TirithRR wrote:
Elinda wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
The side raising concerns about online journalism?
When are things going to get to this part?
I keep seeing people say that this is the 'bigger' issue. Apparently the littler issue about the ****-hurt guy making bad on the girl that hurt his feeling is still muddying the water.
Quote:
Same thing with the NPR piece on Zoe, when it talked about the GamersGate it mentioned only the hateful attacks and threats against the female developer and journalists and not anything about why the controversy existed from the viewpoint of the other side.
Because that is the news. That is the news. That is the news.
Edited, Oct 14th 2014 2:40pm by Elinda Did you even listen to the NPR piece? The story was supposedly about GamersGate, even said so at the beginning. Then they got Zoe on and all she talked about was the attacks and how Anita was threatened all the time. Then some random guy dev got on and talked about the attacks, not once do I recall the issues being discussed prior or during the attack discussion. The one guy did say they the attackers were a small portion of the people, but beyond that nothing.
The anti side has no reason to bring up the issues, by focusing on the attacks they can ignore and discredit any concerns.
Gamer's gate isn't about ethics in journalism - never was. That's bs. It's about people in the gaming industry, specifically female people, getting death threats. That's what it's been about from the beginning. That's why it made news. That's why it continues to make news.
Take sides all you want, but realize that you're sympathizing with and/or making excuses for really bad anti-social behavior. It doesn't matter that Zoe slept around on her boyfriend. It doesn't matter that another girl gamer 'poked' a website. It dosen't matter that Anita publishes her questionable research in video format.
The news here is people making death threats on women in the gaming industry. That's the news. That's what you're siding with. That's what keeps this going.