I just want videogame bloggers to stop referring to themselves as journalists.
I just want them to stop insulting me and calling me a sexist nerd and perpetrating stereotypes because I enjoy video games. I had enough of that in high school.
THIS x2!
I just want videogame bloggers to stop referring to themselves as journalists.
I just want them to stop insulting me and calling me a sexist nerd and perpetrating stereotypes because I enjoy video games. I had enough of that in high school.
THIS x2!
"Gamergate" was, to me, never about games journalism at all. It was 100% about the idea that a bunch of anonymous idiots on the internet got offended that someone had a different opinion than they did, and instead of respectfully debating it, like adults should be doing, they bullied and threatened people they'd never even met, instead of, you know, either asking the developer why they felt this way, or boycotting their games, or not giving them any attention, if they felt they didn't deserve any. I have a zero-tolerance policy on any sort of threat to someone's life or property. This includes leaking any sort of personal information. I don't care why someone felt it was okay or justified to do this. It wasn't. You wouldn't want someone lying about who you've slept with, or why you slept with them, or threatening your life or home, why do it to someone else? People who have "journalistic integrity" don't disrespect others like that, no matter what their opinion is.
Video games are art, and should be treated as such. They should be analyzed, critiqued, and compared to other media. Not every game needs to have social commentary, or be super serious, but if they choose to go down that route, then the message needs to be discussed. There's room for goofy, lighthearted shoot-em-ups and serious, abstract, avant-garde indie epics. I want unbiased, honest opinions. I want games journalists to go outside of their comfort zone. Give the reviewer who knows nothing about wrestling the latest WWE game, or the reviewer who denounced all indie games as "pretentious garbage" the most artsy indie game you can find, and then see if their opinion changes. Have them write why or why not. Write about games you never got to play until now, games from 20 years ago, alongside the newest AAA hit. Compare notes from both a professional journalist, and a person who reviews games as a hobby. That's what I want from games journalism.
What I want varies really strongly from site to site and there is no single, hard-and-fast rule for every bit of coverage. I want different sites to be different things to different people so everyone can find what they want. What I want from Giant Bomb is different than what I want from Polygon, which is different from what I want from YouTube, which is different from what I want from Gamesindustry.biz, which is different from what I want from The Escapist. There are too many people on all sides of this that try to put every game site ever into a single box.
Here's what I understand: Some people want less marketing fluff. They want total honesty, but not insofar as that honesty reflects a subjective view about politics (i.e. They want apolitical content). They want 'more integrity'.
On the surface these are all OK things to want. I'd even point out that there is plenty of content and coverage out there that abides by them. Quick Looks in particular are presented as critical and honest looks at games. They don't (or they very very rarely) get political. They are trustworthy or at least let you make up your own mind. Moreover, this exact type of content that people are clamoring for is also available all over YouTube or Twitch.
But at face value, isn't all preview coverage suspect and unethical? Preview coverage requires a working relationship with a publisher/developer. If an outlet or YouTube channel gets a game early, for free, aren't they indebted to that company on some level? To achieve a truly unbiased point of view, every outlet should go to the store and purchase a game on the day of release.
If an outlet does do preview footage of a game, what can they reasonably say? If the game is unfinished they must give it the benefit of the doubt, yet this might convey the sense that they're just marketing the game. At some point, you will always have to place trust in the content creator. Disclosure is irrelevant if you can't trust.
Here's my take: Critical, apolitical coverage, done with integrity and honesty, is already available all over the internet. These are all virtuous qualities and people should seek out the content creators that exemplify them, rather than berate established outlets into conforming to the nebulous type of coverage they so desire. I'm frustrated by these folks because they don't realize that they've already won.
All right, so people might be wondering if this thread will get locked too: For the time being, as long as the conversation stays on the topic of what people expect from gaming journalists and gaming sites without mentioning a certain Twitter hashtag, and it doesn't descend into chaos for any other reason, it'll be allowed to continue. We have our reasons for keeping discussion on that particular contentious topic centralized to the "Letter From the Editor discussion" thread, chiefly because it's where people can respond to the site's take on the movement directly. People are also far more likely to snipe at each other if we dredge up that "you're either pro-GG or anti-GG" narrative again.
So, to reiterate: Let this thread simply be about the topic at hand. Do not bring up you-know-what, despite their connection to this subject. I'm sure there's plenty to talk about, politely.
I just want them to stop insulting me and calling me a sexist nerd and perpetrating stereotypes because I enjoy video games. I had enough of that in high school.
THIS x2!
very few are actually doing that. If you are not doing those things or supporting those who do they are not talking about you. taking these kind of things personal or making them about you is what started a lot of the craziness in the first place.
I just want them to stop insulting me and calling me a sexist nerd and perpetrating stereotypes because I enjoy video games. I had enough of that in high school.
What "gaming journalists" do you follow that actually do that? Seriously. Please provide links. @mousse_gallon please provide some links as well too. I am really curious to see what games journalists you guys follow that do this.
On Topic: I already get what I want from games journalism. I want to know about games that are coming out, what is new about them, if they are good or not, and stories about the developers behind them.
@mento: Appreciate it. Good opinions so far, IMO.
I just want them to stop insulting me and calling me a sexist nerd and perpetrating stereotypes because I enjoy video games. I had enough of that in high school.
What "gaming journalists" do you follow that actually do that? Seriously. Please provide links.
I just want them to stop insulting me and calling me a sexist nerd and perpetrating stereotypes because I enjoy video games. I had enough of that in high school.
THIS x2!
very few are actually doing that. If you are not doing those things or supporting those who do they are not talking about you. taking these kind of things personal or making them about you is what started a lot of the craziness in the first place.
Heads up : My English isn't great.
Alright, I'll admit it, I was a bit emotional when I wrote that and no recent examples come to mind except Leigh Alexander's "Gamers are over" article and the Gawker guy that said we should bring back bullying on Twiter or something.
The only "gaming press" people I really follow are Giant Bomb and some of the Youtube guys like Total Biscuit and Projared. When I visit other sites it's probably because someone linked to it on Reddit or Facebook or something.
I'll admit that I take this stuff way to seriously and it's probably a defense mechanism I developed in grade school because I've always been made fun of for the things I like.
It's just that the more negative articles get a lot of traffic and get spread around a lot. If I could avoid them I would. A lot of articles that talk about the horrible things a group of people have done often label them as "gamers". Like "horrible gamers have done this" or "horrible gamers have harassed so and so". I think they should detach them from the hobby completely and just call them what they are, "horrible people", because right now I feel like I'm getting lumped in with them because I share a hobby with them.
I know it's stupid, I know take it to personally and I'm trying not to but it's really hard. Each time I see something like "horrible gamers have done this or that" I feel the urge to say "They are just shitty people, being gamers has nothing to do with it." So far I've managed to stay mostly out of it which is a good thing because I tend to be an emotional person that often speaks without thinking but it's getting really hard not to click "post reply" these days.
I have two sources I trust, GB and EuroGamer. For a final verdict I go to the consumer, which means you lovelies in the forums. That's one of the reasons this whole kerfuffle is so ridiculous to me. Don't feel the need to put a ton of stock into games' journos.
I just want them to stop insulting me and calling me a sexist nerd and perpetrating stereotypes because I enjoy video games. I had enough of that in high school.
What "gaming journalists" do you follow that actually do that? Seriously. Please provide links.
I just want them to stop insulting me and calling me a sexist nerd and perpetrating stereotypes because I enjoy video games. I had enough of that in high school.
THIS x2!
very few are actually doing that. If you are not doing those things or supporting those who do they are not talking about you. taking these kind of things personal or making them about you is what started a lot of the craziness in the first place.
Heads up : My English isn't great.
Alright, I'll admit it, I was a bit emotional when I wrote that and no recent examples come to mind except Leigh Alexander's "Gamers are over" article and the Gawker guy that said we should bring back bullying on Twiter or something.
The only "gaming press" people I really follow are Giant Bomb and some of the Youtube guys like Total Biscuit and Projared. When I visit other sites it's probably because someone linked to it on Reddit or Facebook or something.
I'll admit that I take this stuff way to seriously and it's probably a defense mechanism I developed in grade school because I've always been made fun of for the things I like.
It's just that the more negative articles get a lot of traffic and get spread around a lot. If I could avoid them I would. A lot of articles that talk about the horrible things a group of people have done often label them as "gamers". Like "horrible gamers have done this" or "horrible gamers have harassed so and so". I think they should detach them from the hobby completely and just call them what they are, "horrible people", because right now I feel like I'm getting lumped in with them because I share a hobby with them.
I know it's stupid, I know take it to personally and I'm trying not to but it's really hard. Each time I see something like "horrible gamers have done this or that" I feel the urge to say "They are just shitty people, being gamers has nothing to do with it." So far I've managed to stay mostly out of it which is a good thing because I tend to be an emotional person that often speaks without thinking but it's getting really hard not to click "post reply" these days.
Hey man, it takes a lot to even admit that you might be a little too emotionally involved in something. So I give you props man.
I think if you take a step back and look, there really aren't a lot of people calling you a sexist nerd. I can actually confirm that people you seem to like do not think that way of you (giantbomb, tb, etc). When culture gets as big as gaming does you start getting a lot of different people and view points that are going to be at ends with each other. Some of those groups are going to say things that seem to attack your character. But you have to try and not let that shit bother you. Just try to find things and people in gaming that you like and enjoy them. I hope Giantbomb is that place from you. And when people are putting you down for what you like, try to talk with them about it, or ignore them. And finally please do not attack other's because they are either making you feel bad or they have a different look on things then you. I do not say that because I think you will, but because I am truly shocked by some of the shit people have done to other people this month over video games.
Anyways I just want to say is gaming is awesome. Some people are going to try and make you feel bad about it. Forget them. Have fun with games. Be apart of this awesome community. And finally be nice to others. Life is way to short to spend it putting people down.
Here's what I understand: Some people want less marketing fluff. They want total honesty, but not insofar as that honesty reflects a subjective view about politics (i.e. They want apolitical content). They want 'more integrity'.
I want less marketing fluff, I want honesty, and I want more politics. Everything is political, as long as they're open about it I think political discussions about games are interesting, regardless of the expressed views align with my own or not.
Just found this and this is what i want above all else from all games journalists http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp
I really dont think its asking to much.
Do you expect Jeff to throw on a ski mask, break into a popular game developer, steal the latest build, and throw down a 2 hour QLEX?
In a word, awesome.
@legion_ said:
Do you expect Jeff to throw on a ski mask, break into a popular game developer, steal the latest build, and throw down a 2 hour QLEX?
In a word, awesome.
It's the games journalism we deserve, but not the one we need right now... or something.
Gerstmann Begins.
Whilst I appreciate the sentiment that marketing should be less pervasive, games are there to be sold. Thankfully, we as consumers are getting smarter by the day. Kinda. Sorta. I wouldn't mind Ubisoft playing a straight story in a press conference, mind.
"Heads up. We're trying to make it look like this... but it won't."
@bradbrains said:
I just want them to stop insulting me and calling me a sexist nerd and perpetrating stereotypes because I enjoy video games. I had enough of that in high school.
THIS x2!
very few are actually doing that. If you are not doing those things or supporting those who do they are not talking about you. taking these kind of things personal or making them about you is what started a lot of the craziness in the first place.
I think your 100% right I need to try harder to ignore a lot of this.
Nothing anymore. I'm not convinced they'll ever lose the beligerent, holier-than-thou attitude they perpetuate but in only a few years time they'll be irrelevant and replaced by twitch streamers and YouTube celebrities. The last months was a desperate outcry for attention of a dying medium. Reporting on social issues is fine. But writing guidelines on how to behave, like gamasutra did? Now that isn't journalism anymore.
I take real issue with people making this move to get advertisers to pull their campaigns for gaming sites. This harms our hobby as a whole, even if it gratifies the movement in the short term. This entire movement has only strengthened the mainstream public's perception of the gamer stereotype. How is that a win for us? Because you might see a few less articles you deem unworthy for the press?
If they want to compare game news sites to actual news sites, there are often issues that come up with news sites that tend to lean one way or another politically where they are linked to supporting x y or z corporation or political candidate. The difference there though is that people who disagree with the opinions or policies of that news site don't go on a tirade to shut those sites down. For a group that just wants honesty and the right to say what they want without being censored and whom have also collectively complained a great deal about not having their side represented in media, they are doing an *awful* lot to try and silence their opposition.
People want to hold these sites accountable to some greater public standard when they're essentially private businesses and even though they put out "news" stories, they are operating as a business, as content creators, as blogs. They do not exist to serve the public selflessly and objectively. They never have and it's frankly a little ridiculous that people are suddenly expecting them to.
If the world has to deal with Fox News existing, you can deal with Polygon posting editorials with feminist- or sjw-leaning views or reviews you find questionable or employing people whose personalities you can't stand. Despite their popularity, there are TONS of other sites out there reposting the same headlines if you just want straight news.
I take real issue with people making this move to get advertisers to pull their campaigns for gaming sites. This harms our hobby as a whole, even if it gratifies the movement in the short term. This entire movement has only strengthened the mainstream public's perception of the gamer stereotype. How is that a win for us? Because you might see a few less articles you deem unworthy for the press?
If they want to compare game news sites to actual news sites, there are often issues that come up with news sites that tend to lean one way or another politically where they are linked to supporting x y or z corporation or political candidate. The difference there though is that people who disagree with the opinions or policies of that news site don't go on a tirade to shut those sites down. For a group that just wants honesty and the right to say what they want without being censored and whom have also collectively complained a great deal about not having their side represented in media, they are doing an *awful* lot to try and silence their opposition.
People want to hold these sites accountable to some greater public standard when they're essentially private businesses and even though they put out "news" stories, they are operating as a business, as content creators, as blogs. They do not exist to serve the public selflessly and objectively. They never have and it's frankly a little ridiculous that people are suddenly expecting them to.
If the world has to deal with Fox News existing, you can deal with Polygon posting editorials with feminist- or sjw-leaning views or reviews you find questionable or employing people whose personalities you can't stand. Despite their popularity, there are TONS of other sites out there reposting the same headlines if you just want straight news.
Right on. I had a favorite online movie reviewer who started giving a feminist slant to her reviews. I wasn't interested in the direction the site was going, so I moved on to other places like AV Club and Red Letter Media. Simple, no drama and no wrong-headed twitter campaign.
If the world has to deal with Fox News existing, you can deal with Polygon posting editorials with feminist- or sjw-leaning views or reviews you find questionable or employing people whose personalities you can't stand. Despite their popularity, there are TONS of other sites out there reposting the same headlines if you just want straight news.
I like this analogy really. People need to be okay with writers at sites like Polygon and Kotaku posting uber socially concerned games editorial the same way the rest of the world tolerates the ranting and raving Sean Hannity does on Fox News every night. Similarly, the rest of the world should respect Giant Bombs desire to not go in that direction and remain doing what they do best; being the video game website equivalent of The Knife Show.
Every publication doesn't have to be all things to all people. This has never been a website where the primary focus was on dissecting heady social issues. If you like GiantBomb.Com then great! You've come to the right place. If not, oh well there are a lot of websites about video games. If none of them appeal to you, that's not the end of the world either. I have several hobbies that I don't' have an enthusiast website I choose to frequent.
If the world has to deal with Fox News existing, you can deal with Polygon posting editorials with feminist- or sjw-leaning views or reviews you find questionable or employing people whose personalities you can't stand. Despite their popularity, there are TONS of other sites out there reposting the same headlines if you just want straight news.
I like this analogy really. People need to be okay with writers at sites like Polygon and Kotaku posting uber socially concerned games editorial the same way the rest of the world tolerates the ranting and raving Sean Hannity does on Fox News every night. Similarly, the rest of the world should respect Giant Bombs desire to not go in that direction and remain doing what they do best; being the video game website equivalent of The Knife Show.
Every publication doesn't have to be all things to all people. This has never been a website where the primary focus was on dissecting heady social issues. If you like GiantBomb.Com then great! You've come to the right place. If not, oh well there are a lot of websites about video games. If none of them appeal to you, that's not the end of the world either. I have several hobbies that I don't' have an enthusiast website I choose to frequent.
It really is a good analogy. I very much dislike what the extremists on various Fox News shows do to parts of the population, but if someone is going to be swayed by something like that... there was probably no saving them anyways. Likewise, if people thing that Jeff is actively out to discriminate, when I feel he just wants to make funny content for duders, there is nothing I can really say about that either.
I honestly don't expect anything out of games journalism anymore. I consume almost none of it, and spend my time finding people being entertaining with games as a platform for ideas to blossom. And let me say, a lot of it is really ****ing great.
Right on. I had a favorite online movie reviewer who started giving a feminist slant to her reviews. I wasn't interested in the direction the site was going, so I moved on to other places like AV Club and Red Letter Media. Simple, no drama and no wrong-headed twitter campaign.
Good for you. The great irony for me that has come out of this nonsense is that I really did not enjoy Polygon before gamergate was a thing. I rolled my eyes at their clickbait titles. Even though I feel strongly in support of a lot of social issues politically, I often found some of their dissection of games to be a bit too much. But still, I'd roll my eyes and move on if I came across an article I disagreed with or thought was flat out stupid. But I find myself on "their side," if you can even qualify sides. So gamergate has had the opposite of their desired effect for me.
Interesting views, I am not really too stringent on the word "journalist" but maybe I should be.
On the question: I don't know what I want from journalism but I know what I want from giantbomb: quick looks, reviews, personality, and once in awhile I like to have these pieces like the one Patrick just posted on the death mechanic. I think if I have more time to spare I might go over to polygon and filter through what I find interesting and not so interesting but for now its not time I can afford to give away.
GB for games, RLM(red letter media) for movies, that's pretty much all my non-technical reading/exposure.
Thank you! I feel like this is a conversation that people are too busy to have when discussing GamerGate: why do ethics in game journalism matter? At all?
The people championing this shit act like they're uncovering some huge plot or making a big difference. It's not like EA and Kotaku are teaming up to poison the oceans or something. The worst case scenario for this stuff is someone buys a game they end up disliking based on a stranger's lie. And it's kind of "boo hoo", you know? So what?
Every publication doesn't have to be all things to all people. This has never been a website where the primary focus was on dissecting heady social issues. If you like GiantBomb.Com then great! You've come to the right place. If not, oh well there are a lot of websites about video games. If none of them appeal to you, that's not the end of the world either. I have several hobbies that I don't' have an enthusiast website I choose to frequent.
This is really an important point. We can't destroy everything we disagree with. In order for the things that we like to be allowed to flourish, we have to allow other people to have their "thing" no matter how much rage it might inspire in us. Gamergaters can surely have their opinions on what sites they choose to support based on whatever they think makes a site good, or honest, or ethical and they can say whatever they like about the ones that don't fit that mold but they need to stop trying to bulldoze anything that doesn't.
Now, one might say, "But that's what anti-gamergaters are doing! They're trying to bulldoze the side that disagrees with them!" And I would say that I very much disagree. The reaction from the gaming press has largely been about the behavior of the loud few that have attempted to speak for the group (in terrible ways) and far less about their actual message except in the instances where some people have been flat out abusive, ignorant, or hurtful. It's okay to tell those people that they shouldn't behave that way. I think the reaction has been mistaken for "anti-gamergate" silencing their opinions when they're really just tired of being spammed relentlessly and often in really not great ways. Unfortunately those people drown out any viable discussion that might take place.
Having corporate advertising pulled from gaming sites hurts gaming. It hurts legitimate games writing, too. Because the people who might write stuff that people really care about will be less able to do that in the future. Companies outside of gaming will reconsider supporting gaming endeavors because of the public perception this has created. So, maybe they think Intel pulling ads is a win for them. But it's a loss for the industry that makes things we love and the people who deliver us content involving those things.
It also really personally depresses me to witness all of this because I'm a programmer that at one time really aspired to create my own game some day and I really question if that's the direction I want to go in. I'm not one of those mentally strong people that could take the abuse. It would break me to receive the feedback that gamers have shown they're capable of when they dislike a game or the person who made it or wrote about it.
It's just.. ah, a really bleak outlook and I'm sad that we all can't make this better.
/rant
@impartialgecko said:
Jeff Gerstmann. In his room. With a jar.
And that's the way it is.
Right on. I had a favorite online movie reviewer who started giving a feminist slant to her reviews. I wasn't interested in the direction the site was going, so I moved on to other places like AV Club and Red Letter Media. Simple, no drama and no wrong-headed twitter campaign.
Good for you. The great irony for me that has come out of this nonsense is that I really did not enjoy Polygon before gamergate was a thing. I rolled my eyes at their clickbait titles. Even though I feel strongly in support of a lot of social issues politically, I often found some of their dissection of games to be a bit too much. But still, I'd roll my eyes and move on if I came across an article I disagreed with or thought was flat out stupid. But I find myself on "their side," if you can even qualify sides. So gamergate has had the opposite of their desired effect for me.
Yes, I wouldn't want GB to come at games from a social justice POV, either. But I'm all for more articles about the state of the industry not just for women, but for other minorities as well. There's some good work that can be done that doesn't interfere with the fun-loving heart of the site.
I think JusticeJanitor has a point. From my viewpoint...I don't expect much. I think sites like Joystiq, GiantBomb, and Polygon do an excellent job. But given the recent gamergate stuff..I think there is blame on both sides. From the editors of these sites..they have to stop themselves from lumping a few malcontents from their audience with the rest of the respectful fans. Since they function as the mouthpieces for their sites..they have to actively police themselves from overgeneralizing and stereotyping their audience. GB does this pretty good, they respect their audience...but some sites do not. It's one reason I quite consuming IGN content over 2 years ago. I think some people's feelings have gotten hurt, even if these editors of these sites don't realize it. It's not always easy when it's within an atmosphere of lose, open free thinking full of jokes and puns..but it should be done. If it's been one thing from the GG fiasco..I've seen writers and editors begin to think more positively about what they say about their audience or the perception they are giving.
Also, I think the GamerGate brand needs to be killed by it's creators. It's became a vector for bad behavior..for those who want to do evil to hide in the masses. GamerGate should have organized and had a leader or group of leaders to speak for the 'gamers' but that never happened. That needs to happen or any social movement by gamers will become victim to the same bullsh*t that has stained this episode. Also, as many have said..if you want to fight corruption in gaming press, you have to aim high. Targeting indie developers(this includes the women) is stupid, their influence isn't the same as an Activision or even Microsoft. Just think of what a gamer focused campaign could have done for 'D4'. Indie developers have a right to voice their opinions the same as gamers...they shouldn't be attacked for using their 1st amendment rights via harassment. Both sides need to take the responsibility...gamers need to police 'fellow gamers' and the 'journalists' need to be thoughtful of their audiences... keep the discussion respectful.
@ceejay78: I guess no one read the comment from the moderator? This conversation can be had with consistently bringing up GG as it had been an issue several times in the past, even without the hashtag. I really don't want to see this thread locked because 2 or 3 people can't help but talk about that hashtag.
Oh I'm new here and to me it's just a noun..I didn't think of it as a hashtag :p .. eitherway sorry about that.
I just want them to stop insulting me and calling me a sexist nerd and perpetrating stereotypes because I enjoy video games. I had enough of that in high school.
THIS x2!
very few are actually doing that. If you are not doing those things or supporting those who do they are not talking about you. taking these kind of things personal or making them about you is what started a lot of the craziness in the first place.
You probably missed the 28th day of the previous month (or the one before) where the majority of "gaming journalists" called out the death of gamers because we're all sexists and bigots and therefore irrelevant.
Thank you! I feel like this is a conversation that people are too busy to have when discussing GamerGate: why do ethics in game journalism matter? At all?
The people championing this shit act like they're uncovering some huge plot or making a big difference. It's not like EA and Kotaku are teaming up to poison the oceans or something. The worst case scenario for this stuff is someone buys a game they end up disliking based on a stranger's lie. And it's kind of "boo hoo", you know? So what?
So ethics in game "journalism" shouldn't matter but gaming "journalists" should hand out lessons on ethics and morality to anyone they deem unworthy?
Ethics in game "journalism" should matter because they literally live off our money.
Journalist as a title or identity is kind of lame to me. At the end of the day, we're all capable of seeing something and telling people what we saw. The term used to carry a good amount of weight, as it took a lot more resources to start a company than it does now, and it was important to have people worthy of that title representing a company. Now it's used as a short cut or to imply that a person is an expert or that they're perspective is valid. Journalism is also used as a label for 'respectable' or 'serious' content... I don't know, I guess I wan't people who talk about games for a living to be honest about what they've experienced and to be upfront about what they do and don't know. Honesty and accuracy build trust. Trust builds respect. Respect is much more valuable than any title and doesn't carry as many expectations as a title.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment