Many believe "Gamergate" irredeemably tainted. I honestly do not agree and believe that any efforts to talk about journalistic ethics in any context will be tarnished with the same brush. What some people see as a hate group I see as a group of very frustrated individuals who wanted their voices heard and were shut down and insulted. They are angry and they feel betrayed. On the other side, I can totally see why anyone who had received harassment would be taking the stance that engaging with a group they perceive as responsible can never happen. Then we have a bunch of fringe folks just causing more trouble one way or the other, making the situation worse. Is the solution to shove everyone involved in Gamergate into a box with" misogynist" writteon it? No, that makes a bad situation worse. The solution is to freeze out those responsible for harassment and discuss the concerns of the moderate majority. My sole concern is ethics in games media, it's a topic I've been very interested in and covered for several years. I don't buy this whole "social justice is co-opting our media!" thing but I would like a discussion on how to approach political issues in games coverage. I don't buy "burn it all to the ground!" either, because I don't believe games media irredeemably tainted (at least not anymore, I used to) just as I dont believe Gamergate irredeemably tainted. These are my views and they are as always, consumer first. Agree or disagree, that's fine, but I think you'd be surprised how much people have in common when you peel back the facade that is created through the dehumanization process and media narrative.