CBC prompt Response to a complaint I filed about an interview on Q with Brianna Wu from February. Alright, to start off with, it's about what you'd expect from the CBC. Nothing particularly new, just super frustrating. This is their email, with my name removed, and I left out Shortens personal contact info out at the end. Everything else is unedited. Dear **************: Thank you for your email of February 25 addressed to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission. As you will know from his email of February 27, Patrick Desjardins of CRTC’s Client Services asked CBC through the office of Esther Enkin, CBC Ombudsman, to reply directly to your concerns.   You wrote to draw our attention to an interview with Brianna Wu on that morning’s edition of CBC Radio’s Q and what you see as “one-sided” coverage of GamerGate. It is not a “hate group”, you wrote. Since Q is part of my responsibility, I would like to reply. Please accept my sincere apologies for the delay in doing so.  I fully appreciate that GamerGate is a controversial issue. Some of those using the hashtag argue that their goal is to improve the ethics of online video game journalism. And I agree with you to the extent that the program should have acknowledged that point of view. But if the hashtag started with that intent, as with most online headings, it was soon broadened to include other issues.  For the six months or so prior to this story, GamerGate had attracted public attention largely because of those who used the hashtag to make bullying and misogynistic attacks on female gamers – developers Brianna Wu  and Zoe Quinn and feminist social critic Anita Sarkeesian perhaps chief among them.  Two weeks prior to the Q interview, U.S. television program Law & Order: Special Victims Unit broadcast an episode called “Intimidation Game”. The story followed a female video games developer who was the target of a group of violent misogynistic online terrorists. Broadcaster NBC described the program as being “ripped from the headlines”, although viewers said they found the plot unbelievable and the writing poor. Ms. Wu wrote in a piece posted on Bustle.com that same day (“I’m Brianna Wu, And I’m Risking My Life Standing Up to Gamergate – Feb. 11) saying that while the Law & Order producers hadn’t consulted her, the main character appeared to be an amalgamation of herself and two other relatively prominent women in the gaming world. In the piece, she detailed the death threats and harassment she had experienced over the past months often from people using the GamerGate hashtag and how it had affected her and her work as a game developer.  In the Q interview, the program host began by asking what she thought about the Law & Order episode and the parallels she saw in it to her own experience. They explored some of those parallels and the points where they diverge. The host asked about the value of exposing these issues – although admittedly in an exaggerated and perhaps flawed fashion – to a wider television audience. And finally, how she interpreted, and ultimately disagreed with, the implied message in the program’s conclusion. The focus of the Q story was on the misogyny and threats experienced by one prominent female game developer and how her experience had been interpreted in a fictional portrayal in a popular television series. It is a powerful story that speaks to significant themes including gamer culture, misogyny and social media criticism. And while it is disturbing in many ways, I think the program explored it in a respectful and thoughtful fashion in keeping with its mandate to feature conversations with the compelling people who influence our culture today. But let me emphasize that the focus was on Ms. Wu and her experience with those who she said often used the GamerGate hashtag. The program was not an examination of GamerGate. As interesting as it might be, that is a far broader subject and well beyond the scope of this story. Had we done that story listeners might reasonably have expected to hear a range of views on the topic. As it was, although the focus was narrow, it would have benefited from the inclusion of an acknowledgement that GamerGate is associated with other points of view as well.  While CBC’s journalistic policy expects our coverage to balance differing points of view, it also acknowledges that balance does not necessarily mean some sort of mathematical equivalency. Balance does not, for instance, mean that every voice critical of GamerGate must be immediately juxtaposed with an equally strong voice supporting GamerGate. It is not always possible or even desirable to include all relevant points of view in the short time available for one story. Indeed, balance is a more sophisticated concept that can be achieved over a series of programs or a period of time. The important thing is to ensure that differing points of view are treated in an equitable manner.  Thank you again for your email and again my apologies for the delay. Nevertheless, I hope my reply has reassured you of the continuing integrity of our programs.  Finally, it is my responsibility to tell you that if you are not satisfied with this response, you may wish to submit the matter for review by the CBC Ombudsman. The Office of the Ombudsman, an independent and impartial body reporting directly to the President, is responsible for evaluating program compliance with the CBC’s journalistic policies. The Ombudsman may be reached by mail at Box 500, Terminal A, Toronto, Ontario M5W 1E6, or by fax at 416-205-2825, or by email at ombudsman@cbc.ca Lynda Shorten  Director, Network Talk  CBC Radio Takeaways on this: Fer fucks sake, I forgot about this complaint since it was back from FEBRUARY. 5 months? Holy shitballs. CBC Listens and Believes everything Brianna Wu said: "the focus was on Ms. Wu and her experience with those who she said often used the GamerGate hashtag". This is what the Escapist did with Wizchan and Zoe Quinn. That bullshit about mathematical equivalency. I personally am not calling for a one for one ratio of "here's a critic of Gamergate, here's a supporter of Gamergate", what I am calling for is to not label what is likely hundreds of thousands of people as harassers when this cannot be proven. CBC has consistently done this, and have made NO ATTEMPT at resolving this situation. The fact is CBC has never once given Gamergate a proper nod in any form. They've utterly FAILED at presenting Gamergates side PERIOD, nevermind balancing it against it's critics. Referencing the Bustle article. Top keks. The title alone is a massive joke. Uh, CBC? That's a red flag that Wu is a dramatizing lunatic. Once again, we see the "The program was not an examination of GamerGate." If it's not an examination of Gamergate, and if you cannot prove the alleged harassment is coming from Gamergate supporters, would you kindly not mention Gamergate period? It's not a harassment group, it's not even about women in gaming. Frankly, it never was. There might be some cross support between Gamergate supporters and supporting women in games, but that doesn't make it critical to Gamergate. That's like saying bikes are critical to Bikers Against Child Abuse Canada. It's not, it's just a demographic showing their support for a cause, and that cause is what's important, not that they're bikers, y'know what I mean Vern? At least Shorten admitted they failed to acknowledge what Gamergates stated goal is. I didn't bother to verify this with the mods, since nothing new was really said here that we haven't already seen. Just the hilarity of them blatantly Listen and Believing Wu. I can forward the email if anyone from the mods want. Just didn't think it was that important due to the lack of happenings in this. Currently I'm considering how I'm going to reply to this response, because I honestly feel that something needs to be said. Now, I get that it was an interview, so fact checking isn't something you can realistically do in that situation, but the fact that they allow someone to say such lies, whom has been caught in lies before, is incredibly frustrating, and the lack of providing the other side of the story entirely is misinforming their audience. I think I'm going to push on two issues here. 1) Their admittance that they didn't acknowledged Gamergate's point of view. I think this is an angle that could be used to get them to see the error of their ways, and point out that they're not informing their audience correctly of all the possible sides to the story in question, which goes against their policy. Having a balance in differing views of a subject means you have to eventually give the other side some coverage, something I've yet to see the CBC do once. I'm thinking of saying "oh, so you have some coverage of Gamergates side of these issues then? Can you direct me to them? Because I'm pretty sure you haven't once do so, thus there's no balance period." 2) By labelling tens, maybe even hundreds of thousands of people as harassers by failing to address Gamergates side of the issue, they're misleading their audience into thinking that Gamergate is filled with bad people. This is something that is easily disproven by looking to communities such as KotakuInAction, the Gamergate chan boards, etc. In all honestly the show shouldn't have allowed Gamergate to be mentioned to begin with, since it has no hand in the alleged harassment. I think this will be a strong angle to come from as well. Basically, show me the proof that Gamergate is populated by people using the hashtag to bully and make misogynistic attacks on female gamers. This is a claim that has been repeated by CBC numerous times now. If anyone has the various links to studies and surveys contradicting that claim, it would be much appreciated. Any thoughts on this?