Notes:
If any moderator removes this, can you explain why?
Source
#GamerGate: ‘Your Check – From A Publisher – Is In The Mail’ States GJP Thread
"One of the threads in the Game Journo Pros mailing group dealt exactly with what the headline states: what happens when a check from a publisher arrives in the mail? Only, it’s a check from a class-action lawsuit… and the journalist was part of that lawsuit. Is there a need to disclose to readers that a check arrived in the mail directly from a publisher? Does it create a conflict of interest?"
Back on November 5th, 2013, one of the members of the Game Journo Pros – a current writer for Polygon, Samit Sarkar – posed the questionin a thread called ‘Your Check – From A Publisher – Is In The Mail’ about a conflict of interest, as he was unsure about the ethical line of receiving a check from EA as part of the Madden NFL lawsuit while still covering them in the news in articles like the ones covered in the past here or here , or the ones that followed here and here. Sarkar linked to a Kotaku article where writer Owen Good showcased the check from the Madden NFL EA monopoly lawsuit for $64.14, and explained the situation to the public.
Kyle Orland, the creator of the Game Journo Pros group, was the first to reply in the thread, stating the following…
“I don't see this as ethically questionable at all, really. Yeah, you're a game journalist, but in this context you're a consumer that a court determined is entitled to a little bit of money, alongside millions of others. There's really no way to interpret this as any type of quid pro quo or even any kind of special consideration coming from your position as someone who covers EA. You're receiving a court-ordered settlement because you're one of millions that bought a game, not because you're a journalist. If someone wanted to spin that as how they're bribing us now, it seems… pretty inefficient.”
“If you're being hyper-vigilant, I could see refusing it on general principle and to avoid even a hint of impropriety and financial gain directly from a publisher. If you've ever taken a water bottle at an E3 press conference, though, I'd say you're already much more "compromised" than you'd be if you took this check.”
The 'Moai La La La' Dance Trend Is Korean Streamer K's Gift To TikTok
Light's Potato Chip Obsession Started On This Day, When He Was Writing L And Getting Cocky
This AI-Generated Image Of Mark Zuckerberg Should Be Considered An Infohazard
TikToker's Breakdown Over Realizing They Like Boys Becomes A Viral Redraw Meme
Charli D'amelio Saying 'I Can't Do This Anymore' Is Everyone When They Drag Themselves Out Of Bed To 'Do This' Afterall![Jim Sterling on secrecy [19 Updates a Your check - from a publisher - - is in the mail [14 Updates] Where critics and the audience diverge [2 Updates] Kyle Orland Nov 04 08:58PM-0500 I don't see this as ethically questionable at all, really. Yeah, you're a game journalist, but in this context you're a consumer that a court determined is entitled to a little bit of money,more Back to top Jason Wilson Nov 04 06:33PM-0800 Agree with Kyle -this is a consumer-rights issue, not a journalistic ethics issue ...more Back to top James Fudgeov 05 01:54AM -0500 If a writer is worried about it, they should just make a disclosure withirn the story Clearly Owen did in a major way. Case closed) Patrick Klepek > Nov 05 10:36AM -0600 Makes sense to receive the check so you can cover it, but cashing it? Is $60 worth having people raise an eyebrow at you? It wouldn't be for me On Tuesday, November 5, 2013 at 9:32 AM, more Back to top Kyle Orland Nov 05 11:39AM-0500 Lest we forget, EA is not above mailing journalists checks for PR purposes > To post to this group, send ...more Back to top Adam Rosenberg o That wasn't a check, that was art. Fine, it was a check. A damn pretty check. 05 11:40AM -0500](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/872/919/163.jpg "GameJournoPros email conversation about receiving checks from Electronic Arts.")
![Gamergate (harassment campaign) Article Talk From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia For other uses, see Gamergate (disambiguation). Gamergate or GamerGate (GG)[¹] was a loosely organized misogynistic online harassment campaign and a right-wing backlash against feminism, diversity, and progressivism in video game culture. [2][³] It was conducted using the hashtag "#Gamergate" primarily in 2014 and 2015.[1][4][5][6] Beginning in August 2014, Gamergate targeted women in the video game industry, most notably feminist media critic Anita Sarkeesian and video game developers Zoë Quinn and Brianna Wu, among others.[7][8][9][10][11] The harassment campaign included doxing, r--- threats, and death threats.[12][13][14] Gamergate proponents ("Gamergaters") stated that they were a social movement, but lacked well-defined goals, a coherent message, and leaders, making Gamergate difficult to define.[15][16][17] Gamergaters claimed to promote ethics in video games journalism, claimed to be protecting the "gamer" identity, and opposed what they asserted as "political correctness" in video games.[18][19][20][21][22] Read Date Target Gamergate, online harassment campaign in 2014-15 that targeted women in the video game industry. The attacks were attributed largely to white male right-wing gamers who railed against the rise and influence of women and feminism in the industry. Gamergate served as a recruiting tool for the growing alt-right movement and helped spur the online “Pizzagate" conspiracy theory, which soon spawned the wider QAnon conspiracy movement. …………………………....…..……….…..... Attack type Victims Motive View source Inquiry XA 28 languages ✓ Perpetrators Internet trolls, particularly from 4chan, Internet Relay Chat, and 8chan View history Tools ✓ Gamergate August 2014 - 2015 Women in the video game industry See all media Online harassment campaign Zoë Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian, Brianna Wu, and others Gamergaters created conspiracy theories falsely accusing Quinn of an unethical relationship with video game journalist Nathan Grayson.[23][24][25] More broadly, they alleged unethical collusion between the press and feminists, progressives, and social critics.[17][26] [27] These claims were widely dismissed as trivial, conspiracy theories, baseless, or unrelated to actual issues of ethics in gaming and journalism.[28] [29][30] Gamergate supporters frequently denied that the harassment took place, falsely claiming it to be manufactured by the victims.[31][32] Misogyny anti-feminism anti- progressivism FBI investigation Gamergate has been described as a culture war over cultural diversification, artistic recognition, feminism in video games, social criticism in video games, and the social identity of gamers.[28][33] [34] [35] Many supporters of Gamergate opposed the increasing influence of feminism and so-called "social justice warriors" on video game culture. [2][36] Gamergate led figures both inside and outside the gaming industry to focus on methods of addressing online harassment, ways to minimize harm, and prevent similar events. [37] [38] [39] [40] Gamergate has been viewed as a contributor to the alt-right and other right- wing movements.[21][41] Video game developer Brianna Wu](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/list/002/691/215/331.png "What the actual f--- are we supposed to do about this")
![Nobody cares what the pro-GG crowd (which to be honest if one is saying they are po GG" then they are in effect pro sexual harassment thinks or feels in this situation their point-of-view is decidedly fringe. The sooner you and a few others get over the misunderstanding that "pro-GG" is an equal-weight opinion alongside what this is actually about, the better. Tarc (talk) 00:08, 28 September 2014 (UTC) Connecting... (cur) difference from current version, (prev) = difference from preceding version, m-minor edit, → section edit, ← (newest I oldest) View (newer 50 | older 50) (201501 100 | 250 1500) automatic edit summary Compare selected revisions cur prev) ⓔ 1948, 28 September 2014 Cuchu an talk contribs) m (49824 bytes) (0 Changed protection ever f Gamerga e controversy Edi romy administrators] (expires 19:48, 5 October 2014 (UTC) [Move Allow only administrators] (expires 19:48, 5 October 2014 (UTC)) cur prev . ○ 1946, 28 September 2014 Cuchullan talk contribs) m 49,824 bytes) (0 Changed protection level of Game gate controversy: Edit warring content dispute ([Edit Allow only administrators] (expires 18:49, 18 September 2015 (UTC)) Move Allow only administrators] (indefinite))) (cur I prev) O 19:27,28 September 2014 Tar (talk I contribs) .(49,824 bytes) (1,076) (Undid revision 627446884 by Masem (talk) -not a chance that any of that private mailing list nuttery is going to be her,e in any form) . (cur I prev) 18:54, 28 September 2014 Masem (talk | contribs) .(50,900 bytes) (+1,076). . (Undid revision 627444078 by TheRedPenorDoom (talk) this is actually reasonable to include (it's not fringe), but it needs to be written to be a separate concept as I have done) . (cur | prev) O O 18:30, 28 September 2014 TheRedPenofDoom (talk | contribs) . (49,824 bytes) (-984). (Undid revision 627443919 by Bosstopher (talk) undue weight to fringe conspiracy theorist) (cur | prev) O O 18:29, 28 September 2014 Bosstopher (talk | contribs) (50,808 bytes) (+984) (Undid revision 627441233 by NorthBy SouthBaranof (talk) You seem to have reverted based off of a misreading of the sources used. Please look at the Orland source . (cur | prev) O O 18:06, 28 September 2014 NorthBySouthBaranof (talk | contribs). (49,824 bytes) (-984) (We don't really care what someone from Breitbart said. We just don't) (cur I prev)O 17:55, 28 September 2014 Diego Moya (talk | contribs) m (50,808 bytes) (+984). (Reverted edits by NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) to last version by Diego Moya) (Tag: HHVM) (cur | . (cur r(cur prev) O 17:55, 28 September 2014 prev)。 17:48. 28 September 2014 prev) O O 17:47 28 September 2014 NorthBySouthBaranof (talk | contribs) (49,824 bytes) (-984) (Breitbart garbage has no place in this article) Diego Moya (talk contribs) m (50808 bytes) (+3) ( Soc a media campagn and backlash clam (Tag: HHV Diego Moya (talk contribs) (50,805 bytes) (+62) (+Social media campaign and backlash this is at Forbes too Tag:](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/list/000/838/792/fd1.jpg_large "Give it up for the neutral internet encyclopedia, everybody!")
