Brad Glasgow over at GamePolitics.com did something unique when setting out to cover the gamergate movement, he asked people taking part in it questions rather than only their detractors.
I decided to run an experiment and see first-hand the difficulties one might encounter when covering an online movement. Rather than wait for GamerGate to come to us, I went to them. I joined their very popular Kotaku in Action (KiA) subreddit and interviewed several hundred GamerGate supporters from Tuesday, July 28 through Tuesday, August 4. It is my hope that what I learned will assist journalists with covering GamerGate and any similar movements in the future.
The Experiment
I asked one question on the KiA subreddit every 12 hours. The question was stickied (placed at the top in the most recognizable area) until I posted a new question. The new question was then stickied and they were given an additional 12 hours to submit replies to the old question and vote on their favorite answer. After I asked 7 questions I then asked 7 follow up questions on the final day.
The article was interesting enough but what I found hilarious was when he then tried to do a similar interview with the anti-gamergate types over at Gamer Ghazi, he was quickly banned.
I did experience some hostility from the anti-GamerGate side for covering GamerGate. While I was treated well by the people of GamerGhazi when I tried to speak with them, I was quickly banned by moderators, who said I have spent too much time posting on the GamerGate subreddit.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by kurenai.tsubasa on Thursday August 13 2015, @10:07PM
Let me add to this. One possibility I've never seen discussed (link plz if it has been) is that there's a 3rd party trolling both sides for the lulz. It would seem entirely plausible.
It seems impossible to separate out fact from fiction from false flag.