Corruption in gaming journalism discussion and update thread.
15,084 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;46354221]look how fucking casual they are about it. It makes me fucking sick.[/QUOTE]
You'd think with them being under fire that they'd at the very least do this secretly. I cannot comprehend what goes on in their heads.
[QUOTE=N-12_Aden;46354362]I wouldn't expect anything less.
Not to sound really like a fucking nutter, but except for a few websites, these journalist run the show. They get to be paraded around like they are the only official sources because they call themselves journalists.
They aren't going to change. Its too late in the day for it. A lot of these people are in it just to feel superior and justified in life. A lot like some other news networks and sites. It's honestly a depressing situation, and I feel sorry for anyone who got the door slammed in their face when they tried to join in on the club and were told they didn't fit in. I haven't really seen anything about gate keeping but everything I read straight from them would imply it. No criticism or your off the train.[/QUOTE]
It's shit like that which makes me really hope Sommers was right when she said that the narrative was already beginning to change in her brief interview.
[QUOTE=Xenomoose;46354421]It's shit like that which makes me really hope Sommers was right when she said that the narrative was already beginning to change in her brief interview.[/QUOTE]
Don't take my word for it, I've only been following the situation casually and really only found out about this when some idiot I know said something about gamergate that I knew wasn't true.
[QUOTE=gudman;46354115][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljIMMCQyexA[/media]
As seen on King's stream.
[editline]28th October 2014[/editline]
Suck my dick, [b]s[/b] from [b]https[/b]. Choke on it. Fuck you.[/QUOTE]
A: very clear Wu is up to her ass in collusion.
B: Equally clear Milo is an agendist, and that his agenda only tangentially hits GG because most of the people perpetrating bullshit are cartoonishly liberal. While that dovetails well with KoP and to a degree Sargon, I can't say I really think Milo is going to be any kind of a long term asset to consumer concerns and getting fairness and equality in game marketing and journalism.
time to save all archived material
[url]https://mobile.twitter.com/thehat2/status/527133997747683328[/url]
[QUOTE=27X;46354446]A: very clear Wu is up to her ass in collusion.
B: Equally clear Milo is an agendist, and that his agenda only tangentially hits GG because most of the people perpetrating bullshit are cartoonishly liberal. While that dovetails well with KoP and to a degree Sargon, I can't say I really think Milo is going to be any kind of a long term asset to consumer concerns and getting fairness and equality in game marketing and journalism.[/QUOTE]
He definitely knows what he's doing and argued his points well. Even if I don't agree with the last question and how he answered it.
[QUOTE=27X;46354446]A: very clear Wu is up to her ass in collusion.
B: Equally clear Milo is an agendist, and that his agenda only tangentially hits GG because most of the people perpetrating bullshit are cartoonishly liberal. While that dovetails well with KoP and to a degree Sargon, I can't say I really think Milo is going to be any kind of a long term asset to consumer concerns and getting fairness and equality in game marketing and journalism.[/QUOTE]
The difference between aGG and GG: one has agenda-driven personalities who are useless or even harmful, the other has agenda-driven personalities who actually bring something to the table.
Kudos for David btw to actually say "not in regards to Gamergate..." before asking questions about shit Milo writes. Not that it changes anything, but he could've easily not have done that. All around an interesting interview to watch, very decent approach, well constructed arguments.
[QUOTE=Xenomoose;46354313]Just like when Boogie was talking about the threats he'd been getting. Nobody important ever mentions that shit. It makes me ill.[/QUOTE]
Because Boogie looks like the stereotype that the media likes to represent #gg as, even if Boogie is a very kind man and is not a hateful person at all. It would be against the preset narrative the media likes to paint #gg as to report on people like him getting harassed too.
I am glad that Sommers got on that interview instead of boogie. Something tells me that they would have piled up on him en masse with ad hominem attacks and the like if he went like intended. Even through he is neutral on the matter anyway! But it seems that anti-GG is pretty much 'If you do not listen and believe and be with us, you are against us!'
i wonder why gawker is so set on burning their house down. they clearly did not have the sponsors they said they had, considering how many sponsors claimed to never had any advertising set up with gawker, so i don't think they care about their money situation. now they're publishing articles shitting on supposed sponsors (that were previously on their partners list) painting us clear targets.
they've got to have something else up their sleeves. partners and ads are not their main source of funding. something tells me they would be fine even if they didn't have any sponsors left. the partners list was just a lie.
this coupled with brianna wu being the worst face of anti-gg we've ever seen, constantly slipping up and being caught with really obvious lies and showing up with uncombed hair looking quite crazy, and mcintosh and his puppet anita parroting eachother crazy jack thompson-esque rhetoric... it's all really, really desperate, maybe too desperate? your turn. desperate.
is there something else going on behind the scenes and everything we've faced thus far was just a facade that's now been lit on fire and thrown at us, or are they all just having mental breakdowns?
[QUOTE=gudman;46354509]The difference between aGG and GG: one has agenda-driven personalities who are useless or even harmful, the other has [B]agenda-driven personalities who actually bring something to the table. [/B]
Kudos for David btw to actually say "not in regards to Gamergate..." before asking questions about shit Milo writes. Not that it changes anything, but he could've easily not have done that. All around an interesting interview to watch, very decent approach, well constructed arguments.[/QUOTE]
That's...that's not much better really. If someone joins your movement with a clear agenda against the "left" (which should be fairly clear given who we're dealing with here), you need to be incredibly wary of them. If their agenda actually aligned with the movement properly, like they actually care about games and shit, it's less of a concern, but his interest is tangential at best.
Talking a big game about how GG "accepts anyone" isn't really worth doing, and announcing that "no matter who you are, we'll take you" is going to attract detrimental people. And as this isn't organised you can't really kick them out or anything, so you're now lumped with a crazy. gg GG.
Does anybody actually know where he's been getting the information he provided? It was so long ago that he dropped the bomb that I can't actually be bothered to try and find the posts, and it just seems like an interesting point to me.
[QUOTE=TheJoey;46354543]i wonder why gawker is so set on burning their house down. they clearly did not have the sponsors they said they had, considering how many sponsors claimed to never had any advertising set up with gawker, so i don't think they care about their money situation. now they're publishing articles shitting on supposed sponsors (that were previously on their partners list) painting us clear targets.
they've got to have something else up their sleeves. partners and ads are not their main source of funding. something tells me they would be fine even if they didn't have any sponsors left. the partners list was just a lie.
this coupled with brianna wu being the worst face of anti-gg we've ever seen, constantly slipping up and being caught with really obvious lies and showing up with uncombed hair looking quite crazy, and mcintosh and his puppet anita parroting eachother crazy jack thompson-esque rhetoric... it's all really, really desperate, maybe too desperate? your turn. desperate.
is there something else going on behind the scenes and everything we've faced thus far was just a facade that's now been lit on fire and thrown at us, or are they all just having mental breakdowns?[/QUOTE]
I dunno, but it still seems like a lot of celebs and internet personalities are buying their bullshit, so maybe they've let that shit blind them to the reality of the situation they're facing. Unless they slip up so bad the big-name anti-gg's like Joss Whedon start turning on them, they're probably going to be riding their gravy train all the way down the drain with a smug smile on their faces.
[QUOTE=Ithon;46354489]time to save all archived material
[url]https://mobile.twitter.com/thehat2/status/527133997747683328[/url][/QUOTE]
Brewster would be royally pissed, and he'd probably want to get such a decision challenged.
[QUOTE=TheJoey;46354543]
is there something else going on behind the scenes and everything we've faced thus far was just a facade that's now been lit on fire and thrown at us, or are they all just having mental breakdowns?[/QUOTE]
I think it can be one or the other with more or less equal chances. I'm even leaning on mental breakdowns. I have a hard time imagining [b]why[/b] would they have any backup plan: if they were that smart, they wouldn't even see GG as a threat of the scale worthy of such things. It can very well be just their absolute lack of understanding of what they are doing. They moved to the position they occupy now by sheer lack of any competition in the medium and extremely low standards. And began to think they are invincible.
[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;46354632]Brewster would be royally pissed, and he'd probably want to get such a decision challenged.[/QUOTE]
Thank lord for adblock and screencapping.
[QUOTE=Wii60;46354135]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/rJR1Wb3.png[/IMG]
[URL]https://archive.today/ehMM0[/URL][/QUOTE]
Jesus Christ that's disgusting. How can they justify saying that when they dox it's completely fine, but when GG does it, it's worse than auschwitz?
apparently the email the "doxxer" gave adrian chen was @dildomail.com or something
was this just bait?
[QUOTE=TheJoey;46355135]apparently the email the "doxxer" gave adrian chen was @dildomail.com or something
was this just bait?[/QUOTE]That would be funny. Bait them in to outing themselves about trying to buy personal information of their opposition.
[editline]28th October 2014[/editline]
No one said we have to play upfront about all this. Nothing wrong with setting up a trap for them to walk head-long in to.
Maybe I should sell my 8chan diamond dogs tier account, which has information that could destroy GG forever.
[QUOTE=TheJoey;46355135]apparently the email the "doxxer" gave adrian chen was @dildomail.com or something
was this just bait?[/QUOTE]
Oh god I hope so. That would be so rich.
[url]https://archive.today/vIkEg[/url]
[QUOTE=Jamsponge;46351712]Spooky Scary Gamergate would be a fantastic parody cover, actually.[/QUOTE]
Just wrote this for fun.
[QUOTE]>SPOOKY SCARY GAMERGATE
>SENDS SHIVERS DOWN OUR SPINES
>SHRIEKING NERDS WILL SPAM OUR FEEDS
>TRIGGERING US TONIGHT
SPOOKY SCARY GAMERGATE
TRIES NOT TO UPSET
YOU'D SHAKE AND SHUDDER IN SURPRISE
OF YOUR OWN INDECENCIES
>WE'RE NOT SORRY GAMERGATE
>YOU'RE NOT MISUNDERSTOOD
>YOU ONLY WANT TO CRITICISE
>BUT WE DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD
CAUSE SPOOKY SCARY GAMERGATE
FOUND STARTLING EVIDENCE
OF COLLUSION AND BULLYING
AND LYING THROUGH YOUR TEETH
>GAMERS LIVING WITH THEIR MOMS
>ARE SHY WHAT'S ALL THE FUSS?
>BUT AD REVENUE IS RUNNING LOW
>IT'S SEMI-SERIOUS!
SPOOKY SCARY GAMERGATE
IS TAKING YOUR SITES DOWN
BY SENDING MESSAGES TO THOSE
WHO ADVERTISE WITH YOU
>GAMERGATE TELLS ALL THESE LIES
>THEY SELDOM LET US SNOOZE
SPOOKY SCARY GAMERGATE
WILL QUAKE YOU WITH SOME PROOF![/QUOTE]
Good to see that there's some GamerGate support on places other than Twitter and Hatechan
[QUOTE=Jamsponge;46351712]Spooky Scary Gamergate would be a fantastic parody cover, actually.[/QUOTE]
[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VY1iOBbDToc"][video=youtube;VY1iOBbDToc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VY1iOBbDToc[/video]
[/URL]
This has been GamerGate's theme song since October
[URL="http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/10/how_to_end_gamergate_a_divide_and_conquer_plan.html"]We're Winning[/URL]
[QUOTE][B]WHAT DIDN’T WORK[/B]Ending Gamergate will not happen by moral grandstanding. Let’s quickly go over tactics that have been tried so far to stop Gamergate, none of which have worked:
Hyperbolic comparisons of Gamergate to ISIS, [URL="https://twitter.com/josswhedon/status/524015074932174849"]the KKK[/URL], fascists, terrorists, Ebola, child pornography, etc., etc.
Endless ridicule and antagonism of Gamergaters on Twitter.
Convenient erasure of Gamergate’s many female, LGBTQ, and minority members, however wrong they may be.
Telling Intel and others [URL="http://gawker.com/how-we-got-rolled-by-the-dishonest-fascists-of-gamergat-1649496579"]they are misogynist cowards[/URL] when they pull advertising.
Hauling out celebrities to condemn Gamergate and telling them their heroes hate them.
[URL="https://twitter.com/ErnestWAdams/status/525745466034905089"]Threatening to blacklist Gamergate members[/URL] from the gaming industry.
Wishful-thinking pieces like “[URL="http://techcrunch.com/2014/10/19/adios-gamergate/"]So Long, Gamergate[/URL][U].[/U]”
Fire-and-brimstone sermons like “[URL="http://www.theverge.com/2014/10/8/6919179/stop-supporting-gamergate"]Stop supporting Gamergate[/URL].”
Shutting all gamers (not just Gamergate members) out of media discourse.
The old “video games cause violence” canard, unproven as ever.
[URL="http://www.newsweek.com/gamergate-about-media-ethics-or-harassing-women-harassment-data-show-279736"]Defective quantitative analysis[/URL].
[URL="http://jezebel.com/gamergate-trolls-arent-ethics-crusaders-theyre-a-hate-1644984010"]Defective social science[/URL].
[URL="https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/09/death-to-the-gamer/"]Obtuse social theorizing[/URL].
[/QUOTE]
That's a fairly good article I'd say, in terms of facts, even if its tone is quite anti-GG
[QUOTE=Wii60;46355447][url]https://archive.today/vIkEg[/url][/QUOTE]
Damn, so when people don't want these games on steam the developers decide to forgo the democratic process and stuff the ballots with their own votes?
These assholes are so full of themselves.
[QUOTE=1legmidget;46355517][URL="http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/10/how_to_end_gamergate_a_divide_and_conquer_plan.html"]We're Winning[/URL][/QUOTE]
The bargaining begins. This reads like terms for a cease-fire when most GG supporters wouldn't even accept terms of surrender.
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;46355582]The bargaining begins. This reads like terms for a cease-fire when most GG supporters wouldn't even accept terms of surrender.[/QUOTE]
We shouldn't accept any terms of surrender unless its unconditional and people involved this get fired.
Hey look, New York Times says "Game Over for Gamers"....again :suicide:
[url]https://archive.today/H4zUs[/url]
vaasdefinitionofinsanity.mp4
[QUOTE=Eonart;46351215]Reminder that this is the type of people that are on the opposition.
[t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B1CqLVyIEAA9oie.jpg:large[/t]
Don't give up![/QUOTE]
[URL="https://archive.today/xuz3r"]It's real.[/URL]
I don't even.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
