It’s been a pretty shitty week. I don’t think I need to explain why. So here’s something to help take the edge off — a new meme featuring a phrase anyone who’s ever said anything critical of GamerGate has heard, again and again: “Actually, it’s about ethics in games journalism.”
This new meme, which started really taking off today on Twitter and Tumblr, seems to be becoming the new “not all men.” Which makes sense: “Not all men” is to mansplaining what “Actually … ” is to Gatersplaining.
Here are some of my favorites, taken from Twitter and from the new Tumblr blog titled, naturally, Actually … it’s about ethics in games journalism.
I made one myself out of an old #NotAllMen meme:
I made one! #ActuallyItsAboutEthicsInGameJournalism #GamerGate #Gamersplaining pic.twitter.com/NQK1F6Myga
— David Futrelle (@DavidFutrelle) October 24, 2014
This blog, meanwhile, uses the phrase as a caption for New Yorker cartoons.
And then there’s this Tweet.
https://twitter.com/alqaeda/status/524985414973935616
Thank you, anonymous meme-makers, and whoever came up with this in the first place! We needed this.
“My name is Inigo Montoya and it’s about ethics in game journalism. Prepare to die.”
Gamergaters may have a problem with journalists covering their friends but here is how creative industries, such as the gaming industry, works: they’re highly competitive. Networking can be what pushes an unknown indie dev into being featured, maybe often, in a magazine or blog. “Making friends” is a skill recommended by successful people in any field and its an edge if you’re good at it. There is nothing corrupt about it. Networking and building relationships is key to getting ahead if you want your games to be spotlighted. That’s the nature of things.
Grow up GGers and get a job. Find out how the world works. It’s who you know, and that applies for almost anything.
*Knock at the door*
Just ignore it, it’s probably Jehova’s Witnesses
But I’m expecting that package
*Opens door*
Good morning! Have you heard the good word of ethics in game journalism!
@sunnysombera – Exactly! I mean, when I did my postgrad we literally had a class on how to network effectively in the publishing industry.
PEOPLE IN ADJACENT INDUSTRIES OFTEN TALK TO EACH OTHER. STOP THE PRESSES.
tinyorc –
“WOMEN ARE UNETHICAL PROBABLY”
They DEFINITELY are if they play or create or make videos about games!
Tinyorc: honestly every piece of “corruption” Gamergate has come up with has turned out to be not corruption but standard practice.
Mailing lists? “OMG EVIL.”
Networking? “CRUCIFY!”
Male journalistic blatantly trying to exchange sex for a good review on Twitter? “…THAT SLUT SHOULDNT HAVE TURNED HIM DOWN.”
Those “conflicts of interest” are a phony concern. Again, the #gaters place a lot of importance on PERSONAL connections, and gloss over business pressure over reviewers because they KNOW that might mean most of their efforts should not go into attacking women.
A magnificent bastard I know came up with this one:
?oh=f61feab2d139ab46ff345ac3370ef244&oe=54AF04C4
Kotaku and Polygon already updated their ethics rules and GamerGate still goes after them. sunnysombrera is correct, networking is a normal part of any and every business on Earth and I’m willing to bet that most GGers with jobs got them through someone they knew. Hell, I have known at least one person who went from working as a games journalist to working as a designer at a studio. “Games journalism” is basically just advertising for video games, and either GGers are really goddamn naive, or they already know that and are looking for things to get outraged about.
GamerGaters will be happy when they have the ability to censor reviews and opinion pieces on Game websites. That is what they keep demanding, anyways. They want the right to decide what features get reviewed by reviewers, and what scores games are given. This is censorship. They want to stop writers from publishing opinion pieces that are “political”, which is a code word for “about things we don’t like”. GamerGate is a censorship movement. It’s anti-ethical. They will be happy when game websites give them free reign to decide what is published.
The satirical ClickHole article was the best description of what GamerGate really wants: http://www.clickhole.com/article/summary-gamergate-movement-we-will-immediately-cha-1241
They want authority over what is written and published by anyone and everyone in the media, and they want to call that ethics.
No, it wouldn’t.
http://feministing.com/2014/10/23/empire-of-dirt-how-gamergates-misogynistic-policing-of-gamer-identity-degrades-the-whole-gaming-community/
The important bit from that article:
If there are no bullshit “conflicts of interest” to criticize, ones will be invented. Negotiation with terrorists never leads to less terrorism.
Glinda to Dorothy: Just close your eyes, tap your heels together three times and say “actually, it’s about ethics in games journalism.”
Alfred Pennyworth: Why do we fall sir?
Bruce Wayne: So we can learn to pick ourselves up?
Alfred Pennyworth: Actually, it’s about ethics in games journalism.
http://i.imgur.com/2Kp7Ro2.jpg
(I blockquoted! Yay! I’m at my computer rather than on my phone.)
I think if someone has contributed to someone’s game development and then review the game, that should be disclosed. It’s pretty standard practice in journalism to disclose conjoined financial interests.
That’s about the only thing that I agree with the GGs on (at least the ones with which I’ve interacted). I’ve yet to find one who’s looked over that (really) incredibly minor quibble and squarely at direct sponsorship (resulting in coverage that’s more an ad than a review) and play-for-good-review deals. And I wouldn’t even call that “corruption” per se – it’s large companies using the means at their disposal to drum up excitement for their multi-million dollar product and you’re a naive idiot if you can’t parse “coverage” from “review & critique”.
If someone wanted to (really) argue for disclosure of corporate sponsorship and restricted access/review deals, I’d be behind them. But that’s not what they’re doing (as you all rightly pointed out). It seems like even the most well intentioned of them are stuck on calling networking and friendships “corruption” and confusing the critical analysis to which all media is subject “oppression” (or whatever).
For fuck’s sake, as Chris Kluwe pointed out: You’d think that they’d be happy that gaming and society’s relationship with it has evolved to the point that more people think that it warrants critical analysis.
[An aside for those of you who’ve summarily dismissed games/gaming: There are some genuinely worthwhile titles out there – even AAA, mainstream ones – from a purely interactive art standpoint. My husband had to walk away from The Last of Us several times, especially after -spoiler- the main protagonist’s daughter dies.]
The only point that I was trying to get to in my above post was that making disclosures of financial relationships more of an industry standard has the potential to defang any of GG’s perceived legitimacy and would remove some of the shields from in front of its more noxious elements.
But I will concede that that is only a potential outcome.
Reblogged this on iheariseeilearn.
http://i.imgur.com/SxLsAPQ.jpg
@proxieme:
Just like you can’t kill that which is already dead, you can’t deligitimize a group that never had nor cared about legitimacy in the first place. You can’t offend the honor of a person who has none.
Anything about games journalism is just a shield to deflect criticism; respond to one accusation and they’ll toss up three more just so they can keep going. There are certainly real issues in journalism (like game companies having elaborate paperwork detailing how positive an impression must be and what a streamer must cover in order to get early access to a game), but if you want to address those issues you should do it for the sake of those issues rather than as an effort to appease GamerGate.
*prox has read the replies that were written while she was writing her tome*
You all are probably right, and I am (admittedly) basing what I say off my experience as:
(1) someone not in the industry.
(2) someone who was once an intensive gamer but now plays casually (at best) due to kids, work, life, etc. and who hasn’t engaged in any extensive knock-down, drag-outs about GG AND who rarely if ever engages in skill-matched or open world online play because I just don’t have the energy to deal with douchebags.
(3) someone who only casually peruses gaming journalism because, hell, I already have a backlog of games I’d like to get to on my PS3.
I didn’t even know that Kotaku, et al had revised their published standards.
So, yeah – GG’s full of it & the journalist I cited earlier gave their arguments waaay too much credence and leeway in the name of trying to be balanced.
[To any further replies: I probably won’t be able to respond. Frozen has lost the interest of my younger kids and I’m about to go pick up my older daughter from a strings practice. In fact, I just came down here to check my email to verify its end time…and here I am ;p ]
@kirby: Yeah, I’m back around to that stance.
Ack, gtg.
@ Nequam – zie is a truly magnificent bastard. Magnificent. Bastard.
Found this here: http://whatever.scalzi.com/2014/10/23/how-to-boycott-me-i-mean-really-boycott-me/
http://i.imgur.com/9nUguyP.jpg
It’s worth reading. Scalzi continues to be awesome.
Here, David. I made a comic to cheer you up: http://www.shaenon.com/ladygaming2.html
Shaenon – very nice indeed! The Golden Trilbies reminded me of the ominous secret society members in “Bimbo’s Initiation”.
Lea – good ol’ Scalzi. I enjoy his blog even more than his fiction. And he enjoys pie!
Yay, Scalzi.
The memes are awesome.
Great comic, Shaenon
You know what other thing I keep seeing over and over and over and over?
“Why is only one side being reported?”
Because only one side is a group of terrorists. That’s why.
Do people who ask that question then go on a 10 paragraph diatribe about “journalistic integrity” really think they’re fooling anyone into thinking they’re not violent, virulent, psychopathic woman haters? NEWSFLASH: You’re not!
This apologist “both sides” crap has got to stop! There is no “both sides.” No. There are attackers and victims. Those are the only two sides. I keep hearing people say, “Well there’s been bad behavior on both sides.” Um. Yeah. Where? Prove me wrong. Show me. What pro-GamerGater has been doxxed? What pro-GamerGater has been driven from his home? What pro-GamerGater has been threatened with death, rape, AND assault? What pro-GamerGater has been told by multiple people hundreds of elaborate, sick fantasies some SJW has about raping him? What pro-GamerGater has had to contact the police or the FBI in real fear of his life? What pro-GamerGater has had to cancel lectures because of bomb/gun/miscellaneous attack threats? What pro-GamerGater has had a “beat up” game made just for him?
The worst thing that has ever happened to a pro-GamerGater is that he’s been called a misogynist or has been cursed out by me. 0 n0ez! MY LIFE IS FOREVER RUINED BY THIS EGREGIOUS TRAUMA! I’ll no doubt have to spend years in therapy overcoming this obstacle of being called a name this one time…but I’ll make it! Soon enough, the Oprah Network will air a made for TV movie about me and my struggle called, “Not Without My PSP,” which illustrates the strength and triumph of the human spirit.
The only “proof” of bad behavior on the anti-GamerGate side is a bunch of sock puppet twitter accounts. Even people who really know better feel compelled to say, “Well….not ALL Gamer Gaters….I mean…like…there are some real concerns on their side….I mean…I can’t think of any that make any sense and the ones they claim they stand for don’t exist….but….like….yeah…..”
It IS the new “not all men.” It’s the new bullshit device used to detract from the truth or to avoid being accused of something bullshitty. The main difference is that, while “not all men” is usually used as a way to shut down a discussion, most men are not total shitbacks. Find me one pro-GamerGater that is not a total shitbag. You can’t. There aren’t any.
Anyone claiming GamerGate is about journalistic integrity is full of shit. Period. End of story. Let’s do a little poll. Let’s take ALLLLLL the people who claim they don’t hate women, aren’t terrorists, and really only care about journalistic integrity. Ask them to, without Googling to try to find one, if they can name ONE other journalistic scandal they care deeply about and have devoted this much attention to. If any one of them can do that, I’ll eat the assholes of everyone on this board!
Also, why is the shitbag side not inserting “not all SJW’s” or “not all feminists” or “not all anti-GamerGaters,” crap into their writing? Why is there NO ONE ANYWHERE AT ALL EVER who has put up a LEGITIMATE article about their concerns with journalistic integrity that has no history of hating women? Anyone care to answer that for me? Of course not. Because you can’t. Such a person does not exist.