Read on Twitter
WAIT A FUCKING MINUTE.
A reporter for Kotaku's caught lying to rape victims to publish details they were explicitly uncomfortable having published, and their response is "it's not our policy to edit articles we've already published" before waiting 1/2 weeks to edit things out...
A reporter for Kotaku's caught lying to rape victims to publish details they were explicitly uncomfortable having published, and their response is "it's not our policy to edit articles we've already published" before waiting 1/2 weeks to edit things out...
...and respect the people their reporting harmed. But they publish an opinion piece about how Final Fantasy VII's easy mode is too easy and gamers/Twitter users criticizing it is enough to get that edited the same day that it's published?
Why is the former group treated as safe to discount (and when part of your responsibility as a reporter protect the sources said reporting risks harming) where the latter is important enough to warrant an immediate response?
Context for the incredibly heavy first part:
http://www.nathalielawhead.com/candybox/what-its-like-sharing-your-metoo-with-kotaku-a-cautionary-tale
http://www.nathalielawhead.com/candybox/an-open-letter-to-game-journalists-metoo-fighting-with-surviving-abusive-reporting-and-the-fallout-of-not-caring
http://www.nathalielawhead.com/candybox/what-its-like-sharing-your-metoo-with-kotaku-a-cautionary-tale
http://www.nathalielawhead.com/candybox/an-open-letter-to-game-journalists-metoo-fighting-with-surviving-abusive-reporting-and-the-fallout-of-not-caring
