On June six, a game called active shooter was set to be released on steam. For those not familiar steam is an app store for pc games. Now this, active shooter, would allow you to play as a school shooter or as a swat team member responding to a school shooting. Naturally, people got pissed off at the game was offensive. The games offencive. And it shouldn't be allowed to be sold so steam ultimately complied and took the game down, or I should say they never allowed the game to launch in the first. But following this, they made an announcement as to what games they were going to allow on their platform, and it would seem, for taking a rather libertarian approach. So long as the content, is legal and isn't obvious strolling they're going to allow it now. A lot of people are surprised, because this is kind of the opposite approach. Most platforms take when it comes to community guidelines and things like hate speech, Twitter, Youtube, they'll, just ban you and take you down whether it's

eagle content or not so is steam actually resisting censorship, and if so, what is their motivation for allowing almost any content on there before we get started. Let me say to anyone who wants to support my work had over two patrie on dot com forward, slash him cast where you can become a donor, supporting my work any amount helps most of I do is funded by you guys on Patris on so please consider giving whatever you feel comfortable today, Let's take a look at the active shooter story. This from CNN active Shooter video game is pulled from steam gaming platform. After back rush from shooting survivors. A much criticized video game that would let players shoot up. A school has been pulled from a digital storefront just days before its release. In a statement valve spokesman, Doug Lombardi said the games. Developer and publisher is a man who had been banned from steam last fall when he was operating under a different name describe the developer as a troll with a history of cuss

herb, use, publishing, copyrighted material and use? If you make Elation Val discovered, the man was developer behind active shooter when they began investigating amid controversy surrounding the upcoming game. Lombardi said so. The important distinction here as the game wasn't cold for being offensive. It was just hold, because the person who made the game was banned from steam now I'm sure a lot of people who oppose hate speech and things like that were glad to see the game go, but it didn't go for the reasons that they probably thought it did. Because, following this team made an announcement as to what games are actually allowed in an official statement, on this team blog. It says who gets to be on the steam store recently and a bunch of community discussion around what kind of games were allowing onto the steam store, as is in the case, the discussion caused us to spend some time examining what we're doing, why we're doing it and how we could be doing it better. They state we've decided that right approaches to allow everything on to the steam store, except for things We decide are illegal or straight up trolling taking this.

Which allows us to focus less on trying to police what should be on steam and more on I think those tools to give people control over what kinds of content they see. As I stated earlier, this is kind of the opposite approach that many social media platforms steak. They do. Just side with the mob and delete things and tell people? You can't do that, even if it is legal content, so. Why is steam siding with the gamers here or the community and how do you think the media responded? Well business insider said the world's law Most gaming service team is giving up on regulation and turning or two hundred million users into guinea pigs in the article it says past Wednesday Valve Executive, Eric Johnson published an explanation of how steam will handle content going forward. We've decided that right, approaches to allow everything on to the steam store, except for things that we decide are illegal or straight up strolling Johnson wrote, put more simply valve, will no longer police. It's own service, inst,

add valve is creating tools for its two hundred. Plus million users to police their own experience rather than own. Up to the responsibility of operating a service with over two hundred, one million users valve is wash it's hands and abdicating responsibility to its users, see that valve standing by the values that made the internet terrible commentary, while the world is figuring out how to moderate and curate content sports audiences valve is leaving it up to the user I can also say using the same logic, that Val is using the same values that made the internet great. The ability for any one to have a voice and to publish things so long as they aren't illegal and two extend the internet allowed Tro Ling. So if valve is going to ban Tro Ling, then they're actually not siding with values that It's been terrible. There actually standing up for freedom of expression, an free speech, an article from rock paper, shotgun, said, valves, abdication of fonts ability over steam is the worst possible solution, an article

variety says each dot io founder, weighs in on valves, new steam policy, and he said, platform that allows everything unless it's illegal or straight trolling is ridiculous. Please keep malicious derogatory discriminate, bullying, harassing demeaning content off itch io, our band things are ready from polygon valve gives up on responsibility. Anything goes as long as you give valve a cut. Then we have kotaku steams, irresponsible hands off policy is proof that valve still hasn't learn. It's lesson in the article they say, critics fears that steam will become assessment of gross content. Aren't just hypothetical steam isn't the store and valve has already done similar things with other portions of steam, often to disastrous results So I'm not surprised to see so many digital outlets being shocked and outraged by this, because it to be these digital outlets that are activists for the left, because it fits their particular political agenda.

Now I can't say why steam is doing this exactly I mean they published a blog about it. There's a lot of speculation over. What's really going on, you can see all these articles. I just showed you saying that scheme refuses to take responsibility, and I don't think that's the case. Steam is obviously just interested in running a successful business. So there's a few reasons why I think they did this for one they're. Probably thinking about their customers are customers of steam likely to port, some media company or just use the platform as they see fit. Yes, teams, I'm going to say, look if gamers want These games. We are going to sell him to him. It's not our responsibility to tell them what they can or can't buy. And by siding with the media over an issue like this, they would just be turning against their own user base. That makes no sense, but when we look at it from a political point of view, It would seem like the smart these four steam is to take the approach that many people in the Anti sjw side have been advocating, for, if we break it down very simply in terms of gamergate

you had video game players and you had the digital media outlets. So why would valve care? what the digital media outlets think when there or users are gamers who probably align with one side of the debate in which, they're going to say you know what let them have their content and we are going to censor our platform lest we lose customers, but a lot of people. So what does tro Ling even mean this story from pc gamer Aids, simulator, an other games removed from steam valve, clarifies strolling policy. Just after valve announced a new anything goes policy for steam simplistically. As long as game, is not illegal or trolling. It will be allowed. It is removed AIDS. Simulator ISIS simulator suicide, simulator asset, flip, simulator and fingering simulator from the platform valve statement, clarifies its definition of trolling, somewhat

be inevitable that some degree of- and I know it when I see it, attitude- will have to be taken when determining what crosses that line. But the big picture approach remains vague for one thing will games which generate outrage in a more coded way, not countest rolling and does in ten going to generate any kind of outrage counter strolling people are out, page about a lot of things, including good things. In a best case scenario, the removal of these games and their developer bunch of dudes means that the absolute this. Most derogatory games won't be welcome to the platform as the sloppy bring up the announcement suggested to us trolling remains a hazy term that other developers might harder unless obviously to push, and I have no doubt that something that valve will be forced to confront in the fairly near future, one way or the other so maybe valves language about allowing anything other than Tro Ling is actually just clever way of saying they reserve the right to ban whatever content they want. It's entirely

pull that they're going to police their platform, the exact same way that Twitter and Youtube police their platform, because if something makes, well outraged. That must be trolling right and that's where things get murky. So for now we really don't know what I was considering doing, but I will say that by their statement that they're going to support content so long as it's legal scrolling. There kind of siding with the Anti Sjw's on this one, because that is a much more libertarian approach to content than we've seen from basically any other platform. It's interesting to see the escalation of what could be an aspect of gamergate right. The culture war has expanded dramatically. There's now, academics involved, there's not the intellectual dark web. There are ST battles with FIFA and free speech advocates, and now we have valve stepping up and siding. Intentionally or not with one faction with one side of this culture war. There are many different factions but taking the freedom of expression approach and defending a gaming platform. So it will be

Thing to see how the culture war continues to develop, as businesses must make allegiances to certain principles and instance, it's obvious to me that a gaming company is going to side with gamers the most politically vocal gamers tend to be for free expression, so there you have it Val said: hey we're with these guys! Why? Because they give us money, it's really simple: isn't it money speaks loudly and valve, probably don't want to shoot themselves in the foot. But let me know what you think in the comments below. Is this really a victory for free expression, an for gamers, or is this just a clever way of warning their policy so that they can get rid of However, they want an just call: it rolling again comment below the conversation going. You can follow me on Twitter at TIM Cast, stay tuned, new video every day at four hundred pm? Thank you all so much for watching, and I will see you all next time.