Actually, it's about made-up shit that no one cares about

So the thing about gamergate is that, even if we forget about the fact that the [bowel] movement consists primarily of sociopaths, “ethics in gaming journalism” is a fucking weird thing to care about (let’s for the moment leave aside the odd notion that the coveted five-exploding-heads review in Gamepro constitutes “journalism”).  The argument, I guess, would be this: it’s bad when publishers exert undue influence on reviews of videogames (the question of how this is different from reviews of movies/music/books/&c will remain unanswered).  Okay.  I guess.  In theory.  But, seriously: who cares?  How does this matter?  You’re really telling me this is in your top thousand things to care about?  Occasionally you’ll see some misguided soul saying something like “sure, all this gamergate misogyny is awful, but the underlying point is valid and important!”  That just leaves me completely baffled, because for the gamergate faithful, it’s easy to understand: pretending to care about a nebulously-defined “ethics” in gaming “journalism” is really just an excuse to spew the contents of their diseased psyches all over any woman unfortune enough to be in the way  Got it.  But actually caring about a nebulously-defined “ethics” in gaming “journalism?”  What?  Is it not, in fact, the case that this issue is actually less pressing than ever, given that, with the internet, everyone and their mother can and does make their opinions easily available all over the place?  Who cares what a calficied organ like IGN, that everyone’s already cynical about, has to say?  It is truly strange that anyone would try to make anything of this non-issue.