-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
VG247 pulls support and coverage of GOG.com following pro GamerGate tweet [Update: GOG apology]
- Thread starter Kenzodielocke
- Start date
I mean looking at their tweet that's exactly what they did so what else do you want?
What garbage
Also: People ITT who are saying maybe they didn't know the meaning behind the image - even taken at face value, that's a trashy thing to tweet out. Why is a store slinging mud at an entire industry? I'd be mad if Walmart put out a tweet shitting on consumer report magazines, for example.
But seriously, this is pretty overt in message. Fuck that.
Also: People ITT who are saying maybe they didn't know the meaning behind the image - even taken at face value, that's a trashy thing to tweet out. Why is a store slinging mud at an entire industry? I'd be mad if Walmart put out a tweet shitting on consumer report magazines, for example.
But seriously, this is pretty overt in message. Fuck that.
My bad, the twitter module didn't load and I didn't expect to see it now
Good response from GOG, I'm glad they didn't mince their words. Like, I wish they had gone into how it happened (because it's so blatant!) and wish they named "an abusive movement" by name... but ultimately, they owned up to their actions and didn't deflect anything.
It's nice to be reminded that companies can still do the right thing.
It's nice to be reminded that companies can still do the right thing.
"There is an abusive movement".
"GamerGate is an abusive movement".
Which of those two statements is present in the tweet? Which of those two statements clearly, unequivocally calls out GamerGate for what they are?
I personally think that not calling them out by name is exactly what mincing their words imply.
That's how you apologize. It looks like they made a honest mistake.
Well, I made the mistake of reading the responses to the apology.
Seems like you can't un-blow that dog whistle quite so easily.
Seems like you can't un-blow that dog whistle quite so easily.
I seem to remember their forums having a dedicated GG forum thread back in the day. Of course it was mostly people supporting and organising in there.
I see why they would pull support. I did the same, and while their apology helps, that they posted it in the first place really did add to my side-eyeing of gog after their Magnum Opus stunt. Two of three strikes.
At least it's not a "both sides" fake apology, so it's fine enough.
Calling vg247 "reactionary" for such seems pretty nuts. It's a reasonable response to someone peddling the content of a harassment mob. Reactionary is posting an image posting about someone pissing on the grave of "Games Journalism" which, as one can see, supposedly committed suicide in 2014. Even if someone was wholly ignorant of the connotiations somehow, the image itself has content strange enough to make one wonder what it is about - and one single google search answers that.
But ignorance is unlikely: Even the developer posted it with the gamergate hashtag.
Gamergate comes up routinely at industry events in Europe, is frequently discussed as a problem, and affected employees of European companies. That "nobody really cared about it here in Europe" is flat out false, and I'm really wondering why you keep trying to make that claim.
A "middle european company" would definitely know about it. Especially one that is a major online storefront that does, you know, marketing research. Gog is not just some random guy in a random house that never goes outside.
At least it's not a "both sides" fake apology, so it's fine enough.
Calling vg247 "reactionary" for such seems pretty nuts. It's a reasonable response to someone peddling the content of a harassment mob. Reactionary is posting an image posting about someone pissing on the grave of "Games Journalism" which, as one can see, supposedly committed suicide in 2014. Even if someone was wholly ignorant of the connotiations somehow, the image itself has content strange enough to make one wonder what it is about - and one single google search answers that.
But ignorance is unlikely: Even the developer posted it with the gamergate hashtag.
Gamergate comes up routinely at industry events in Europe, is frequently discussed as a problem, and affected employees of European companies. That "nobody really cared about it here in Europe" is flat out false, and I'm really wondering why you keep trying to make that claim.
A "middle european company" would definitely know about it. Especially one that is a major online storefront that does, you know, marketing research. Gog is not just some random guy in a random house that never goes outside.
They made their stance clear for anyone listening and knowing what this is about, which most likely include anyone still rooting for GG, as they're starving for validation any way they can get it and most certainly watching this like hawks. Mentioning GG might have the opposite effect and remind the people that it exists, make fans of the game that might not know about it check it out (and they aren't likely to be swayed by a corporation's negative statement), etc.
You might be right and an explicit condemnation of GG might be the best course, but I frankly have no clue what would be the best action in the end.
Clear naming of the movement and publicly denounce it. Also make sure to tell us how this does not happen again, by for example telling us that they don't employee GGers, or telling us that the company has a strict anti-harrasment standards.
So let me start by saying I only have a surface knowledge of gamergate and legit want to learn because the dynamic around it is fascinating. So this is a legit question. Is it fair to assume at this point that everyone who references gamer gate is leaning into the harrassment side and not still just championing for better in games journalism? Is that nuanced position still open? The issue seems so bifurcated at this point that maybe not. But there doesnt seem room for nuance points about it any more. It seems you either have to get angry and use sweeping accusations of sexism and hate or on the flip side you are a hater.
I guess I'm asking how one voices the view I mentioned (harrassment is sick but there is definitely shady crap in games journalism regardless of whatever happened with the people the controversy centered on) but doesn't get branded a lover of hate. Some of the bans here even follow that assumption. You don't rabble in the comments and you are accused of supporting a hate movement.
One more time for the record, harrassment and hate are evil. Those who did so are sick. I barely know what Gamergate is and don't support anything but rational discourse and learning with this question. Please don't yell at me, call me a hater, and ban me. : )
I guess I'm asking how one voices the view I mentioned (harrassment is sick but there is definitely shady crap in games journalism regardless of whatever happened with the people the controversy centered on) but doesn't get branded a lover of hate. Some of the bans here even follow that assumption. You don't rabble in the comments and you are accused of supporting a hate movement.
One more time for the record, harrassment and hate are evil. Those who did so are sick. I barely know what Gamergate is and don't support anything but rational discourse and learning with this question. Please don't yell at me, call me a hater, and ban me. : )
Simple: Don't used tired rhetoric, and don't reference shit specific to this movement. Discuss specific issues with reporting in specific articles, don't go 'it's about ethics in journalism'.
I think you should try doing some basic independent research yourself before pushing extensively debunked line about actually it's about ethics in games journalism in 2018.
GG is photoshoping tweets, forum entries etc. to paint a certain picture. They are not talking about game journalism, but attack certain individuals they have a problem with. Instead of e.g. discussing about the contents of Anita Sarkeesians videos and maybe offer counter-arguments or different solutions, they attacked the person making the videos.
There is no discourse about whether the fear of being blacklisted by pubs is a bad look, but it is usually about attacking several individuals.
It is about how more women in gaming is bad.
It's completely safe to say that because they only came up with the "ethics in gaming journalism" line *after* the harassment started. I was there. I saw it happen all in real time. And a lot of people saw the threads in 4chan/8chan where they were just like "well we need to rebrand this thing somehow to give it some legitimacy".
I could believe it, if it were a common screenshot, but that gif is actually pretty hard to find without running into screenshots of the #gamergate tweet.
It's good that they apologized, but I'm not convinced that they're being entirely honest here.
I feel they should definitely have referenced and denounced Gamergate specifically in the 'apology' here. Any additional visibility and hard-line stances on how shitty these people are is key, because all this tweet's managed to do is give the scum behind GG a platform, an excuse to come out of their little caves and spew bile. Goes to show what kind of audience they've cultivated I guess, I would've respected their quick response were it not for the fact that they're too cowardly to take a real stand on real issues.
Will be taking my money elsewhere.
Will be taking my money elsewhere.
To be honest, you did say there's some shady crap going on in game journalism.
That's my question as well. Now that they know the game contains imagery that supports "an abusive movement", are they going to remove it from the store?
Because not condoning hate doesn't mean much when you're profiting economically from it.
the "ethics" in games journalism that gamer gators want to stamp out, according to them, is a conspiracy theory about some sort of global liberal and feminist agenda that games journalists are supposedly bending knee to. The entire thing is just a very round about way of providing cover for the true intention - a culture war where they are acting in accordance with the alt-right.
This is pretty damn clear to see if you spend even a cursory glance at their activity.
That's why the antithesis of a gamergator is called a "SJW." Durr.
This is pretty damn clear to see if you spend even a cursory glance at their activity.
That's why the antithesis of a gamergator is called a "SJW." Durr.
Just one look at the replies to that apology show why you can't just post crappy "sorry we did this" apologies like this one.
People are already spinning this as "those durn sjw's" having pressured a company into giving into their demands.
Clear, open opposition to gamergate is pretty much the only acceptable response in this situation. But, then again, you wouldn't be selling pro-gamergate games if you actually cared.
People are already spinning this as "those durn sjw's" having pressured a company into giving into their demands.
Clear, open opposition to gamergate is pretty much the only acceptable response in this situation. But, then again, you wouldn't be selling pro-gamergate games if you actually cared.
Because there is lol. Much of it being sexist too. This is kind of my point. Can you not question games journalism without being a gamergate fan now? That seems silly to me whether or not the movement hid behind that front.
Wanting "less shady stuff" is all cool, and nobody will have a problem with that. But: What is the shady stuff, and how do you want it to be less shady? These days it's not games journalism that is shady for the most part - they're doing pretty fine. The most shady things are happening with youtubers. it has a reason they are called "influencers" now.
But hey, even if you completely ignore influencers and all the shady stuff with them, and just want games websites to be better on covering games: Do that. Nobody will think you're a gamergater unless you also go into long rants about women or think women shouldn't criticize games/make games/games should only have half naked women with giant breasts.
That's the thing: Nobody in their right mind equals "wanting good games journalism" and gamergate, because gamergate stood for more biased games journalism that would only post fact sheets, was devoid of any criticism of a game they didn't like, and that would uncritically repost outright lies about Zoe Quinn. The main "reviews are bought!" accusation from gamergaters was a lie as well.
That's not your goal? Then you're great. Jim Sterling keeps shouting about journalists, and while I think he's full of it on that subject, I sure don't think he's a gamergater for his opinion!
Worse still, the chronology is significant and worth stating. Gamergate fed directly into the rise of the alt right.
It's a hate movement through and through, there is no room for nuance. Fuck gamergate.
What does it mean to "question games journalism"? That is such a vapid statement. The entire concept is so bizarre to me. Honestly, how can anybody honestly care about something so frivolous and trivial as "games journalism"?
For those who gave actual information, and not just "lol" style post : ), thanks, I appreciate it!
I can see that the people who are that invested in it are the ones whose only hobby might be that. "Social outcasts".
Sure bud, did you learn anything or do you still believe that there is room for nuance and that the intent behind gamergate is debatable?
Wasn't there a giga-troll about Valve and Steam in Postal ? Something that stay hidden for a decade or something.
It's all the same thing, yes. It's become incredibly clear that this sort of prevasive online culture that has existed for a long time has finally congealed into what is now known as the alt-right. It's always existed. At one time it was just called trolling. Then it was like this part of Something Awful. Or LUE on gamefaqs. It was a part of FARK. Then it became 4chan. And anonymous. And gamergate. It's deeply integrated into video game culture now because early online activity tended to be the realm of young nerds who were naturally into video games.
All of it is the alt-right. To be ignorant of what gamergate is, is to really be ignorant of internet culture in general. If you've bounced around on the internet at all for a period of time, you've run into this thing in some form or another. It's incredibly easy to spot.
It depends what you mean about caring I guess. I care about dishonesty, I care about "back door shady deals", I care when sexism is present in the "boys club" of payouts and rewards. I mean we are on a video game message board, so we care about games and thus to an extent the reporting of them right?
"Dense and cynical"? Nah, more like "aware and intuitive."
I know I'm now never buying anything from GOG; and I'm stubborn, so I stick to my guns on this, even in light of their "apology."
People have been rationally criticising games journalism as long as games journalism has existed. You don't need to associate yourself with a movement founded on hatred to do that.
We all know you are trolling, but for the silent readers:
Critizing games journalism, or any kind of journalism by any kind of outlet, was always and will always be okay. Noone has taken that right away or intends to do so.
Gamergate was born to harrass a indie game developer. Harrassment of a indie developer is not criticism of games journalism. It is harrassment of a indie developer.
If we're having an honest back and forth: why? Why do you care about that? I just don't pay attention to outlets like that. It's pretty easy to do. Like, I haven't read IGN or Game Informer or anything like that seriously in decades. Who cares about any of that stuff? To me, that's like raging at a sears brochure catalog. What's the larger purpose of being so invested in keeping some advertising outlets honest?
Like others have already pointed out to you, you're free to cite specific instances of these "shady deals" etc you're referencing. You're also able to make a thread on here about them. You don't need GG to do that though.