This past weekend I traveled to beautiful Miami to discuss ethics in video game journalism — a theme popularized by the Twitter hashtag and controversy known as “GamerGate.”
For those who just read that sentence and thought, “What the heck,” GamerGate began when a handful of video game players discovered conflicts of interest between game developers and the media who review their products. A gaming journalist repeatedly promoted a game developer he had been dating without disclosing the relationship.
The Internet being the Internet, the game developer also received negative comments. This all came to light in the ugliest way possible, when her former boyfriend detailed his grievances about the relationship.
Because of the negative attention foisted upon the game developer, the media — always happy to report a “war on women” story — ran with the narrative that people who play video games are hateful and misogynistic. Those involved with GamerGate have been fighting an uphill battle to get accurate representation in the media ever since.
On Saturday, at the Society for Professional Journalist’s Airplay debate, I and my fellow panelists — video game and culture commentator Mark Ceb and Breitbart News contributor Allum Bokhari — noted several instances where the games media dropped the ball, ethically. I noted the story of Max Temkin, the creator of the popular party game Cards Against Humanity, who was accused of a years-old rape on Facebook by a former college acquaintance whom he says he never had sex with, though he dated her very briefly.
The video game media deployed the same level of journalistic integrity that led to the retraction of the now infamous Rolling Stone story about an alleged gang-rape. Video game journalists did nothing to try and verify the story or reach out to Temkin, relying solely on the Facebook post and Temkin’s defense on his personal blog. Their reports led Temkin to be branded a “rapist” and disinvited from a tech conference — all based on a Facebook accusation.
Ceb pointed out the conflicts of interest — without proper disclosure — permeating video game media. This prompted the “neutral” panelists — consisting of the Poynter Institute’s Ren LaForme, NBC San Diego’s Lynn Walsh and game developer Derek Smart — to concede that there are problems in video game media.
“It’s a slam dunk for you guys, you got one, you have an ethical dilemma here,” LaForme said. “This is unethical, I agree.”
The afternoon panel — consisting of American Enterprise Scholar Christina Hoff Sommers, Reason contributing editor Cathy Young and Breitbart contributor Milo Yiannopoulos — was interrupted by a bomb threat that forced an evacuation of the building.
If you would like to read more details about the event, I suggest you read Smart’s excellent play-by-play.
Those fighting for ethics in video game journalism — and the broader media, which has relied on video game media numerous times — should be proud that the event was able to show that GamerGate is not a harassment movement, and that ethical lapses are a problem in video game media.
But Airplay was just one event with a small reach. While thousands watched the live feed online, the event ultimately didn’t reach everyone that needed to watch it. Young noted that The New York Times ran a front-page story about feminist video game critic Anita Sarkeesian canceling a speech at Utah State University over death threats — allegedly from a GamerGate supporter, though no evidence exists to prove her claim. Young also pointed out that the Times has thus far made no mention of the bomb threats against Airplay.
This was a great first step, but more events and panels are needed.
Michael Koretzky, the regional SPJ director who hosted the panels, offered some insight into what’s next for the movement.
“We are talking about offering the gaming press some education, some training directly from SPJ and the Poynter Institute … to help provide direct contact and support,” Koretzky said during Airplay.
He also suggested providing gaming outlets with a policy for correcting articles in a timely and accurate manner, and a policy for addressing conflicts of interest. He also floated the idea of beginning a new outlet or creating a position to report on gaming media — an ombudsman of sorts for gaming media. Such a site or position could help keep gaming journalists honest.
In an email, Koretzky recommended that he and SPJ create a category of journalism awards specifically for the gaming media, a proposal he first brought up during Airplay.
“My yet-to-be-congealed idea was to use SPJ’s awards to encourage ethical games reporting. Among the criteria for all SPJ awards is hewing to the Code of Ethics,” Koretzky wrote. “So if SPJ had a games journalism award, or even a few of them, then media outlets who want the prestige of boasting they’re the best will have to obey that Code or never win.”
He added that if major gaming outlets boycotted the awards, smaller websites could win them and gain credibility. “And that’s how large media outlets become small ones, and small ones become large ones,” Koretzky wrote.
