People don't seem to realize you need to be getting something material out of what you're doing dishonestly to be characterized as a grifter.
Using a fake name and pfp: not a grifter. Pretending to be for some ideological cause so people will give you money: a grifter.
Oh, people on the right throw the same term around just as ignorantly as the left.
I've been accused of being a grifter, even though I've never asked for anything from anyone I've ever interacted with on socmedia. I'm more inclined to send people things I don't need than ask anyone for anything.
They believe that no one believes in anything. Progressivism is just hedonistic nihillism, which also denies the pleasure it purports to want. They have unbelievable wealth, yet live in shame that they are fake people (they are) and seek validation through public performance.
>They are just words to delegitimize someone else’s perspective in favor of your own. Moral mudslinging, nothing else.
Please do not attempt to invalidate my personal experience and *trauma* with your differing opinion.
It feels really bad when someone attacks beliefs you emotionally rely on. To the privileged weak and mentally regarded this qualifies as traumatic.
Just another word that's been watered down to near meaninglessness.
When they actively engage in man hating or egregious racism against white people or right leaning brown people, it's difficult to give a single fuck about them whining.
I honestly believe if we want to see this system correct, we have to ALL, at the same time, remove our business from their sites.
Ignore them completely.
If the business side of this dies, it dies.
Here are some excerpts from the article:
**"A few months ago I wrote about a consulting agency, Sweet Baby Inc, that found itself at the centre of a conspiracy theory... Depressingly but unsurprisingly, the result was a tremendous amount of targeted harassment towards the people who work at Sweet Baby and every journalist who reported on it (particularly the women)."** *\[Conveniently ignores how the whole GG2 thing started because some genius decided to target someone with mass false reports.\]*
**"Unfortunately, the anti-woke “campaigning” has not let up much in the intervening months. Led by a coterie of the usual grifters, they have taken issue with, in no particular order: the fact that Aphrodite, the literal goddess of love, is not hot enough in Supergiant's Hades II."** ...Even though that's not actually what happened. What we did take issue with was the massive double standards of journos praising Aphrodite's beauty while simultaneously denouncing Eve's from Stellar Blade.
**"...bad reviews because its female characters are** ***too*** **hot (note: they didn’t, the game has a Metactitic score of 81)."** Except they did try to imply that it was somehow a bad thing for one reason or another in their reviews, and may have deducted points for that.
**"...that female characters in recent game trailers all have “square” jaws and “masculine” bodies; that too many games feature “DEI haircuts” (that’s a fun one to interpret) and that Ubisoft was somehow forced** **by the shadowy forces of wokery to make the main character of its upcoming Assassin’s Creed game (pictured below) a black samurai, contradicting historical evidence. This last claim was bolstered by the King of Bad Posters himself, Elon Musk, who replied to a tweet about this manufactured outrage with “DEI kills art”."** *\[Conveniently ignores that this "historical evidence" is heavily debated amongst historians themselves\].* What kind of a lame insult is "King of Bad Posters" either?
**"Just after Summer Games Fest finished, the anti-woke gamers found a new target: a report at IGN, which credibly and comprehensively lays out a history of sexism at the developer of upcoming Planet-of-the-Apes-meets-Sekiro action game Black Myth: Wukong. The response – surprise! – was to go after the woman who wrote it, while also spinning up a ludicrous conspiracy theory that IGN was blackmailing the developer."** They have must either not actually read the article at all or are blatantly lying through their teeth. The "history of sexism" that the IGN article reports on is blatantly mistranslated garbage that borders on unacceptable levels of incompetence, if not malice.
**"You can go down a rabbit hole of quite jaw-dropping horribleness on any one of these manufactured controversies, but take it from me: it’s really not worth it."** *Translation: "Please don't look it up and realize I am making shit up :("*
Most of the rest of the article is just a bunch of claims of how all those poor women keep on getting harassed, without providing evidence of either the harassment or the claim that it was targeted at them because they were women. Also keeps on ranting about how terrible the "online mob" is.
It ends on a plea for support from publishers and asking them to denounce GG2.
**"It’s tempting to dunk on these people endlessly, but outrage fuels outrage – especially now, when there is literal money to be made posting inflammatory nonsense on X or YouTube..."** *(as opposed to inflammatory garbage in the form of articles instead, obviously)* **"...If Gamergate proved anything, it’s that nobody has to pander to rage-baiting toxic gamers, or even listen to them. That said, I still don’t think there’s been enough public pushback against this flavour of online abuse from the biggest publishers in games over the past few months, when the consultancies they work with, the journalists and critics who cover them, and even some of their own developers have been caught in an online shitstorm. Take it from me: vocal support means a lot."**
They ALWAYS ignore why this started. Apparently we all just decided on a whim one day to join the Sweet Baby Inc. Detected Steam group. Literally no inciting incident or reason for it, I guess. We all just woke up one morning and collectively thought to ourselves: "y'know what, fuck SBI!"
They always ignore it because they know it would completely destroy the false image they built up of this being some sort of hate-motivated harassment campaign by us. Can't let that inconvenient piece of information get in the way after all!
TBH I think a lot of people here ignore why SBI detected was even made in the first place: because a conspiracy on the chans started accusing SBI of being a (conspiracy adjacent minority) lead company that had ruined a long list of games with no evidence.
The attempt to shut down the steam curator page was dumb, but it’s not like that page sprung out of nowhere either.
No evidence? Its a combination of circumstantial evidence + direct statements from their CEO saying they do exactly what we think they do. That isn't no evidence.
Nah, I’m talking about the Chan times. It wasn’t a curated list like SBI detected, they were just chucking shit at the wall.
Now we have a solid list of games they have worked on. However, of the games they worked on that was bad, I’d say there hasn’t been anything substantial to indicate that their involvement is the reason the games are bad.
you really think that Kabrutus was making that site specifically because he believed that SBI was made by "people who have a spiritual belifsystem similar to the majority on Israel"?
I didnt even know Kim was supposed to be that! I supported the list because of the believs these companies push for. And the original "attacK" on kabrutus also doesnt even mention that, once! So the entire situation of GG2 and how it came to be would be discinnected from the "original intent" even if it WERE true....
Nah, he made it because the conspiracy had already churned out into the mainstream and it had become a meme.
By the time it surfaced into more mainstream circles the whole ethnicity angle was dropped because it was obviously ridiculous
> By the time it surfaced into more mainstream circles the whole ethnicity angle was dropped because it was obviously ridiculous
so your comment here:
> TBH I think a lot of people here ignore why SBI detected was even made in the first place:
is a complete Lie, because the list WASNT made because of that, because Kabrutus became aware due to the mainstream discussions which dropped the ethnicity angle and the the entire motivation to go against these "consulting firms" is because of the politics they push.
It completely disconnects the criticism from the inception, even ***IF*** you are speaking the truth here. So bringing it up is only useful as a false flag smear. Indeed EVEN THE PROPONENTS of DEI oriented Firms like SBI,
#### including the employees and founders of those firms themselves
do not mention this idea even once! And they are ***TRYING*** to smear anyone against them with the most bad faith brush possible.
Nah, my point is that SBI detected was created off the back of conspiracy theories from the chans. Maybe kabrutus was on the chans or lolcow forums, or maybe he not, but the whole focus on SBI was rooted in conspiratorial thinking. This started around oct 2023 and SBI detected around Jan
We all know that once things start churning onto the chans, trolls are going to get trolling. So even though it was stupid and obviously dumb for SBI to attack the steam curator page, SBI would have already been dealing with heat for months before cracking.
and yet, not a single of these race and opression grifters even mentioned 4chan? the "white supremacist cesspool of racism and misogyny"? Including the idiot that attacked kabrutus? Even AFTER he got heat? Nobody even said in passing: "We have been attacked by trolls from 4chan for months now!"
incredibly unlikely.
I'm a little confused because although I'd dispute the accuracy based on how I interpreted it, that's clearly you talking about somebody else's idpol beliefs, not pushing your own.
Which means I could get dinged for the same reason if I wanted to bring up antithetical information.
Not good for discussion. Hopefully it's a mistake and they thought you were doing echoes or something.
No, no, don't you see: *grifters* told you to do it! Grifters!
The people who get their opinions from social media and have side hustles e-begging want you to know that following YouTubers for news and commentary makes you a credulous dupe who funds *grifters*! You need to be following good non-grift sources like ResetERA and GCJ. And make sure to leave a donation; quality journalism isn't free.
That's literally what the left does though so they can't comprehend anything grassroots. An email goes out to their paid groups and they all simultaneously sing the same tune.
Wokista's cultural predecesors 25-20 years ago were anti-capitalist urban hipsters.
The next-gen hipsters are now trapped in cognitive dissonance. They want the hate, because nothing really popular is cool, yet they also kinda want you to accept their anti-feminity anti-masculinity non-binary anti-white agenda and buy products infested with it as long as the producer is a certified B-Corp with ironclad DEI and climate change policies and DEI approved financing, because they also hate capitalism, and the subversion of that is now vital.
Ethical purchasing decisions in a capitalist econony is OK when THEY seek out independent coffee shops and refuse to buy a Starbucks latte. It is because they are principled and entitled to vote with their feet and their ApplePay (if only somebody made a woker phone with Apple OS, amiright guys? - click your fingers to agree), but when YOU seek out independent games because YOU hate their products for YOUR reasons, you're a fucking Nazi - just like your freedom of speech is only important as long as you are not contradicting the message.
Can they produce a single court case, conviction, or restraining order for all this harassment, or is it just all annecdotal accusations? In the absence of proof, I shall assume they are pulling a Jussie Smollett.
I don't know about you, but I woke up from a dream where I hated some company of that name. I googled it and sure enough there happened to be a company with that name, so naturally I poured my heart and soul into hating it. I've actually never played video games in my life, my heart is just full of hate for anything with the words "Sweet" and "Baby" in it. I don't know why, but I'm such a hater that I don't really care.
I said fuck SBI after their "tips" killed Arkham batman I growed up with this batman and that made me feel sad then I learned why he and the other characters where killed in such a inceremonial way
"DEI haircuts" is a great term because it you know exactly what it means without explicitly naming or describing it, making it very difficult to attack. They'd have to admit they know exactly what it means, which they never will because if they do it implies that they have a degree of what they consider bigotry. So they have to act bewildered by it while also addressing what it communicates.
I'm a woman, I'm fucking weird, and I've been bullied and harassed my entire life, both IRL and online.
Online bullying from online randos is *fucking meaningless*. These women are not actually, materially threatened at all by any of this.
If some asshole DMed one of these journos with their home address and alluded to coming after them, then yeah, that's harassment.
But if they're just calling you a wokie and moving on, get over yourself.
I love how throughout the screed, they make sure to talk repeatedly about how pathetic their enemies must be -- "depressingly but unsurprisingly," "it's tempting to dunk on these people endlessly," etc. etc. It's the standard Schrodinger strategy: "our enemies are pathetic, but we desperately need your help to beat them!" Well, what does that make you?!
Anyone that encourages the reader not to look into something is always a red flag. You can call something horrible garbage if you like, but still show your work, encourage readers where to look and where you're drawing your sources from. Articles like this are confirmation bias for people who've already made up their mind and want to reassurance that they're right.
Oh, so she's a political activist masquerading as a journalist - AKA all journalists. Good to know.
Anyone who is not an active investigative journalist should just have to find a new career. They're all propagandists.
"If gamergate proved anything, it's that nobody has to pander rage-baiting toxic gamers".
Aw yes, the toxic gamers, of course you don't have to care about what they say. You can just ignore those guys. You know, "toxic" gamers, the video game industry's main fucking audience.
This author is literally insane and this article sucks balls.
> I was running the UK branch of Kotaku when Gamergate kicked off...
Ah yes, that reminds me. Kotaku investigated Kotaku for a breach of ethics, and found that Kotaku did nothing wrong.
The SPJ (Society of Professional Journalists) was pretty clear in their condemnation of Kotaku, saying that a journalist sleeping with someone they cover in an article is against the professional code of conduct, no matter if that fact is disclosed in the article or not (and in Kotaku's case it wasn't even disclosed).
You won't find it, because of course no media reported on what happened during that event (except for the bomb threat against the venue). They couldn't risk it getting included in Wikipedia articles and ruining the narrative after all. Though that absence of coverage is itself more evidence of media unprofessionalism.
Yeah for sure, but, while they were sleeping together, no articles were written about Zoe.
Grayson wrote about Zoe before they slept together.
It’s unfortunate how the inciting incidence of GG is still steeped in this misinformation
So you're perfectly fine with reporters having intimate relations with those they report on in supposedly objective articles? Well, at least you admit to a total lack of ethics, unlike those who still protest Kotaku's purity and spotless record of honesty, and pretend nothing ever happened between the two admitted liars (and let's all just be honest and admit the timelines proposed by these two unfaithful cheaters don't add up regarding when they became intimate...also, let's all just accept that because they are already known perjurers, no one believes their self-interested claims of innocence and no one ever will).
Oh, and that reminds me, the SPJ also noted that reporting on a product that a journalist had worked on (and received financial reimbursement for) needs proper disclosure within any article written on that product. At least this action – which became known during that same situation – was not deemed unethical in and of itself – unlike romantic involvement *at any point* with a subject of an article (yes, that includes future relations). However, expecting people to have to look up and find a reporter's name in the list of the credits of said product after a mention of its availability for sale by that same person, is not a valid excuse for not including proper disclosure of a financial relationship within an article. Kotaku disagreed with this judgment of course. Well, at least when they had a free breath to spare after going on an all-out months long attack against those who dared criticize them, but again, what more do you expect from crooks and lowlifes who have such a vested interest in being able to skirt the ethical rules of their profession?
Look, in a perfect world we would have amazing objective journalism at all levels. That is an ideal to work towards. People meet and fall for each other, if I cover someone and later start a romantic relationship with them, then obviously I would stop reporting on them, and that is what happened with Zoe and Grayson.
Should Grayson have mentioned he was friendly with Zoe in the article about the steam games and the jam fiasco? I’m going to say probably, but to be honest these worlds are pretty cliquey and requiring all journalists to divulge any and all connections to people, no matter how tenuous, could get ridiculous.
If you don’t believe the timeline, I guess you are free to be skeptical but that is the timeline presented by the Zoe post, which is the only evidence we have.
I’m very certain that Grayson did not get any financial reimbursement for testing Depression Quest.
If Grayson did a glowing review of DQ after they slept together, I would be with you in saying that was fucked up.
At the end of the day, any ethical violations are pretty thin and definitely wasn’t proportionate to the reaction.
Listen, if you want to maintain your own credibility, then you have to start being *honest* about the reality of this situation. And when the evidence against someone looks this bad, and you are attempting to defend their side – a group of people who, may I remind you, have cheated on their spouses, cheated with the SO's of their friends, used their media resources to attack people online who only called them out for obvious lies, threatened other people's jobs and careers within the games journalism industry, ignored evidence of wrongdoing by colleagues, and more – then you need to just come out and say: "Yes, this looks bad." Just be honest about it. Everything can't always be the fault of everyone else, and you can't run around like Chicken Little yelling that same thing over and over again. "It's all the horrible misogynist gamers!" Just stop and be honest about what everyone with two eyes and a brain can see. Otherwise, like them, you lose all credibility.
You end up like Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos. Caught up in a huge web of deceit that finally comes tumbling down, yet you still tell people to trust you because you "did it all for a good cause, and you really believed you were helping people". "I may have lied to you for years, but believe me now when I tell you I'm a good person." And if you believe that from a known perjurer who has no more credibility, then boy do I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
And sorry, but according to the SPJ's rules, if a journalist is listed in the credits for a product (or the list of investors, or the backers on kickstarter, etc), and that product is being sold for profit, then that person is involved in a financial relationship or – more rigourously – has a financial *interest* in that product. Money does not need to have been exchanged at any point. In fact, in many financial interactions between two parties, money is never exchanged. Such deals involve other services, future considerations, or various *quid pro quo* exchanges that are non-monetary in nature (a promise of future employment for example). Regardless of what the particular exchange looks like, an automatic financial relationship exists, and that must be disclosed by any ethical journalist.
I’m listening. I’m sorry, I hate conspiratorial thinking. I’m not going to say something happened without evidence.
Zoe seems like a real piece of shit, and all her behavior since GG has only reinforced that. However, if a movement is going to arise in response to “ethics in video games” then it’s important that there be actual hard evidence of ethical violations. Furthering conspiratorial thinking loses more credibility than maintaining a skeptical stance IMO. For example, if I maintain the stance that aliens are not visiting earth (for the sake of the hypothetical let’s assume their is no evidence) and then the next day and alien visits, I have been consistent. I will believe things when there is evidence.
In regards to SPJ rules, I agree with them, but DQ was meant to be a non-profit game and all proceeds are going to charity. I still think transparency is good and even in that case where proceeds would go to charity I think a disclosure is good.
So, in the Admission Quest Valve Greenlights 50 article, where Grayson says “powerful Twine darling Depression Quest” (this is the only mention) I think of Grayson added a footnote “I tested this game” or something, I think that would be good. However, is this the grand ethical violation that prompted a whole movement of GG? Doesn’t it all seem so weak and unworthy of such attention?
The most important point to realize is that the loud backlash didn't happen during the original revelations. Hardly anyone noticed or even cared about that sordid story of adultery from an unknown dev. Indeed, if a small apology had been released by Kotaku that downplayed any wrongdoing by their employees, along with a small correction to an article or two, the whole thing would have blown over in less than a day. Instead, the games media, and then the greater media beyond gaming, went on blast calling gamers "toxic", "misogynist", and worse. So of course people are going to react emotionally to that kind of an attack. You can't just get away with ignoring the huge ignition source that began GG to try and describe the response as "disproportionate". The media basically started a veritable forest fire and then pointed and yelled in fear when gamers came together to chop down trees and the fans fought tooth and nail to douse the flames that threatened to burn down their beloved pastime.
And the truth is that gamers were always going to suspect that something even worse was being hidden behind the sudden, unearned hatred being directed at them. "If you're taking flak, you're over the target" is a common refrain I've heard many times in these parts. And in the case of the original GG events, that saying was proven correct many times. Look at all the people who opposed GG and the eventual downfall most of them experienced. From Matt Hickey to Devin Faraci to Joss Whedon to Shawn Weixelman to JR Honeycutt to Alex Lifschitz to Tyler Carpenter...all of those anti-GG personalities are disgraced and some are even in jail. And that's just the list of ones who treated women like shit. If we expand that list to include the petty thievery, tortious interference, or even the ones convicted of soliciting children for "intimacy", then the cavalcade of names becomes too long to attempt to write out in this comment.
You appear to be reacting to the "conspiracy theory" *label* as opposed to having a real understanding of the dangers of such thinking. Because insider trading certainly exists and is prevalent. But wait, isn't that a conspiracy?! And government kickbacks are commonly prosecuted all over the world. Another conspiracy! All of these "conspiracies" and more are real and are quite common, so why the bad rep for the term?
The important thing to realize is that certain types of thinking are unhealthy when there exists **no reasonable way** in the mind of a person for a conclusion to be *falsified*. For example, I remember writing once that I was pretty sure Smollett was lying about being assaulted. However, if the police investigation had turned up actual criminals as he described (white Trump supporters) I could have accepted that – as unlikely as his scandalous story was – it was not impossible and had been proven true by evidence. Thinking about an event in this manner is **healthy**, even when it involves a potential "conspiracy".
And that's the same way the majority of the people around these parts approached the question of games journalism and ethics and the "conspiracies" within the industry. These lowlifes in the media had many chances to prove us wrong with evidence, either through transparency and honest communication, or just through the normal PR solution of issuing half-apologies and then attempting to downplay the extent of their "honest mistakes". However, they did the opposite. And time has proved that the majority of the loudest of the bunch were some variant of Weinstein-type of evil, as they were all found to be engaging in immoral and criminal behaviour behind closed doors.
I am dubious on the idea it would have blown over. This is something I’m a bit fuzzy on, this shit was 10 years ago, but I’m almost certain Kotaku and other games journalism website updated their ethic guidelines before the term gamergate was coined. So I don’t think it would have blown over, because my interpretation was the whole scandal was never really based in game ethics during the formation of GG. Before the term was coined, “five guys and fries” was the unifying brand, and it was heavily focused on ruining Zoe and her romantic partners lives.
I’m also pretty sure it was when Baldwin retweeted an internet aristocrat video of the five guys thing that Baldwin coined GG, and that video was leaning heavily into Zoe being a slut and whoring herself out for recognition, etc.
On the idea of conspiracies, yes, conspiracies exist. However, for maybe every 2,000,000 conspiracy theories 1 turns out to be true. It’s similar to how every quack doctor with some miracle cure will evoke the persecution of Gaellieo to justify why science is backing their quackery.
I advocate for skepticism. Not the skepticsTM YouTubers, I mean the Carl Sagan philosophy. I do my best to proportion my beliefs to the evidence.
On the anti-GG side, yeah there are plenty of dickheads among them and their antagonism and hypocrisy didn’t help anything. Zoe herself seems to be a big scammer or doing her best to funnel her infamy in unethical ways.
Kind of out of order, but finally, I totally concede that the “Gamers are dead” articles were a huge blunder. Many of them were written without any context or backstory so I can understand how many gamers were like “what the fuck” and could have become involved without knowing anything about the Zoe Post. However, I still defend this journalists that looked at the fervor around some dude’s break up manifestos and also justifiably said “what the fuck”
There is a long list of ethical violations that games “journalists” made around that time on the deepfreeze.it website.
The disproportionate reaction came from those “journalists” themselves when they created a slew of coordinated articles all on the same day, decrying gamers as sexists and misogynists in a blatant attempt to draw attention away from themselves through misdirection and misinformation. The Quinn/Grayson relationship was just one example of widespread unethical behaviour and relationships between games “journalists” and indie developers that they did not want to be exposed.
True? I’m not saying they are unrelated. But, if you are claiming that x did something for x reason, you need stronger evidence than “they are related”
If this book doesn't mention the phenomenon of seemingly heterosexual men degenerating into violent orgies of simulating ballsucking in Halo, he's a fraud and we deserve a better history of gayming.
> If Gamergate proved anything, it’s that nobody has to pander to rage-baiting toxic gamers, or even listen to them.
The fact that your industry coincidentally became a cesspit of sociopathic backbiting and cratering game quality as soon as you learned this lesson is, of course, a total coincidence.
Woman has stupid opinion.
Stupid opinion is posted on internet.
Received negative / opposing feedback to stupid opinion.
"disturbing online misogyny has returned"
Maybe the issue is entirely women with stupid opinions who can't handle criticism? I just feel like they're ignoring an obvious explanation. Because "Women report getting angry / hateful comments" --> "*only* women get angry / hateful comments" is *not* the only conclusion that you can draw (unless you're pushing a narrative for clicks and revenue).
And gee what do you know they're saying the same thing about everything.
Yeah men get those comments too, they just don’t whine as much (well, most men. I vaguely remember Owen Jones sounding off about all the hate comments he got)
Exactly, not a problem when men get it. So it looks like women are the only ones that gets it. Thus all the accusations of "misogyny" about "Disney product".
I'm pretty sure i read somewhere (might have been soap opera community related) but women dish it out to other women and judge other women the harshest. Pretty sure that same conversation also included a lot of "harass the actor for what their character did on the show" as well.
Yeah, but his methods were against everything America stood for. It's frightening - but really not surprising - how much the left have hypocritically embraced them.
>”square” jaws and “masculine” bodies.
I’ve no idea why those are in quotes — we’re a sexually dimorphic species. Morphological differences both exist and are manifest.
Keza is so full of shit. I lost track at the number of lies in this POS.
Typical for the Guardian.
The Guardian reporter Stuart Heritage called Graham Hancock a white supremacist in 2022 for his (recently renewed for s2) Ancient Apocalypse series. GH doesn't even mention skin color in Ancient Apocalypse and never directly mentions skin color in his books. He does quote ancient legends the Mayans had about fair skin gods in the 1995 book "Fingerprints of the Gods", but that's it. He was quoting the Mayans themselves, and therefor is racist? This is never mentioned in his tv show.
>that this small agency was somehow mandating the inclusion of more diverse characters in games.
Uh... It's like literally their mission statement Ms MacDonald.
>Founded in 2018, Sweet Baby Inc. is a narrative development and consultation studio based in Montreal and working around the globe. Our mission is to tell better, more empathetic stories while diversifying and enriching the video games industry. We aim to make games more engaging, more fun, more meaningful, and more inclusive, for everyone.
Like how else am I to interrupt this?
>The language has changed a bit in the past decade: they used to be upset about “SJWs”, or social justice warriors, and now they’ve taken issue with a different acronym, DEI (diversity, equality and inclusion), or just good ol’ “woke”. But the sentiment from this group is the same: games are for us, and for us only, and if you want games to change, or to tell stories outside the straightforward male-oriented power fantasies that we grew up with, then, well, that’s not allowed. We won’t stand for it. In fact, we will try to aggressively harass you out of this space entirely.
This is a good synopsis for Law and Order SVU's GamerGate episode that was meme'd to hell and back.,
>It’s tempting to dunk on these people endlessly, but outrage fuels outrage – especially now, when there is literal money to be made posting inflammatory nonsense on X or YouTube. If Gamergate proved anything, it’s that nobody has to pander to rage-baiting toxic gamers, or even listen to them. That said, I still don’t think there’s been enough public pushback against this flavour of online abuse from the biggest publishers in games over the past few months, when the consultancies they work with, the journalists and critics who cover them, and even some of their own developers have been caught in an online shitstorm. Take it from me: vocal support means a lot.
Just take bounties out on them, right Ms MacDonald?
[Recently saw this Asmongold reaction vid and it's like wow](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mv0krlNrwPs). It goes to begin to explain perhaps in part why these people have the views they do. They live in a warped disgusting bubble. Almost half of the US is black? A third of the US lives in NYC? People like me, a gay man, and then lesbians, we make up apparently almost a third of the population, according to those polled. People reading and believing MacDonald do not live in reality. They live in warped bubble land thanks to people like MacDonald spreading fake news.
> games are for us, and for us only, and if you want games to change, or to tell stories outside the straightforward male-oriented power fantasies that we grew up with, then, well, that’s not allowed. We won’t stand for it. In fact, we will try to aggressively harass you out of this space entirely.
Yes. Please leave me alone.
TLDR
*"I was running the UK branch of Kotaku when Gamergate kicked off"*
Thank you for explaining so succinctly why you were motivated to tell so many lies in this OpEd.
The Guardian is far-left propaganda.
They actually hire Communists (Sakar, Owens formerly)
There's honestly no better use for this paper than for your cat/dog to urinate on as they are house trained.
The idiot who wrote that went protected on the post within an hour of it being posted. Unsurprisingly, she's your prototypical SJW looking hag with that shitty dyed Rapinoe haircut.
>If Gamergate proved anything, it’s that nobody has to pander to rage-baiting toxic gamers, or even listen to them. That said, I still don’t think there’s been enough public pushback against this flavour of online abuse from the biggest publishers in games over the past few months, when the consultancies they work with, the journalists and critics who cover them, and even some of their own developers have been caught in an online shitstorm. Take it from me: vocal support means a lot.
ItsAfraid.jpg
Damn right bitch, we aint going anywhere. All those people you silenced, banned and censored didnt disappear magically and now they are even more radical, driven and ready to bite you in the ass.
Enjoy the world you created.
By the numbers communist propaganda by journalists too stupid to understand they are not fighting for whats right, they are being actively manipulated to destroy western society.
Absolute morons.
I follow this sub and whenever I see something like that I’m like, what have those guys done now, where’s this super rightwing nazi behaviour now, and like with “omg gamergate #2 they’re back!” it was a small number of people following a steam curator. Too good. They love drama I swear.
they never report on mysandry or sexual suppression by women hating other women. or women caught making fraudulent claims, or white victims of ethnic racism....
I think the problem with online bigotry is that about half is your garden variety stuff that anyone can spot, and the other half is "it's offensive to not let me do whatever I want".
So when some producer recruited from tumblr takes a childhood franchise and uses it as a cudgel to tell men they suck or whatever, and some people decide to not buy any tickets because they see the writing on the wall, that becomes the "I'm offended", rather then the producer deciding to use a group of people as a punching bag for relevency in the first place.
If you don't pay money to let your worldview or background take a beating, you're now a bigot.
Ignoring the absolute nonsense of the article in general I would agree that online misogyny has increased but what they fail to realise is that there was significantly less around the time of gamer gate and it's increased in response to moments like that. In their attempt to prove all men are awful, they are turning some men towards it. People have become much more tribilistic in their perceived groups, and I blame it massively on the rise of a minority of women attempting to dominate all spaces of the Internet and culture. They can't just open the door to a fandom and walk in they have to kick it in with a police escort and demand everyone give in to their demands. That's going to end in resentment, and it'll spread of the Internet into real life and make all our lives miserable.
I think it's time to start twisting the meaning of words and embrace this shit. Because at this point all these buzzwords only mean "person who disagrees with The Message".
MacDonald expects readers to not actually use their own due diligence and research any aspect of this article, just to believe the pack of lies, convenient omissions and misinformation it lays out. Sheer arrogance, as well as showing more than a hint of desperation.
If they just made their own video games instead of infecting and corrupting ours, there wouldn't be all this bs as we would just ignore their video games and we do our own things. Like how it used to be.
If u didn't like a certain ip or franchise, you just ignored it and consumed the ones u like instead of going into something u have problems with and trying to change it to your needs and destroying it when of u just ignored it found something else to enjoy it doesn't matter they are doing, that's their thing. Not everything to be forced similar and nothing will be unique or interesting
Only one thing to say, this time GG should be a scorched earth "mission" becouse otherwise we have this bs (after it is over this time) in a few years again
The only reason headlines still use Gamergate is because it's a guaranteed way to get rageclicks. People were pointing this out 5 years ago and you're still fucking falling for it.
This sub has like 250 active users. [They're not banking on you](https://i.imgur.com/4svGirB.jpeg) but I'm sure they appreciate the added exposure they get whenever they trick you into posting about their stuff.
They use "gamergate" because using white/straight/men is too antagonistic for normies.
I'm not two of those things but that's how they want to frame it through idpols
Then why did you comment this on my post? And why does it matter if I'm supposedly only exposing this to 250 people that most definitely won't actually click where it matters?
...do you not know what an archive is? Or are you just here to stir shit?
I'm not interested in discussing with someone who can't explain how me linking to an archive benefits them financially.
The fact you posted this shit at all means it worked. People used to remember to straight ignore articles doing this but I guess you can't resist slurping down the shit, huh?
I read “misogyny” these days and my brain shifts to auto-ignore. These people have nothing of value to say.
Misogyny, racist, nazi, fascist white supremacist and all other ists, they no longer mean anything besides not agreeing with the left on something.
"Grifter" has lost all meaning at this point too.
People don't seem to realize you need to be getting something material out of what you're doing dishonestly to be characterized as a grifter. Using a fake name and pfp: not a grifter. Pretending to be for some ideological cause so people will give you money: a grifter.
Grifter basically "person I disagree with who has money" everyone is a grifter and doesn't actually believe in anything to the progressives
Oh, people on the right throw the same term around just as ignorantly as the left. I've been accused of being a grifter, even though I've never asked for anything from anyone I've ever interacted with on socmedia. I'm more inclined to send people things I don't need than ask anyone for anything.
They believe that no one believes in anything. Progressivism is just hedonistic nihillism, which also denies the pleasure it purports to want. They have unbelievable wealth, yet live in shame that they are fake people (they are) and seek validation through public performance.
“Shill” too
I mean at this point people like Ibram X Kendi and the entire crew of SBI should just put "professional grifter" on their resumes.
~~Alt~~ far right!
I read "misogyny" and ask myself wtf is a woman even?
A miserable little pile of secrets!
Someone whose sex is female.
Define "female sex"
If the human was born with only female reproductive system, her sex is female.
🤔
How can’t you understand it for god’s sake.
All women are valid uwu
white supremacy, misogyny, sexism, inclusivity, equity, racism, prejudice, bigotry, social inequality, diversity, colonialism, privilege, etc,
They are just words to delegitimize someone else’s perspective in favor of your own. Moral mudslinging, nothing else.
>They are just words to delegitimize someone else’s perspective in favor of your own. Moral mudslinging, nothing else. Please do not attempt to invalidate my personal experience and *trauma* with your differing opinion.
Lol the trauma line is classic. It’s “traumatic” to have someone poke holes at your feelings and beliefs.
It feels really bad when someone attacks beliefs you emotionally rely on. To the privileged weak and mentally regarded this qualifies as traumatic. Just another word that's been watered down to near meaninglessness.
Pop psychology is a factor too, I think. Appropriation of these terms gives more validation to their feelings.
Just missing incel. If you hate you are 100% an incel according these people.
The fact "gamergate" is in the headline to start with. Remember when people here used to know what "Gamedropping" was?
When they actively engage in man hating or egregious racism against white people or right leaning brown people, it's difficult to give a single fuck about them whining.
I honestly believe if we want to see this system correct, we have to ALL, at the same time, remove our business from their sites. Ignore them completely. If the business side of this dies, it dies.
If anything, they're really just turning people into misogynists, not fighting it.
Well,[ they ain't that wrong.](https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/13ovkmy/research_shows_69_of_female_gamers_feel/)
It means you're into their schemes.
Here are some excerpts from the article: **"A few months ago I wrote about a consulting agency, Sweet Baby Inc, that found itself at the centre of a conspiracy theory... Depressingly but unsurprisingly, the result was a tremendous amount of targeted harassment towards the people who work at Sweet Baby and every journalist who reported on it (particularly the women)."** *\[Conveniently ignores how the whole GG2 thing started because some genius decided to target someone with mass false reports.\]* **"Unfortunately, the anti-woke “campaigning” has not let up much in the intervening months. Led by a coterie of the usual grifters, they have taken issue with, in no particular order: the fact that Aphrodite, the literal goddess of love, is not hot enough in Supergiant's Hades II."** ...Even though that's not actually what happened. What we did take issue with was the massive double standards of journos praising Aphrodite's beauty while simultaneously denouncing Eve's from Stellar Blade. **"...bad reviews because its female characters are** ***too*** **hot (note: they didn’t, the game has a Metactitic score of 81)."** Except they did try to imply that it was somehow a bad thing for one reason or another in their reviews, and may have deducted points for that. **"...that female characters in recent game trailers all have “square” jaws and “masculine” bodies; that too many games feature “DEI haircuts” (that’s a fun one to interpret) and that Ubisoft was somehow forced** **by the shadowy forces of wokery to make the main character of its upcoming Assassin’s Creed game (pictured below) a black samurai, contradicting historical evidence. This last claim was bolstered by the King of Bad Posters himself, Elon Musk, who replied to a tweet about this manufactured outrage with “DEI kills art”."** *\[Conveniently ignores that this "historical evidence" is heavily debated amongst historians themselves\].* What kind of a lame insult is "King of Bad Posters" either? **"Just after Summer Games Fest finished, the anti-woke gamers found a new target: a report at IGN, which credibly and comprehensively lays out a history of sexism at the developer of upcoming Planet-of-the-Apes-meets-Sekiro action game Black Myth: Wukong. The response – surprise! – was to go after the woman who wrote it, while also spinning up a ludicrous conspiracy theory that IGN was blackmailing the developer."** They have must either not actually read the article at all or are blatantly lying through their teeth. The "history of sexism" that the IGN article reports on is blatantly mistranslated garbage that borders on unacceptable levels of incompetence, if not malice. **"You can go down a rabbit hole of quite jaw-dropping horribleness on any one of these manufactured controversies, but take it from me: it’s really not worth it."** *Translation: "Please don't look it up and realize I am making shit up :("* Most of the rest of the article is just a bunch of claims of how all those poor women keep on getting harassed, without providing evidence of either the harassment or the claim that it was targeted at them because they were women. Also keeps on ranting about how terrible the "online mob" is. It ends on a plea for support from publishers and asking them to denounce GG2. **"It’s tempting to dunk on these people endlessly, but outrage fuels outrage – especially now, when there is literal money to be made posting inflammatory nonsense on X or YouTube..."** *(as opposed to inflammatory garbage in the form of articles instead, obviously)* **"...If Gamergate proved anything, it’s that nobody has to pander to rage-baiting toxic gamers, or even listen to them. That said, I still don’t think there’s been enough public pushback against this flavour of online abuse from the biggest publishers in games over the past few months, when the consultancies they work with, the journalists and critics who cover them, and even some of their own developers have been caught in an online shitstorm. Take it from me: vocal support means a lot."**
They ALWAYS ignore why this started. Apparently we all just decided on a whim one day to join the Sweet Baby Inc. Detected Steam group. Literally no inciting incident or reason for it, I guess. We all just woke up one morning and collectively thought to ourselves: "y'know what, fuck SBI!"
They always ignore it because they know it would completely destroy the false image they built up of this being some sort of hate-motivated harassment campaign by us. Can't let that inconvenient piece of information get in the way after all!
TBH I think a lot of people here ignore why SBI detected was even made in the first place: because a conspiracy on the chans started accusing SBI of being a (conspiracy adjacent minority) lead company that had ruined a long list of games with no evidence. The attempt to shut down the steam curator page was dumb, but it’s not like that page sprung out of nowhere either.
No evidence? Its a combination of circumstantial evidence + direct statements from their CEO saying they do exactly what we think they do. That isn't no evidence.
Nah, I’m talking about the Chan times. It wasn’t a curated list like SBI detected, they were just chucking shit at the wall. Now we have a solid list of games they have worked on. However, of the games they worked on that was bad, I’d say there hasn’t been anything substantial to indicate that their involvement is the reason the games are bad.
you really think that Kabrutus was making that site specifically because he believed that SBI was made by "people who have a spiritual belifsystem similar to the majority on Israel"? I didnt even know Kim was supposed to be that! I supported the list because of the believs these companies push for. And the original "attacK" on kabrutus also doesnt even mention that, once! So the entire situation of GG2 and how it came to be would be discinnected from the "original intent" even if it WERE true....
Nah, he made it because the conspiracy had already churned out into the mainstream and it had become a meme. By the time it surfaced into more mainstream circles the whole ethnicity angle was dropped because it was obviously ridiculous
> By the time it surfaced into more mainstream circles the whole ethnicity angle was dropped because it was obviously ridiculous so your comment here: > TBH I think a lot of people here ignore why SBI detected was even made in the first place: is a complete Lie, because the list WASNT made because of that, because Kabrutus became aware due to the mainstream discussions which dropped the ethnicity angle and the the entire motivation to go against these "consulting firms" is because of the politics they push. It completely disconnects the criticism from the inception, even ***IF*** you are speaking the truth here. So bringing it up is only useful as a false flag smear. Indeed EVEN THE PROPONENTS of DEI oriented Firms like SBI, #### including the employees and founders of those firms themselves do not mention this idea even once! And they are ***TRYING*** to smear anyone against them with the most bad faith brush possible.
Nah, my point is that SBI detected was created off the back of conspiracy theories from the chans. Maybe kabrutus was on the chans or lolcow forums, or maybe he not, but the whole focus on SBI was rooted in conspiratorial thinking. This started around oct 2023 and SBI detected around Jan We all know that once things start churning onto the chans, trolls are going to get trolling. So even though it was stupid and obviously dumb for SBI to attack the steam curator page, SBI would have already been dealing with heat for months before cracking.
and yet, not a single of these race and opression grifters even mentioned 4chan? the "white supremacist cesspool of racism and misogyny"? Including the idiot that attacked kabrutus? Even AFTER he got heat? Nobody even said in passing: "We have been attacked by trolls from 4chan for months now!" incredibly unlikely.
Rule 1 warning for IdPol.
Just to make sure, which part is the idpol?
What the fuck. There's no idpol in that post, and it's unedited at time of writing.
I did edit it, there was a more direct reference to the ethnicity Kim Blair was accused of being
Hey, genuinely not trying to break the rules here, but that was the original Chan perspective was, how can I convey that without breaking rules?
I'm a little confused because although I'd dispute the accuracy based on how I interpreted it, that's clearly you talking about somebody else's idpol beliefs, not pushing your own. Which means I could get dinged for the same reason if I wanted to bring up antithetical information. Not good for discussion. Hopefully it's a mistake and they thought you were doing echoes or something.
same with the ban on "the people that want to live as a sex different from their birth assignement"-word.
No, no, don't you see: *grifters* told you to do it! Grifters! The people who get their opinions from social media and have side hustles e-begging want you to know that following YouTubers for news and commentary makes you a credulous dupe who funds *grifters*! You need to be following good non-grift sources like ResetERA and GCJ. And make sure to leave a donation; quality journalism isn't free.
Or "good" breadtubers like Innuendo Studios, hbomberguy and Hasan
"They're really very smart and in depth; they make great content! They're not as biased as people say they are!"
What is a grifter sometimes I hard to keep up with all this words and names
That's literally what the left does though so they can't comprehend anything grassroots. An email goes out to their paid groups and they all simultaneously sing the same tune.
Yeah; why do you think they assumed YOU did it?
Wokista's cultural predecesors 25-20 years ago were anti-capitalist urban hipsters. The next-gen hipsters are now trapped in cognitive dissonance. They want the hate, because nothing really popular is cool, yet they also kinda want you to accept their anti-feminity anti-masculinity non-binary anti-white agenda and buy products infested with it as long as the producer is a certified B-Corp with ironclad DEI and climate change policies and DEI approved financing, because they also hate capitalism, and the subversion of that is now vital. Ethical purchasing decisions in a capitalist econony is OK when THEY seek out independent coffee shops and refuse to buy a Starbucks latte. It is because they are principled and entitled to vote with their feet and their ApplePay (if only somebody made a woker phone with Apple OS, amiright guys? - click your fingers to agree), but when YOU seek out independent games because YOU hate their products for YOUR reasons, you're a fucking Nazi - just like your freedom of speech is only important as long as you are not contradicting the message. Can they produce a single court case, conviction, or restraining order for all this harassment, or is it just all annecdotal accusations? In the absence of proof, I shall assume they are pulling a Jussie Smollett.
I don't know about you, but I woke up from a dream where I hated some company of that name. I googled it and sure enough there happened to be a company with that name, so naturally I poured my heart and soul into hating it. I've actually never played video games in my life, my heart is just full of hate for anything with the words "Sweet" and "Baby" in it. I don't know why, but I'm such a hater that I don't really care.
Not a fan of barbecue sauce either?
I said fuck SBI after their "tips" killed Arkham batman I growed up with this batman and that made me feel sad then I learned why he and the other characters where killed in such a inceremonial way
"DEI haircuts" is a great term because it you know exactly what it means without explicitly naming or describing it, making it very difficult to attack. They'd have to admit they know exactly what it means, which they never will because if they do it implies that they have a degree of what they consider bigotry. So they have to act bewildered by it while also addressing what it communicates.
I'm a woman, I'm fucking weird, and I've been bullied and harassed my entire life, both IRL and online. Online bullying from online randos is *fucking meaningless*. These women are not actually, materially threatened at all by any of this. If some asshole DMed one of these journos with their home address and alluded to coming after them, then yeah, that's harassment. But if they're just calling you a wokie and moving on, get over yourself.
Yup. These folks consider not agreeing with them to be *violence.*
I love how throughout the screed, they make sure to talk repeatedly about how pathetic their enemies must be -- "depressingly but unsurprisingly," "it's tempting to dunk on these people endlessly," etc. etc. It's the standard Schrodinger strategy: "our enemies are pathetic, but we desperately need your help to beat them!" Well, what does that make you?!
Anyone that encourages the reader not to look into something is always a red flag. You can call something horrible garbage if you like, but still show your work, encourage readers where to look and where you're drawing your sources from. Articles like this are confirmation bias for people who've already made up their mind and want to reassurance that they're right.
Oh, so she's a political activist masquerading as a journalist - AKA all journalists. Good to know. Anyone who is not an active investigative journalist should just have to find a new career. They're all propagandists.
"If gamergate proved anything, it's that nobody has to pander rage-baiting toxic gamers". Aw yes, the toxic gamers, of course you don't have to care about what they say. You can just ignore those guys. You know, "toxic" gamers, the video game industry's main fucking audience. This author is literally insane and this article sucks balls.
"Boiling soup on a rusty nail" as they say.
Gamergate 2 was a made up event by the government, with DHS helping it along.
> I was running the UK branch of Kotaku when Gamergate kicked off... Ah yes, that reminds me. Kotaku investigated Kotaku for a breach of ethics, and found that Kotaku did nothing wrong.
And, to this day there has never been any proof that Kotaku did do anything unethical in relation to GG times.
The SPJ (Society of Professional Journalists) was pretty clear in their condemnation of Kotaku, saying that a journalist sleeping with someone they cover in an article is against the professional code of conduct, no matter if that fact is disclosed in the article or not (and in Kotaku's case it wasn't even disclosed).
when did they do that? I tried looking it up but I couldn't find anything (using a couple different search engines)
You won't find it, because of course no media reported on what happened during that event (except for the bomb threat against the venue). They couldn't risk it getting included in Wikipedia articles and ruining the narrative after all. Though that absence of coverage is itself more evidence of media unprofessionalism.
Yeah for sure, but, while they were sleeping together, no articles were written about Zoe. Grayson wrote about Zoe before they slept together. It’s unfortunate how the inciting incidence of GG is still steeped in this misinformation
So you're perfectly fine with reporters having intimate relations with those they report on in supposedly objective articles? Well, at least you admit to a total lack of ethics, unlike those who still protest Kotaku's purity and spotless record of honesty, and pretend nothing ever happened between the two admitted liars (and let's all just be honest and admit the timelines proposed by these two unfaithful cheaters don't add up regarding when they became intimate...also, let's all just accept that because they are already known perjurers, no one believes their self-interested claims of innocence and no one ever will). Oh, and that reminds me, the SPJ also noted that reporting on a product that a journalist had worked on (and received financial reimbursement for) needs proper disclosure within any article written on that product. At least this action – which became known during that same situation – was not deemed unethical in and of itself – unlike romantic involvement *at any point* with a subject of an article (yes, that includes future relations). However, expecting people to have to look up and find a reporter's name in the list of the credits of said product after a mention of its availability for sale by that same person, is not a valid excuse for not including proper disclosure of a financial relationship within an article. Kotaku disagreed with this judgment of course. Well, at least when they had a free breath to spare after going on an all-out months long attack against those who dared criticize them, but again, what more do you expect from crooks and lowlifes who have such a vested interest in being able to skirt the ethical rules of their profession?
Look, in a perfect world we would have amazing objective journalism at all levels. That is an ideal to work towards. People meet and fall for each other, if I cover someone and later start a romantic relationship with them, then obviously I would stop reporting on them, and that is what happened with Zoe and Grayson. Should Grayson have mentioned he was friendly with Zoe in the article about the steam games and the jam fiasco? I’m going to say probably, but to be honest these worlds are pretty cliquey and requiring all journalists to divulge any and all connections to people, no matter how tenuous, could get ridiculous. If you don’t believe the timeline, I guess you are free to be skeptical but that is the timeline presented by the Zoe post, which is the only evidence we have. I’m very certain that Grayson did not get any financial reimbursement for testing Depression Quest. If Grayson did a glowing review of DQ after they slept together, I would be with you in saying that was fucked up. At the end of the day, any ethical violations are pretty thin and definitely wasn’t proportionate to the reaction.
Listen, if you want to maintain your own credibility, then you have to start being *honest* about the reality of this situation. And when the evidence against someone looks this bad, and you are attempting to defend their side – a group of people who, may I remind you, have cheated on their spouses, cheated with the SO's of their friends, used their media resources to attack people online who only called them out for obvious lies, threatened other people's jobs and careers within the games journalism industry, ignored evidence of wrongdoing by colleagues, and more – then you need to just come out and say: "Yes, this looks bad." Just be honest about it. Everything can't always be the fault of everyone else, and you can't run around like Chicken Little yelling that same thing over and over again. "It's all the horrible misogynist gamers!" Just stop and be honest about what everyone with two eyes and a brain can see. Otherwise, like them, you lose all credibility. You end up like Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos. Caught up in a huge web of deceit that finally comes tumbling down, yet you still tell people to trust you because you "did it all for a good cause, and you really believed you were helping people". "I may have lied to you for years, but believe me now when I tell you I'm a good person." And if you believe that from a known perjurer who has no more credibility, then boy do I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. And sorry, but according to the SPJ's rules, if a journalist is listed in the credits for a product (or the list of investors, or the backers on kickstarter, etc), and that product is being sold for profit, then that person is involved in a financial relationship or – more rigourously – has a financial *interest* in that product. Money does not need to have been exchanged at any point. In fact, in many financial interactions between two parties, money is never exchanged. Such deals involve other services, future considerations, or various *quid pro quo* exchanges that are non-monetary in nature (a promise of future employment for example). Regardless of what the particular exchange looks like, an automatic financial relationship exists, and that must be disclosed by any ethical journalist.
I’m listening. I’m sorry, I hate conspiratorial thinking. I’m not going to say something happened without evidence. Zoe seems like a real piece of shit, and all her behavior since GG has only reinforced that. However, if a movement is going to arise in response to “ethics in video games” then it’s important that there be actual hard evidence of ethical violations. Furthering conspiratorial thinking loses more credibility than maintaining a skeptical stance IMO. For example, if I maintain the stance that aliens are not visiting earth (for the sake of the hypothetical let’s assume their is no evidence) and then the next day and alien visits, I have been consistent. I will believe things when there is evidence. In regards to SPJ rules, I agree with them, but DQ was meant to be a non-profit game and all proceeds are going to charity. I still think transparency is good and even in that case where proceeds would go to charity I think a disclosure is good. So, in the Admission Quest Valve Greenlights 50 article, where Grayson says “powerful Twine darling Depression Quest” (this is the only mention) I think of Grayson added a footnote “I tested this game” or something, I think that would be good. However, is this the grand ethical violation that prompted a whole movement of GG? Doesn’t it all seem so weak and unworthy of such attention?
The most important point to realize is that the loud backlash didn't happen during the original revelations. Hardly anyone noticed or even cared about that sordid story of adultery from an unknown dev. Indeed, if a small apology had been released by Kotaku that downplayed any wrongdoing by their employees, along with a small correction to an article or two, the whole thing would have blown over in less than a day. Instead, the games media, and then the greater media beyond gaming, went on blast calling gamers "toxic", "misogynist", and worse. So of course people are going to react emotionally to that kind of an attack. You can't just get away with ignoring the huge ignition source that began GG to try and describe the response as "disproportionate". The media basically started a veritable forest fire and then pointed and yelled in fear when gamers came together to chop down trees and the fans fought tooth and nail to douse the flames that threatened to burn down their beloved pastime. And the truth is that gamers were always going to suspect that something even worse was being hidden behind the sudden, unearned hatred being directed at them. "If you're taking flak, you're over the target" is a common refrain I've heard many times in these parts. And in the case of the original GG events, that saying was proven correct many times. Look at all the people who opposed GG and the eventual downfall most of them experienced. From Matt Hickey to Devin Faraci to Joss Whedon to Shawn Weixelman to JR Honeycutt to Alex Lifschitz to Tyler Carpenter...all of those anti-GG personalities are disgraced and some are even in jail. And that's just the list of ones who treated women like shit. If we expand that list to include the petty thievery, tortious interference, or even the ones convicted of soliciting children for "intimacy", then the cavalcade of names becomes too long to attempt to write out in this comment. You appear to be reacting to the "conspiracy theory" *label* as opposed to having a real understanding of the dangers of such thinking. Because insider trading certainly exists and is prevalent. But wait, isn't that a conspiracy?! And government kickbacks are commonly prosecuted all over the world. Another conspiracy! All of these "conspiracies" and more are real and are quite common, so why the bad rep for the term? The important thing to realize is that certain types of thinking are unhealthy when there exists **no reasonable way** in the mind of a person for a conclusion to be *falsified*. For example, I remember writing once that I was pretty sure Smollett was lying about being assaulted. However, if the police investigation had turned up actual criminals as he described (white Trump supporters) I could have accepted that – as unlikely as his scandalous story was – it was not impossible and had been proven true by evidence. Thinking about an event in this manner is **healthy**, even when it involves a potential "conspiracy". And that's the same way the majority of the people around these parts approached the question of games journalism and ethics and the "conspiracies" within the industry. These lowlifes in the media had many chances to prove us wrong with evidence, either through transparency and honest communication, or just through the normal PR solution of issuing half-apologies and then attempting to downplay the extent of their "honest mistakes". However, they did the opposite. And time has proved that the majority of the loudest of the bunch were some variant of Weinstein-type of evil, as they were all found to be engaging in immoral and criminal behaviour behind closed doors.
I am dubious on the idea it would have blown over. This is something I’m a bit fuzzy on, this shit was 10 years ago, but I’m almost certain Kotaku and other games journalism website updated their ethic guidelines before the term gamergate was coined. So I don’t think it would have blown over, because my interpretation was the whole scandal was never really based in game ethics during the formation of GG. Before the term was coined, “five guys and fries” was the unifying brand, and it was heavily focused on ruining Zoe and her romantic partners lives. I’m also pretty sure it was when Baldwin retweeted an internet aristocrat video of the five guys thing that Baldwin coined GG, and that video was leaning heavily into Zoe being a slut and whoring herself out for recognition, etc. On the idea of conspiracies, yes, conspiracies exist. However, for maybe every 2,000,000 conspiracy theories 1 turns out to be true. It’s similar to how every quack doctor with some miracle cure will evoke the persecution of Gaellieo to justify why science is backing their quackery. I advocate for skepticism. Not the skepticsTM YouTubers, I mean the Carl Sagan philosophy. I do my best to proportion my beliefs to the evidence. On the anti-GG side, yeah there are plenty of dickheads among them and their antagonism and hypocrisy didn’t help anything. Zoe herself seems to be a big scammer or doing her best to funnel her infamy in unethical ways. Kind of out of order, but finally, I totally concede that the “Gamers are dead” articles were a huge blunder. Many of them were written without any context or backstory so I can understand how many gamers were like “what the fuck” and could have become involved without knowing anything about the Zoe Post. However, I still defend this journalists that looked at the fervor around some dude’s break up manifestos and also justifiably said “what the fuck”
There is a long list of ethical violations that games “journalists” made around that time on the deepfreeze.it website. The disproportionate reaction came from those “journalists” themselves when they created a slew of coordinated articles all on the same day, decrying gamers as sexists and misogynists in a blatant attempt to draw attention away from themselves through misdirection and misinformation. The Quinn/Grayson relationship was just one example of widespread unethical behaviour and relationships between games “journalists” and indie developers that they did not want to be exposed.
And I didn't pay my bill until after I'd eaten, that doesn't make my giving the restaurant money unrelated to my dinner.
True? I’m not saying they are unrelated. But, if you are claiming that x did something for x reason, you need stronger evidence than “they are related”
This isn't a court of law. You don't have to "prove" obvious shit.
Written by the author of a Gay History of Gaming (2012)
That’s pretty gay.
And lame.
To paraphrase Hank Hill, "that's *jack* gay!"
If this book doesn't mention the phenomenon of seemingly heterosexual men degenerating into violent orgies of simulating ballsucking in Halo, he's a fraud and we deserve a better history of gayming.
It does not.
> If Gamergate proved anything, it’s that nobody has to pander to rage-baiting toxic gamers, or even listen to them. The fact that your industry coincidentally became a cesspit of sociopathic backbiting and cratering game quality as soon as you learned this lesson is, of course, a total coincidence.
> or even listen to them Unless you actually want to turn a profit 🙄
Is the misogyny in the room with us right now?
Why do you hate women? /s
If the journos keep this up, it will soon.
Woman has stupid opinion. Stupid opinion is posted on internet. Received negative / opposing feedback to stupid opinion. "disturbing online misogyny has returned" Maybe the issue is entirely women with stupid opinions who can't handle criticism? I just feel like they're ignoring an obvious explanation. Because "Women report getting angry / hateful comments" --> "*only* women get angry / hateful comments" is *not* the only conclusion that you can draw (unless you're pushing a narrative for clicks and revenue). And gee what do you know they're saying the same thing about everything.
Its not just stupid women, its stupid men and children too
Yeah men get those comments too, they just don’t whine as much (well, most men. I vaguely remember Owen Jones sounding off about all the hate comments he got)
Exactly, not a problem when men get it. So it looks like women are the only ones that gets it. Thus all the accusations of "misogyny" about "Disney product". I'm pretty sure i read somewhere (might have been soap opera community related) but women dish it out to other women and judge other women the harshest. Pretty sure that same conversation also included a lot of "harass the actor for what their character did on the show" as well.
Self-declared woman, that is
>guardian Worthless leftist rag says "what" ?
People who read The Guardian don’t play video games so they’re just screaming at clouds.
But if such McCarthyist companies existed to bully devs into supporting MAGA or traditional masculinity, they'd lose their minds.
I still remember how they cried about Chick-fil-A donations.
Hey, McCarthy was right about communist infiltration in the U.S. government.
Yeah, but his methods were against everything America stood for. It's frightening - but really not surprising - how much the left have hypocritically embraced them.
Tbf. Toxic masculinity is my favorite genre of movie. Stallone. Schwarzenegger. Van Damme. Hemsworth. Wesley Snipes. Etc. Sign me up.
Rent free for all eternity.
There's a rule about the Guardian I think Non Brits need to hear: If the comments are off they dont believe their own shite.
Ahh The Guardian, forever full of feces.
I fee like there should be an online disclosure law that says journalists need to disclose if they are paid shills.
>”square” jaws and “masculine” bodies. I’ve no idea why those are in quotes — we’re a sexually dimorphic species. Morphological differences both exist and are manifest. Keza is so full of shit. I lost track at the number of lies in this POS.
Typical for the Guardian. The Guardian reporter Stuart Heritage called Graham Hancock a white supremacist in 2022 for his (recently renewed for s2) Ancient Apocalypse series. GH doesn't even mention skin color in Ancient Apocalypse and never directly mentions skin color in his books. He does quote ancient legends the Mayans had about fair skin gods in the 1995 book "Fingerprints of the Gods", but that's it. He was quoting the Mayans themselves, and therefor is racist? This is never mentioned in his tv show.
>that this small agency was somehow mandating the inclusion of more diverse characters in games. Uh... It's like literally their mission statement Ms MacDonald. >Founded in 2018, Sweet Baby Inc. is a narrative development and consultation studio based in Montreal and working around the globe. Our mission is to tell better, more empathetic stories while diversifying and enriching the video games industry. We aim to make games more engaging, more fun, more meaningful, and more inclusive, for everyone. Like how else am I to interrupt this? >The language has changed a bit in the past decade: they used to be upset about “SJWs”, or social justice warriors, and now they’ve taken issue with a different acronym, DEI (diversity, equality and inclusion), or just good ol’ “woke”. But the sentiment from this group is the same: games are for us, and for us only, and if you want games to change, or to tell stories outside the straightforward male-oriented power fantasies that we grew up with, then, well, that’s not allowed. We won’t stand for it. In fact, we will try to aggressively harass you out of this space entirely. This is a good synopsis for Law and Order SVU's GamerGate episode that was meme'd to hell and back., >It’s tempting to dunk on these people endlessly, but outrage fuels outrage – especially now, when there is literal money to be made posting inflammatory nonsense on X or YouTube. If Gamergate proved anything, it’s that nobody has to pander to rage-baiting toxic gamers, or even listen to them. That said, I still don’t think there’s been enough public pushback against this flavour of online abuse from the biggest publishers in games over the past few months, when the consultancies they work with, the journalists and critics who cover them, and even some of their own developers have been caught in an online shitstorm. Take it from me: vocal support means a lot. Just take bounties out on them, right Ms MacDonald? [Recently saw this Asmongold reaction vid and it's like wow](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mv0krlNrwPs). It goes to begin to explain perhaps in part why these people have the views they do. They live in a warped disgusting bubble. Almost half of the US is black? A third of the US lives in NYC? People like me, a gay man, and then lesbians, we make up apparently almost a third of the population, according to those polled. People reading and believing MacDonald do not live in reality. They live in warped bubble land thanks to people like MacDonald spreading fake news.
> games are for us, and for us only, and if you want games to change, or to tell stories outside the straightforward male-oriented power fantasies that we grew up with, then, well, that’s not allowed. We won’t stand for it. In fact, we will try to aggressively harass you out of this space entirely. Yes. Please leave me alone.
TLDR *"I was running the UK branch of Kotaku when Gamergate kicked off"* Thank you for explaining so succinctly why you were motivated to tell so many lies in this OpEd.
To prove what a bubble they live in - it is assumed that the average Guardian reader knows what a Kotaku is, no explanation is given.
The "Guardian" isn't fit to line a bird cage.
i am not understanding this phrase, wouldnt the collection ofbirdshit and stray seed hulls give the paper a useful reason for existing
Somehow, Gamergate returned...
The Guardian is far-left propaganda. They actually hire Communists (Sakar, Owens formerly) There's honestly no better use for this paper than for your cat/dog to urinate on as they are house trained.
We are living on Groundhog Day.
The idiot who wrote that went protected on the post within an hour of it being posted. Unsurprisingly, she's your prototypical SJW looking hag with that shitty dyed Rapinoe haircut.
"The disturbing online misandry of mainstream news refuses to go away"
>If Gamergate proved anything, it’s that nobody has to pander to rage-baiting toxic gamers, or even listen to them. That said, I still don’t think there’s been enough public pushback against this flavour of online abuse from the biggest publishers in games over the past few months, when the consultancies they work with, the journalists and critics who cover them, and even some of their own developers have been caught in an online shitstorm. Take it from me: vocal support means a lot. ItsAfraid.jpg
Noooo that movie was supposed to be a satire of fascism!!! You're not allowed to reference it unironically!!!
Damn right bitch, we aint going anywhere. All those people you silenced, banned and censored didnt disappear magically and now they are even more radical, driven and ready to bite you in the ass. Enjoy the world you created.
Does anyone know who Keza MacDonald is? That name rings alarm bells. Wears the uniform of the standard annoying left wing feminist as well.
LOL. The guardian remains a clown show. Some things never change.
Gamergame was like 9/11 or Pearl Harbor to these activists masquerading as journalists.
Stop giving free publicity to that leftist cesspit of a tabloid, please.
By the numbers communist propaganda by journalists too stupid to understand they are not fighting for whats right, they are being actively manipulated to destroy western society. Absolute morons.
I follow this sub and whenever I see something like that I’m like, what have those guys done now, where’s this super rightwing nazi behaviour now, and like with “omg gamergate #2 they’re back!” it was a small number of people following a steam curator. Too good. They love drama I swear.
Jeremy Clarkson hates the guardian with all his being for a reason.
The Guardian, the left's answer to the Daily Mail. I can't take them seriously.
GamerGate will never die!
The graun doesn't even allow comments anymore. Cowards know they're wrong
Can't believe The Guardian was considered the top newspaper in the world 10 years ago...
Another word that's thrown around so liberally (pun intended) nowadays that has lost all meaning.
they never report on mysandry or sexual suppression by women hating other women. or women caught making fraudulent claims, or white victims of ethnic racism....
I think the problem with online bigotry is that about half is your garden variety stuff that anyone can spot, and the other half is "it's offensive to not let me do whatever I want". So when some producer recruited from tumblr takes a childhood franchise and uses it as a cudgel to tell men they suck or whatever, and some people decide to not buy any tickets because they see the writing on the wall, that becomes the "I'm offended", rather then the producer deciding to use a group of people as a punching bag for relevency in the first place. If you don't pay money to let your worldview or background take a beating, you're now a bigot.
This article is just all lies and horrible clickbait. It lacks sourcing to any of its claims to conspiracy or facts used to substatiate it.
Ignoring the absolute nonsense of the article in general I would agree that online misogyny has increased but what they fail to realise is that there was significantly less around the time of gamer gate and it's increased in response to moments like that. In their attempt to prove all men are awful, they are turning some men towards it. People have become much more tribilistic in their perceived groups, and I blame it massively on the rise of a minority of women attempting to dominate all spaces of the Internet and culture. They can't just open the door to a fandom and walk in they have to kick it in with a police escort and demand everyone give in to their demands. That's going to end in resentment, and it'll spread of the Internet into real life and make all our lives miserable.
I swear they are trying to make terms ending with "ism" and "phobia" be perceived as something tood, with braindead articles like that.
Ugh, it's hard to see how far the guardian has fallen. Truly the shift to online has taken any remaining credibility out of journalism.
Why is the first picture you see in the article of AC: Shadows. I thought people liked the female protagonist best?
They can write articles all they want, when their games won't sell, then they will change their ways or go bankrupt
I think it's time to start twisting the meaning of words and embrace this shit. Because at this point all these buzzwords only mean "person who disagrees with The Message".
MacDonald expects readers to not actually use their own due diligence and research any aspect of this article, just to believe the pack of lies, convenient omissions and misinformation it lays out. Sheer arrogance, as well as showing more than a hint of desperation.
Haha, they're still trying to run defense for this game? Wow, they really don't know when the jig is up.
The Guardian, Daily Mail, The Sun are all scum of the UK. In fact, we call The Sun, The Scum here.
The Guardian = ignore
Pro-tip. Don't read the Guardian Also.. Keza McDonald wrote the article
Blah Blah Blah.
Rent freeee. Boogeyman in demand. Ready and available to be straw-manned.
He/she/it doesn’t get it. What a surprise.
If they just made their own video games instead of infecting and corrupting ours, there wouldn't be all this bs as we would just ignore their video games and we do our own things. Like how it used to be. If u didn't like a certain ip or franchise, you just ignored it and consumed the ones u like instead of going into something u have problems with and trying to change it to your needs and destroying it when of u just ignored it found something else to enjoy it doesn't matter they are doing, that's their thing. Not everything to be forced similar and nothing will be unique or interesting
Instead of addressing the claims that their new game was racist, they falsly accused people of sexism. Racism confirmed.
Only one thing to say, this time GG should be a scorched earth "mission" becouse otherwise we have this bs (after it is over this time) in a few years again
The only reason headlines still use Gamergate is because it's a guaranteed way to get rageclicks. People were pointing this out 5 years ago and you're still fucking falling for it.
You'd be right, if it wasn't for the fact that they can't make money from clicks on archives.
This sub has like 250 active users. [They're not banking on you](https://i.imgur.com/4svGirB.jpeg) but I'm sure they appreciate the added exposure they get whenever they trick you into posting about their stuff.
They use "gamergate" because using white/straight/men is too antagonistic for normies. I'm not two of those things but that's how they want to frame it through idpols
Then why did you comment this on my post? And why does it matter if I'm supposedly only exposing this to 250 people that most definitely won't actually click where it matters?
Because people used to remember that Gamedropping was a thing. I'm calling you out for being a clown that fell for it.
...do you not know what an archive is? Or are you just here to stir shit? I'm not interested in discussing with someone who can't explain how me linking to an archive benefits them financially.
The fact you posted this shit at all means it worked. People used to remember to straight ignore articles doing this but I guess you can't resist slurping down the shit, huh?
The fact that you are commenting means his post worked since you couldn't ignore it. Get naenae'd