DrPizza[/url]":23ckxz7x]
[url=http://meincmagazine.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=28316939#p28316939:23ckxz7x said:
0bliv!on[/url]":23ckxz7x]Again, I concede that Ars has editorial control over what it decides to report on and what not to report on, but I don't think even you'd deny that Ars coverage on the wider issue has been fairly one-sided. Even assuming that 90% of Gamergate is scum of the earth (and that may actually be fairly accurate), in the dozens of articles on the issue, there has not been a single article exploring their valid concerns.
They have no valid concerns. Gamergate was constructed as a harassment campaign, and harassment is what gators do.
"But what about ethics in games journalism?" gators may cry.
What about them? Gamergate has no interest in "ethics in games journalism" beyond using it as a pretext to attack people. There is no serious interest in "ethics in games journalism" from gators, which is why their biggest targets have been Zoe Quinn, Brianna Wu, and Anita Sarkeesian, not one of whom is a games journalist. The gator interest in ethics begins and ends in the gator's ability to use ethics to attack people.
In the same vein as Alfonse saying that doxxing from the anti-Gamergate side is partially justified (even if still wrong) due to it being done in defence after being attacked, forgive me for having sympathy for the "Gamers" who started the Gamergate group, despite its myriad of flaws, after being attacked by the wider media. And it's an attack that really hasn't stopped, even if the criticisms have become less hysterical and more evenly tempered.
Gamers weren't attacked. Assholes were attacked. They responded by being assholes.
