Aktivarum

Sex, lögner och dataspel – Del 3 #GAMERGATE korruptionen i Spelmedia når Massmedia | september 9, 2014

Det är dags att lämna Zoe Quinn-affären och fokusera på de större problem som den avslöjade.

Efter Del 1 och Del 2 har vi nu nått både tredje veckan av diskussioner online och tredje videon av InternetAristocrat. Här visas ännu fler kopplingar mellan personer i så kallad ”speljournalism” och personer som sysslar med spelutveckling inklusive deras PR-folk. Detta är långt värre än någon kan föreställa sig.

Det första ni undrar är sannolikt vad sjutton står #GamerGate för? Svaret är att #GamerGate är namnet och hashtaggen som uppkom när speljournalister på halvdussinet publikationer på kort tid skrev artiklar om hur det enligt dem var dags att sluta använda ordet ”Gamer”

Dessa politiska anti-gamer artiklar inkluderar: (Observera! Dessa är unvis.it/)

‘Gamers’ don’t have to be your audience. ‘Gamers’ are over. (Leigh Alexander – Gamasutra) Let’s retire the word ‘gamer’ (Brandon Sheffield , Gamasutra) A Guide to Ending ”Gamers” (Devin Wilson, Gamasutra) The death of the “gamers” and the women who “killed” them (Casey Johnston, Ars Technica) We Might Be Witnessing The ‘Death of An Identity’ (Luke Plunkett, Kotaku) There are gamers at the gate, but they may already be dead (Jonathan Holmes, Destructoid) The Monday Papers (Graham Smith, Rock Paper Shotgun) This guy’s embarrassing relationship drama is killing the  ‘Gamer’ identity (Mike Pearl, Vice Motherboard) Gaming Is Leaving “Gamers” Behind (Joseph Bernstein, Buzzfeed)

Länkarna ovan har alla gemensamt att de leder till spelsajter och saknar objektiva källor. De flesta tycks länka till en och samma bloggpost. Dan Goldings ”The End of Gamers”. Kampanjen mot Gameridentiteten begränsades dock inte till spelsajter utan spred sig snabbt till feministiska nyhetssajter. Snart fanns anti-gamer texter hos Jezebel (Callie Beusman)  The Mary Sue (Victoria McNally) och The Daily Beast (Tauriq Moosa).

Under tiden som femsemedia var upptagna med att skriva artiklar om hur hemska gamers var så avsöjades ännu en skandal bland spelmediafolket. Inom kort fanns nedan videoklipp som berättar sagan om Maya ”Legobutts” Kramer och kopplingarna mellan speljournalister, spelutvecklare och en allt mer central PR-firma som finns mellan dem.

Observera att informationen ovan i hög grad kommer från ”Cameralady” en kvinnlig vbloggare. Hon berättar att Maya Kramer både jobbar åt och har privat relation med Zoe Quinn.

Maya Kramer visar sig även jobba åt samma PR-firma som Anita Sarkeesian, nämligen Silverstring Media. En PR-firma med uppenbart vänsterpolitisk agenda som kan kopplas till marxisten Antonio Gramscis tankar.

We talked a big game at DiGRA about dismantling hegemonic masculinity through intimate friendships. Tearing down those emotional walls that are part of the infrastructure of gendered oppression. Pursuing that male emotional fulfillment that Samantha Allen writes about as essential to the liberation of women. (Silverstring Media)

Silverstring tycks också ha kopplingar till människor på flera av de mediasajter som började skriva anti-gamer artiklar med några timmars mellanrum. Kort sagt en PR-firma försöker manipulera information, detta medan internet slår tillbaka genom att kartlägga de parter som ingår i kampanjen. Exempelvis på forumet där Silverstring-personal diskuterar hittar vi Dan Golding som skrev den bloggartikel som flera av spelsajterna länkar till.

Det är bara ett problem. Det räcker med en enda ärlig journalist så faller hela bygget. I detta fall har vi två:

Dessa är Erik Cain på Forbes ”GamerGate: A Closer Look At The Controversy Sweeping Video Games” 

…och David Auerbach på Slate ”Gaming journalism is over”

Returning to the real world, the biggest problem with all these claims is that they are demonstrably untrue. A quick glance at financials shows that “gamers” are not going anywhere. If “gamers” really are dying, no one told the marketing departments for these publications, which continue to trumpet their “gamer” demographic to advertisers.

PR-kampanjen är alltså byggd på lögner och har ett uttalat vänsterpolitiskt PR-företag (Silverstring Media) i centrum. Deras konsult är Anita Sarkeesian vars hela karriär bygger på att smutsmåla personer som gillar dataspel, söka sympatier hos jounalister och skrämma okunniga politiker med ”låtsasvetenskaplig vänsterpolitisk teori” om hur dataspel påstå skapa sexistiska samhällen och därför behöver hårdare politisk kontroll.

Detta ett par futtiga år efter att lika låtsasvetenskaplig högerpolitisk teori om effekten av våldsamma dataspel har mosats i U.S. Supreme Court där beviskraven var betydligt högre än vad de är på dessa spelsajter som av allt döma kontrolleras av Silverstring Media, vilka bland annat anordnar ”Corporate Retreats” där de predikar om vikten av ”Dismantling the male hegenomy in gaming” av allt att döma under hotet att Silverstrings journalistvänner kommer att smutskasta företag som inte lyder partipiskan

Utpressning av denna sort finns det till och med bildbevis på.

Ovan nämnda speljournalist Leigh Alexander (Gamasutra) och hennes vänner (kom ihåg att Silverstring media uttalat förespråkar privat vänskap som politiskt verktyg) sitter otroligt nog helt öppet och hotar spelutvecklare på Twitter. I tweets mellan spelutvecklaren Ross Roegner så kan vi se följande replik från Leigh:

Be careful with me I am a megaphone, I am much less kind than Rami and won´t mind making an example out of you

Samma Leigh Alexander skriver för TIME Magazine artikeln ”Sexism, Lies and Video Games: The Culture War Nobody Is Winning”.  Internet har dock tröttnat på översittar-låtsasjounrnalister. I en massiv expose på Imgur demonstreras hur Leigh Alexanders artikel bryter mot TIME Magazines regler bland annat genom partiskhet och med smygreklam åt företaget InkleStudios. Där finns även bildbevis på Tweets där Leigh Alexander hotar med att göra exempel av Russ Roegner om han inte rättar sig efter hennes politiska agenda.

@IncredRoe: I have not attacked or insulted anyone. I have been kind and respectful this entire time

@Leighalexander: Respectful? By now the entire industry you want to work in is chastising your comments

@Laralyn (McWilliams) : It is not respectful to deny sexism in game development to women actually working in games

Budskap: vi och våra vänner (vissa i sexuell relation) anser bara folk som tycker rätt skall få jobba här.

Jenn Franks, en annan skribent av samma sort lämnade sitt jobb på The Guardian efter reaktioner på hennes artikel ”How to attack a woman who works in video gaming”. Artikeln hänvisar till Anita Sarkeesian och Zoe Quinn. Det är bara det att det snabbt avslöjades att Jenn Franks ger pengar till Zoe Quinn via Patreon. Inte nog med det gissa vem som ger pengar till Jenn Franks? Ingen mindre än Maya ”Legobutts” Kramer (Silverstring Media).

De här människorna måste vara helt rubbade. Jenn Franks tar först emot pengar av Silverstring Medias PR-konsult Maya Kramer. Hon skriver sedan en artikel i THE GUARDIAN om Silverstrings egen konsult Anita Sarkeesian samt om ”spelutvecklaren” Zoe Quinn vars dataspel samma Silverstring Media är betalda att marknadsföra och Jenn Franks själv är en av dem som ger pengar till Zoe Quinn.

Det är ju inte ens roligt längre det är fullkomligt vansinne. Det finns dock en ljusning: #NotYourShield. Jag återkommer till det på Genusdebatten.se

Annonser

Publicerat i Genus

5 kommentarer »

  1. Wikipedia-redigeraren ”Titanium Dragon” i annat kommentarsfält. På sina platser så kanonbra att jag citerar hela kommentaren här.

    ”The whole thing has been brewing for years. Arguably decades; John Romero’s whole Daikatana thing really is an infamous instance of people not really respecting their audience, and given that much of the gamer audience are people who were bullied themselves, they are very sensitive to perceptions of being bullied or talked down to. The gaming press clearly does not respect them in many cases, and some of the more brazen instances of conflict of interest has upset them for ages.

    On the other hand, a lot of these people ARE introverts and not very good with people, and have a tendency to lash out and insult people. It is hardly surprising that they can be very nasty, because they often don’t have the best of social skills, and their private activity being soemthing that they can do in the privacy of their own home without face to face interaction. They DO have a massive sense of entitlement, as shown by the incredible anger over the ending to Mass Effect 3 which, while rather poorly written, did not warrant the incredible amount of anger shown. And that is hardly the only instance of such. Many of them want exactly what they want, and want it now.

    And misogyny is to some extent an issue in the gaming industry, but the thing is, blaming the gamers for misogyny in games is more than a little misguided. Moreover, a lot of the complaints are simply nonsensical; complaining about Princess Peach and GTA is stupid. Princess Peach IS an object, a MacGuffin; she isn’t meant to be a character in the mainline Mario games, she’s an objective. And that’s fine! Those games barely have a plot at all; it is a pure excuse plot. On the other hand, GTA is a power fantasy for a specific demographic of gamer; I don’t like it at all, and I’ve often looked down on it in the past (and, frankly, still kind of do so), but after reading about why people enjoy power fantasies like that, and listening to people, and actually getting over myself and asking myself “why DO people like that?”, I’ve come to accept their existence.

    No, the issue is with the disempowerment of women (like in Metroid: Other M) and inappropriate sexualization of female characters (King in King of Fighters, Samus and her Zero Suit) in games. If someone is an object, that’s fine. The problem comes when you take someone who isn’t an object and make them into one – that’s potentially demeaning. And if you do it to women far more often than you do it to men, then there’s an issue.

    Putting in nearly-naked ladies into things which aren’t power fantasies like GTA is bothersome as well and I don’t like it very much, because that’s not why I play video games – and I’m sure that gamers have no shortage of places to look at scantily clad women on the internet. And it IS offputting for women.

    The dearth of female protagonists is also problematic. I don’t think women in video games are actually all that poorly written on the whole – I just think that they are underrepresented in certain roles, as “real characters”.

    But I digress.

    Point is, I actually agree that the gaming industry should do better.

    The problem is that Zoe Quinn and Phil Fish are exactly a part of the nasty gamer subculture they supposedly despise – they are very nasty people who harass and demean others. Zoe Quinn has complained about slut shaming while simultaneously demeaning virgins, not recognizing that virgin-shaming is exactly the same as slut-shaming – in fact, slut-shaming and virgin-shaming are caused by each other. They are inextricably linked. And people like Phil Fish called everyone who complained about Zoe Quinn rapists.

    The original bout of censorship was what catapulted this into prominence; had they not deleted all the stuff off of Reddit and various other places, it probably wouldn’t have exploded. But the suppression made the people who were angry about it believe that they had something to hide – perhaps rightly, perhaps wrongly. It doesn’t really matter at this point, because it looked like it to them. And indeed, I am very strongly anti-censorship, and this is partially why – when you tell people that they aren’t allowed to discuss something, you are fundamentally telling them that whatever it is is real and that you have something to hide. This is why I believe all hate speech laws are severely counterproductive – making denying the Holocaust illegal implies that you are scared that if people were allowed to ask these questions, they might find “the truth”. If you leave it legal and make fun of the people who deny the Holocaust, it just makes them look like the crazy nutjobs that they are.

    In this case, it is really hard to say – the problem is that the industry is unquestionably corrupt and in many cases really doesn’t understand proper ethical conduct. The question is whether or not any particular case rises to the level of being a problem. Honestly, as one of my friends pointed out, the Grayson thing is a lot less questionable than the Boggs thing – how many nerdy gamers would be thrilled to have some pretty woman who is into gaming express interest in them? A lot of them, I’m sure. Would they really think about the implications that it would look like they had written a positive press piece about someone that they started a relationship with shortly thereafter? Many of them probably wouldn’t. It looks terrible, but that doesn’t mean that it WAS – but we, the world in general, has no way of knowing whether or not what happened was inappropriate or not.

    Boggs, on the other hand, slept with her shortly before hiring her. That’s incredibly awful. If you’re a young female game developer looking for a job, and you hear that someone got hired after they slept with their future boss, and NO ONE IN THE INDUSTRY SAID ANYTHING BAD ABOUT IT, how would that make you feel? What would that make you think was the expectation for behavior in the industry? Is that not, itself, rather misogynistic? Because I sure think it is. And that’s ignoring the fact that he was married, and that apparently Quinn claimed that the whole thing coming out would be bad for “the movement” and would “silence” her voice for feminism, and that, thusly, the wife should keep the affair quiet. That is unconscionable.

    But no, everyone is talking about Grayson. And so, the article is very likely to only very passingly mention, if at all, the whole thing with Boggs (it has been mentioned, but it is only very briefly mentioned as being a side show, and the only article which went into any real depth about it which I found was an opinion piece, which isn’t a RS), while it will go into great depth about the stupid blowup over game journalism over something which may or may not have even been wrong. Stupid, yes, and something he shouldn’t have done, but there’s no evidence of evil there, just people who can’t keep their pants zipped. But that’s how Wikipedia works, and that’s my job as a Wikipedia editor – I don’t insert my opinions into things, I have to document it. So I have to document stupid internet fight which the press covered, and people yelling about misogyny and corruption, and I can’t really talk at all about that stuff.

    And I’m okay with that. Wikipedia isn’t my personal voice piece, and I would be wrong to use it as such. The entire reason why Wikipedia is useful is precisely because it isn’t anyone’s personal voice piece. The article will contain plenty of great information on the subject matter so people can go back in ten years and be like “Wow, people in 2014 were really dumb.” It won’t contain everything I might like for it to contain, but I can write articles on the internet or whatever talking about my personal point of view, and that’s much better than contaminating Wikipedia with what I consider to be important – Wikipedia is bigger and better and more important than that. That’s what makes Wikipedia great.

    When people – such as the writers of this piece, or the #GamerGate folks, or the anti-global warming crazies, or racist people, or anyone else – try to push their point of view into Wikipedia, that’s a problem. Wikipedia is MEANT to be neutral. It is meant to take a neutral point of view. And we use reliable sourcing and other things to help make sure that Wikipedia does not suck.

    They made fun of the stylo thing in the article, and I probably shouldn’t have linked to that (even though stylystic analysis tools are publicly available on the internet, so anyone could verify the information) because it isn’t something which can be confirmed as a reliable source. Who Bad Horse is is not public knowledge (even though I do know who he is, and he is less unreliable than you’d think), so linking to that blog is inappropriate. And I’m glad someone caught that and fixed it, because, well, we all screw up. We write things which are slanted or incomplete, or use bad sources, or write the wrong name, or misquote a source, or do any number of other stupid things. Wikipedia is awesome because when you screw up, someone else will come along five minutes later and fix it.”

    Kommentar hittas här http://wikipediocracy.com/2014/09/07/wikipedia-and-the-war-on-womens-dignity/

    Kommentar av Aktivarum — september 10, 2014 @ 1:24 e m

  2. ”As for the reason why people whine about the gender gap task force – it is the exact same reason you’re whining about this. They’re afraid that they’re irrelevant and will be pushed out, without realizing that they’re the aggressors.

    Though let’s face reality here – the real reason that the gender gap exists is because women aren’t interested in editing Wikipedia. This isn’t because of systematic discrimination against women, it is because people – like the person who runs this blog – are jerks, and because a lot of them simply aren’t interested in nerding out and writing and editing Wikipedia articles obsessively. The task force is a ridiculous farce, not because it wouldn’t be a good thing to get more women on Wikipedia – it would be – but because there is no easy solution to the problem. People need to WANT to work on Wikipedia, and the problem is that many people – male and female alike – simply are uninterested in doing so.”

    Kommentar av Aktivarum — september 10, 2014 @ 1:32 e m

  3. Intressant.

    http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1s85o6r
    ”Then the #notyourshield hashtag hits the world. Destroying the Press’s narrative that everyone that is complaining is a white male […] Blacks, hispanics, asians and women of all colors have stood up to confront the ‘journalists’ that then insist these people aren’t REALLY minorities, but white men in disguise. When that fails, they accuse these people of having internalized misogyny, or internalized racism. They cannot comprehend that a colored person or female could possibly hold the opinions of white men.”

    Kommentar av Kristian — september 10, 2014 @ 2:14 e m

  4. Jag trodde min engelska var hyfsad, men vad sjutton betyder ”Pursuing that male emotional fulfillment that Samantha Allen writes about as essential to the liberation of women.”?

    Kommentar av Kristian — september 10, 2014 @ 4:31 e m

  5. Kristian:

    Jag tror det betyder att hon tycker att män skall vara som kvinnor. Exakt vad hennes beskrivning av män betyder vette sjutton men säkerligen något negativt.

    Kommentar av Aktivarum — september 10, 2014 @ 8:57 e m


Kommentera

Fyll i dina uppgifter nedan eller klicka på en ikon för att logga in:

WordPress.com Logo

Du kommenterar med ditt WordPress.com-konto. Logga ut / Ändra )

Twitter-bild

Du kommenterar med ditt Twitter-konto. Logga ut / Ändra )

Facebook-foto

Du kommenterar med ditt Facebook-konto. Logga ut / Ändra )

Google+ photo

Du kommenterar med ditt Google+-konto. Logga ut / Ändra )

Ansluter till %s

    aktivarum@gmail.com

    Skriv in din epostadress för att prenumerera på den här bloggen och därmed få information om nya inlägg via epost.

    Gör sällskap med 1 199 andra följare

    Arkiv

%d bloggare gillar detta: