As a journalist who has worked with #gaming and #eSports as a subject (though not exclusively), I want to recommend to other journalists one thing: when talking about the gamer public/majority opinion, e.g. "gamers were upset about x", give examples of threads that support that.
If you're going to tell people that an opinion is widely accepted or something is believed by "a majority of gamers" you must give a timeline of that belief. Show different sources, different voices, different public figures who hold that belief. Show people believing it!
You can't just assume an opinion is de facto accepted, and that acceptance is widely known. If you want to say something like "the majority of the x gamer community feels y" you either SHOW that belief or you admit you're peddling stereotypes, lies, and exaggeration.
Especially if it is something contentious. Generalizations may have their place, only for the sake of brevity on something seriously minor.
As you might recognize, this is in response to Eordogh's @Forbes article concerning GG and lingering sentiments from the 2012-14 climate.
As you might recognize, this is in response to Eordogh's @Forbes article concerning GG and lingering sentiments from the 2012-14 climate.
My criticisms, as a fellow journalist, are not that the subject does not need to be discussed - it does, we need to be able to talk about this stuff without receiving death threats - but to have a better pulse on the consensus. The majority opinion is not what Eordogh purports.
In the end, the article did no one good. It dredges up the anger of those who feel this criticism is shaky and unwarranted, pits one man against the world to "defend" TB's "legacy", and then just repeats he's wrong without providing example. It made things worse for all sides.
@threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
