Jophiel wrote:
idiggory wrote:
So if gamergate is successful in increasing their presence (since I don't believe lasting change is possible anyway), I'm unhappy. If gamergate loses (as is inevitable, because change isn't possible), I'm unhappy because they seem determined to take as many people down with them as possible.
On the other hand, if the state of affairs re: misogyny remains the same since lasting change isn't possible, you're unhappy as well. It's not as though all this has
decreased the amount of harassment or changed the state of gaming at all.
Man, you're just doomed.
I mean lasting change regarding what gamergaters SEEM to want in terms of journalistic integrity. It just won't happen. Ever.
For one, subjective content (from the actual writing to the curating) is always going to be subjective and you're never going to have any clue how influenced a piece is by outside forces (and all of them will be heavily influenced). That will literally never change, because it's the nature of subjective pieces. And because journalists have limited resources, they're going to be using their personal networks to discover the elements they put in stories. So yeah, the girl you're interested in who is also a game designer? You're probably going to mention her game, if it's appropriate for the piece.
And the audience isn't ever going to know which of those mentions would have made it in if the journalist knew about them and didn't have any relationship to them. And editors aren't going to know. And the writers probably aren't going to know, unless they're aware that they're actually giving them a promo.
And in the other issue - that of what gaming sites choose to cover, or not - it's definitely not going to change because gaming news sites are businesses who need to cater to industry powers. Kotaku needs EA WAY more than EA needs Kotaku. They need their goodwill for access to events, for review copies of games, for tours of the offices, for testimonies and interviews, etc. Sure, EA gets publicity out of it. But EA only cares as long as that publicity helps them. So Kotaku HAS to protect its image, and it HAS to be discerning in what it publishes about industry giants, because that's the only way it'll ever survive.
So they'll try to walk the line between promises and reality so they can get the attacks against their advertisers to stop, and then they'll continue on as ever. Because they
cannot sustain the changes gamergate wants.