Industry and Gamergate Analysis (Continued)

Today I'm going to look at different aspects of the industry and will pick through to some key facts and scenarios, no matter how hidden under layers of deception and misdirection they've typically been placed.

Wikipedia

While, as a whole, a great source for quick access to information, Wikipedia’s strongest feature also becomes its Achilles heel. Namely the ability for anyone to create an article or edit an article allows people to sabotage articles. There is a countermeasure in the form of an edit history, which allows other editors to go back and correct the vandalism, but ultimately the site relies on two things: the editors and the sources they use to verify entries.

An obvious problem rears its head in the form of articles reflecting the biased nature of the media. If the “respected” media outlets decide to pursue a shared narrative then what you end up with is an overwhelming number of sources cross referencing each other and tainting the pot for the sources of Wikipedia articles. This is actually seen in full effect if you read through the Gamergate Wikipedia page, where the constructed narrative the media pushed is duplicated, without any regard for the facts.

“The Gamergate controversy began in August 2014 and concerns sexism in video game culture. It is most notable for a harassment campaign that sought to drive several feminists from the video game industry.”

The above is the opening paragraph for the article, and in just this opening paragraph alone there are a number of strongly asserted falsehoods. Gamergate is not about sexism in video game culture, its primary focus has actually been - since its appearance - the discussion of whether certain elements of news coverage have been conducted in an ethical manner. While some have attacked certain figureheads over their views, attributing everyone to those actions is an entirely blockheaded approach, but as discussed in the previous article, such an approach was beneficial to the people who felt under pressure from such a movement, namely the journalists who were being questioned.

Secondly, there was no concerted effort to drive feminists from the video game industry; a number of them were simply coming under fire for their views. When you approach a large group of people, be they gamers, or any other diverse group of people, if you question something they all love and show either a biased attitude or a disregard to actually discuss what you are talking about, it’s only natural that people will be angry or will fire back questions.

“The harassment included doxing, threats of rape, death threats and was related to a mass shooting threat at a university speaking event.”

As mentioned in the previous article, each group has its bad apples, however here what we have is a clear attribution of these actions to a specific group of people with no actual evidence. Additionally, because of the way in which these reports are made, it is impossible to assume that the source of such threats came from a specific group as they could be sent by anyone, be it the “victim”, the “victim's supporters”, or anyone wanting to troll the discussion or paint a particular side in a negative light.

So referencing this as fact in a Wikipedia article is questionable. Where is the evidence to support these claims beyond simple hearsay?

As it stands the Wikipedia entry for gamergate is based on, at best, half truth and a reflection of media bias. As the discussion grew in complexity and notoriety the people in charge of managing the page slowly whittled down to those sympathetic with the views of the media at large. With the last bastion of reality being removed from the page recently, the outlook for the Gamergate entry is grim. What should have been a fair and balanced overview of a debate has instead been distorted with propaganda that has been used time and time again as a source for other journalists who believe that reading through a Wikipedia page is the only research necessary, which in turn furthers the level misinformation and media whitewash of opinion.

In essence, what the article does is expose us to journalists who are failing to do their jobs properly, and making the current editors of the article complicit in their deception. The editors of the page have shown themselves to be strongly against additions or edits that in any way move towards making the entry more balanced.

Meanwhile, the media portrayal of these events was entirely one sided, taking accounts as fact with no effort being made to verify their claims. Anita herself switched tack from being a critic of games to a critic of gamers. As people watched the media roll out its supportive smear campaign, more and more people stepped forward into the limelight, attacking gamers and the Gamergate hashtag before running to the media the second any of their shots rebounded...

To read the full article check out the link below.