#gamergate is a nebulous beast. Its desires and aims are diverse.

But whatever your your views on allegations regarding improper behaviour from those within or attached to #gamergate, one thing I think everyone can agree on is the main argument regarding motivation and aims is for greater journalistic ethics in video games.

There’s just one little problem though — by their own admission, #gamergate is actually firmly against that.

Some history.

“Gerstmanngate” is the common term to refer to the firing of GameSpot writer Jeff Gerstmann, for giving a bad review to a game whose publisher had spent a LOT of money on ad placement on GameSpot. Gerstmann’s firing proved that GameSpot was corrupt — they allowed their advertising department to control their editorial process, meaning every positive review ever published could be assumed by readers to have also been “bought” by advertisers.

Stop Rush.

Rush Limbaugh is widely regarded by various groups as a bad man, whose speech should be suppressed. A “consumer action” group, Stop Rush, encourages individuals to contact advertisers, and tell them to stop advertising on Rush Limbaugh’s show — that the association between their brand and Rush is detrimental to their brand.

Consumer action of this type is fine, if your motivation is to silence a voice you disagree with — as is the case for left-wing enemies of Rush Limbaugh’s right-wing ranting. And it works, too. They rely on advertiser influence being able to influence editorial content. Spot the issue?

Operation Disrespectful Nod. Operation Bayonetta 2.

The problem emerges when you look at #gamergate’s consumer action campaigns, Operation Disrespectful Nod and Operation Bayonetta 2, in context of Gerstmanngate.

“Consumer action” against writers relies on a corrupt relationship between Advertising and Editorial. Otherwise it wouldn’t work.

“Gamers are over”

I have asked, time and time again, for someone in #gamergate to tell me what the ethical breach by Leigh Alexander in her article on the obsolescence of the “gamer” identity is.

The answers are not forthcoming, because there isn’t one.

GamaSutra was attacked in order to silence Leigh for saying things #gamergate doesn’t like — for “being a bad person” like Rush, not for breaching any standards of journalistic ethics. It’s why they spend so much time focusing on charges of “racism” or “bullying” — they need to paint Leigh as a “bad person” to help explain the justification for “consumer action” against her employers. #gamergate is using Stop Rush tactics against Leigh, to silence her.

Stop Rush-style action only works if Advertising controls Editorial.

And that is why the simple unanswered, unanswerable question “what is the specific breach of journalistic ethics by Leigh Alexander in her GamaSutra piece” is so important.

Because without an answer, Operation Disrepectful Nod is entirely dependent upon corruption in games journalism, something #gamergate claims to be entirely opposed to.

Operation Disrespectful Nod sees the corruption of Gerstmanngate as a model to be emulated, not a dark period that proves how corrupt games journalism is.