Nov. 5, 2014 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin
19:22
| 
| Time | Text |
|---|---|
| We're continuing our discussion today of Gamergate and I'm pleased to welcome Arthur Chu to the program. | |
| He's a writer who blogs about nerd culture for the Daily Beast and other websites. | |
| Arthur, it's really great to have you on. | |
| It's been a couple of days since we scheduled our interview and I think a good place to start would just be kind of how you got pulled in to writing about video games. | |
| Well, I don't really write about video games as a career or anything, but I've always been in gaming culture. | |
| I care a lot about it. | |
| Gamergate has been a very distressing and painful thing to watch, and I couldn't not talk about it when I tried to not talk about it, hoping it would go away when it was originally just one harassment campaign against Zoe Quinn, but as it got bigger and bigger, I didn't feel it was responsible of me or even possible of me not to talk about it. | |
| Overlooking the absurdity of the idea of tens of thousands of people from around the world all gathering together to form an attack mob on three women in a consistent sustained assault for two months and over three million tweets now. | |
| If we were to accept Chu's proposition that Gamergate was based almost entirely around the harassment of Zoe Quinn, then it appears Gamergate are doing an exceptionally bad job and focusing far too much on journalistic ethics. | |
| Because there have been 16,914 tweets this month involving Zoe Quinn from either side or direct replies to her account. | |
| And there have been 1.8 million tweets about Gamergate and people claiming to be concerned about journalistic ethics. | |
| It would seem that a committed group of misogynists from around the world who have banded together for two months and three million tweets to attack these three women would have shown a lot more focus than Gamergate appears to have done in this scenario. | |
| And if you were to, of course you've written a lot about it, but for the audience who may not be familiar with your take on this, what is your primary concern when you characterize what Gamergate is? | |
| It's a reactionary movement. | |
| What's an absolutely pointless statement. | |
| Every movement is reactionary. | |
| Your brand of extreme progressivism is reactionary. | |
| It's primarily driven by a sense that games culture is changing negatively because of its exposure to the outside world, particularly to what they think of as a feminist ideology. | |
| would they think that a lot of people driven by but not entirely you know young white men who hashtag not your cracker within the demographic the core audience for gaming What, even for this game? | |
| Reacting with this extreme, violent possessiveness to things that threaten to change their hobby. | |
| So we have established that you are trying to change the hobby then. | |
| And I wrote something about how you see this kind of reaction in other venues in music. | |
| We actually have had a similar conflict like that in written science fiction with the Hugo Awards this year with a huge political spat with right-wing authors quote-unquote trying to take back science fiction from the feminists and the PC left. | |
| I'm really baffled as to why you'd say that, Arthur, because you make it sound like the people in Gamergate have a good point. | |
| If the extreme progressive left is doing this all over in many other areas of life, then maybe the problem is with the extreme left. | |
| And it's the same thing. | |
| All of the stuff about ethics boils down to attacking people based on what they see as an ideology that's changing their culture. | |
| That's true, Arthur. | |
| And they say ethics because they think that you are changing their culture by removing the ethical values that they hold from it. | |
| And it's interesting because the more I dig into this, and you know, with every subsequent interview, we're doing more and more research on our end to figure out all of what's been said and all of what the positions are. | |
| It seems like the view you've espoused is one of the predominant views. | |
| And then the other one, it's interesting because it seems to be it at least is framing itself as a view that is not necessarily an opposite view to what you've stated, but simply that Gamergate is about something else rather than journalistic ethics, right? | |
| This is absolutely correct. | |
| Members of GameGate actively police their own hashtag to watch out for harassment and report it when they find it. | |
| And when it comes to ethics, I'll let Total Biscuit explain. | |
| Policy varies on a publication-by-publication basis. | |
| There are some publications that do not believe they need an ethics policy. | |
| We're still in a situation where some people, including Stephen Totillo of Kotaku, do not believe that friendly relationships require disclosure. | |
| And there are people that fervently disagree with that particular idea. | |
| And I'm one of those people. | |
| We have the issue of Game Journal Pros, which was a Skype group in which a large number of games journalists spoke to each other. | |
| And there are several allegations, including the blackballing of ex-destructoid journalist Alistair Pinsoff, that are tied in some way to a degree of collusion within that group. | |
| These are, again, things that need to be investigated. | |
| Investigation is ongoing. | |
| And I think you'll see the theme here, and that's the betrayal of trust of the consumer. | |
| And that is all very much compounded by the release of these Gamers Are Dead articles, which I do genuinely feel poured petrol on the fire. | |
| How would you characterize that claim? | |
| Is that a claim that doesn't resonate with you? | |
| It's nonsense because they are focusing on the issues that have the least to do with journalistic ethics. | |
| That's ridiculous, Arthur. | |
| Gaming Gates is concerned about ethical practices within the industry across the board. | |
| The difference between you and this publisher is that this publisher will admit when they are wrong, and they will do so for reasons that I will explain shortly. | |
| If they cared about journalistic ethics, they would be attacking the mainstream gaming culture that pushes a certain kind of game on the public because of a very narrow view of what would sell. | |
| Two, that sounds exactly like that kind of social justice Marxist crap. | |
| When a publisher releases a game, they are not thinking how can we dictate to our audience. | |
| They are thinking, how can we best cater to our audience? | |
| And if you find those games don't cater to you, then you are not the target audience. | |
| Also, that's got nothing to do with ethics. | |
| That's your personal preferences. | |
| We'll be attacking the so-called AAA games. | |
| They're doing the opposite of that. | |
| They are defending AAA games from criticism from the fringe, from academics, from the indie media by saying that those people are corrupt. | |
| No, you are both corrupt. | |
| The difference is that when game publishers are caught red-handed, they do not turn around and declare war on their consumers. | |
| If they cared about ethics, they would care about Shadow of Mordor actually paying people, actually telling people that they could get early access review copies and perks only if they made YouTube videos that criticized Shadow of Mortar in a certain positive light. | |
| That was an extremely blatant form of people, marketers trying to influence reviews in a way that subverts journalistic ethics, but because it was in a field they see as culturally theirs, which is YouTube as opposed to traditional sites, and because it wasn't in favor of what they see as a feminist ideology, they didn't care. | |
| No, it's just that the issue was resolved. | |
| This kind of extreme progressive press is the problem. | |
| You won't talk to anyone. | |
| It seems you literally aren't interested in representing the Gamergate side correctly. | |
| And I honestly have no idea why, Arthur, because as far as I know, you're not implicated in any of this. | |
| If you personally were going to lose your job, I could completely understand it. | |
| I wouldn't condone it, but I would at least be able to understand. | |
| There was hardly any reaction to that compared to tons of people talking about a long-since debunked story that Zoe Quinn got publicity for sex for a free game. | |
| Then stop bringing her up. | |
| I'm quite willing to bet that the 16,000 tweets with Zoe Quinn's name in came from anti-Gamergate people trying to restructure the narrative around Zoe Quinn and not corruption. | |
| Which on the radar of the actual industry is barely a blip. | |
| It was a free indie game that didn't cost any money. | |
| She makes less than $30,000 a year. | |
| Actually, she makes almost $45,000, which I suppose is how she's able to give her games away for free. | |
| But somehow, this is the ethical issue they care about? | |
| No. | |
| Anita Sarkeesian's videos, there's no ethical issue there at all. | |
| Then why bring it up? | |
| Anita Sarkeesian's obviously an activist. | |
| That's great. | |
| I ignore activists every day. | |
| She portrays herself as an activist, but they say that for people to voluntarily give attention to Anita Sarkeesian because they actually think it's important, that's unethical. | |
| Actually, no. | |
| No one's ever said that the press's uniform support for Anita Sarkeesian is unethical. | |
| They've said it's annoying. | |
| When you dig into any of the stuff they say about ethics, it's not about being influenced by money. | |
| No, but I've covered how that issue gets solved. | |
| Because the people with the money aren't ideologues. | |
| They just want more money. | |
| Which is what we mean when we talk about ethics. | |
| No one cares what you mean when you talk about ethics. | |
| They care about the actual definition of the word ethics. | |
| And whether it's you or them, you both lack them. | |
| They say that people having genuine political convictions or genuine moral beliefs that inclusion in gaming is important and quote-unquote pushing that agenda is unethical. | |
| That's the opposite of any sensible definition of ethics. | |
| And no one cares what you ideologues think a sensible definition is. | |
| Because you have repeatedly demonstrated a complete inability to be sensible. | |
| You have defended corruption, you have attacked your audience, and now you are trying to slander tens of thousands of people as woman haters. | |
| Your definition of sensible and ethics is irrelevant. | |
| You've on Twitter been very, very critical of some of the prior interviews that I've done with regard to Gamergate. | |
| So I would love to address exactly what your gripes are with me. | |
| And these have ranged from fairly specific critiques about the interviews themselves to bordering more on specific attacks on me as a journalist. | |
| So I'll open it to you. | |
| You tell me what your critiques are of our coverage so far. | |
| You're giving voice to an angry mob and you're hurting real people. | |
| Giving aggrieved consumers a platform with which to air their grievances is not hurting real people. | |
| Okay, you are legitimizing insane conspiracy theories. | |
| Is this something to do with the patriarchy? | |
| In a way that's hurting real people. | |
| You're acting like this is a debate with two sides instead of a bunch of angry anonymous trolls trying to harass and hound specific people out of the industry. | |
| you suggesting that Total Biscuit is an anonymous troll who's trying to hound people out of the industry because it's either him or Jenny Barrage who has been on David's show and I certainly haven't seen her harassing anyone. | |
| She was asking for an apology, which frankly seems quite warranted at this point. | |
| No, but you are legitimizing a false balance kind of narrative. | |
| And it all comes down to the narrative. | |
| Because I think, Arthur, that what you do is you pick out a bunch of points, a bunch of things that are true, and say, this is the narrative that I'm going to hold in my head. | |
| And anything that goes against my narrative, I'm going to simply deny. | |
| I'm going to choose what I want to believe. | |
| And when people present me with things that I don't want to believe, like David is doing right now, you're going to say, I don't like that, because that presents me with a narrative that makes me look like a total prick. | |
| Unfortunately, Arthur, all the people you are defending have acted like total pricks. | |
| And it's this control of your own little narratives to be in your own little echo chambers. | |
| This is how you prevent each other from going mad with guilt at the way you treat other people. | |
| You're doing it at a time when this is a live issue, when there are active threats to people right now. | |
| Do you think you're part of the SWAT team or something? | |
| Where are these active threats? | |
| Why don't you contact the authorities? | |
| You are not really in a position to be policing them, are you? | |
| We're asking Zoe Quinn in particular to address concerns brought up by the people harassing her while she is being harassed, while she is in fear for her safety. | |
| No one is asking Zoe Quinn to address any issues at all. | |
| You may have forgotten, but you brought her up repeatedly. | |
| You are acting like Zoe Quinn is a political candidate running for office who needs to fairly debate her opposition. | |
| No, we're acting like Zoe Quinn is not relevant to the discussion, and therefore you have to validate why you are bringing her up. | |
| She is the victim of a crime, and you are enabling the people who are committing that crime. | |
| Arthur, I don't know what country you live in, but I'm sure they have law enforcement. | |
| Contact them. | |
| Arthur, this isn't, this can't possibly be about Zoe Quinn because we never scheduled an interview with her. | |
| We never asked for questions for Zoe Quinn because she never even agreed to talk to us. | |
| I don't know why we're talking about Zoe Quinn. | |
| I was referring more to your criticisms of our Brianna Wu interview, which actually happened. | |
| The focus on an interview that was never even a possibility seems misplaced to me. | |
| I left that in because it was such a brilliant piece of onage. | |
| Also, Zoe Quinn is not a journalist. | |
| Alright, she doesn't have to explain herself or defend herself. | |
| But this unbiased journalism doesn't mean putting the harassers on the same plane as the harassed. | |
| Listen, Arthur, I know that you're not all that bright, but I really need to explain to you that when you go on David Pachman's show and complain that he has given Total Biscuit and Jenny Barrage a platform to explain the pro-Gamergate position, and then you complain that he is putting the harassers on the same plane as the harassed, you are saying that Jenny Barrage and Total Biscuit have harassed Brianna Wu. | |
| It doesn't mean pretending like there is no, there is no actual moral framework here, all right? | |
| It's one thing to say, I'll talk to a racist and ask him what he thinks. | |
| Uh-huh, go on. | |
| It's another thing to look at someone who has been attacked by racists and say, we're going to give equal time to the people who have attacked this person and to the person who has been attacked. | |
| You see, Arthur, what you're failing to understand is that David wants to try and be unbiased. | |
| And that means he gives an equal platform to both sides of the discussion. | |
| Just because you despise the people on the other side of this debate doesn't mean they shouldn't be heard. | |
| Remember that you are on the pro-corruption side of this issue, so your ethical judgments aren't really that important. | |
| And I am saying that the way you framed it afterwards, where you made it out to be that Brianna was the one being unreasonable to you, that her reaction was an overreaction in the moment, and that you're the one who's somehow being attacked for trying to be neutral after you repeatedly stepped on the feelings of people who are in a very sensitive place. | |
| All right, that is what I have a problem with. | |
| Okay, I just, I respectfully disagree that your characterization of what happened is accurate in the sense that Brianna Wu did accuse me of doing a hit interview. | |
| I responded in the most kind of extemporaneous and immediate way that I thought to. | |
| I don't think it was an aggressive response. | |
| And with regard to our characterization of the interview afterwards, I didn't even say that she was being unreasonable to use that term. | |
| I merely said she accused me of doing a hit piece. | |
| That's an empirical reality. | |
| People can interpret that however they want. | |
| And as Arthur has shown, they will. | |
| You're continuing to insist on looking at this from the perspective of this is a debate. | |
| These are all different people whose perspectives need to be, you know, harshly evaluated and judged instead of there are people being attacked and reacting to being attacked. | |
| And therein lies the rub. | |
| Less than 1% of the tweets talking about Gamergate could possibly have been about Zoe Quinn. | |
| Less than 1%. | |
| 99% of people are not talking about Zoe Quinn. | |
| When they talk about Gamergate, Arthur, when you are ready to stop talking about Zoe Quinn, then you will be able to address the issues that Gamergate is talking about. | |
| Until then, neither you nor she is relevant. | |
| Okay, so you're so you're what you're saying is you just don't think that there should even be a presentation of sides on this. | |
| It should just be presented basically with your point of view that that's the accurate and real point of view, period. | |
| That other voices should not be heard. | |
| If you do any factual looking into what has actually happened, if you do factual reporting on it, then the two sides are not equal. | |
| I wouldn't say that those are the only facets of it. | |
| There are those that believe in the notion of social Marxism and the infiltration of progressive radical social justice ideas into gaming media and gaming journalism. | |
| And some people object to that. | |
| Some people do not object to it. | |
| There are people in it solely because they feel alienated by the games media that they trusted for so long. | |
| And that really boils down to the Gamers Are Dead articles that were released. | |
| There are people in it solely for that reason. | |
| And yes, I do believe there are some people, a minority, but some people that are in it to cause trouble. | |
| Now, whether or not they are trolls, whether or not they are actual misogynists that really believe that the presence of women in this industry is somehow a threat, it's very hard to quantify that. |
Export Selection