/gamergatehq/ - #GamerGate and #NotYourShield

>>297345

CONT.

Point is MSM didn't just smear Gamergate and gamers in general out of some ideological loyalty to SJWs but because they knew they could make money off this shitstorm

Sure a few like gawker and vox got hit when we attacked their advertisers, but what about huffpo? or salon? or NYT? they all ran smear pieces that got shared everywhere

This "template for profitability" as that jackass consultant called it actually fits within the current media climate

Think about it, when was the last time you remember not having to deal with a shitty controversy? not having to listen to your friends talking about shit you know its fake?

This has been going on for a while, we didn't see it because it didn't affect us directly, but its there, and the dead of old media its only making it worse.

In the past it was only shitty cheap tabloids who employed tactics like this, but with the newspaper business model going down now every major media outlet works like this.

>>297345

>>297348

That's what I pretty much expected since I became aware of how bad the MSM is.

Don't forget that anyone with a webcam, a microphone and a Youtube channel can basically run their own news station now, making the MSM even more obsolete, thus they're becoming even more desperate to stay afloat.

>>297351

>Don't forget that anyone with a webcam, a microphone and a Youtube channel can basically run their own news station now

Not quite leader, they are still relying in the 'branding' factor, and because what we're talking here isn't common knowledge most people consider these hacks more respectable than an independent guy.

>>297348

>>297357

I think journalism integrity/ethics was dead before the new media. Watergate made legends of Woodward and Bernstein and everyone expected that other journos were trying to be like them. Meanwhile, so much was made of watergate (books and a movie by w/b) that the PR/Marxist hacks got to study exactly what happened and build their networks safe against future journalism.

The noble efforts of W/B were not "real" journalism, they were eager kids who didn't know the business yet. They were outliers. They didn't get newshours on tv or newspapers of their own. They became oddities on cspan.

meanwhile, anyone who wanted to follow in their style ran face first into all the hacks who had studied watergate to avoid being news stories.

>>297348

>>297345

Not to rain on your parade, but that's pretty much what we expected. I mean, he's basically saying "if it bleeds, it leads". Pair it with the need to make money in today's very competitive market (and, as you yourself mentioned, part of it is maximizing profits by minimizing cost) and the need to fill in the 24-hour news cycle, and you have the perfect recipe for a downfall of news media.

Don't get me wrong, it's nice to get a confirmation though. But what we need now is a whistleblower. Gawker was bitching a while ago about plummeting levels of the public's trust in media, but it's still too high. A respectable figure blowing the case wide open would lower it even more (too bad that the most respected - at least for the masses - are the satirists, and while people listen to them, they don't really take them seriously).

Journalism is kill, but for it to be reborn, we first need to take care of its shuffling zombie corpse.

>MSM didn't just smear Gamergate and gamers in general out of some ideological loyalty to SJWs but because they knew they could make money off this shitstorm

There are people who didn't realize this? They've been milking the controversy since day 1. The problem is, for every one of us who did what we should be doing:

>Stop giving the game sites traffic. Drag their names through the mud. Destroy their reputation as a result of blatant anti-consumer actions.

We've got five dumbasses and jackoffs who gave them more and more attention. Controversy only brings them money if you let it. And with something as big as this, there was little hope to control it. They spun the controversy to be about US being angry rather than being about the shit THEY did to make us angry in the first place. They lied and twisted things to cover their own asses, deflect any criticism away from them, and milk as much money out of it as they could.

And it worked because there are a lot of dumb fucks so stupid that they let it work.

>>297383

>And it worked because there are a lot of dumb fucks so stupid that they let it work.

…because autists whining that Ralph receiving $.00001 from a view from a link here, because he said something awful that hurt their widdle feelings; is the same as Gawker's ad-affiliate system being taken down by an concerted-but-leaderless email campaign… because autism…

Or were you talking about something else?

MSM went antigamer because gaming is anti-mainstream. There's nothing more or less complicated to it than that.

Didn't we discuss this already on month 1 and came to the conclusion that the SJW clique is used only because it creates controversy (clickbait) while at the same time working as a tool for collusion and isolating unwanted competition from actually competent people?

Anyway, it's always good to revisit the causes and context of things. Good thread OP.

Another thing:

All this proves is that journalism's weak spot is ad revenue. This is why they were so afraid of GG.

>>297345

Thanks for the post! I think that's why gg is winning, because we are archiving stories instead of click baiting them.

>>297460

he's not talking about Ralph, he's talking about the mindless consumer-mass of media that keeps these antisocial assholes employed.

>>297360

>>297369

Here is the thing, while this been going on at least since the 90s the fact is that it was the end of the classified ads business model what made this blogspam shit the new standard

Newspapers and channels in the past were able to afford good investigative journalism because their profits came from very highly paid ads in print and TV. When the internet came that ended because not only is the internet theoretically infinite so there's infinite space for ads (ergo no scarcity ergo prices plummet) but analytics and tracking means that clients only have to pay for ads that are actually seen and clicked. In the past clients couldn't know that just like they had to compete for limited ad space, and that created a huge source of revenue.

With that gone news companies have been going bankrupt for years, CNN doesn't even have a war correspondent anymore because its too expensive for them, and this is a network that only became famous for its coverage of the gulf war.

>what we need now is a whistleblower

I think that what we need is a good hack, getting a syrian-style hijacking would be pretty awesome but getting the real dirt gawker has in its vault would be even better

>>297383

This is direct confirmation, and I been talking here for a year that we should've made extensions for browsers that block these sites and automatically give you an archive link, that way anyone can join the fight

But no, keep it manual so only a tiny minority bothers to do it….

I always felt like they attacked us because we were pushing for journalistic ethics and the last thing they want is a grassroots group calling their shit out.

>>297542

>I think that what we need is a good hack

I dunno man, with how little the normies know about tech and the web, the hacked could try and convince them that "Ebil Goobergrape hacked this stuff ONTO our servers to discredit us!"

And I'm not really convinced they wouldn't fall for it.