An In-Depth ANALYSIS of the Total Biscuit Interview of Steven Totilo
Any true analysis must begin with what a tremendous leap forward this interview is. For really the first time, there was a frank one on one debate about GamerGate by two people on opposite sides of the conflict. The importance of this cannot be overstated as dialogue is the only thing that will ever allow this to end. I only hope this can begin a new chapter in the history of GamerGate. Here, I will be discussing the positives and the common ground that I feel will be key in the coming months. I will also be sharing criticisms and concern over some of the responses Totilo gave and why I feel they highlight what the real problems will continue to be going forward.
If you have read my People's History of GamerGate, you will know that Steven Totilo is the Editor-In-Chief for Kotaku, the publication who is arguably more in the center of the controversy than any other. It has been and still is my assertion that proper action by Totilo could have prevented GamerGate from occurring at all. Though I will freely admit this is debatable, what is not debatable is that his actions regarding Grayson's relationship with a subject of his stories fueled an enormous amount of skepticism for a large chunk of the gaming audience. This interview was very telling for many reasons.
Foremost is the fact that Totilo admits to certain improprieties. It is important that this is not viewed as a "Gotcha," but rather as a leaping off point. He admits for instance, that it was wrong for Patricia Hernandez, writer for Kotaku, to write articles about people she was involved in a living relationship with. He also discusses the effect of Patreon, saying there are virtually no instances where a reporter should have any kind of financial ties to people in the industry. From where GamerGate has come from, being constantly accused of misogyny and terrorism, to where we are now, being constantly accused of misogyny and terrorism and having people admitting we have some valid points, this is a huge victory. Coming from the EIC of Kotaku, that is an even larger victory.
If you have read my People's History of GamerGate, you will know that Steven Totilo is the Editor-In-Chief for Kotaku, the publication who is arguably more in the center of the controversy than any other. It has been and still is my assertion that proper action by Totilo could have prevented GamerGate from occurring at all. Though I will freely admit this is debatable, what is not debatable is that his actions regarding Grayson's relationship with a subject of his stories fueled an enormous amount of skepticism for a large chunk of the gaming audience. This interview was very telling for many reasons.
Foremost is the fact that Totilo admits to certain improprieties. It is important that this is not viewed as a "Gotcha," but rather as a leaping off point. He admits for instance, that it was wrong for Patricia Hernandez, writer for Kotaku, to write articles about people she was involved in a living relationship with. He also discusses the effect of Patreon, saying there are virtually no instances where a reporter should have any kind of financial ties to people in the industry. From where GamerGate has come from, being constantly accused of misogyny and terrorism, to where we are now, being constantly accused of misogyny and terrorism and having people admitting we have some valid points, this is a huge victory. Coming from the EIC of Kotaku, that is an even larger victory.
There are however some negative points. I have never considered myself a "salt the earth" type of Gamergater, but after this interview it makes me wonder if I can ever again trust a Kotaku that is headed by Steven Totilo. This does not come from a place of rhetoric, or even that we are on opposite sides of a debate. It is the ideas he expressed regarding journalistic objectivity and professional distance that make me feel we are diametrically opposed on these topics.
Namely, it is his assertion that, quoting Totilo here, "I'm uneasy about any written ethics policy because you end up writing your self into corners that are unnecessary..." It is not that GamerGate is even overly concerned with a written ethics code, it's the fact that after a perceived betrayal of trust, there needs to be some show of good will to demonstrate to the audience they are serious about reform. Totilo argued the fact they made changes to the guidelines so quickly after the controversy began, as well as the fact that they have gone back and added disclosures to Hernandez's work, demonstrates their commitment to transparency.
Namely, it is his assertion that, quoting Totilo here, "I'm uneasy about any written ethics policy because you end up writing your self into corners that are unnecessary..." It is not that GamerGate is even overly concerned with a written ethics code, it's the fact that after a perceived betrayal of trust, there needs to be some show of good will to demonstrate to the audience they are serious about reform. Totilo argued the fact they made changes to the guidelines so quickly after the controversy began, as well as the fact that they have gone back and added disclosures to Hernandez's work, demonstrates their commitment to transparency.
Totilo's early tweets on the controversy
This shows that there were conflicts of interest, and while I do applaud them going back to update the stories with disclaimers, he also insisted there was nothing to apologize for. Phrased in another way, Totilo is saying they made mistakes, they aren't going to let it happen again, and they aren't sorry. I am of the mind that apologies cost you nothing and can gain you everything, but the lack of the apology is not the important part.
Totilo speaks of murky situations when a reporter is establishing relationships with those he reports on. His assertion is that this is needed.He doesn't want his reporters not to be able to make connections in the industry because it could cause a conflict of interest. This is troubling to hear the EIC say, as he is the one in charge of policing conflicts of interest. He of all people should understand the fine line that must be walked, and furthermore, should understand the importance of not giving his readers an impression that the line could be crossed.
He admits to walking in the "murky territory," but his response is not to prevent the murkiness in the first place. Instead, he asks the reader to have faith that both himself and Grayson have acted appropriately. For a publication so embattled, that is a large amount of faith required. The primary problem is that he recognizes these issues but does not think anything needs to be done about them.
In my mind, Totilo takes one step forward and two back on most points. He acts admirably regarding the articles they have appended with disclosures, and I absolutely admire his strong stance on Patreon and Kickstarter, virtually banning reporters from engaging wih them. I disagree with his refusal to offer an apology for losing some trust of his readers, regardless of whether he thinks anything was actually wrong. It is, however, his views on that murky territory that I have a hard time reconciling in any way with my own. He feels it is up to the journalist to know when a line has been crossed and to trust them to act accordingly when the lines become too blurred. There was a time I would have perhaps even agreed with that sentiment. If you cannot trust a journalist, you are better off not reading them in the first place. Time and attention are too valuable to squander having to second guess the motives of the author. When the editor, the one most in charge of policing ethics in the publication, does not realize the importance of erring on the side of caution, it gives little cause for trust in the publication. Until Kotaku understands the importance of impartiality, readers should be cautioned not to take what they read there on good faith.
Totilo speaks of murky situations when a reporter is establishing relationships with those he reports on. His assertion is that this is needed.He doesn't want his reporters not to be able to make connections in the industry because it could cause a conflict of interest. This is troubling to hear the EIC say, as he is the one in charge of policing conflicts of interest. He of all people should understand the fine line that must be walked, and furthermore, should understand the importance of not giving his readers an impression that the line could be crossed.
He admits to walking in the "murky territory," but his response is not to prevent the murkiness in the first place. Instead, he asks the reader to have faith that both himself and Grayson have acted appropriately. For a publication so embattled, that is a large amount of faith required. The primary problem is that he recognizes these issues but does not think anything needs to be done about them.
In my mind, Totilo takes one step forward and two back on most points. He acts admirably regarding the articles they have appended with disclosures, and I absolutely admire his strong stance on Patreon and Kickstarter, virtually banning reporters from engaging wih them. I disagree with his refusal to offer an apology for losing some trust of his readers, regardless of whether he thinks anything was actually wrong. It is, however, his views on that murky territory that I have a hard time reconciling in any way with my own. He feels it is up to the journalist to know when a line has been crossed and to trust them to act accordingly when the lines become too blurred. There was a time I would have perhaps even agreed with that sentiment. If you cannot trust a journalist, you are better off not reading them in the first place. Time and attention are too valuable to squander having to second guess the motives of the author. When the editor, the one most in charge of policing ethics in the publication, does not realize the importance of erring on the side of caution, it gives little cause for trust in the publication. Until Kotaku understands the importance of impartiality, readers should be cautioned not to take what they read there on good faith.
This has been an analysis of an interview between Total Biscuit and Steven Totilo published Oct 29, 2014. It can be found in its entirety here.
RSS Feed