Draft:Gamergate (harassment campaign): Difference between revisions

* The page Gamergate controversy in the mainspace is currently a redirect to Gamergate (harassment campaign). This is a draft article. It is a work in progress open to editing by anyone. Please ensure core content policies are met before publishing it as a live Wikipedia article at Gamergate controversy. Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL Easy tools: Citation bot (help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs · Article logs · Draft logs. Last edited by Rhoark (talk | contribs) 8 years ago. (Update) Finished drafting? Submit for review or Publish now

The Gamergate controversy is a collection of cultural debates about online harassment, video game journalism, and inclusion of women in video gaming. Gamergate and its detractors fundamentally disagree on what the controversy is about.

The controversy was incited in August 2014 by false or unsubstantiated accusations against game developer Zoe Quinn, though the issues date back at least to the 2012 controversy over Tropes vs. Women in Video Games by Anita Sarkeesian. It gained widespread press coverage in 2014 due to the harassment of these women, among other individuals. Threats of violence also disrupted physical gatherings including a planned speech by Sarkeesian, the South by Southwest festival, and a panel discussion hosted by the Society of Professional Journalists. The controversy has motivated efforts in government, social media providers, and independent non-profits to generate new solutions to online harassment.

The term "Gamergate" also references the #GamerGate hashtag and loosely associated online movement. Supporters of the movement alleged that members of the press were using their platforms to advance friends' careers. Wider participation in the movement was driven in reaction against media condemnations of gamer culture. The movement's critics meanwhile regarded its claims of being a watchdog for journalism ethics as a pretense for further harassment.

Indie game developer Zoe Quinn's games have often received hostile reactions, including threats.^[1] She began to receive substantial and prolonged harassment following the February 2013 release of Depression Quest.^[2]

On August 16, 2014, Quinn's former boyfriend Eron Gjoni made a blog post accusing her of infidelity,^[1][2][3][4] which was circulated on 4chan.^[5][a][6] Gjoni's blog drew attention from people with a variety of pre-existing grievances about Quinn or the industry, including: what some considered undue media praise for Depression Quest,^[7][8][9] Quinn's prior conflicts with Wizardchan and The Fine Young Capitalists,^[10][3][11] and perceived bias in video game journalism.^{[2][1][12][13]} Among those with whom Quinn was accused of having a relationship was a game journalist Nathan Grayson^[13], raising concerns of conflicts of interest.^[1] Contrary to allegations that Grayson had written a review of Depression Quest, he had merely mentioned its existence in print.^[7][14] According to Kotaku leadership, they were not involved at the time the article was written.^[15] Quinn refused on principle to discuss the allegations, writing, "The idea that I am required to debunk a manifesto of my sexual past written by an openly malicious ex-boyfriend in order to continue participating in this industry is horrifying, and I won’t do it. It’s a personal matter that never should have been made public."^[16]

Three days after Gjoni's post, Quinn was doxxed: her address and other information posted online.^[2] Harassment then escalated, including threats towards Quinn's father.^[5] Quinn considered it unsafe to return home, citing threats to stuff her mailbox with dead animals.^[2] Threats also promised to cause harm to Quinn at conferences and industry gatherings.^[7][5][17] In an interview at one such event, Quinn said, "I used to go to games events and feel like I was going home [...] Now it's just like... are any of the people I'm currently in the room with ones that said they wanted to beat me to death?"^[17] Although the controversy completely changed her life, Quinn plans to continue her video game career, saying "I love games more than they hate me."^[17] As of March 2015, Quinn said her public appearances continued to reliably attract threats.^[18]

Some threats were made on 4chan or in IRC chats arranged by 4chan posters under the name "quinnspiracy".^[19] Logs show that participants shared Quinn's personal information and discussed ways to discredit and persecute her.^[19] Some of those quoted in these logs say the excerpts are unrepresentative of their views and may contain false flag messages intended to discredit them.^[20] Expectations of discussions in chan communities diverge significantly from the mainstream.^[21] It can be difficult to discern participants' true intent.^[22][20] Nevertheless, this discourse can cause very real distress when its effects extend outside the chans - especially through doxxing.^[21] In response to the doxxing, 4chan founder Christopher Poole eventually banned all Gamergate discussion from the site,^[23] motivating some users to migrate to 8chan.^[24] Quinn has said she understands chan culture well, having participated in Project Chanology, and that has been to her advantage in preparing for and dealing with harassment.^[18]

Gjoni has said he did not intend for Quinn to suffer harassment, though he does not regret the blog post.^[4] On the basis of Gjoni's alleged encouragement towards those harassing Quinn, she sought and obtained a restraining order against him.^[5] Eugene Volokh filed an amicus curiae brief opposing this order on first amendment grounds.^[6][25][26] Quinn responded that Internet harassment has curtailed her own freedom of speech.^[18] She lost faith in the courts due to the lack of effective remedies and the increased public scrutiny the case has brought her.^[18] In February, 2016 Quinn dropped her legal complaint, considering it to have been ineffective at stopping harassment,^[6] and not wanting to facilitate creation of a legal precedent as in R v Elliott.^[27][28] The Massachusetts Appeals Court declined to rule on the order's constitutionality, since Quinn's withdrawal rendered the issue moot.^[29]

Although allegations regarding Grayson were unfounded,^[30][22] they spurred further interest and discussion about journalists' relationships with their subjects.^[19][30][31] The hashtag #GamerGate was first used by actor Adam Baldwin in August, 2014.^[22][32] Baldwin, who considers himself "not an avid gamer,"^[22] expressed solidarity with gamers' resistance against "prioritizing identity politics[...] over good storytelling."^[32]

A loose and disorganized movement coalesced around the name Gamergate, but Internet anonymity leaves uncertainties about its members, goals, and actions.^[22] The Gamergate movement is described in The New York Times as "those who see ethical problems among game journalists and political correctness in their coverage."^[33] CNN says Gamergate is a term used by gamers for "a loosely defined movement defending hardcore games against criticisms from feminists and others."^[34] Journalists have sampled opinions from supporters, but doubts remain about what views are truly representative of the movement.^[22][35] Clusters of discussion about media ethics can be found within Gamergate, but a larger issue public focuses on political correctness and critiques of feminism,^[36][35] especially in the form of third-wave feminism.^[37][35] Supporters commonly express anger that gamers have been stereotyped as misogynist.^[38]

Rather than following a centralized plan, participants have tended to act on their own or in reaction to a limited circle of direct peers.^[10] Many members favor anonymity out of a belief that communicating without markers of identity is more meritocratic, while some choose anonymity out of fear of doxxing.^[10] Many Gamergate supporters specifically oppose the idea of nominating leaders.^[39][40] Individuals who have been prominent within the movement include journalists Milo Yiannopoulos,^[41] Oliver Campbell,^[30] and Lizzy Finnegan,^[42] as well as feminist scholar Christina Hoff Sommers^[39] and YouTube commentator TotalBiscuit.^[43][10]

Gamergate and its detractors fundamentally disagree on what the controversy is about.^[30][10] Critics assert that ethics concerns are only a pretense for further harassment - a view which is bolstered by Gamergate's origins in Quinn's harassment.^[30] Gamergate is described by its critics as being rooted in misogyny and reactionary politics.^[39] Jessica Valenti wrote in The Guardian that Gamergate is an effort by white men to maintain cultural dominance.^[44] Chrisella Herzog in The Diplomatic Courier writes that Gamergate manifests sexism, racism, transphobia, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and neo-Nazism.^[45] A parallel hashtag, #NotYourShield, was started by an African-American 4chan poster^[10] to promote female and minority gamers who disputed media framing of Gamergate as racist and sexist.^[12][38][46] In practice, a significant proportion of accounts using that tag are suspected to be sockpuppets.^[20] Elements of the Society for Professional Journalists have attempted to communicate with and empower moderate supporters, who are genuinely interested in the ethics of journalism.^[47]

A sample of Gamergate tweets as studied by Andy Baio over a period of 72 hours in October 2014 involved 38,630 accounts, of which 17,410 accounts generated original tweets rather than retweeting only.^[48] According to Baio, the accounts clearly clustered into groups on either side of the controversy, and most interactions occurred within each group rather than between them. By February 2015 the hashtag was used much more by the Gamergate movement than by its opposition.^[36] The hashtag was used as a means to disseminate and comment on a variety of media objects, including news stories, YouTube videos, and meme images.^[36] The main subreddit used by Gamergate supporters is KotakuInAction, which had 55,000 subscribers as of January 2016.^[40] Others, objecting to moderation policies at KotakuInAction, prefer to communicate through 8chan or Voat.^[40]

People representing various points of view about Gamergate have faced harassment, doxxing, and threats of violence.^{[49][50][51][52][53][54][55]} In public discourse, Gamergate as a controversy or movement has mainly been associated with harassment of women, and this has severely damaged the movement's credibility.^[56][57] Harassment has also been directed towards Gamergate supporters, many of whom are female.^[10][43][58] After the hashtag was created, it quickly began to be used by those previously involved in harassing Quinn.^[19][59] Gamergate then grew beyond the control of its instigators.^[38] The hashtag attracted new supporters who were unaware of the harassment or opposed to it.^{[2][19][39][40][10]}

Although supporters claim to be apolitical and opposed to censorship, the movement has in some cases intimidated political opponents into curtailing their online expression.^[2] Some Twitter users found it intimidating to suddenly come under criticism from multitudes of tweets in the #GamerGate hashtag. According to Danielle Citron, criticism from a large number of senders can be harassing, even when no specific message is abusive.^[60] Kelefa Sanneh^[61] and David Auerbach^[62] have said that blurred lines between public and private communication on Twitter serve to bring strangers into conflict with one another. The Gamergate controversy motivated coinage of the term "sea lioning," meaning polite but unwelcome attempts to engage in debate.^[62][63]

Gamergate supporters tend to define the limits of acceptable behavior in consequentialist terms, emphasizing legality and advancing the movement's goals.^[64] Supporters have often admonished one another to avoid behaviors that would "make the movement look bad," though such entreaties are frequently rejected on the grounds of free expression.^[64] Many Gamergate supporters consider vituperative language a legitimate part of debate, whereas recipients may feel harassed by it.^[10][64] In other cases, Gamergate supporters have been unsympathetic to victims because they believe the harassment to have been fabricated or that the targets benefited socially and financially from resulting media attention.^[10][40]

The origins of threats are difficult to determine, as law enforcement must seek warrants or subpeonas, and even then might only obtain an IP address that does not uniquely identify an individual.^[65] Serious threats have been attributed to a much smaller faction than the Gamergate movement as a whole.^[33] Some say harassment is the work of trolls playing the sides against each other.^[22][17][30] Cathy Young writes that a trolling group called "AyyTeam" splintered from the Gamergate movement because of the larger movement disavowing harassment.^[66] Several instances of SWATting are attributable to an 8chan harassment board /baphomet/.^[67][10] Users of the board joked about Gamergate "taking the fall" for their actions.^[67]

Adi Robertson says "there's every reason to believe" swatting is the work of unaffiliated trolls,^[67] but notes these kinds of attacks are facilitated by information accumulated through Gamergate's opposition research. Gamergate supporters routinely trawl online sources for information that could be used against ideological opponents.^[68] This is a trending practice among activists across the political spectrum, built on the ethical position that people in public-facing roles should be held publicly accountable;^[68] however, it often causes harm disproportionate to its target's actual influence or responsibilities.^[68] In Gamergate as in other online controversies, people compete to "one-up" one another in the degree of sensitivity in information they are able to find about an opponent.^[69] Katherine Cross wrote that Gamergate supporters described their efforts through analogies to video game concepts such as grinding or bosses, thereby gamifying the process of researching and attempting to discredit opponents.^[64]

Jon Stone wrote in The Guardian says there must not be neutrality or negotiation with Gamergate, as it is a disservice to the victims. He says supporters must recognize they are making common cause with reactionary elements that have harassed women in gaming for years, even if as individuals they have not done so.^[70] Keith Stuart commented that readers have a right to be skeptical about the press, and that conflating that with harassment only "added to the opprobrium."^[71] David Auerbach writes that vilifying Gamergate is not a strategy for ending harassment, merely reinforcing alliances between Gamergate's moderate and right-wing elements.^[72]

Gamergate is in large part a cultural conflict between critics writing from a feminist perspective and self-identified gamers.^[34][71] The debate concerns journalistic integrity and the social identities of those who play games.^[34] Gamergate presents just a few examples out of a much larger phenomenon of hostility towards feminist commentary online.^[73] Noah Berlatsky^[74] and Beth Elderkin^[75] have written that similar hostility is displayed in online controversies unrelated to gaming. Michelle Goldberg says online harassment, like that occurring in the Gamergate controversy, discourages young women from writing about feminism or otherwise raising their public profiles.^[73]

The conflict in gaming goes back years, but is traceable particularly to controversy around the Tropes vs Women video series by Anita Sarkeesian.^[34] As appreciation for games grows outside its stereotypical audience, journalists and critics have increasingly spoken out against sexualization of female video game characters. Sarkeesian has proposed that game developers should apply a quota that at least half of characters in any game be female, and that games should avoid any juxtaposition of violence with sexual titillation.^[76] Gamers such as those that comprise Gamergate resent these appeals, which they see as efforts to censor or dictate game content.^[77] They perceive her criticism as scapegoating games for larger societal problems, similarly to the activism of Jack Thompson in the 1990s.^[78][13][10] Sarkeesian recieved hostile reactions online, including threats, slurs, doxxing, denial-of-service attacks, and pornographic images photoshopped in her likeness.^[79] These attacks renewed and included a specific threat of murder after a Tropes vs. Women episode was released in August 2014.^[80] Many criticisms of Sarkeesian are reactionary, ad hominem, or incorporate unfounded conspiracy theories ^[81] The polarizing nature of this abuse led other, reasonable commentary on Sarkeesian to go unheard or to be scrutinized for misogynist intent.^[78][82]

The style of New Games Journalism describes games as personal and anecdotal experiences rather than as consumer products.^[83][84] These ideas, which were influential with a number of outlets including Polygon^[83], Kill Screen^[83], and Rock, Paper, Shotgun.^[85] were considered innovative but contributed to a cultural divide between gamers and press.^[86] Subjectivity in game reviews can anger those who feel their personal tastes are being questioned.^[87][84] Gamergate objected to reviewers judging games on the basis of alleged sexism, particularly Polygon's criticism of perceived sexual objectification in Bayonetta 2.^[88][89] Because aggregate Metacritic scores can directly affect developers' pay,^[88] Gamergate supporters called for more objective reviews. Contra that desire, many critics consider objectivity in describing games to be undesirable or impossible.^[90][87]

Controversy about reviews raises questions about the standards by which games should be judged.^[90][91] Art games may be praised by professional critics but resented as pretentious by those who regard games as simply entertainment.^[92][91] Milo Yiannopoulos writes that gamers appreciate titles like Planescape: Torment and BioShock that simultaneously excel as works of art and as entertainment products.^[93] Some gamers reacted very negatively to games like Depression Quest and Gone Home that they did not consider to be "real" games.^[90] Gamergate supporters regard these kinds of games as being products of press hype, unworthy of their successes.^[86] Some backlash has also been blamed on hostility to games intended for women,^[94] though the complaints about such games focus on their lack of interactivity.^[90] Leigh Alexander suggested gamers were afraid of how games like Gone Home could change the conventions of gaming and its audience.^[95] Gaming's expansion to less traditional demographics has been led by mobile and Wii games that make no claim to artistic expression.^[95] Anita Sarkeesian credits the Wii's broader demographic apppeal for renewing her interest in gaming,^[96] prior to which she had "bought into the myth" that only those who play hypermasculine titles are "real gamers".

There has been significant distrust of the gaming press among some readers since at least 2007.^[10][97][19] Contrasting with earlier scandals, the Gamergate controversy has concerned press interaction primarily with indie developers.^[19] Particular issue was made of Patreon, where both developers and journalists have sought monetary donations.^[98][99] Suspicion arose of developers and journalists promoting each other's careers or political aims,^[98] and critics of game journalism called for outlets to create explicit policies on these types of donations.^[30][12] Kotaku, Polygon, and The Escapist issued new guidelines in response.^[13][31] Stephen Totilo wrote that the situation was, "if nothing else, a good warning to all of us about the pitfalls of cliquishness in the indie dev scene."^[98] A barrage of criticism drove Jenn Frank to retire from journalism after her piece about Gamergate ran in The Guardian without disclosing her Patreon support for Quinn.^[31] She had suggested including the disclosure, but Guardian editors considered it unnecessary.^[31][100] Some, such as Alex Goldman^[101] and Leigh Alexander,^[102] have criticized Gamergate for focusing on indie games to the exclusion of major publishers.

Gamergate supporters perceive the gaming press as exploiting the problem of misogyny to deflect criticism on these issues.^[12][71] Such supporters often style their opponents as Social Justice Warriors, a term meaning someone arguing for diversity in ways that are disingenuous or hypocritical.^{[103][1][104]} Jonathan Chait wrote that a tendency to "regulate political discourse by defining opposing views as bigoted and illegitimate" migrated from academia into social media and mainstream journalism.^[105][106] He adds that writing about race and gender bias attracts audiences, "making identity politics a reliable profit center" for media companies.^[105][73]

Near the end of August 2014, several news outlets published articles suggesting that the term "gamer" had become obsolete since the act of playing was not concentrated in a single subculture.^[107] The most prominent of these was a piece in Gamasutra written by Leigh Alexander.^[107][108], and several articles also linked to a blog post by Daniel Golding.^[107] Alexander's article described gaming culture as "young white dudes with disposable income"^[108] and argued that gaming culture as a whole bore responsibility for harassment like that which was directed at Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian.^[108][109] Alexander concluded,

"Gamer" isn’t just a dated demographic label that most people increasingly prefer not to use. Gamers are over. That’s why they’re so mad. These obtuse shitslingers, these wailing hyper-consumers, these childish internet-arguers - they are not my audience. They don’t have to be yours. There is no 'side' to be on, there is no 'debate' to be had.^[109]

These articles provoked outrage in readers who felt they were being unfairly labeled as misogynists.^{[91][107][71][110]} The conflict drove greater engagement in the then-nascent Gamergate movement.^{[108][91][38][10]} Gamergate supporters organized a letter-writing campaign encouraging Intel to cease advertising with Gamasutra, to which Intel responded by ending an advertising campaign earlier than planned.^[108] Intel resumed advertising on Gamasutra in November and made a statement indicating they did not wish to take a side in the controversy.^[111] Responding to accusations that it was supporting anti-feminist bullying, Intel pledged $300 million towards increasing diversity in the technology workplace.^[112]

Although there was some sincere discussion about journalistic ethics, this was overshadowed in public perception by harassment and threats.^[19] Alex Goldman from On the Media wrote that there was a "scintilla of truth and merit" to some complaints, but that 4chan's actions damaged their credibility.^[101] James Fudge of GamePolitics.com said, "I think people have a right to question when a personal or financial relationship between a game developer and a writer/journalist is not disclosed," but questioned whether the vehemence of the Gamergate controversy was justified.^[47] Some theories of collusion were unjustified by evidence.^[71][113] A YouTube video detailing game developer Silverstring Media's professional connections with DiGRA and DARPA prompted unfounded conspiracy theories of a government-funded initiative to influence video game culture.^{[114][113][10]} Some employees of Silverstring Media were doxxed and harassed as a result.^[115]

The Gamergate controversy exhibits characteristics of a culture war between liberal and conservative values. Some, such as Jon Stone^[70] or Chrisella Herzog,^[45] describe the Gamergate movement as reactionary resistance to the increasing prominence of women. Others such as Nathaniel Givens^[58] or Ben Southwood^[3][116] say the controversy represents a schism within the political left. William Audureau in Le Monde calls Gamergate's themes of feminism and free speech representative of distinctly American values.^[117]

The Gamergate controversy was a factor in the rise of alt-right ideology into mainstream politics.^[118][37] Alt-right gamers tend to reject both religious conservatism and left-wing multiculturalism, which they see as interfering with their enjoyment of video games.^[118] Milo Yiannopoulos, one of the most recognizable exponents of Gamergate, has been described as part of the alt-right.^[119][120] Yiannopoulos considers the racism exhibited by the alt-right to be partly ironic and partly a justified reaction to anti-white hate speech.^[121] Cathy Young^[121] and Ian Tuttle^[122] have criticized Yiannopoulos' position as excusing genuine and committed racism. Mike Cernovich and Vox Day are among other pundits who have sought to channel Gamergate activism into right-wing causes.^[117] Some Gamergate supporters have spoken out against racial supremacism of the alt-right and see it as another avenue by which the media attempts to demonize the movement.^[123]

Allum Bokhari described Gamergate as being a component of a political philosophy he called "cultural libertarianism", concerned primarily with the defense of free speech.^{[124][125][126]} Cultural libertarians define themselves in opposition to what they call cultural authoritarians or the regressive left.^[127] Jonathan Haidt, who identifies as a cultural libertarian, writes that critical thinking is subsumed by signalling of group allegiances in cultural debates, which include topics like trigger warnings and campus safe spaces.^[124]

Commentators including Jason Wilson,^[125] Vlad Chituk,^[124] and Daniel Pryor^[127][128] have said that cultural libertarians hypocritically employ the same tactics of which they accuse their opponents, or seek to limit the political expression of those who disagree with them. Chituk writes that the root of the controversy is whether to place greater emphasis on freedom of expression or protection of the marginalized, adding that "conflicts between such sacred values are notoriously difficult to resolve."^[124]

The Gamergate controversy has been likened to claims about Bernie Bros during the 2016 United States presidential election.^[129][130] Supporters of Democratic primary candidate Bernie Sanders were alleged to be disproportionately male and engaged in misogynist online harassment, while others regarded this as a fabrication or exaggeration promulgated by Sanders' political opponents.

Anita Sarkeesian cancelled a speaking engagement at Utah State University scheduled for October 15, 2014, citing inadequate security arrangements at the venue.^[131][132] Her talk would have concerned sexism in the game industry, with particular focus on Bayonetta and the male gaze.^[133] The university received three threats related to Sarkeesian's appearance, one of which claimed affiliation with Gamergate.^[132] The first and most publicized threat, which did not mention Gamergate, warned of a mass shooting inspired by the École Polytechnique massacre.^[134] That threat purported to be from a student at the university, but university officials consider this unlikely.^[134] Police and FBI analysis concluded the threat was similar to others Sarkeesian had received in the past,^[134] and the university determined the threat "was not imminent or real."^[132] Sarkeesian decided to cancel her appearance after her requests for metal detectors and patdowns at the venue were declined.^[132]

The incident prompted a debate about gun laws in Utah. Utah is one of seven states that allows concealed firearms on college campuses.^[135] A 2004 law prohibits Utah universities from restricting the possession or use of firearms.^[136] Utah State Representative Carolyne Moss said the university's "hands were tied" by the law and that it threatened the vitality of higher education in the state.^[135] University president Stan Albrecht wrote that a change in campus gun policies depended on the state legislature.^[137] Salt Lake City defense attorney Greg Skordas said a restriction on firearms would have been legal in the circumstance of specific threats.^[138] Cyberharassment expert Danielle Citron called the incident an example of the trivialization of online threats against women.^[135] Charles Cooke in the National Review argued that an armed audience is a more effective security measure than attempting to disarm a potential assailant.^[139] Sarkeesian plans never to speak in Utah until there is a change in the law, and called for others to join her in a boycott.^[132]

A restaurant hosting a gathering of Gamergate supporters in Washington, D.C. was evacuated by police May 1, 2015 in response to a bomb threat made via Twitter.^[140][141] The event was attended by more than 200 people including Christina Hoff Sommers, Milo Yiannopoulos, Cathy Young, and Lizzy Finnegan.^[141][42] No one has claimed responsibility.^[141] The restaurant had received several phone calls and e-mails opposed to the meetup, including from anti-Gamergate critic Arthur Chu.^[140][42] Chu denied involvement in the bomb threat.^[140][42]

On August 15, 2015, the Society of Professional Journalists hosted a series of panel discussions about the Gamergate controversy. The event, called AirPlay, was arranged by SPJ Southwest US regional director Michael Koretzky after Gamergate supporters flooded the #SPJEthicsWeek hashtag.^[47][142] Although many tweets were offensive, Koretzky wrote, "Is it ethical to refuse to talk about ethics? ... Lost in the noise were some legitimate posts about journalism ethics."^[47] Koretzky named a panel of four Gamergate supporters to recommend representatives of the movement in a debate. The final panel consisted of Allum Bokhari, Mark Ceb, Ashe Schow, Christina Hoff Sommers, Milo Yiannopoulos, and Cathy Young.^[143] No prominent anti-Gamergate critics were found who were willing to participate in a debate.^[142][143] SPJ president-elect Lynn Walsh, Ren LaForme of the Poynter Institute and game developer Derek Smart joined the discussion.^[142] The morning session concerned journalism ethics, with particular attention to Gawker Media's handling of a rape allegation.^[142][144]

Koretzky anticipated the event would provoke harassment and threats but thought it worthwhile, saying, "No one calls in a bomb threat or sends harassing emails to a boring debate."^[39] Multiple bomb threats were called in throughout the event, though they were disregarded because the venue had been screened beforehand.^[145] Several panelists were doxxed during the event, forcing comments to be closed on the web stream.^[144] The venue and nearby residences were evacuated when a threat arrived with thirty minutes remaining in the event, as it was possible for a device to have been introduced by that time.^[145] Responsibility for the threat was claimed by a member of a trolling group that had previously harassed participants on both sides of the controversy.^[144]

A pair of panel discussions at the 2015 SXSW Festival were initially cancelled over threats of violence, then later re-instated.^[146][147] The panels, titled "SavePoint: A Discussion on the Gaming Community" and "Level Up: Overcoming Harassment in Games" did not explicitly reference Gamergate, but featured speakers respectively outspoken in their support or opposition to the movement.^{[146][148][149]} Threats were not sent to the panelists themselves, only to festival organizers who did not share their contents.^[148] Explaining the cancellations, festival director Hugh Forrest wrote, "If people can not agree, disagree and embrace new ways of thinking in a safe and secure place that is free of online and offline harassment, then this marketplace of ideas is inevitably compromised."^[146]

Media and public reactions were sharply critical of SXSW's decision, which was seen as ceding control of festival programming to online trolls.^{[149][150][151]} Vox Media and BuzzFeed announced their intent to withdraw from the festival in protest to handling of the incident.^[151][149] Members of the Level Up panel said that prior to the threats the festival did not respond to their questions about site security.^[148] Responding to criticism, SXSW reinstated the Level Up panel as part of a day-long track of panels about online harassment.^[147][150] SavePoint was restored as part of the festival's gaming track.^[150] Some feminists, believing the two panels to represent respectively the perpetrators of online harassment and their victims, objected to them being characterized as sides in a legitimate debate.^[151] Brady Dale wrote that victimization by online trolls, and an interest in stopping them, was a common trait between both sides.^[152] Users at KotakuInAction expressed that they did not know who issued the threats or support the action.^[152]

The panels were held amid tight security at a separate venue from the rest of the festival.^[153] Attendance was sparse, possibly due to the more remote location.^[154] No disruptive incidents occurred. The anti-harassment track consisted of 15 panels, including the Level Up panel as well as presentations by Brianna Wu, congressional representative Katherine Clark, and representatives of Facebook and Google. Participants generally avoided discussing Gamergate, instead focusing on technical solutions to online harassment.^[153][155] The appropriate balance between controlling harassment and allowing freedom of speech was a topic of discussion.^[154][153]

Mercedes Carrera canceled her appearance rather than comply with festival officials' demand that she delete tweets critical of Randi Harper.^[156][157] The Save Point panel proceeded with the remaining three participants and mostly revolved around questions of ethics in journalism.^[157]

The rising rate of online harassment of game developers came to public attention in 2013, following incidents affecting developers including Jennifer Hepler, Adam Orth, John Smedley, David Vonderhaar, Phil Fish, and Stephen Toulouse.^[158][159] One month prior to the beginning of Gamergate, IGDA president Kate Edwards said the trend was continuing at similar levels as had been seen in 2013.^[160]

Game developer Brianna Wu reported that she began to receive misogynist threats as early as January 2014.^[161] In October 2014 she began producing image macros mocking Gamergate, to which Gamergate supporters responded in kind.^[162] She then saw her address and personal details posted to 8chan, which she was preemptively monitoring.^[162][163] Due to death threats, Wu and her husband avoided sleeping at their home for approximately a month.^[164] Gamergate supporters worked to get Wu's information removed from social media and the responsible accounts banned.^{[162][163][165]}

Wu holds Gamergate responsible for the threats, which Gamergate supporters dispute.^[162] Numerous harassing and threatening messages were directed at Wu by a pair of comedians, Jan Rankowski and Sam Hyde, who were attempting to satirize the Gamergate movement.^[166] The Massachusetts attorney general determined Rankowski was not mentally competent to face prosecution.^[6] Others identified by law enforcement as sending threatening messages were found to be minors and given only warnings.^[6] Citing a lack of communication from PAX East organizers about her security concerns, Wu withdrew her company's booth from the 2015 conference, though she still attended in person.^[167] Messages Wu had interpreted to be from Gamergate supporters actually threatened violence against Gamergate supporters attending PAX.^[42]

Gamergate supporters^[162] and one of Wu's colleagues in game development^[164] suspect Wu of deliberately soliciting harassment. Wu acknowledges that Gamergate stimulated sales of her game, raised her profile in the industry, and could increase her attractiveness to some venture capitalists.^[164] She says, however, that it has not been worth the financial and emotional costs.^[164] Wu spends about a day each week dealing with harassment and law enforcement^[168] and has employed an assistant to help document her harassment.^[6]

After Phil Fish aggressively denounced Quinn's abusers, accounts of Fish's company Polytron were compromised, including its web site, Dropbox, PayPal, and Twitter accounts.^[169][170] Detailed personal and financial information of the company and its employees was leaked.^[169][170] As a result, Fish announced he was quitting game development, and offered Polytron and its intellectual property for sale.^[169][170] An IndieGoGo campaign by The Fine Young Capitalists, which had gained significant support from 4chan posters, was hacked in apparent retaliation.^[171]

Stephen Williams, known on YouTube as Boogie2988, received death threats after making a video encouraging both sides of the debate to beware of dehumanizing the other.^[172][173]

Gaming critic John Bain, known as TotalBiscuit, began to receive harassment after tweeting in support of ethical journalism.^[43] The harassment - including threats to kill him, rape his wife, and kill his child - remained ongoing after two years and motivated Bain's withdrawal from social media.

Gamergate supporter Erik Foreman was advised by police to leave his home temporarily after receiving a threatening e-mail that referenced his home address.^[30]

Milo Yiannopoulos has been harassed, including by being mailed a dead animal^[41] and a syringe of unknown fluid^[163]. He does not take such incidents seriously^[41][163] and said, "No one seriously believes there's any physical danger to anyone".^[41]

Actress Felicia Day wrote a blog post on how the controversy had eroded her camaraderie with male geeks and gamers, saying she feared being doxxed.^[174][175] Within an hour, a reply to the blog purported to have obtained Day's address from Google.^[176] Sympathy for Day and condemnation of the doxxing was widespread in social media communities on both sides of the issue.^{[175][176][177]} Chris Kluwe was noted for his outspoken criticism of Gamergate following the incident, saying male critics like himself were not subjected to doxxing.^[174] Kluwe is one of the most frequently targeted individuals for swatting attempts on /baphomet/.^[67]

In incidents related to Gamergate, users of the /baphomet/ board attempted swatting of web developer Israel Galvez and former baphomet participant Grace Lynn.^[178][67]

Journalist Liana Kerzner was harassed by Gamergate supporters following an online argument with Milo Yiannopoulos.^[62][179] She also reported being bullied online by fans of Anita Sarkeesian angered by Kerzner's criticisms of Tropes vs. Women.^[180] Kerzner objects to being defined by victimization, noting how men can hold controversial positions on Gamergate without their stories being reduced to one of harassment.^[165] She expressed guarded support for positions on either side of the controversy and encouraged reconciliation.^[165]

Gamergate supporters doxxed anti-Gamergate activist Sarah Nyberg, revealing chat logs in which Nyberg advocated neo-Nazism and pedophilia.^{[10][181][182]} Nyberg and other Gamergate critics initially said the logs were fabricated and part of a smear campaign. Nyberg later acknowledged the logs' authenticity, but said the views she expressed had been a juvenile attempt at edginess rather than being sincere.^{[181][182][183]} Noah Berlatsky criticized the release of the logs, saying conservative commentators would have cast the situation as an attack on free speech if the sides had been reversed.^[184] Mytheos Holt^[181] and Cathy Young^[182] criticized Nyberg's allies for defending her in ways that implied that pedophilia was a natural consequence of Nyberg being transgender.

A hacker obtained data about Patreon user contributions in September 2015.^[185] The perpetrator, who had previously expressed hostility to Gamergate and taken down pro-Gamergate websites, claimed to have hacked Patreon on behalf of the movement.^[185] Blogger Sam Smith used the leaked data to contact Patreon sponsors of anti-Gamergate activist Randi Harper with messages recipients saw as extortionate.^[186]

The Gamergate controversy was a factor in the firing of Allison Rapp.^[187]

In July 2014, the FBI approached the International Game Developers Association with an offer to help with incidents of harassment against game developers.^[158][160] All FBI field offices investigate cybercrimes, including harassment.^[160] As of December 2014, the FBI had an active investigation pertaining to Gamergate, but would provide no further details.^[188] According to a retired FBI investigator, casual threats against adults are rarely investigated, on account of the agency's workload.^[189]

Massachusetts congressional representative Katherine Clark contacted the FBI on behalf of Brianna Wu and had a meeting which she described as "disappointing."^[190] Clark introduced a non-binding resolution through the House Appropriations Committee calling for the FBI to increase the pace of investigations and prosecutions of online threats against women.^[191] In April 2015, Clark sponsored a congressional hearing on cyberstalking, featuring Zoe Quinn as a speaker.^[192] Clark introduced a bill in June 2015 that would require the FBI to task a team of agents to investigate online harassment, but it failed to be endorsed in a subcommittee.^[6] In March 2016, Clark proposed a bill to establish $24 million in grants for research and law enforcement training regarding harassment.^[193]

In Elonis v. United States, a case with potential implications for the prosecution of online harassment related to Gamergate,^[194][195] the Supreme Court ruled that a conviction for issuing threats requires mens rea of intent to threaten, not only perception by other parties that the message was threatening.^[194][196]

UN Women and the UN Broadband Commission released a report in September 2015 saying "cyber violence", including online harassment, is equivalent to physical violence.^[197] It called upon governments to hold content providers legally responsible for ensuring civility in the communications they host.^[198] Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian spoke at the report's unveiling and were cited as examples within the report.^[199] The quality of the report was widely criticized over claims it made that lacked supporting research or were supported by dubious sources.^[200] Gamergate supporters, concerned that the report would lead to greater Internet censorship, questioned the legitimacy of the UN's involvement in the issue.^[201] Quinn said she was disappointed in the report and increasingly fearful that legislators would try to respond to harassment in ways that don't respect privacy and free speech.^[199] Ken White said regarding the report that the U.N. was "increasingly a hub of frankly totalitarian countries trying to get speech restrictions passed that they can then use to suppress dissent."^[199] Caitlin Dewey called the report's ideas "dangerous" as according to the EFF the kind of liability the report calls for would make many online services impossible to provide.^[198][202] Arthur Chu disputed the claims by Dewey and the EFF that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act was necessary or desirable.^[203]

The Entertainment Software Association issued a statement saying, "Threats of violence and harassment are wrong. They have to stop. There is no place in the video game community - or our society - for personal attacks and threats."^[204][33] ESA president Mike Gallagher elaborated on his position in an interview, saying the association should not get involved in what was "two different constituencies having a shouting match over the internet," but that, "we do not want to ... have people's speech rights curtailed through threats of physical harm."^[205] The International Game Developers Association issued a statment saying, "While we support diverse viewpoints and healthy debate on the issues within our industry, we condemn personal attacks such as these which are not only morally reprehensible, but also illegal in many countries. We call on the entire game community to stand together against this abhorrent behavior."^[206] The IGDA created a web page of resources for responding to harassment^[207] and has been considering forming a support group.^[208]

Blizzard Entertainment CEO Mike Morihame called on the 2014 BlizzCon audience to stand against the actions of a small group of people "tarnishing our reputation as gamers."^[209][210] Electronic Arts COO Peter Moore said the Gamergate controversy had caused the company to pay more attention to diversity in hiring.^[211] Sony Computer Entertainment America chairman Shawn Layden thought there was more to Gamergate than harassment, but said "I'll be very clear about my view of harassment or bullying. It's completely unacceptable".^[212] Layden added that Sony was putting more women in leadership positions. A letter calling for gamers to report online harassment attracted over 2,000 signatures, including some from employees of major studios or publishers.^[213]

In November 2014, Twitter trialled a pilot program for working with third parties to respond to harassment on its platform, allowing Women, Action & the Media to collect user complaints and escalate them to Twitter as needed.^[214][215] WAM received 811 reports about 512 accounts and escalated 161, which Twitter acted upon in 55% of cases.^[215] More than half of reports were made on behalf of another user, and Twitter modified its policy in February 2015 to allow it to act on such reports.^[215] About 12% of the reported accounts related to Gamergate.^[215] Many reports were false or from accounts mutually harassing each other.^[215][216]

In April 2015, Twitter broadened its definition of threats to include non-specific promotion of violence, and it made automated curation algorithms less likely to present users with abusive tweets.^[217] Between the summers of 2105 and 2016, Twitter banned about 125,000 accounts for promoting terrorism, but several commentators have found it difficult to tell where Twitter draws the line between hateful or controversial political speech.^[218]

Twitter announced in February 2016 that more than forty external organizations, termed the "Trust & Safety Council", would become involved with its user conduct policies.^[219][220] Commentators including Robert Tracinski^[221] and Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry^[222] have objected to the council's lack of transparency and the liberal leaning of the chosen organizations, especially after conservative commentator Stacey McCain was apparently banned for criticizing Anita Sarkeesian. Brendan O'Neill disputed whether the council was intended primarily to address the problem of violent threats, highlighting comments by British Twitter policy-maker Nick Pickles saying the company needed to "drown out" divisive viewpoints.^[223]

Reddit took steps in 2015 to curb harassment on its site, following issues including Gamergate, celebrity photo leaks, and fat shaming.^[224] Enforcement of the new policy was seen as inconsistent, and much objectionable content remained on the site.^[225] Backlash against the changes, combined with controversy over the firing of Victoria Taylor contributed to Ellen Pao's resignation as Reddit CEO.^[224][226] Users on Gamergate subreddit KotakuInAction responded positively to Pao's departure, but expressed doubts whether new leadership would be an improvement.^[227] Incoming CEO Steve Huffman and Reddit co-founder Alex Ohanian have repudiated the site's former commitment to free speech.^[225]

Zoe Quinn and Alex Lifschitz co-founded the Crash Override Network to provide support and advice to victims of online harassment.^[228][229] Quinn says their web site, which offers advice on how to respond to being doxxed and how to discuss the situation with one's employer, is visited 6,000 times per month.^[230] One of their first clients was developer Israel Galvez.^[228][229] The network partnered with Feminist Frequency, which handles monetary donations.^[230][231]

A tool called Gamergate autoblocker was created by open source developer and anti-gamergate activist Randi Harper.^[232] The tool creates a list of likely Gamergate supporters based on whose tweets they follow, and users may then opt-in to pre-emptively blocking these accounts.^[232][233] About 10,000 accounts were blocked during 2014.^[10] The tool can not evaluate whether someone is a Gamergate supporter or engages in harassment, so those using the tool will be blocking a much broader population.^[232][233] Some users having their Twitter use disrupted will consider the false positives to be acceptable.^[233] While aware of valid concerns in the Gamergate controversy, GaymerX founder Matt Conn decided to enable the blockbot for the conference's Twitter account.^[234] IGDA Puerto Rico regional president Roberto Rosario, who was placed on the list, objected to the implication that those on the list were responsible in some way for harassment.^[232][235] David Auerbach wrote that blocklists enable bullying and exclusion that can be as problematic as the behaviors they are designed to address.^[236] Harper founded the Online Abuse Prevention Initiative in cooperation with Crash Override Network.^[230]

Motivated by an experience of bullying in high school, Candance Owens intends to create a site called Social Autopsy that would document and archive harassing social media messages.^[237][238] The idea got negative reactions from both sides of the Gamergate controversy.^[237] Zoe Quinn and Randi Harper attempted to dissuade Owens from the project, and these exchanges became heated.^[237][238] Social Autopsy's Kickstarter campaign was cancelled, which Harper claimed to have effected.^[237][239] Owens subsequently received large amounts of racist harassment, which she attributed to Quinn's Twitter followers.^[237] Jesse Singal called Owens' reactions naive and paranoid.^[237]

Gamergate supporters do not in general have the ability to affect others' online activity, but have in some cases attempted to take down harassing material or report those responsible.^[240][162] The Gamergate ethos calls for those being harassed to avoid calling attention to it, which makes harassment of members less visible.^[10] Gamergate supporters have organized donation drives for charities working to prevent bullying and suicide.^[30][241]

Some journalists have been reluctant to revisit the controversy when new developments might validate the Gamergate movement.^[47] Some, including Alex Hern of The Guardian, believe news coverage has exhibited false balance in presenting two sides of the issue.^[47][242] Hern criticized The New York Times, Vice, and Vox for treating Gamergate ethics complaints seriously.^[242] According to Cathy Young, media coverage routinely links Gamergate with instances of harassment that are verifiably hoaxes or perpetrated by people unconnected with the movement.^[9] David Auerbach wrote, "I think that there is next to zero interest among the press in establishing the facts around Gamergate, and quite a lot of pressure *against* establishing a factual record."^[47]

Columbia University journalism professor Emily Bell says responding to negative feedback on a personal or institutional level is an unresolved challenge for journalism.^[31] Failing to respond to a controversy can further inflame it.^[31] Social media makes more information about journalists and their personal connections available to the public, making potential conflicts of interest more visible.^[31] There is little authoritative guidance on how journalists should respond to accusations, but SPJ ethics committee chair Andrew Seaman recommends that if conflicts of interest cannot be avoided then they should be disclosed transparently.^[31]

Breitbart revealed in September 2014 that a number of games journalists were in communication using a JournoList-like group called GameJournoPros, where among other issues they discussed how to react to breaking allegations against Zoe Quinn.^{[30][243][244]} Gamergate supporters considered some of these messages to constitute unethical collusion or coercion. Ars Technica editor Kyle Orland, who particpated in GameJournoPros, said he regretted some statements sent to the list but that they did not result in coordination or influence on any published material.^[245] GamePolitics editor James Fudge defended his use of the list to advise Escapist editors to more strongly moderate forum discussions about Quinn, and Fudge said that others' calls for list members to express open support for Quinn had not gained consensus.^[246]

In late 2014, Gamergate supporters conducted letter-writing campaigns asking companies to withdraw advertising from sites opposed to the movement, especially Gawker Media properties.^[247] This activity heightened after Gawker employee Sam Biddle tweeted "Ultimately #GamerGate is reaffirming what we’ve known to be true for decades: nerds should be constantly shamed and degraded into submission," and "bring back bullying".^[248] The tweets may have been intended in jest, and editors apologized, but Gawker has been known for shades of bullying or cruelty in its coverage.^[248] Gamergate supporters convinced Adobe Systems to distance itself from bullying by having Gawker remove Adobe's logo from its pages.^[248][247] This created further controversy, with Gamergate critics accusing Adobe of aligning with Gamergate-related harassment.^[247] Adobe responded with the statement, "We are vehemently opposed to bullying of any kind and would never support any group that bullies."^[247] Mercedez-Benz also temporarily withdrew advertising in response to Biddle's tweets but declined to comment further.^[249] Gawker editor Max Read said that overall the incident cost the company "thousands of dollars".^[248][247] Caitlin Dewey^[249] and Todd VanDerWerff^[250] expressed concerns about potential chilling effects on journalistic freedom arising from the tactic of targeting advertising revenue. Gamergate supporters have applauded Peter Thiel's campaign of litigation against Gawker.^[251]

The Guardian reported incorrectly in January 2015 that Wikipedia had banned five feminist editors after disputes over Wikipedia's page on the Gamergate controversy.^{[252][253][254]} Secondary reporting by other outlets further inflated the claims, spawning rumors that Wikipedia had "purged all their female editors".^[253] The issue sparked a brief controversy within Wikipedia regarding whether its reliable-sourcing policies required it to echo reporting that Wikipedia had banned feminism.^[252][253]

At least four new Gamergate-linked publications emphasizing "ethics in gaming journalism" attended E3 in 2015.^[255]

"Intimidation Game", an episode of Law and Order: SVU in its 16th season, was inspired by the Gamergate controversy.^[256] The episode's conclusion was controversial for implying that women do not belong in gaming communities.^[257] Responses to the episode from both sides of the controversy were largely negative.^[36] The episode motivated developer Mark Kern to start a petition against what he called yellow journalism about the Gamergate controversy.^[258]

Brianna Wu was the subject of a segment on Syfy's The Internet Ruined My Life.^[259]

• GTFO (film)
• Sad Puppies