What dark things did you learn?

[The Lurker]

But that demographic isn't dead, and it's not what "gamer" ever meant anyway.  The term "gamer" just means someone who's enthusiastic about playing video games, so it was already inclusive (see #notyourshield).  And it definitely wasn't Gamergate that was obsessed with attaching race/gender/whatever to it (or anything else).

All that (and the collusion) goes a long way toward explaining the near-universally negative reaction to those articles, and their failure to distract from the scandal.  Plus we've already fought (and defeated) such a moral panic twice before: in the 90s with Mortal Kombat, and the 00s with Jack Thompson.

I meant the perceived demographic of gamers.

[kunedog]

Jack Thompson technically defeated himself, though.

Oh, no argument there.  I contend that the current moral guardians are doing the same . . . let's just say the SVU episode (100% inspired by their "narrative") isn't going over well in any part of the game industry.

I meant the perceived demographic of gamers.

It would appear that was only the perception of a corrupt component of the gaming press.  Everyone else (developers, publishers, marketers, retailers, and of course gamers themselves) used the term freely and positively and without regard to genitals, skin color, and especially politics.  So everyone else kinda looked on in disbelief at the months-long smear campaign (beginning with the "Gamers are Dead" articles) the gaming press has carried out against, well, gamers.

[The Lurker]

In all fairness, it seems whenever SVU tries to do a topical episode they tend to trip over themselves in the writing department.  I remember a similar episode on Furries getting similar flack, though a fursuiter getting mistaken for an actual animal by a drunk and shot at I could see happening.   I doubt somewhat that the "Gamers are dead" thing was meant to be taken as literally as it was and the demographic thing was based on old statistics.

[ScottotD]

Well done Lurker for attempting to seriously engage a gamergater,

[kunedog]

Before the "gamers are terrorists" episode I hadn't paid attention to SVU for many years, but what i've read in the last week lines up pretty well with what you say.  Most people tend to reference an episode where (no bullshit) Paula Deen shoots Trayvon Martin as more outrageous than the gamer one, but I think most know enough about those real-life cases to not take SVU's work seriously.  The audience is probably more likely to accept the furry episode as real, which sucks for them, but it doesn't sound like furries were portrayed as dangerous to "normal" people, and their "hobby" never depended on good PR anyway.

Gaming OTOH is a multi-billion dollar industry that millions enjoy and tens of thousands depend on to earn a living, and it took decades of hard work for it to earn some prestige and mainstream acceptance.  But then the gaming press (of all people) slanders gamers as "misogynists and terrorists" and SVU buys into that story hook, line and sinker.  Now even big-name developers are calling the press out over what they've done (remember, the developers' and their companies' livelihoods are at stake), which would have been unheard of months ago.

Oh, and we do know where the demographic claims came from.  The "Gamers Are Dead" articles mostly cite each other or one specific blog, which in turn cites a few supposedly academic papers.  It's too much to get into here, but the info isn't hard to find (there are even some great vids documenting it on Youtube).  There definitely weren't any statistics involved, nor hard science of any kind.

Well done Lurker for attempting to seriously engage a gamergater,

I guess I agree?  Not that there's anything stopping you from doing the same.

[ScottotD]

The fact you seem to genuinely be trying to paint gamergaters as victims is enough to tell me I have no desire to engage with you, calling the assholes in the movie gamergaters is a compliment because they're much less disgusting than anyone who claims that title in my opinion

[kunedog]

The fact you seem to genuinely be trying to paint gamergaters as victims

To some extent, sure, why not.  But the nice thing about a customer revolt against corrupt (and colluding) journalists is that once the corruption is exposed, the customers will only stay victims for so long.  The news outlets have a major incentive to clean house and reform (e.g. The Escapist), otherwise new outlets are going to emerge to fill the gap (e.g. Techraptor).  As soon as that happens (and I do mean the instant), the customers win.  Any news sites that refuse to adapt or even take responsibility (e.g. Kotaku, Polygon, etc.) only hasten their own decline.

is enough to tell me I have no desire to engage with you, calling the assholes in the movie gamergaters is a compliment because they're much less disgusting than anyone who claims that title in my opinion

Classy.

[Darth Geek]

Aaaand added to ignore.

[The Lurker]

Before the "gamers are terrorists" episode I hadn't paid attention to SVU for many years, but what i've read in the last week lines up pretty well with what you say.  Most people tend to reference an episode where (no bullshit) Paula Deen shoots Trayvon Martin as more outrageous than the gamer one, but I think most know enough about those real-life cases to not take SVU's work seriously.  The audience is probably more likely to accept the furry episode as real, which sucks for them, but it doesn't sound like furries were portrayed as dangerous to "normal" people, and their "hobby" never depended on good PR anyway.

Gaming OTOH is a multi-billion dollar industry that millions enjoy and tens of thousands depend on to earn a living, and it took decades of hard work for it to earn some prestige and mainstream acceptance.  But then the gaming press (of all people) slanders gamers as "misogynists and terrorists" and SVU buys into that story hook, line and sinker.  Now even big-name developers are calling the press out over what they've done (remember, the developers' and their companies' livelihoods are at stake), which would have been unheard of months ago.

Oh, and we do know where the demographic claims came from.  The "Gamers Are Dead" articles mostly cite each other or one specific blog, which in turn cites a few supposedly academic papers.  It's too much to get into here, but the info isn't hard to find (there are even some great vids documenting it on Youtube).  There definitely weren't any statistics involved, nor hard science of any kind.

Well done Lurker for attempting to seriously engage a gamergater,

I guess I agree?  Not that there's anything stopping you from doing the same.

The thing though, Gamergate does have problems with misogyny and harassment. 

[kunedog]

OK, both women and men in pro- and anti-GG have received anonymous harassment.  Pro-GG folks get it slightly worse in my experience, but overall it still makes up a tiny amount of the correspondence sent to either side.  I'm not sure what your point is.  Maybe you didn't know that, because the corrupt press conveniently neglects to report the harassment pro-Gamergate folks get?

[ScottotD]

Aaaand added to ignore.

Agreed. 

Probably best before one of the 'victims' threaten to rape, kill or actually chase you out of your home.

[kunedog]

Aaaand added to ignore.

Agreed. 

Probably best before one of the 'victims' threaten to rape, kill or actually chase you out of your home.

This kind of outrageous paranoia, right here, is exactly why so many gamers and developers call the SVU episode the new Reefer Madness, and remain (rightly) astonished and appalled at the gaming-press-driven smear campaign that directly brought it about.  From the Reefer Madness judge/narrator to Tipper Gore to Jack Thompson, we've seen countless moral guardians dupe a gullible public by demonizing whatever product/activity/media/etc they want to shut down or control.  And they always find quite a few saps willing to believe them without evidence.

Imagine, for a moment, that instead of merely poking some good-natured fun at pot smokers, MKB had genuinely bought into the Reefer Madness narrative (and all the propaganda that spawned it) of potheads being rapists, killers, etc.  The resulting jokes would be just as off-the-mark and cringeworthy, and I doubt most of us could've sat through the whole thing.

[ScottotD]

You are truly as hilarious as you are sad and deluded, gamergaters are on par with Men's rights activists in their awful ridiculousness.  Keep living the lie but you're on ignore and nobody outside of your Li'l Rascals gang believes your crap for a second, you're a living punchline.

[kunedog]

You are truly as hilarious as you are sad and deluded, gamergaters are on par with Men's rights activists in their awful ridiculousness.

You should really take a minute to read some of your own posts out loud (preferably before you hit the Post button).  You come across as a paranoid fearmonger who does nothing but spit venom.

Keep living the lie but you're on ignore and nobody outside of your Li'l Rascals gang believes your crap for a second, you're a living punchline.

Fortunately, I'm not that interested in what a random anti-GG guy does or doesn't believe, only what evidence you present to support it (there's a damn good reason GG's motto is "Trust, but verify" vs anti-GG's "Listen and believe.").  Anti-Gamergate folks are typically running on empty when it comes to backing up their claims, and so far you're no exception.

[TriffRax]

I learned, once again, that even mentioning "gamergate" results in an unholy shitstorm from both sides of the "controversy".