their local police department to try to prove that they are lying about it, so statistical data one actionable threats is harder to establish. Whereas we now know as a simple matter of fact that the FBI are treating threats against Sarkeesian and Wu at least as evidenced.

[Gormongous]

I think there's a lot of truth in that - there is a Tumblr purporting to record incidents of harassment against Gamergaters, in which the bar for harassment is set very low - to include harsh disagreement, mockery and blocking.

 

I have seen all three of those things called out as "bullying" and "harassment" by dozens of people from #GamerGate on Twitter. In one instance, which I can't find again, someone asked what #GamerGate thought its ideal would be for a gaming website and one guy wouldn't stop tweeting really hostile and histrionic things at him. It lasted for several attempts to get the guy to calm down and clarify himself, until finally the person who asked said that this wasn't a conversation and they were going to block the guy. He immediately posted in all caps about how asking a question and then "censoring" someone for their answer was a "classic example" of how gamers get bullied nowadays. It was unbelievable.

[Cyborg771]

Any chance you have a link to that tumblr? I'm curious what they think harassment means.

[cowuponacow]

Earlier you pointed to KiA as being an example of a place to look for examples of what it is that gg wants to achieve, and I'll agree that compared to something like 8chan, KiA is the reserved and calm place to go. But as for understanding motives and desires, I'd like to point you towards the mod team that runs KiA. We Hunted the Mammoth pointed out that one of the mods of KiA also mods another subreddit that is dedicated to rape and bdsm fantasies featuring the conquest and humiliation of feminists, including Sarkeesian specifically. That same mod seems to run a Tumblr (that I won't link to) that features additional porn aimed at the humiliation and punishment of women.

Looking at the mods was not something I had thought of. The rape fantasy subreddit gave me the first "you can't be serious" moment I've had on reddit in a while.

 

Just to close the loop on this - donating to charity is a nice thing to do, generally, and a giving nature is often considered a redeeming quality in an individual. However, charities actively don't want to be given highly public donations by organizations in the headlines for the wrong reasons, no. It creates an awkward situation for them both ethically and in PR terms.

This is a good point, and something that had not occurred to me.

Twig and others seem to be taking the stance that the motivations behind the donation entirely dictate its moral value, which suggests a philosophical disagreement between myself and them which is... probably not surmountable in this venue.

 

That's probably the biggest issue I have with CustooFintel's questions, because he asserts that the reasonable claims represent the "true" #GamerGate and unreasonable claims represent the extremist fringe. Why isn't it the reverse?

Because the "reasonable claims" are the ones that I've observed using my meager investigative methods (described previously). Again, if you have better methods of discerning this stuff, I'm honestly interested in hearing them (thanks again to Bjorn for suggesting investigating mods). I'm aware that all manner of evil things are attributed to GG, including the many threats and doxxings (doxes? doxen?) that their opponents have endured; but since I lack the evidence to tie these actions to GG with a high degree of certainty, the principles I observe (also mentioned previously) require me to presume innocence on the part of the majority of GG supporters.

[Denial]

Any chance you have a link to that tumblr? I'm curious what they think harassment means.

 

Oh, sure - it's here. 

[Gormongous]

Because the "reasonable claims" are the ones that I've observed using my meager investigative methods (described previously). Again, if you have better methods of discerning this stuff, I'm honestly interested in hearing them (thanks again to Bjorn for suggesting investigating mods). I'm aware that all manner of evil things are attributed to GG, including the many threats and doxxings (doxes? doxen?) that their opponents have endured; but since I lack the evidence to tie these actions to GG with a high degree of certainty, the principles I observe (also mentioned previously) require me to presume innocence on the part of the majority of GG supporters.

 

I'm not exactly sure what evidence you want. I don't think there's a forum out there where people who are involved with #GamerGate openly discuss their hatred of women and free speech under their real names. Beyond investigating people like Yiannopoulos and Cernovich, who are prominent public figures that #GamerGate has chosen to represent them when convenient, the method by which I see the face of #GamerGate is simple. I ask myself, what happens to people who speak out against #GamerGate? The answer is, every single one of them is attacked and harassed in the most brutal possible ways that the internet permits.

 

It might be possible to look at such thugs as only nominally connected to the "consumer revolt" that is #GamerGate, but aren't they actually the core around which the rational facade has been built? I mean, the thugs were there first and are still the ones dictating what #GamerGate as a whole says and does, if only in reaction to the thugs' attacks and harassment. Any truly rational movement would recognize that they have been hijacked (and in this case, always have been hijacked) and do everything they can to distance themselves from the thugs, even if it means disbanding the movement itself, but instead they are content just to ask us again and again to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, while that man points a gun at the head of whomever disagrees with them. Even when it's pointed out that being nice and making donations to Quinn and Sarkeesian is good PR in addition to basic human decency, they refuse. As far as I'm concerned, all that makes them entirely complicit in the thugs' behavior. Kris Straub said it a week ago:

 

And not to dredge up Godwin again, but it's really convenient to have a private army of Brownshirts who have no formal ties to the Nazi Party but just happen to destroy the property and threaten the lives of anyone who publicly criticizes said party. Don't forget that the Nazis (#GamerGate) pushed a platform of economic renewal (ethics in journalism) and saw early successes due to their opponents' disorganization and fear, but in the end, the solution to "economic" ("ethical") problems was and always had been the eradication of Jewish (progressive and feminist) influence in German society (video games). That sentence is basically Reactionary Movement Madlibs, so enjoy.

 

Side note, I've spent three days now wracking my brain for a technical term I used to know that described the conspicuous expenditure of wealth on the less fortunate solely as a means of acquiring prestige. It's "evergetism," goddammit.

[Bjorn]

Felicia Day on GamerGate

 

I've actually avoided getting worked up about much with gg for awhile, but this (and the gg response on KiA) makes me want to simultaneously cry and break something. 

 

Any chance you have a link to that tumblr? I'm curious what they think harassment means.

 

Archive.today link to the tumblr that "tracks" harassment.  When I looked, the top example is what appears to be a fake tweet by Leigh Alexander.  A bit further down is someone asking why the proven fake tweet by Brianna Wu is still listed, and the person running the tumblr basically replies fuck off, it's not his job to verify if things are real or not. 

 

Another thing being passed around the pro-gg crowd proving that Quinn doxxed someone is her tweeting a link to a blog post about one of the newest gg members.  It's the Mike guy who's a lawyer and been chest thumping all over the place.  He's shared some excerpts from the restraining order Quinn has against her ex, has threatened to post more, is threatening legal action and has been harassing people (there's a link of him going off about gamergate on someone with absolutely no relation to gaming or journalism earlier in this thread).  The blog post  just outlines this guy's legal experience, and looked up his professional listing in a lawyer's directory and posted a picture of his "office" (which appears to be a condo).  Mike went ahead and tweeted out the streetview image himself (twice) once he became aware of the post.  And posted a link to the blog post himself.  Meh.  That's gg's definition of doxxing one of their own.  Looking them up in a professional directory when they constantly throw their profession in people's faces.

[brkl]

Twig and others seem to be taking the stance that the motivations behind the donation entirely dictate its moral value, which suggests a philosophical disagreement between myself and them which is... probably not surmountable in this venue.

Allowing people to buy indulgences opens up a huge can of worms. It's been tried and the results weren't great.

[Gormongous]

Allowing people to buy indulgences opens up a huge Diet of Worms.

 

Fixed it!

[BigJKO]

 

It has come full circle. The beginning of the end of it all.

[Denial]

Oh God those poor people.

[SuperBiasedMan]

"Please help us share this post"

I feel for them.

[Ozzie]

I visited some GamerGate hubs and there was a thread that asked what harassment was carried out by Anti-GamerGaters. That's when I realized I don't trust any information put forth by people that associate with GamerGate. For good reason, I would say, considering all the lies that got the movement started, but surely they're not only lying, not all of them. I look at the Tumblrs that collect harassment against Gaters (http://gamergateharassment.tumblr.com, http://antigamergate.tumblr.com) and I wonder how much of it is fabricated.

I think my mistrust to this degree isn't entirely justified. You can't even start to engage if you don't trust any of the information that the opposed movement shares. Maybe that's what separates us, the information we put and don't put trust in.

[Merus]

I don't know, I think there's something to the idea that they don't seem to care if their concerns are accurate.

[SecretAsianMan]

So, who else is learning new, terrible things from the internet thanks to all this mess? For me, this video (which is a good watch for anyone like me who's still trying to make sense of this whole thing) taught me that 'sea lioning' is an actual thing that actual jerks do when arguing in bad faith. And suddenly the comic with the sea lions makes a new kind of sense. I'm not sure if I'm happier with this knowledge, or anything else in that video.

 

That video was great.  He does state a lot of things as facts (none of which I disagree with mind you) without specific evidence but that stuff has been documented plenty of other places and isn't the purpose of the video anyway.  I read a couple of the comments and my favorite was one gater who said (specifically in reference to Zoe Quinn)

 

If we really gave a shit about Literally Who, we would call her by her name.

It is people like you, who keep dragging her into this to deflect the real criticism.

 

Yeah, because assigning specific people code names means you don't care about them.

[sproutella]

That video was great.  He does state a lot of things as facts (none of which I disagree with mind you) without specific evidence but that stuff has been documented plenty of other places and isn't the purpose of the video anyway.  I read a couple of the comments and my favorite was one gater who said (specifically in reference to Zoe Quinn)

 

 

Yeah, because assigning specific people code names means you don't care about them.

 

Yup the codename stuff is by far the most scary thing (mostly because it's adopted by the so called moderate crowd). Like if you want to look like crazy people so far up your own ass... mission accomplished?

 

The attempts to whitewash their underlying feelings are just the most brain scrambling thing. 

[Justin Leego]

I visited some GamerGate hubs and there was a thread that asked what harassment was carried out by Anti-GamerGaters. That's when I realized I don't trust any information put forth by people that associate with GamerGate. For good reason, I would say, considering all the lies that got the movement started, but surely they're not only lying, not all of them. I look at the Tumblrs that collect harassment against Gaters (http://gamergateharassment.tumblr.com, http://antigamergate.tumblr.com) and I wonder how much of it is fabricated.

I think my mistrust to this degree isn't entirely justified. You can't even start to engage if you don't trust any of the information that the opposed movement shares. Maybe that's what separates us, the information we put and don't put trust in.

 

What troubles me about these two Tumblrs is that the publisher of the first has stated their lack of interest in verifying the authenticity of posted quotes or the history of the individuals that wrote them (in several cases, commenters have indicated that the quotes or images were fabricated or made by persons that were self-confessed trolls without particular allegiance).

 

The other presents material without comment (and doesn't seem to allow reader comments?), which makes it more rather than less easy to misinterpret.

 

TLDR neither seem particularly interested in practicing good journalism or demonstrating ethical behaviour?

edit - though of course when you or your friends are on the receiving end of unpleasant messages I guess assessing the credibility of each sender isn't high on your to-do list and maybe that's the point

[Cyborg771]

The fake Leigh tweet would be laughable if I didn't know so many people would believe it.

[Ozzie]

edit - though of course when you or your friends are on the receiving end of unpleasant messages I guess assessing the credibility of each sender isn't high on your to-do list and maybe that's the point

 

I think so? Intentions are an incredibly difficult thing to judge, and I don't feel comfortable always assuming the worst. I don't factcheck statements made by Gaters, I just don't trust 'em and assume they're bullshit.

[Synnah]

I visited some GamerGate hubs and there was a thread that asked what harassment was carried out by Anti-GamerGaters. That's when I realized I don't trust any information put forth by people that associate with GamerGate. For good reason, I would say, considering all the lies that got the movement started, but surely they're not only lying, not all of them. I look at the Tumblrs that collect harassment against Gaters (http://gamergateharassment.tumblr.com, http://antigamergate.tumblr.com) and I wonder how much of it is fabricated.

I think my mistrust to this degree isn't entirely justified. You can't even start to engage if you don't trust any of the information that the opposed movement shares. Maybe that's what separates us, the information we put and don't put trust in.

Every time I look at Tumblrs like that, I veer from infuriation to depression to sheer disbelief. So for a start, basically everything that's purporting to be a Leigh Alexander tweet is a fake. And not even a good fake; anyone with half an eye for fonts can see that. One of the posts in the second Tumblr is a fake by someone who can't even tell the difference between a serif font and a sanserif font. And Leigh's a fucking writer, but most of these tweets look like they're written by someone who can barely string a sentence together. But they convince enough people that the damage is already done. The purpose of them is to make people think she's a monster, and they do. Fucking infuriates me.

 

Next are the 'harassment' tweets, which are basically just people saying that they'd like to kill all GamerGaters, and that kind of thing. They're kind of dumb, but people are frustrated about this, I guess. And obviously, there's a massive difference between expressing anger at an amorphous group of people and a sustained campaign of individual harassment directed at a single person. Also, a lot of these are jokes that fly right over peoples' heads. Like, people thought this tweet by Steve Hogarty was serious. So, these don't count either.

 

But then there are the doxxings, several of which are posted in the second of those two blogs. I mean, I can't look at these and assume they're all faked. But what can we do? As has been said in here before, the subset of people that are opposed to GamerGate basically includes everyone that isn't part of their movement, so there are going to be some real shitheels in there, the kind of people who would do this kind of thing for a laugh. But can we say 'they don't represent us' without it being a No True Scotsman situation? I don't see any way of policing these guys.

 

I dunno, I'm just going around in circles.

[Denial]

Pretty much business as usual on the fakes - the hate campaign against Jennifer Hepler involved poorly composited fakes of comments she had allegedly made on the Bioware Social Network, also.

[Ozzie]

[...]

 

Thanks for the post.

[itsamoose]

I used to think that Gamergate would eventually dissipate once enough people started to engage them, but apparently not.  Apparently even a relatively tame blog post is enough to incite their rage.  I wonder if at this point the movement is so far gone that it will never go away but instead become a permanent fixture in the games space.

[sclpls]

This kind of reminds me of the 2012 election, and all the deficit reduction rhetoric that Tea Party types waved around. The goal of engaged American conservatives isn't much of a secret: it is to cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans as much as possible, and to reduce government spending on everyone else as much as possible. All other goals are secondary to that. The problem with that goal though is that it doesn't poll well, at all. It gets even worse if you get into specifics. A lot of Americans might agree with the idea that the federal government spends too much money, but if you ask if they spend too much on big ticket items like medicare, the military, or social security you don't find a lot of people agree with that. I'll get back to that idea of specificity in a bit.

 

So the primary goal isn't a very politically popular one. Instead activists and politicians have to come up with some other, more high minded sounding goals that might resonate, and deficit reduction fit the bill well enough. The problem with that rhetoric though is it didn't make much sense upon scrutiny. The proposed tax plans from politicians like Paul Ryan typically featured large tax cuts for the rich, modest tax cuts for everyone else, a lot of unspecified spending cuts, and when asked about how this would reduce the deficit there would be a lot of hand waving about magic growth and closing tax loopholes. But almost no one could specify which tax loopholes because again, the specifics hurt their argument politically. Closing loopholes in the abstract sounds great, you imagine some big company with a department full of accountants and tax lawyers finding ways to avoid paying money. But largely what those loopholes are are things like deductions for charity and homeowners, and they are hugely popular.

 

You see very similar tactics with gomblergate. Generally avoid talking too much about your actual desires (people don't want feminists discussing games or airing some of gaming's dirty laundry), use some other high minded rhetoric ("this is about game journalism ethics"), and keep it in the abstract as much as possible because upon close examination that rhetoric doesn't make much sense.

[coaxmetal]

I used to think that Gamergate would eventually dissipate once enough people started to engage them, but apparently not.  Apparently even a relatively tame blog post is enough to incite their rage.  I wonder if at this point the movement is so far gone that it will never go away but instead become a permanent fixture in the games space.

 

Yeah, I think as part of not actually having any defined goals or objective, it became a thing that maintains its own momentum, its just a participation thing -- people participating feel like they are doign something, it sort of gives them power. It's also an excuse to feel like they are being victimized.