Tag: censorship

2261: Tracer’s Ass

0261_001

In yet another disappointing example of developers caving in to the demands of a minority of players, it seems that World of Warcraft developer Blizzard has made changes to a character in its upcoming game Overwatch, apparently for little reason other than to placate one poster who played the “sexualisation!” card. Here’s an archive of the thread in question, in case it mysteriously disappears.

Now, normally I would say that everyone is perfectly welcome to give their opinions on character design and appropriateness and whatever. But what we have here is Blizzard explicitly stating that they’re going to change an animation for one character because a poster is worried about it sending the wrong message to their young daughter, who is already interested in the character through trailers. This goes a step beyond someone just stating their opinion, and it’s a dangerous road for any developer to embark on, because if you make changes for just one poor soul, where do you then draw the line when someone else claims to be offended by something you found to be quite innocuous and may even be proud of or happy with?

There’s an argument, of course, that there were people in Blizzard who already wanted to change the pose and this simply provided a convenient excuse, but I’m not sure I buy that. Even if true, it doesn’t send a great message to the community, and it has the potential to put Blizzard in a sticky situation down the line, as previously noted.

TracerThe pose in question, incidentally, can be seen in the picture here. There’s nothing particularly offensive about it; the only even vaguely sexualised thing about it is the fact that Tracer is wearing very tight trousers indeed, and that some people have chosen to interpret this as her “presenting” (you know, like baboons do when they’re in heat) rather than, you know, just doing a cool action hero pose.

I’m not going to argue about whether or not this is sexism or objectification or sexualised or whatever because I’m frankly really, really tired of that discussion happening over and over and over and never, ever going anywhere. Instead, what I wanted to do was share this response — and my own thoughts, too.

“Today, I feel like my voice no longer matters to Blizzard,” writes disappointed Blizzard fan and longtime World of Warcraft player Ginny Higerd, a 30 year old woman who goes by @mahoumelonball on Twitter. “I’m not attractive. I’m not skinny. I’ve been teased about my appearance since elementary school. […] I love being a sexy night elf character. I love being Tracer. I love being Nova. I LOVE these strong women that can be confident in their abilities and their appearance, because in the real world, I’m none of those things. These games were an escape for me. I channel myself into these characters, because I would give anything just to be like them.”

Higerd’s words resonated with me a great deal, because it kind of sums up how I feel about the whole thing with “sexualised” or “sexy” characters. When I play a game with an attractive female cast — or deliberately make my custom avatar, where available, to be an attractive woman — I am not doing so to get my rocks off. I’m doing so because I like the way the character looks, and I like feeling like I’m taking on the role of someone else — someone who’s not me, and someone I’d like to be, but will never get to be. Much like Higerd, I am none of the things that these characters represent, and I love having the opportunity, however limited it might be, to feel like I’m if not one of them, then certainly at least hanging out with them.

To take things a bit deeper, I’ve always been fascinated by what it would be like to be female, for a variety of reasons. Some of these reasons are sexual in nature, others are simple curiosity about the differences between the sexes — and the different ways people respond to men and women. I have recurring dreams and fantasies about having the ability to switch between being a man and a woman at will, and it’s sometimes frustrating that I can’t do that, even though it’s obviously an impossibility. This isn’t an indirect means of coming out and saying that I want to make any sort of transition, I might add — it’s just something that has fascinated me for a long time, and here’s the thing: video games have always provided me with a means to explore that fantasy in its most idealised form. Because what’s the point in getting to live out a fantasy if it’s not quite perfect? Assuming you can recognise the difference between fantasy and reality, of course, which all but the most deluded, mentally unstable have absolutely no problem with, what with the escape from reality into fantasy being one of the main reasons people like to game in the first place.

Games are, at their core, pure escapist fantasies of various descriptions. Like any other form of art, they can be autobiographical, realistic, fantastical, historical, abstract, stylised, childish, provocative, erotic and any number of other descriptors you might care to mention. I have an almost infinite amount of respect for the talented men and women who make these experiences come to life on my television and in the palm of my hand, and I would never, ever question how an artist has chosen to represent a character that they created, nor would I start demanding that there are more characters that look like me for the sake of that increasingly irritating buzzword “diversity”. Instead, I would look to understand the character in question through playing as them, and determining what I can learn about them — and about myself — through how they play and how they act. Over the years, I’ve found far more characters I can relate to that don’t look like me than those that do.

Characterisation is a great deal more than just physical appearance. And, ironically, it is the ones who judge characters like Tracer based solely on their physical appearance who are the ones indulging in objectification, not those who enjoy the designs of these characters for whatever reasons they might have. And I’m growing increasingly impatient with those who cry “sexualisation!” at every opportunity without 1) offering any “solutions” (to this non-existent problem) and 2) explaining exactly why it’s somehow bad to have characters that look nice in our interactive fantasies.

2198: Petting Waifus and Gay Conversion

0198_001.png

It came to light today that Nintendo of America apparently hasn’t stopped with the localisation edits to the upcoming Fire Emblem Fates that had already been revealed: it seems that the “petting” minigame, during which you can directly interact with the characters in your party — male and female — and improve your relationships with them has been excised completely. Kotaku described this as a “minor change in the name of localisation”.

Perhaps it is “minor”. Perhaps it is an unnecessary part of the game. Perhaps those who are unaware of the Japanese version won’t even know it was there to be missed. But none of this changes the fact that a feature of the game — with this being the first Fire Emblem game where you could directly interact with party members in this way — has been removed entirely from the Western release, giving English speakers a version of the game which is comparitively gimped when placed alongside its original Japanese source material.

Before I go any further, I’d like to talk a little about my general views on localisation. In short: localisation can be helpful and sometimes necessary to ensure that the right audience can access a work. The Ace Attorney series, for example, benefited considerably from its rather drastic localisation, opening it up to a much broader audience than those who would have been comfortable with a protagonist called Naruhodo Ryuuichi rather than Phoenix Wright.

For me, the key thing when considering how drastic localisation changes should or could be is the question of cultural context. Sometimes the inherently Japanese context of a work is important — key examples include titles like the Persona series, which is set in and around Japanese high schools; the Shenmue series, whose entire first game was set in a few lovingly rendered regions of a Japanese town; the Yakuza series, which is about as accurate a simulation of Japanese nightlife as you’re going to get, regular street brawls aside; the Senran Kagura series, which is steeped in both Japanese mythology and cultural peculiarities such as student rivalries and, you know, being a ninja; and any number of visual novels you’d care to mention, which often rely heavily on conventions of Japanese culture, particularly with regard to interpersonal relationships.

For other titles, though, it’s less important to keep this authentically Japanese feel to it. Something like my perennial favourite the Hyperdimension Neptunia series, for example, works well with the breezy tone of its localisation, though more diehard fans remain dissatisfied with character traits introduced through NIS America’s original translations of the PlayStation 3 games prior to Idea Factory International taking matters into their own hands. Likewise, the localisation of Final Fantasy XIV was excellently handled, featuring some well-done and deliberately flowery — almost Shakespearean at times — dialogue that many have noted added considerable depth to the original source’s writing. Indeed, in Final Fantasy XIV’s case, many of the things introduced through its localisation have found themselves “backported” to the Japanese version, so well-received were they — though I will admit if you know even a bit of Japanese, playing the game with Japanese voices and comparing to the English subtitles can be a little jarring.

Anyway: the point is, I’m not opposed to localisation where it’s appropriate or necessary to broaden a work’s appeal, and particularly if said work is aimed at mass market but is still riddled with Japanese cultural references no-one but 1) Japanese people and 2) weeaboos will recognise. Where a specifically Japanese tone and feel is necessary to an authentic translation of the work, though, I’d rather the translation be as literal (but readable) as possible where it can.

And so we come to Fire Emblem Fates. What we have here is a title that isn’t particularly Japanese in feel or tone, since Fire Emblem has always erred on a stereotypically Western approach to fantasy at times. As such, I wouldn’t be opposed to localisation changes that help a broad audience to access, understand and appreciate the work as a whole by toning down its “Japaneseness”.

That’s not what we’re getting though. Fire Emblem Fates’ most drastic localisation edits are nothing to do with helping people understand and access the work, but they are everything to do with minimising offense. Take the notorious “gay conversion” scene, for example: the original hoohah over this came about as a result of some Tumblrina spilling her spaghetti everywhere over what she perceived to be a male protagonist spiking the drink of a lesbian character and “converting” her to being straight enough to marry him. In actuality, the scene is about nothing of the sort: not only is the “magic powder” used to improve her battle effectiveness rather than get her into bed — fainting the moment you get close to a man isn’t a good way to wage war — but the female character in question, Soleil, might not even be gay in the first place, if the Fire Emblem Wiki is to be believed: all Soleil’s romantic interests are male, making the matter perhaps more one of something related to androphobia rather than homosexuality.

And as for the removal of the “petting” minigame, it just feels like a “mother knows best” moment; like we Westerners are somehow expected to be shocked and appalled enough at the prospect of physically interacting with a video game character and faint on the couch in protest.

I don’t like this trend. It feels like a reversal of all the good work that was done in the late ’90s and early ’00s, where games were regularly praised for having the guts to include adult content other than the “usual” violence. I vividly recall Sierra’s adventures Police Quest 4 and Gabriel Knight being highlighted as examples of the medium maturing because of their willingness to include the word “fuck” in their scripts, previously never heard in a game; and likewise I remember PC Zone magazine running a feature in one of its early issues about Megatech’s hentai games, noting that their willingness to tackle adult themes — just like anime, which was starting to become popular and fashionable in the UK around the same time — was a sign that some game makers were finally starting to acknowledge that games weren’t just for kids.

I’m no fan of Fire Emblem generally — largely due to a lack of experience with the series rather than an actual dislike of it — but these types of big changes made for the wrong reasons make me somewhat uncomfortable, because they’re sanitising works of art in the name of appeasing small but loud groups of people, many of whom likely wouldn’t have played the game in the first place. It’s babying the Western audience, protecting them from things that might “offend” us, whereas one of the best things about art — any form of art, whatever the medium — is its ability to challenge us and get us to think about things in a different way. If you wipe out everything that might offend someone somewhere from art, you’re left with a castrated culture that increasingly wants to retreat into its “safe spaces” rather than explore the strange, wonderful, terrible and fascinating things writers come up with.

Not to mention the inherent hypocrisy: Western games don’t get butchered in this way in the name of “think of the children”. Grand Theft Auto features strip club scenes where you can have a first-person view of a lap dance, which provides no gameplay benefits whatsoever. The recent Thief reboot featured a level where you could peek through a hole in a wall and witness an explicit BDSM sex scene — again, for no real reason other than for background decoration. One of the Far Cry games from a while back opened with a first-person sex scene. And there’s the multitude of banging scenes in the Witcher series.

I don’t object to any of the above — I’m of the opinion that it’s nice for games to treat me like an adult who can handle seeing sexual material. But when Western games get away with stuff as explicit as this, whereas Fire Emblem Fates gets butchered for something far tamer than anything the aforementioned games included, I cry foul. It makes me particularly uncomfortable as a fan of Japanese games to feel that titles from certain publishers or localisation teams aren’t providing me with an experience that’s completely true to the source material. It may still be great, sure — and everything seems to indicate that Fire Emblem Fates is an ambitious, excellent game — but the experience is somewhat marred by the knowledge that I’m missing out on something that other regions are more than happy to include.

I hope this is a trend which fizzles out quickly; the sooner we get over this inane desire to “protect” people from content they might want to see, the better; in the meantime, I’m more than happy to continue supporting developers and publishers who bring titles over mostly if not completely unscathed: groups like Idea Factory International, Marvelous Europe, Koei Tecmo (with the exception of Dead or Alive Xtreme 3, of course), XSEED Games and latter-day NIS America.

“Gaming needs to grow up,” the argument frequently runs. Well, for that to happen, you need to start acknowledging players like adults first.

2183: Why It Would Be a Mistake to Not Localise Valkyrie Drive Bhikkuni

0183_001

Earlier today, a tweet from Senran Kagura creator Kenichiro Takaki did the rounds, apparently indicating that his newest video game creation Valkyrie Drive Bhikkuni — part of an ambitious transmedia project that involves anime, mobile games and conventional games — would not be localised.

Takaki’s wording is a little ambiguous, due to English not being his first language, but if I’m interpreting his words correctly, it seems that there are no current plans to release a localised version of Valkyrie Drive Bhikkuni, but that he does want to release a localised version.

In other words, there’s a shred of hope in that tweet thanks to the word “currently”, particularly as the creator himself has expressed a desire to bring the game over. However, the final decision will be in the hands of Marvelous and their frequent localisation partners XSEED Games and Marvelous Europe, and this is where things become a little worrisome.

You might recall that a few weeks back there was something of a hoo-hah over Dead or Alive Xtreme 3, with a widely quoted comment apparently from a Tecmo Koei employee seeming to indicate that Western territories would not be receiving an official release of the game due to the unwelcome influence of loud-mouthed outrage megaphones in the games press and on social media at large. Whether or not those comments were actually true is beside the point; plenty of people believe them and have no reason not to given recent happenings. As a result, import specialist Play-Asia scored something of a coup by pointing out that there was an Asian English version available, and that, conveniently, they were offering it to those who wanted it — along with a cheeky biting of the thumb at so-called “social justice warriors” along the way, too. Fine with me.

The thing Valkyrie Drive Bhikkuni and Dead or Alive Xtreme 3 have in common is that they’re both provocative, sexy games that feature exclusively female characters in cute outfits, suggestive poses and varying states of undress. The similarities end there, of course, with DOAX3 being a beach volleyball/dating sim type affair, while Valkyrie Drive Bhikkuni is more along the lines of Takaki’s successful Senran Kagura franchise, but to the eyes of those who thing everything involving depictions of the female form — particularly in works of Japanese origin — is somehow worse than ISIS, there’s little difference; these are games for neckbeard basement-dwelling virgins, they’d say — games for desperate losers who’d never get their hands on a real woman.

This is enormously reductive thinking, as I’ve argued on a number of occasions in the past. I think it’s extremely important that video games as a medium feels that it is able to explore sex, sexiness, sexuality and deliberately provocative aesthetics. And, over the last few years, we’ve started to see more and more developers, publishers and localisation outfits apparently feeling the same way, with PlayStation platforms in particular getting more than their fair share of games that are unafraid to revel and delight in explorations of sexuality. Sure, a few have made it over with some edits here and there in the name of differing cultural norms — particularly with regard to the depiction of young-looking (“loli”) characters in provocative situations, even if, canonically, they are of an appropriate age to be engaging with such activities — but for the most part, the last two generations of hardware in particular have been a wonderful time to be a fan of Japanese gaming and sex-positive titles.

What the loud-mouthed outrage megaphones threaten to do, though, is undo this amount of progress we’ve seen over the last few years. Because yes, it is progress, whatever you may personally think of the games in question. These games seeing a successful release to a passionate audience in the West demonstrates that it is possible to release games to a niche rather than a mainstream audience — and, thus, if it’s possible to run a successful business catering to those who enjoy games involving pretty anime girls (which isn’t just white cis heterosexual men, I might add, as my Twitter Following list will attest) then it is certainly possible to cater to other audiences too: gay men, heterosexual women, gay women, asexual people, bisexual people, trans people and even the genderfluid otherkin bullshit that Tumblr seems to make up on a regular basis.

As such, seeing a relatively high-profile title from a high-profile niche-interest creator like Takaki at risk of not coming over for reasons as-yet unknown — but you can bet it’s something to do with the recent controversies, along with the amount of outright ill-informed abuse that has been spewed at the Senran Kagura series in particular over the last few years — is both saddening and worrying, but perhaps understandable. To be honest, were I in Takaki’s situation, as a creator who clearly loves both his work and his creations, I would feel enormously demoralised every time the mainstream press covered my games and wrote them off without, in many cases, even playing them — though I would take heart from the fact that there are plenty of passionate fans out there willing to spread the good word, even if the press isn’t. And in this age of social media, as the traditional games press becomes more and more irrelevant, sadly, it’s word of mouth that really counts more than anything.

I sincerely hope that Takaki, XSEED and Marvelous are able to reach some kind of arrangement where Western fans are able to pick up Valkyrie Drive Bhikkuni officially, without having to resort to possible Asian English imports, because refusing to release this sends a message to the wannabe “progressive” bullies of the world that their tactics — shaming creators and audience members of niche-interest products rather than being the change they want to see in the world and creating their own media that better reflects their interests — are working. And I really don’t want them to get that message, because for all their bleating about “diversity” and “representation”, nothing good ever comes from denying groups access to the media they want to enjoy; in fact, if anything, it makes the world a less diverse and representative place overall.

So fuck that. Takaki-san, XSEED, Marvelous: you announce an official Western (preferably European — we’re a lot more open-minded over here!) release of Valkyrie Drive Bhikkuni, and I — and numerous others I know — will more than happily pre-order it immediately, particularly if there’s a lovely limited edition on offer with, say, posters, figurines, soundtracks, dakimakuras and the like.

Do the right thing. Don’t let the crybullies of the world win. Take a stand. Show that you believe in your work, and in your audience. Tits are life, ass is hometown — and your games are happiness.

2181: Coming to a Head

0181_001

I generally try and steer clear of Internet drama as much as possible, but sometimes it’s impossible not to see what’s been going on when it’s all over a website you use regularly.

Most recently, Twitter has seen some interesting happenings that make it feel like the ongoing culture war between “loudmouthed, self-professed progressives (who aren’t actually all that progressive at all)” and “people who just want to be left the fuck alone to talk to their friends about things they enjoy without being shamed for it” has been coming to a head. And it’s been kind of fascinating to watch, particularly as the most recent happenings make one wonder what role — if any — sites that provide a means of communication, such as Twitter, have in these sort of sociopolitical debates.

The most recent drama surrounds one Milo “Nero” Yiannopoulous, a writer for the conservative/right-wing news site Breitbart. Nero is, to put it mildly, something of a controversial, divisive figure: he’s brash, opinionated, flamboyantly homosexual and vehemently against the rise of “third wave” feminism — that particular ideological offshoot that we’ve seen in the last few years that seemingly concerns itself more with scoring “victim points” than actually promoting any sort of societal change for the better. At the same time, he’s also someone who stands up for what he believes in, protective of people and groups he cares for and willing to go against the grain when he believes that the “grain” is going in the wrong direction.

I find him quite amusing to read at times. I don’t follow him on Twitter, but in my occasional (non-participatory) explorations of what GamerGate subreddit KotakuInAction is up to, I tend to keep abreast of what he’s been up to, and occasionally feel inclined to read some of the things he’s posted on Breitbart. I don’t agree with everything — many things, if I’m honest — that he says, but I do agree with some others. I find his writing entertaining to read, though, and challenging to my preconceived notions about particular issues. His writing makes me think, in other words, and contemplate how I feel about something, whether or not it’s the same as what he thinks about the thing in question — and that’s something that journalists should aspire to, in my opinion, wherever they are positioned on the overall political spectrum.

Anyway. The issue is with Nero’s behaviour on Twitter, and with his subsequent treatment. He frequently comes under fire for “harassing” people himself, and for “inciting harassment” by drawing attention to things that people have said by using Twitter’s built-in “quote and comment” functionality that they added to Retweets a while back. So strong is the backlash against him that a couple of days ago, his “verified” checkmark was removed from his Twitter account, seemingly as a punishment for the way he had behaved.

Thing is, the “verified” checkmark is not supposed to be a mark of good behaviour or anything; all it’s supposed to be is an indicator that yes, this particular Twitter account is indeed the person or company that it claims to be. And Nero is Nero, no doubt about that. Taking it away for the way he has behaved on Twitter — whether or not you feel that was justified — is, frankly, insane, because it doesn’t stop him being the person he is.

Naturally, as these things tend to go, the Internet reacted immediately, with a wide variety of Twitter accounts immediately rebranding themselves as “Milo Yiannopoulous” and adopting his avatar as their profile picture, making the timeline an occasionally extremely confusing place to navigate. Alongside this, the hashtag #JeSuisMilo — a reference to the #JeSuisCharlie hashtag movement from around the time the offices of French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo were attacked in Paris last year — was launched in an attempt to show solidarity with Nero and disapproval for Twitter’s peculiar (and, as of the time of writing, unexplained) actions.

Various people, including writer and former Conservative MP Louise Mensch, did some digging and discovered the Twitter account of Michael Margolis, aka @yipe, the “engineering manager” at Twitter itself. Examining Margolis’ retweets, likes and replies to people made it look to some like there were some conflicts of interest going on, with many people alleging that Margolis was inappropriately using his position at Twitter to do favours for “progressive” types — such as reporting Nero through means other than the usual channels.

All this is hearsay and conjecture, so far as I can make out, but it raises some interesting questions, for sure. Twitter is intended to be an open, free communication platform for everyone to use. It’s not supposed to be moderated or policed — with the sheer number of users and messages that are exchanged every day, it’s simply impossible to do so. Instead, Twitter operates on the (arguably flawed) assumption that, much like society, people will naturally peel off into their own groups and interact with one another, with any cross-cultural clashes able to be resolved through use of the mute and block functions — or, in extreme cases, through Twitter’s formal reporting processes.

I have some experience with Twitter’s formal reporting procedures. Some of you may recall a couple of years back I suffered a campaign of targeted harassment from a notorious group of Internet trolls known as the GNAA. At the time, this group were targeting people who were fans of the My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic TV show, and since I’d recently discovered this, I had the word “Brony” (the term for an adult-age fan of the show) in my Twitter profile bio. This, it seems, was an invitation for the group in question to start accusing me of being a paedophile, even going so far as to look up the WHOIS information of websites I’d linked to from my Twitter profile or this site, then phoning up the owners of said websites (which, in this case, were the owner of Games are Evil, a site I was running at the time, and my brother) and repeating said vile accusations.

It was an extremely unpleasant, scary experience, not so much because of the torrent of abusive tweets coming my way — those were easy enough to ignore and block using Twitter’s basic tools — but because it was spilling over into the real world like this. Consequently, rather than simply shrugging the situation off, I reported it to Twitter and to my local police station. The latter were unable to do much about it — I suspected as much, but I thought it was worth doing anyway — and the former were simply useless, claiming that they were unable to intervene in this situation because it amounted to a “disagreement” rather than “harassment” by their definition.

In other words, under Twitter’s definitions, you have to be receiving some pretty damn vile harassment before their formal reporting procedures will actually do anything — or, at least, this was the case back in 2013, anyway. For everything else, you have to just deal with it, or leave the site altogether — which I did for a while, but came back after I felt worse about being alone and isolated than I did about being targeted by trolls.

In a way, I understand the way Twitter reacted the way they did to my situation. I wasn’t directly in danger or anything, and in retrospect the behaviour of the trolls was little more than the sort of casual abuse-hurling you’d get in the schoolyard. This isn’t defending it by any means, of course — I had certainly done nothing to deserve such treatment, and I was genuinely very afraid while it was all going on — but in the grand scheme of things, it perhaps was barely a blip on the radar of Bad Shit happening in the world. By acting upon it, Twitter would be setting a public precedent, and this would then have to be followed up on in future to ensure that their policies were being enforced in an even-handed and fair manner — and I got the distinct impression that Twitter support felt that the whole thing was rather more trouble than it was worth.

This little digression is an explanation of the fact that Twitter is generally very hesitant to intervene in situations where people “disagree” with one another by their definition — and their definition of “disagreeing”, at least as it stood in 2013, was rather, shall we say, lenient. So for a Twitter employee to put across the impression of giving preferential treatment towards particular individuals is not a particular fair and even-handed way to approach the situation. Moreover, Nero’s behaviour in the instances where he was accused of “inciting harassment” wasn’t anything out of the ordinary — he was simply using Twitter’s own tools (in this case, the “Quote Tweet” function) to highlight some things he wanted to discuss or bring to the attention of his audience.

Several interesting questions are raised as a result of this debacle, however. The first is whether or not popular Twitter users such as Nero should be held responsible or accountable for the actions of their followers when they do something to make a conversation or comment public. Twitter does have tools to minimise contact with people you haven’t specifically authorised to talk to you — most notably the ability to make your account private, locking it down to everyone except those who follow you — but at its core it’s designed to be a means of public discourse: the world’s biggest cocktail party, where anyone and everyone is free to wander around, listen in on what everyone is saying and contribute their own thoughts and feelings to a conversation, regardless of whether or not they know the existing participants.

In this instance, Nero was simply using Twitter as intended, so is it his fault if some followers took it upon themselves to be unpleasant little scrotes towards the person he quotes (whom, it has to be said, appears to be a fairly unpleasant little scrote herself — not that this justifies any sort of abuse)? I certainly don’t have an easy answer to that.

The second question raised by all this — particularly Margolis’ alleged involvement, which is yet to be conclusively proven — is whether or not social media companies as a whole or their employees have any sort of obligation to make decisions about users based on political or ideological viewpoints. The argument in this instance is whether or not the removal of Nero’s verified status — his “punishment” — is justified on the grounds that he disagrees (there’s that word again) with the views of third-wave feminism. Or, to take it as a broader picture, whether or not any user should be punished in any way for expressing an opinion that differs from the accepted “norm”, or which some claim to find “offensive”, or which is regarded as “unacceptable” in some way.

You get into dangerous territory with that last section. Twitter is a private company, however, so it is, of course, free to police its platform however it pleases, and if it wants to become some sort of “safe space” where third-wave feminists and their white knight “allies” can happily skip through fields of flowers (not white ones, though, because white people ruin fucking everything, apparently) then that is the company’s decision entirely. Since it has always sold itself as a means of free expression and communication for people all over the world, however, there’s an argument that we are taking a few tentative steps into a somewhat Orwellian area — though it is also worth noting that should Twitter actually decide to go down this route wholeheartedly, the market will be flung wide open for a new, alternative means of communication and expression for people who are no longer welcome under the New Tweet Order.

Personally speaking, I would rather Twitter remain completely apolitical, and continue to act as a means of free communication for groups all over the world covering a wide variety of viewpoints and ideologies, many of which would clash with one another if they came into direct contact. It’s been a valuable tool in times of crisis, such as during the massacres in Paris, the assaults in Cologne over the New Year period, and during the riots in Egypt a while back. More than that, though, it’s brought people together who may never otherwise have had the chance to talk to one another. It’s allowed friendships and even relationships to blossom, and it’s allowed differing viewpoints the chance to interact and attempt to understand one another. It’s been inestimably valuable from that perspective, and for it to start pushing one particular political viewpoint or ideology as somehow “superior” or “correct” would go against this openness that has been its most key feature ever since day one.

More than that, though, regardless of whether or not you think Nero is a twat or a genius, removing his verified status as a “punishment” is just plain stupid. What kind of message, exactly, is that supposed to send? “You said the wrong thing, so you are no longer you?” What utter nonsense.

Perhaps this is why I don’t run a huge, successful social media enterprise. Or perhaps the rest of the world really has gone completely and utterly mental.

2111: On Censorship, Bikinis and The Cheapening of Real Issues Through Stupid Arguments

0111_001

Controversy erupted once again recently in the gaming sphere when it seemingly became apparent that, despite saying they wouldn’t, Nintendo of America had made edits to one of the characters’ costumes in the upcoming RPG Xenoblade Chronicles X. (I’m still a little skeptical this has actually happened, but I’m going to work on the assumption that it has for now, since Nintendo has indeed done this before with games like Fire Emblem Awakening.)

The character in question is canonically “underage” (though remember that the age of consent in Japan is different to that in other parts of the world — legally, it’s 13, though in certain areas of the country a higher age is enforced at the discretion of the local government) and one of her outfits was a set of bikini-like armour. Impractical, but not particularly offensive, and indeed nothing unusual for a Japanese role-playing game, which often have swimsuit costumes available either as downloadable content or unlockable extras.

As those of you who follow this particular part of the gaming sector can probably surmise, this quickly escalated into the inevitable clashing between those who are against censorship in any form, preferring an authentic experience true to the creators’ original intentions, and those who believe that Japanese games are inherently “creepy”, whom we’ve had words about before.

The usual argument against vaguely (or indeed explicitly) sexualised outfits in video games is that it is, yes, “creepy” with a garnish of paedophilia. This is a natural escalation of the current trend for feminist “criticism” (and I use that term loosely) of video games and popular media by people like Anita Sarkeesian and her ilk. Said “criticism” already fails to take into account the fact that sex and art have been inextricably intertwined for many hundreds — probably even thousands — of years, but criticism such as that we’ve seen of, in this case, Xenoblade Chronicles X and, at other times, games like Criminal Girls, Omega Labyrinth, Dungeon Travelers 2, Hyperdimension Neptunia and any number of other Japanese-developed games you might care to mention, takes this to a whole new level by cheapening the unfortunately very real, horrendous issue of child abuse.

I am no expert on child abuse, though remember I did once work as a teacher and consequently had the “telltale signs” of abuse drummed into me; I also came into contact with a number of children who had had somewhat difficult home lives, to say the least. Thankfully, I don’t think I ever dealt with anyone who had been outright sexually abused, though there were certainly a few who had “seen some shit”, as it were. This was often reflected in their behaviour in the classroom which, unfortunately, made them somewhat difficult to deal with, and difficult children were, frankly, one of the main reasons I decided not to continue pursuing teaching as a career. I just wasn’t built to stand up to them, particularly when I knew — or at least had an idea — where their anger was coming from.

One thing I do know about child abuse and paedophilia, though, is that it is absolutely abhorrent. The very thought of a child suffering in such a way makes me feel sick to my stomach. And I know that most rational people that I count among my circles of acquaintances and friends would feel the same way too. Which is why it makes us so utterly livid that something as inherently harmless and stupid in the grand scheme of things as liking drawings or polygonal models of titties is equated with such a horrible, disgusting crime.

To put it another way: those who criticise anime-style art, Japanese video games such as Xenoblade Chronicles X — or indeed any form of fictional media that takes a non-literal approach to the representation of characters — are cheapening and devaluing the very real issue of paedophilia in modern society by applying that label to something that is, let’s be clear here, absolutely completely and utterly legal, not to mention completely and utterly harmless, given that there are no “real people” involved at all. Child abuse destroys lives, and often leaves both physical and mental scars that never heal. Dungeon Travelers 2 features bosses who occasionally show you their bum when you beat them. Xenoblade Chronicles X has a character who wears a bikini. That’s it. She’s not even doing anything sexual in it, she’s just wearing it. And yet that, it seems, is enough to bring out the editing scissors in the name of “catering to an audience”.

Guess what, though: the “audience” you should be catering to is the audience that wants to see the work in its original form. That audience are passionate and enthusiastic about being able to enjoy work from another culture in their own native language. That audience wants to feel like they are having the same experience as their Japanese cousins, not being “protected” against things that they don’t feel they need to be protected against. That audience will pay through the nose for the privilege of enjoying these delightful, surprising, wonderful games that, thanks to their laser-sharp focus on a very specific niche audience, feel like they’re tailor-made for each and every individual consumer.

The audience that you are catering to by hacking away at content, though, probably weren’t interested in these games in the first place. Do you really see Her Most Holy Ladyship Twatface Sarkeesian slogging through 100+ hours of Xenoblade Chronicles X? Do you see Jonathan Cuntrag McIntosh slapping down the readies for a copy of Fatal Frame? I certainly don’t, and so no consideration should be given to their opinion whatsoever, and no consideration whatsoever should be given to people who believe that drawings are equatable to fucking child abuse, either.

Don’t get me wrong, if the only choice I have to play and enjoy a game in a way that I understand is to purchase an edited version, I’ll do it, because I believe showing companies that there are people out there hungry for the localisation of these games is more important than anything a “boycott” might imply — if anything, a boycott is more likely to send the mistaken message that there aren’t people who want to buy these games. I’d import if my Japanese was good enough for me to have an enjoyable experience in the original language version, but it isn’t, so that’s not an option for me right now for anything other than games in which spoken or written text isn’t a major part of the experience. (Shoot ’em ups, in other words.) This doesn’t mean that I’m particularly happy with games having the editor’s scissors taken to them in the name of “cultural differences”, though; games are, like it or not, works of art, and to have to deal with an inferior version in my native language because someone, somewhere went “heavens to Betsy, think of the children!” isn’t really acceptable.

Grow up. Deal with the fact not everyone likes everything. And if a polygonal character in a bikini offends your sensibilities or makes you think of child abuse, perhaps you’re the one with the issues here.

1991: Reddit in Trouble?

I find online social networks a fascinating thing to observe and sometimes participate in. Twitter is the main one I’m a part of, and over my time using it I’ve been part of a number of different subcultures that make use of the site as a means of talking to one another about common interests, regardless of geographical location.

In this sense, social networks are a bit like real life; you tend to gravitate towards people with whom you have common interests, and you drift away from people you find objectionable or simply don’t mesh well with. It’s exactly the same online; I know exactly the sort of people I’m likely to get along with, and exactly the sort of people I want to avoid at all costs. The nice thing about online interactions is that you can — for the most part — take a lot more control over your experience than you can in reality. You can’t, for example, choose the people that you work alongside, so if you dislike, say, your manager or another member of your team, you can’t get away from them. You can, however, mute or block people you don’t gel with online; while there’s an argument that this can lead to an “echo chamber” effect in which people are unwilling to have their viewpoints and opinions truly challenged, for the most part I find this a good way of minimising the stress that social interactions (be they real or virtual) can sometimes cause me.

One social network that I’ve never quite managed to integrate myself into is Reddit, and that’s simply because Reddit as a whole is such a hugely sprawling entity that it’s difficult to know where to start. There are popular subreddits for pictures, jokes, games and all sorts of other things, as well as highly specialised subreddits for niche interests or simply running jokes. Effectively, each subreddit is like a forum with message threads and discussions that follow on from an original post, but there’s also a sort of “metagame” aspect to the site, where you earn points for posts and comments according to the community’s overall reaction to them. This metagame doubles as the site’s main means of automatic “curation” — high-rated content shifts to the top and becomes more visible, perhaps even hitting the front page of Reddit (which often describes itself as “The Front Page of the Internet”, though Facebook might like to believe differently) if it’s really popular and transcends its original context.

Reddit’s an interesting site to browse even if you don’t actively participate, though. It’s the birthplace of a number of now-commonplace Internet memes and jokes, and the community as a whole can usually be relied on for some highly entertaining, quick-witted responses as well as scathing takedowns of stupid, ignorant or bigoted people. Assuming the subreddit you’re in isn’t specifically designed for stupid, ignorant or bigoted people, of course.

Now, this latter aspect is where things have got a little bit interesting recently. Reddit has traditionally positioned itself as being a bastion of its interpretation of “free speech” online, trusting individual subreddit moderators to set the rules for their individual communities and enforce them accordingly, while at the same time ensuring that nothing actually outright illegal is posted, and if it is, that it is removed quickly. To date, it’s worked pretty well; while there are some subreddits that are the online equivalent of a notorious dark alley you probably wouldn’t wander into alone if you didn’t have a very good reason to be there, for the most part each individual community has kept itself to itself, content with its own little space of the Internet for its discussions, even when said discussions might not be welcome elsewhere on the Internet. (“Gamergate” subreddit “KotakuInAction” is a good example of this, and there are plenty of others along the same lines.)

But there have been Happenings recently. As someone who isn’t an active participant in Reddit, I haven’t really been following the whole drama, but so far as I can make out, Reddit brought on a new CEO recently known as Ellen Pao, and she has not been a popular “leader” for the site. The popular conspiracy theory is that she’s attempting to “clean up” Reddit prior to selling it off to the highest bidder — likely Facebook, who would doubtless very much like to get their hands on “the front page of the Internet” — and in the process is ruffling a whole lot of feathers of people who have traditionally found Reddit to be a good home for their discussions and activities.

Pao’s actions coupled with a widely-criticised lack of communication between the overall Reddit administrators (who run the site as a whole, and have the power to ban and “shadowban” users according to their behaviour) and the firing of a number of Reddit employees for seemingly questionable reasons have been causing rumblings of discontent for some time, but it seems that today, for whatever reason, was the tipping point; a number of popular subreddits, including front-page, “default” subreddits that are automatically included in a new Reddit user’s list of subreddits, have “gone dark” in protest against Pao’s management, the aforementioned lack of communication, a very inconsistent application of the “rules” for the site as a whole and, in some cases, a rather opaque sense of what the “rules” actually are. These subreddits have “gone dark” by setting themselves to “private” mode, meaning that only users who are already approved to post there (usually just subscribers to that particular subreddit) can see what is going on and being discussed; casual browsers, those who are not logged in or those who are not subscribed, meanwhile, are simply shown a default page explaining that the sub is private, and the reasons for it.

Over the course of the day, more and more subreddits have “gone dark” in protest, effectively crippling Reddit’s traffic as a result. It’s been absolutely fascinating to see, and while I don’t 100% understand the reasons for the protest at this time, I think it’s a potent reminder that when you create something as sprawling as a social network, as much as you’d like to think you can stay in complete control of it, ultimately the site it made or broken by its users. Without users, the site is completely useless, so if you piss off those users then you’re going to have a big problem.

It remains to be seen whether Reddit will pull through this debacle, or whether a young pretender like Reddit clone Voat is ready to pick up the baton and try not to make the same mistakes. (I mention Voat specifically because they have reported record amounts of traffic since the controversy really exploded today.) This isn’t the first time this sort of thing has happened, after all; Reddit originally grew to prominence thanks to the once-popular Digg fucking itself up beyond all recognition, so while it may seem dramatic to contemplate that this might be The Beginning of the End for Reddit, it’s certainly not beyond the realms of possibility.

Basically, the lesson from all this appears to be pretty simple: don’t think you know better than your users. Because you probably don’t.

#oneaday Day 729: Stop SOPA, Read Books

So apparently a bunch of the Internet has blacked itself out in protest against the insanity that is SOPA. It’s a move that I fully support and endorse, as SOPA is a piece of crap that, while (arguably) well-intentioned, is completely impractical with the digital world we take for granted today.

That’s all I’m going to say on the politics of the matter for the moment, since there are plenty of other commentators out there who can doubtless discuss it in much greater detail than me. As a Brit, too, I’m not someone who will be directly affected by the law, but as we all know by now, the proposed measures will have a knock-on effect that could throw the whole online world out of balance.

What I wanted to talk about was how Wikipedia’s blackout has affected the stupid people of the world. Not sure what I’m talking about? Give @herpderpedia a follow on Twitter and you’ll quickly see what the problem is.

Wikipedia is an excellent and useful resource, of that there can be no doubt. But the level to which people have come to rely on it is perhaps a little worrying. To some people, it’s almost as if Wikipedia is the only source of information. (People who think this are probably the same people who believe that Facebook is “the Internet”)

There are, however, many more sources of information in the world than Wikipedia. Many more sources of information in the world than the Internet, for that matter. (Engage Old Fart mode) When I was at school, we had no Internet. Imagine that, you teenage morons! No Internet! If I got a bit of homework to “research” something, then I had to pick up an actual book and look through it. I had to know my alphabet well enough to look stuff up, and I had to know how to spell the thing I was looking up. Dark times? Not really, it was the norm; we accepted it. When the Internet came along, it was a source of information in addition to the knowledge we had in books, not a replacement. When I presented that homework to the class, it was written in my own words, showing my understanding. It wasn’t a printout from Wikipedia.

And yes, when I worked as a teacher, on more than one occasion (more than ten, in fact) I received homework from students who thought that I wouldn’t recognise a printout from Wikipedia. It showed absolutely no understanding on their part besides the most basic of net-savviest — an important skill in today’s society, for sure, but not what I was looking for with the assignments in question.

Technology breaks. Open forms of media are unreliable. Every so often someone will come along and want to censor things. I’m not saying books are immune to these issues, but at least you can still read them when the power goes off.

SOPA sucks. Fortunately, it looks like it might not get through — though we’re still a long way off victory at this time. Instead of bitching about not being able to cheat at your homework, try opening one of those dusty old books on your shelf and looking up the thing you want to know more about.

Magic, isn’t it? Knowledge without electricity. Who would have thought it?

#oneaday, Day 43: Got any ID?

Little Johnny wants to buy a copy of acclaimed and excessively popular (some might say cultish) Lovecraftian multiplayer FPS Call of Cthuty: Black Arts and heads down to his local GAME. There, he attempts to procure a copy of said game—which has a big shiny red BBFC “18” certificate on it—with the pocket money he’s saved up. Little Johnny is eleven years old and doesn’t have any ID, fake or otherwise. The cashier at GAME refuses to serve him. Little Johnny goes home and cries, and Xbox LIVE is safe from another squeaky-voiced pipsqueak for another day.

Well done, GAME, correct response.

Little Johnny returns to GAME with his mother, who doesn’t know much about video games. He has convinced her that he “needs” this game in order to fit in with all the cool kids, who are all playing it for 37 hours a day, some of whom have already Ascended and are going around the levelling system again, only this time with brand new Elder Powers to choose from. His mother picks up the game, barely gives it a second glance, asks the cashier for it with Little Johnny standing right there, and the cashier doesn’t question this at all. Little Johnny’s mother hands him his shiny new game, he shouts “FUCK YEAH!” and runs out of the shop giggling.

No, GAME. Bad GAME. Incorrect response.

Bigger Johnny (no relation) wants to buy a copy of acclaimed and excessively popular (some might say cultish) Lovecraftian multiplayer FPS Call of Cthuty: Black Arts and heads down to his local GAME. There, he attempts to procure a copy of said game—which has a big shiny red BBFC 18 certificate on it—with his credit card. He is 19, after all. He gives the “If you’re lucky enough to look under 21…” sign on the counter a brief glance but decides that the bum-fluff he’s managed to grow on his chin will ensure he won’t have to worry about ID—which is good, because he’s forgotten to bring it. He is incorrect in his assumption, as the cashier asks him for ID and he is unable to provide it. He leaves the shop empty-handed, but with his bank account forty quid better off than it would have been.

Well done, GAME, correct response.

Bigger Johnny’s mum just happens to be Mary “Queen of Shops” Porta, supposed shopping “guru” who is on the tellybox frequently whingeing at shop-owners about how rubbish they are. She is outraged at the way GAME have treated her darling son and tells him all sorts of things about how he should have demanded to see the manager, then promptly gets on the phone, shouts at them, gets hung up on and then demands to speak to the CEO of the entire company. In public. On Twitter. CEO promptly deflects her with his PR human shield… and the matter is still ongoing at the time of writing.

This latter part actually happened today, albeit with a 15-rated game and a 17-year old son who attempted to use his 16+ Oyster Card as valid ID for GAME staff to check his age. They refused—and good on them, frankly, for upholding a law which is all too often flouted by retailers more concerned with making a quick buck than actually ensuring inappropriate content doesn’t get into the hands of kids. Mary Queen of Shops, however, was furious, though it’s not entirely clear what grounds she has to complain. Here are some of her tweets on the subject:

You’ll notice her casual dismissal of the ratings system as “we are not talking drink”. Apparently some retail laws really are worth more than others to our Mary. She is also heavily focused on the ID issue, though implies that there was some non-specific “rotten attitude” from the store in question. When asked about this by one Twitter user, however, her only response was this:

No mention of what the “more to it than that” was. She hasn’t said anything since, at the time of writing.

Now, I’ve talked about this topic a number of times. Censorship is a bad thing; but the refusal to sell age-restricted products to minors is not censorship. It’s ensuring that people have access to age-appropriate material—a law which would mostly work were it not for the stupid loophole most retailers use to avoid difficult conversations where they’ll happily sell the game to a parent even if it is very, very obviously on behalf of a child who is standing right there.

I don’t for a second believe Fox News’ nonsense that games cause rape, violence and AIDS. But I do believe that “mature” content should be kept out of the hands of minors until they’re old enough to deal with it appropriately and not run around shouting “Fuck! Fuck! Fuck! Fuck!” in the middle of the street. (Which they genuinely used to do in sunny Southampton.) Foot-stamping and attitude from people like Mary here doesn’t achieve anything except devalue the law every time it’s circumvented. If her son wanted to buy the game—which he was quite entitled to do if he had one of the forms of ID that everywhere else in the world accepts and not an Oyster card which no-one has ever* accepted as valid ID—then he should have gone prepared. And when he got turned away, his initial reaction should not be to speak to the manager as Mary seems to think it should be. It should be to shrug, accept the fact that he done messed up, like, go home, get his ID and then try again.

But no; the customer is always right, after all. Even when they’re clearly wrong. You have my sympathies, retail types. I remember all too well what it was like.

* And if they did, they shouldn’t have. FACT.

#oneaday, Day 39: Games Maketh the Man

“Is Bulletstorm the worst video game in the world?”

That’s the question Fox News asked earlier with an article that was hyperbolic and scaremongering, even by their questionable standards. According to Fox’s “experts”, including Carol Lieberman, a psychologist and book author, “the increase in rapes can be attributed in large part to the playing out of [sexual] scenes in video games”.

Whoa there. Hold on a minute. The playing out of sexual scenes in video games (which, I might add, are typically incredibly tame and rather immature in the way they are handled) is a “large” contributing factor to the increase in rapes?

This is scaremongering against games taken to a whole other level. Unbelievable stuff. And, of course, complete and utter nonsense. If we follow through Lieberman’s arguments to a natural (and exaggerated) conclusion, here’s how the life of an average gamer would generally go:

09:00 – Wake up wearing same clothes you’ve been wearing for the last six months because game characters never change their outfits. Skip breakfast because game characters never eat. Skip going to toilet for same reason.

09:05 – Leave house. Run down road because game characters never walk except in cutscenes.

09:06 – See passer-by, assume they’re enemy. Kill them for XP and loot and/or rape them if they’re female.

09:07 – Repeat process ad nauseam until reaching work.

09:30 – Reach work, still running. Enter work building. Start lurking around corners.

09:35 – Shoot out security camera in case it sees you, despite the fact you actually work here.

09:40 – Run around office using cubicles as cover, shooting anyone you happen to catch a glimpse of in the head.

10:00 – Called into boss’s office.

10:05 – Defeat boss by filling him full of lead.

10:10 – Rape him for good measure.

10:15 – Loot his body, because bosses always carry the phattest lewt.

11:00 – Take elevator up to next level. Repeat process.

12:00 – Police arrive. Shootout ensues.

12:10 – Die. Fail to respawn because you don’t get to do that in real life.

Now, granted, there are some absolute fuckwits in the world to whom that probably sounds like a great way to live out the last few hours of their lives. But, as is frequently pointed out by rational people every time such a tragedy happens, if someone is going to go on a killing and/or raping rampage, it’s probably not games that caused it in the first place. To assume that the average person doesn’t have the appropriate filters in their brain to differentiate between the darkly comic, over-the-top, ridiculously exaggerated violence in Bulletstorm—a game intended for (immature) adults, let’s not forget—and how horrifying it would be to witness real-life violence or rape? That’s just insulting to, well, everyone.

The article does raise one valid point about control and “censorship”, though. Parents still aren’t taking responsibility for the entertainment their kids are interacting with. Personally, I strongly believe that there should be tighter controls on how games are sold. I’m not talking about censorship, I’m talking about stricter enforcement of age ratings—and a change in the ridiculous policies that most retailers adopt that allow parents to buy age-inappropriate games for their children. If the parent is by themself, then sure, there’s not much that can be done. But as it stands right now, if a parent is obviously buying a game for the kid they have with them, most retailers won’t do a damn thing about it.

The above will probably have made clear that I don’t believe that there’s a direct causal link between violence and sexual content in the media and the way people behave. But I do believe that children shouldn’t be exposed to such content from such an early age these days—more so they can hold on to the increasingly-irrelevant concept of “youth” more than anything else.

Sadly, though, it’s pretty clear that it’s too late. To backtrack now and enforce tighter controls would be difficult, if not impossible to do. So we’re just going to have to live with the consequences. Which, according to Fox News, is a society full of joypad-wielding rapists.

I shall leave you with two interesting thoughts to mull over:

#oneaday, Day 298: Did You Hear The One About The [REDACTED] And The #TwitterJokeTrial?

If the name Paul Chambers doesn’t mean anything to you at the moment, then take a moment to read this summary of the day’s proceedings, courtesy of The Guardian.

The TL;DR version (God, I hate that phrase and wish it, and everyone who uses it unironically, would die in a f… would, err, live a long and happy life filled with kittens and/or puppies, whichever they preferred, really, because it’s up to them how they live their lives and I love them, whatever they decide) is this: Chambers made an (arguably) ill-advised joke on Twitter about blowing Robin Hood Airport “sky high”. It was a throwaway comment that got blown (pardon) out of all proportion and, thanks to some very, very silly people, has been treated as something roughly approaching a mid-level terrorist incident.

The conclusions of the judge today were that Chambers’ original comment was “obviously menacing” and that any “ordinary person” would “be alarmed”.

Funny, then, that Twitter itself has been full of bomb threats, incitements to violence, discussions of inflicting bodily harm on individuals, and no-one else (save Conservative councillor for Birmingham, Gareth Compton, who made some similarly ill-advised comments, got bollocked and then promptly released on bail) has been arrested for it.

The long and short of it, though, is that Chambers’ appeal was unsuccessful, meaning he is now lumbered with a mounting legal bill and fine which—bless him—Stephen Fry has offered to pay, but members of the public have been generously donating to, also. (Find out how you can help too here).

Chambers has lost his job as a result of one silly comment on Twitter that clearly wasn’t intended to be “menacing” in the slightest. What sort of incompetent terrorist hatches their plans via social media anyway? Everyone knows they still use cassettes and VHS tapes. But the fact stands; this poor chap has had his life pretty much destroyed as a result of an almost total abandonment of Common Sense.

I like to think of myself as a fairly ordinary person, and I certainly wasn’t menaced by Chambers’ tweet. I wasn’t even aware of it until this whole legal fiasco started—but I follow plenty of people who make comments which could, according to Judge Jacqueline Davies, be interpreted as “menacing” and “alarming”. Are they all going to be arrested now? Or was Chambers set up to be made an example of? Certainly if the authorities are intending prosecuting everyone who has made mock “bomb threats” on Twitter today, they’d better get started now, because it’s going to take a good long while, and lots of courthouse space to get it all sorted.

Or perhaps they could, you know, focus on some actual crimes. Perhaps they could take some steps to deal with kids carrying knives, youth gangs, burglaries, assaults, murders, even fucking traffic incidents carry more weight than a ridiculous comment on Twitter.

Or even—here’s a thought—they could invest some resources into tracking down actual, genuine terrorists and foiling their plots before they happen. But perhaps that’s too difficult, and it’s much easier to make a scapegoat of a poor fella who was simply excited to spend time with the love of his life, and was frustrated by the fact that the airport’s closure was making that look more and more unlikely.

So, moral of the story, kids? Be careful what you say. Otherwise Big Broth—

[THE REMAINDER OF THIS BLOG POST HAS BEEN REDACTED BY ORDER OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND. PLEASE DIRECT ALL ENQUIRIES TO [email protected]]