You’re Missing the Point: #GamerGate, SJWs, and the Myth of Objective Media
It took me a while to understand what #GamerGate folks were on about. But in my defense, it took them at least a day to organize themselves. Now that the proverbial battle lines have been scribbled across social media, let’s take a step back and see where the dust has settled. As always, we begin with the basics.
#GamerGate is a dedicated offshoot of the calls of corruption that stemmed from allegations of collusion and biased relationships between independent game developers and the video game press. These complaints stemmed from an ex-lover of an independent game developer claiming that the dev slept with various members of the press indirectly (or directly) leading to more and better coverage for their game.
I will not be discussing these instances in detail here. The evidence in favor of this alleged corruption has yet been correlated into a trustworthy case file, and the situation has become downright nuclear. Seething hatred from both sides has turned any reasonable attempt at discussion or debate into the same procession of dated insults and slurs. The point to be had in the origin of #GamerGate is that a certain section of self-identified gamers are seemingly attempting to raise awareness of their allegations of the aforementioned industry corruption.
The demands of #GamerGate appear to be forcing more transparency in press coverage, particularly in regards to a specific writer discussing a project they have personally supporting through crowd funding. At least, that’s what I’m pretty sure the demands are…
At the core of issue being argued by both those in favor and those against #GamerGate is instant stereotyping. Those against have characterized every proponent of the outrage as drooling mongrels, largely because the Twitter hashtag has been quickly and frequently adopted by the same troglodyte slime that has been spitting venom at anyone (particularly women) who have referenced political or social points in relation to video games. Those for have characterized everyone outside the #GamerGate bubble as corrupted hacks decrying all self-identified gamers as every -ist and -phobe in the dictionary.
Like every effort contained almost entirely online, the anonymity of text has made the most vile thoughts of everyone involved public, with satirical or sarcastic commentary being absorbed (and often misinterpreted) with the same fervor as completely serious endorsements. It is difficult for anyone without a predisposed opinion on the minute of the subject matter being discussed to have an accurate method of entry into the debate when private hate messages are just one poor word choice away.
A muddied point, and a complete lack of self-regulation
If the purpose of #GamerGate is indeed strictly to improve the transparency of gaming journalism, it has so far been indistinguishable from a march of hateful glee at the successful punishment of women writers. Direct and repeated harassment has caused multiple prominent women writers and play critics, including Mattie Brice and Jenn Frank, have proclaimed to have quit the industry over the assaults they have received. The response has been utter delight from the forumites and reactionary elements of #GamerGate.
My summation of the goals of those outraged was a charitable one. Scrolling through prominent messages featuring the hashtag on Twitter or Reddit, one could make an equally good (or often superior) case that the end goal of #GamerGate is a) an industry devoid of any commentary outside of direct reporting of the features and technical specs of video games b) the reclamation of the term “gamer” as one of diversity or c) the forcible removal of every major or minor voice espousing any values not in line with theirs.
Organic, leaderless grassroots efforts are more often than not better in theory than practice. Without leaders, the idiots amongst even the most pragmatic and calm organization are given equal volume to those with points of actual merit. #GamerGate is being derided because, to most of those already targeted by online harassers, all that’s changed is that the troglodytes have new ammunition. And to many others, the face value of this outrage is that when women/minority/ally voices are called names, they should suck it up because that’s the way it is, but when those in the prime audience are called names, it’s a massive conspiracy worthy of reference to the political scandal that took down the most powerful man in the world.
Also, the prefix of a “____Gate” is supposed to be cause for concern. #GamerGate makes it seem that “gamer” is the problem. Was “GameJournoGate” taken?
Photo copyright Deviantart User lionsilverwolf
One of the few inarguable points in the favor of any iteration of #GamerGate is that a subsection of a subsection of the industry (that being the active commentators of those of – or supportive of – minorities in the male-dominated video game industry) are quite active in lashing out insults at anyone that questions the various claims of sexism and racism in video games. There is an internet population emboldened by the same internet hive-mind as their opposition (which I will now unfairly tie specifically to blog and lifestyle sites along the lines of tumblr) to see any opinion voiced against them as being that of a blind, biased member of the oppressive majority. For example, the most favored insult when it comes to me is “cis-gendered fat shamer.” This was most prominently used after I used the term “waddle” to describe the movements of some people I saw at a carnival once.
It seems that you can never be too liberal for this crowd. Even the most progressive amongst us seem to be accused of some internalized bias of some sort. We are in the earliest days imaginable for the public, open discussion of some complicated gender, sexual, and moral issues. But it seems that those believing themselves to be enlightened on the topics are just as quick to poison the waters of genuine discussion as those dismissive of anything not conforming to the straight-white-male paradigm.
The state of gaming journalism
There are definite problems with the current state of gaming journalism. But for some reason, most are ignored by #GamerGaters. Their charges of corruption largely revolve around freelance writers covering subjects they have had previous relationships with, or receiving favors in exchange for positive coverage. The latter point is certainly present, and at objectionable levels, but it is not exclusive to the video games industry.
There has been little said in the #GamerGate conversation about the frequently hazardous relationship between websites and advertisers, with review pages having border ads for the very game being critiqued. Even former talking points like the Dorito Pope or the firing of Jeff Gertzmann are not likely to be found as much as indistinct complaints against Anita Sarkessian. Awards shows have been held that give monetary prizes for popular tweets about the products on display that night, and our biggest conventions are more publisher-press collaboration than ever.
We live in a world of diminishing returns on formal reporting. Print is all but buried, and major sites are consolidating to avoid labor costs that cannot match the rapidly decreasing profits being returned. When a vast majority of news of any type is condensed across an information medium no one has figured out how to properly monetize, everyone is in constant danger of losing the ability to absorb news properly and without interference. But you wouldn’t register that as a prevalent #GamerGate complaint, because the priority is about the death threats everyone else has been receiving online since 2007.
Here is the precipice on which #GamerGate dangles. In between calls of industry transparency and less bias, the abbreviation of SJW is commonly seen. he favorite term of #GamerGate, outside of “corruption”, is social justice warrior. The presence of these SJWs, according to many outraged proponents, are the leading cause of the bias.
The phrase is primarily used as a derogative to describe someone quick to defend those perceived to be victims. At first it seems almost a term of endearment, but in relation to this outrage it also means someone who picks up their values and opinions directly from prominent bloggers without any critical reasoning. And like most suddenly popular colloquialisms, it’s flung around without any semblance of sense.
Even if every single person accused of being a Social Justice Warrior was as vapid as the term implies, the threat to the self-professed gamers of #GamerGate would still be close to zero. Voicing concerns about racial, sexual, and gender representations in video games will never turn a significant number of formerly mindless power fantasies into boring, wimpy lectures on feminism. The whims of billion dollar corporations will not be swayed much by even the most stalwart petitions for inclusiveness, at least not to a point of complete industry changes. Video games are – as vehemently professed by many #GamerGaters – a free market. And that means everyone with a voice, even the whiniest Trader Joe’s shopper gets to speak their mind.
More importantly, the hatred toward those that (at least appear to) advocate for moral and social change within the industry changes the #GamerGate movement into an inflexible ideology. If anti-corruption is the primary cause, how does someone voicing their opinion factor into industry-wide conspiracy? The video game industry (including the press) is one of the least unionized labor forces in the history of entertainment media. The pay rates for freelance writers, editors, and forum moderators is laughable, if existent at all. In order for the press as a whole to be corrupt, there must be collaborations across dozens of different sites with little monetary motivation.
There is no corruption inherit in simply voicing concern of a direction or past of an industry unless your position is in stringent support of the status quo. At this point, the term “corruption” is more metaphor complaint. Many #GamerGaters seem to not like SJWs because they represent a different perspective than theirs that is given equal weight, a potential threat to decades of narrowcasting to their demographic and ideology. And keep in mind that individuals being banned or restricted in their speech is the prerogative of each individual, privately-owned website, and not evidence in and of itself of a web of dominating influence.
The myth of objective media
#GamerGate has not been effective at laying out exactly how the industry is meant to become more transparent and less biased. Some steps have been taken by certain sites, like Kotaku and Polygon, to state when a writer has a prior relationship with a subject they are covering, and that’s wonderful. But that step was not prescribed specifically by the folks of #GamerGate, at least not in way they have proven publicly. The clarion call for this outrage is largely, and simply, for writers and reviewers to be “more objective.”
And here, is where it gets personal. I have been writing about video games for a few years now, across several publications. When I began, I would have in pretty strong agreement with the vague sentiment above. I still demand as much disclosure from any writers below me, and I am proud to be connected to publications with strict ethics guidelines. But asking for an objective media is both childish and impossible.
As long as a human being is constructing something, there exists bias. The mean act of selecting something to report on, whether or not it bumps something else from the schedule, is an act of inherent bias. If the main form of communication for most of these writers requires them to assign a value set (often in very limited numerical terms), precisely how are they to restrict themselves from making a value judgment? Judging a product by its manufacturing alone is a half-review, one must take into the account how the product affects the audience’s mindset and emotions. If I were to describe the driving controls of an in-game vehicle as “frustrating”, I have judged subjectively judged a product in a way that not everyone will agree with.
Perhaps most sad of all is that those complaining the hardest about objective media are often the exact same people that refuse to support it. Every single media or news outlet I have worked with or interviewed for acknowledge the need for some distinguishing flavor text. Straight news reports do not get the same traffic as those with a reference in them, or adjectives that lead the viewer into a particular mindset. Formal news outlets cannot compete with 24-hour entertainment channels that occasionally break away from covering a reality television star to cover a story about a missing Malaysian airliner. The word many of the #GamerGaters would use to describe this ideal world of objectivity they are demanding would be “boring.”
There is no such thing as “just games”
One of the rallying cries of the #GamerGate outrage, if the most popular pictures passed around with the hashtag can be trusted, is that proponents “just want to play their games”. The views of the supposed SJW-army allegedly interferes with the enjoyment these people have with their entertainment. Reviews, previews, and news reports should not express anything but the mechanics of the game they are discussing, leaving commentary out completely.
This view is completely divorced from reality. Never before in the history of media has their been an instance of “just” something. Games, like movies, television, books, and all other forms of entertainment, are by their nature intimately tied to, and expressions of, the world in which they are enjoyed. You cannot tell a story without approximating or exaggerating existing events and philosophies, otherwise you wouldn’t be able to re-appropriate real life successfully enough in a truncated format for the audience to relate and understand the narratives depicted. Speaking about how our lives are being interpreted in video games is simply examining something beyond the immediate reflexes and mindset it takes to play it.
If you want your games free of all these discussions of race, gender, politics, etc., you are advocating for regression. Games have been evolving in more ways than visual fidelity, and can now approximate enough of the world around us to tell deeper and more meaningful stories. But with these empowered narratives also comes the need to address complex and often topical issues. To state that you want to just be told what a game is and its price, then sit down and “just play” them, is to demand to remain in an era of forced simplicity.
Everyone is right, and everyone is wrong
I wanted to support the better ideals of #GamerGate. The state of gaming journalism is in the same financial pit as all other internet-dominated press industries. But the relevant complaints have been completely overshadowed by whining and entitlement. If any positive change can be affected by this outrage, there must be some serious self-policing and priority re-framing. Because all that has happened right now is that forums are dancing around the spots vacated by writers barely making any money at all.
