It’s been seven months and infamous #GamerGate has stopped being a movement or consumer revolt, as some have coined it, and transformed into another Internet subculture. I’ve written two long posts essentially supporting the hashtag; however, the honeymoon is over and retrospection has set in. I stand by my prior analysis of the media and game journalists mislabeling #GamerGate with misogyny, anti-feminism and sexism. Unfortunately, those claims are not entirely untrue.
To be honest, my support aligned less with the movement’s goals and more with my dislike of its opposition. Here’s the breakdown of prior my motivations:
1) Mislabeling or blaming a group of people because they disagree with a particular worldview is wrong. Folks within the game journalist community did this apparently expecting no backlash.
2) Activist journalism creates problems because peddling ideology takes a priority over presenting factual information. Journalists in any industry can’t be trusted to honestly report information that conflicts with their predisposed worldviews, yet they expect that trust from their readers/viewers.
3) I’ve seen supposedly “progressive” groups in the past use their cultural influence to shame and bully people who disagree with them into silence which frustrates me. #GamerGate seemed like another victim of this tactic.
Therefore, my perspective has always been from the outside looking in. My twitter feed is still full of people from both sides attacking each other. Then it hit me: does #GamerGate mean anything positive now? I don’t mean to belittle the meaningful work of its members, but was this worth the high price?
1) Mislabeling or blaming a group of people because they disagree with a particular worldview is wrong. Folks within the game journalist community did this apparently expecting no backlash.
2) Activist journalism creates problems because peddling ideology takes a priority over presenting factual information. Journalists in any industry can’t be trusted to honestly report information that conflicts with their predisposed worldviews, yet they expect that trust from their readers/viewers.
3) I’ve seen supposedly “progressive” groups in the past use their cultural influence to shame and bully people who disagree with them into silence which frustrates me. #GamerGate seemed like another victim of this tactic.
Therefore, my perspective has always been from the outside looking in. My twitter feed is still full of people from both sides attacking each other. Then it hit me: does #GamerGate mean anything positive now? I don’t mean to belittle the meaningful work of its members, but was this worth the high price?
I’ll address the anti-feminist claims first. Many folks in #GamerGate identify with feminism, but with its second iteration. Some might label this “equity feminism” which stands in opposition to third wave or “gender feminism.” Christina Sommers is without a doubt the most famous pro-GG feminist. From my observation, a majority of anti-GGers seem to identify as Social Justice Warriors who ideologically fall under third wave feminism. Current theory consists mostly of gender elimination which second wavers disagree with; therefore by current definitions, #GamerGate is an anti-feminist movement. Personally, I don’t see a problem with that. However, it did attract people who were more interested in shitting on SJWs than raising ethical concerns about gaming journalism.
Even in the early days, people on both sides were harassing each other on twitter and I assume the same was happening on forum boards like 8chan, reddit or NeoGAF. It was a miniature extension of the larger culture war. Pro-GG folks stuck to the ethics in journalism, but anti-SJW folks under GG’s banner were too vocal and said a plethora of stupid stuff that anti-GG fed on. Even when GGers tried to police their own, it ended up backfiring. People within GG were turning on each other. Then harassment escalated to doxxing. It didn’t matter who got doxxed or which side they gave allegiance to, #GamerGate’s credibility no longer existed. So much time and resources were spent trying to convince people that #Gamergate wasn’t a movement motivated by hate to no avail.
The hashtag’s nature was its own downfall. Historically, social and political movements ensure longevity by establishing an ideology, leadership roles and membership parameters. Do these elements remain static and unchanging? Probably not, but they are necessary. A leaderless group with no real ability to police how their hashtag is used or by whom only works with momentum. It’s game over when stagnation hits and that’s exactly what happened. #GamerGate fought an uphill PR battle which they lost. I don't think they’ll recover from it. Now both sides just use the hashtag to make fun of each other.
What are GG’s accomplishments? Some websites changed their ethic policies, awesome. They did raise an impressive amount of money for various charities. Gawker Media lost seven million dollars when pro-GGers wrote to its various sponsors. Another example of how powerful a group of people with a united cause can be, but the impact is insignificant. Gawker has gotten more popular through this controversy and regained lost sponsors. The careers of Anita and Brianna have benefited massively from these last six months. Intel put three hundred million dollars into diversity programs a PR make-up for pulling sponsorship last fall. Game journalism practices stay largely unaffected; the Game Journo Pros still exist. #GamerGate hasn’t died, but I think it has lost meaning. After becoming an Internet sub-culture, it’s just both sides saying, “oh we don’t participate in X, but those other people do and here’s proof *random link*” People are just shitting on each other through harassment. Over and over and over again.
In my experience, real impact occurs by changing peoples' hearts and not arguing them into the ground. That means engaging people who disagree in civil conversation and ignoring harassment when it happens, maybe even befriending them. If video game culture is as diverse and welcoming as many in GG have claimed, then we must create a space for people like Anita and others who hold strong convictions about social issues. Let them criticize and make games that explore the issues they talk about. Just as I can stand for gender equality without being a feminist, I support ethical journalism without being apart of GG. #Gamergate was the conduit allowing gamers to stand against being marginalized and mislabeled, but that time is over. The greater gaming community will need to address these issues, not just two small factions (pro-GG and anti-GG). We all have voices which don’t need to be chained to groups or associations. The best way to answer hate is with kindness. That’s idealistic, but it greatly affects people when successful. If bettering our community is the goal, then we must consider the possibility that perpetuating #GamerGate won’t achieve those goals. This isn’t a “#GamerGate is over” post; rather we should let it end. Responsibility doesn’t lie with one side to stop attacking, but with both sides to cease. This entrenched miniature culture war won’t solve anything.
Find me on Facebook or Twitter
No comments:
Post a Comment