Szuban / Reconstituting Vocabularies

Reconstituting Vocabularies: User Generated , Social Tagging, and Folksonomies in Giantbomb’s Videogame Peter Szuban

Abstract

This paper investigates Giantbomb’s mobilization of data vocabulary folksonomies for its videogame database wiki. Using Jennifer Trant’s “Social Classifcation and Folksonomy in Art Museums: Early Data from the Steve.Museum Tagger Prototype” (2006) to establish the hierarchical taxonomic practices in art museums, it is argued that Giantbomb’s community-specifc database, user generated entries, and unlimited cross-references promote a lateral structure that resists the traditional hierarchical forms of databases. This database enables competing narratives to emerge through the application of Trant’s (2006) social tagging and folksonomy, thereby constructing a database that refects a more diverse user base, while avoiding single narratives. Nevertheless, the retains hierarchical structures, such as moderators, to curb any malicious activities against its members and to remove superfuous entries and information. This mixture of folksonomies and hierarchy allows for a sustainable web database that avoids the negatives of either structuring concept.

Keywords folksonomies, social tagging, databases, video games, wiki

iJournal - Journal Vol. 4 No. 1, Fall 2018 41 Szuban / Reconstituting Vocabularies

Giantbomb is a videogame website that joins independent, personality-driven journalism with fan communities and includes a videogame wiki database. With free basic membership, the scope of the fan communities is large and open to anyone with access to the internet. Giantbomb’s mobilization of a community-specifc database, user generated entries, and unlimited cross-references enables an effcient search engine of a perpetually expanding wiki database. Consequently, Giantbomb’s database vocabulary accommodates disparate communities and terminology that mitigate the hierarchy of classifcation systems, highlight database entries that would otherwise exist on the periphery, and empower marginalized communities to resist dominant narratives that otherwise limit their identities, effectively rendering them invisible. On July 21, 2008, , Ryan Davis, and Dave Snyder launched the website Giantbomb. Both Gerstmann and Davis previously worked for the video game website GameSpot, working in the editorial department until Gerstmann’s termination from the Editorial Director position on November 28, 2007. With Giantbomb, Gerstmann and Davis built a website that imitated GameSpot’s infrastructure while reinforcing the editorial department’s autonomy from the marketing department. Consequently, Giantbomb mobilizes personality- driven content, community involvement, and paid subscription services for exclusive content to preserve Giantbomb’s infrastructure from the external pressures of video game publishers. During an interview between Gerstmann and GameSpot VP John Davison, on GameSpot’s March 15, 2012’s On the Spot webshow, Gerstmann’s termination was revealed to have been instigated by increased pressure on the website from video game publishers to receive more positive reviews for their games (Luke; GameSpot). Although Gerstmann was fred shortly after the publication of his review for Eidos Interactive’s Kane & Lynch: Dead Men, complaints were presented from several publishers who had purchased advertising space on GameSpot (Luke, 2012). These complaints functioned as an external pressure on GameSpot’s infrastructure, revealing the overlap between the marketing and editorial departments. This infrastructural overlap undermined the editorial department’s journalistic integrity, by not allowing editorial staff to produce reviews irrespective of video game publisher’s economic transactions with the website (Totilo, 2012). Therefore, GameSpot’s decision to fre Gerstmann—for refusing to write video game reviews infuenced by video game publishers—was a “glitch” in GameSpot’s infrastructure. This culminated in the departure of key personal in the editorial department and rendered visible the fssures in the website’s infrastructure (Berlant, 2016, p. 394). At Giantbomb’s inception, Whiskey Media’s construction of Giantbomb’s infrastructure in Django mobilized the wiki structure to promote community involvement in the creation of the site’s database. Unlike a , a wiki promotes community involvement in the construction of content that constitutes the infrastructure. Such an infrastructure self-corrects through user involvement, customizing the infrastructure to refect concerns and objectives within the iJournal - Journal Vol. 4 No. 1, Fall 2018 42 Szuban / Reconstituting Vocabularies community. Notwithstanding, Giantbomb relies on moderators to police the community’s contributions to remove objectionable material. In the frst few days of its launch, this was not the case, leading to a chaotic forum that included objectionable and illegal material. The subsequent implementation of moderators represents an authorial standard upon the community to enable the contributions of marginalized communities that may otherwise become the target of renegade users (Giantbomb). The staff’s tumultuous history with their previous employer encouraged a community-driven infrastructure, supporting diverse viewpoints and values the individual contributors. Jennifer Trant’s “Social Classifcation and Folksonomy in Art Museums: Early Data from the Steve. Museum Tagger Prototype” (2006) suggests that the application of social tagging and folksonomy to American art museums promotes the inclusion of a wider user base. Both social tagging and folksonomy refer to vocabularies generated by a user base, with social tagging referring to the creation of terms for online entries and folksonomy referring to the terminology and vocabularies of a specifc community (Trant, 2006, p. 10). Trant argues that “proof of concept studies seemed to indicate that terms assigned by non-specialists could signifcantly enhance the number and kind of points of access to works of art, and could offer another layer of documentation to supplement and complement that provided by professional cataloguers” (2006, p. 11). “Non-specialists” indicates members of a separate community who are not initiates into the dominant narrative (Trant, 2006). Following, the community that is as at the top of a hierarchy controls the dominant narrative and excludes other narratives and communities by rendering them invisible (Trant, 2006). All attention is drawn to the dominant narrative, by investing it with the authority of the hierarchical structure that places a select community’s narrative at the top of the structure. Trant indicates that American art museums privilege professionals and create reference systems from the vocabularies of the professional art world (2006, p. 12). As such, the vocabularies refect the narrative of the experts to the exclusion of non-specialists. This exclusion renders non-specialists invisible and limits their participation in the art world (Trant, 2006). In turn, this limitation acts as an obstacle for the non-specialist becoming a professional, by reducing the accessibility of the catalogue and preventing any overlapping terminology that facilitates cross-discussion and education (Trant, 2006). This limited participation in the art world constitutes a determination of identity and precludes change to other identities within the social structure (Trant, 2006). Implicitly, the top of the hierarchy remains diffcult to ascend for identities lower in the hierarchy, while the dominant community dictates the structure for all members of the hierarchy—irrespective of position (Foucault, 2005, p. 150). Consequently, by increasing “the number and kind of points of access to works of art,” American art museum catalogues become accessible to a wider user base and promote a non- iJournal - Journal Vol. 4 No. 1, Fall 2018 43 Szuban / Reconstituting Vocabularies hierarchical database that better serve all potential users (Trant, 2006, p. 10). The inclusion of social tagging and folksonomy destabilizes the hierarchical structure of American art museum catalogues, offering alternative vocabulary that supports differing narratives. As a result, the dominant narrative ceases to be dominant, as it is no longer the only narrative in which the vocabulary supports. Although Trant (2006) examines the application of social tagging and folksonomy in American art museum catalogues rather than video game wiki databases, this system of organization and classifcation—mobilizing social tags and folksonomy—applies to online databases beyond the gallery context. Trant’s (2006) formulation of social tagging and folksonomies conceptualizes American art museum catalogues as a database through its accumulation of tags from non-specialist visitors. The focus is on tags rather than physical art space. Individual art pieces in the catalogue function as entries in a database and acquire successive tags from art gallery visitors. Consequently, the catalogue’s use of social tagging and folksonomies to refect the terminology of non-professionals introduces multiple terms that refer to a single entry, thereby overcoming the exclusory power of single keywords. Furnas, Laundauer, Gomez, and Dumais’s (1987) “The Vocabulary Problem in Human- -System Communication” highlights the database query limitations of keywords by drawing a distinction between the user, the designer, and the system (1987). Furnas et al. claim that a disconnect exists between keywords used by the administrators of the system and keywords imputed by users therefore, “the keywords that are assigned by indexes are often at odds with those tried by searchers. The seriousness of the problem is indicated by the need for professional intermediaries between users and systems [sic] and by disappointingly low average performance (recall) rates” (1987). As a solution, Furnas et al. (1987) recommend unlimited aliases in search engines as an alternative to existing keyword vocabulary; the alias is an alternative keyword or phrase for an existing entry in the database. By adding the keywords from search failures to the existing vocabulary as an alias, the index increases the effectiveness of the search engine, while maintaining the structure and order of the database (Furnas et al., 1987). These additions draw upon the folksonomy of the user base and their inclusion into the database, thereby collapsing aliases with social tagging (Furnas et al., 1987). Giantbomb deploys the folksonomy of its user base to create a comprehensive video game wiki database. Giantbomb’s database allows the user base to generate entries and cross- references through its wiki system. The cross-references are divided into characters, things, concepts, and locations, with further subdivisions of people, franchises, platforms, companies, concepts, and accessories—for specifc entry types that facilitate database breadth and user generation (Giantbomb). Any duplicate entries are collapsed into single entries by moderators and establish aliases for the confated entry (Giantbomb). These cross-references echo Trant’s iJournal - Journal Vol. 4 No. 1, Fall 2018 44 Szuban / Reconstituting Vocabularies

(2006) social tagging and promote alternative classifcations to entries in the database. If either an entry or cross-reference does not exist within the database, any user can add missing elements to the database. Furthermore, rather than privileging one vocabulary over others, Giantbomb’s database promotes diverse taxonomies that prevent the database from becoming hierarchical. Hope A. Olson’s “The Power to Name: Representation in Library Catalogues” (2001) represents the hierarchical database emerging from a centralized and exclusionary authority that structures and administers the database. Olson declares that “naming information is the special business of librarians and information professionals. Applied in our role as ‘neutral’ intermediaries between users and information, our theories, models, and descriptions are as presumptuous and controlling as scientists’ construction and containment of nature” (2001, p. 540). Olson’s quotation marks around “neutral” highlights its ambiguity and suspicious application to information management. The presumptuousness and control of librarians and information professionals’ self-identifcation as “‘neutral’ intermediaries between users and information” (Olson, 2001, p. 540) undermines the controlled vocabularies’ purpose of serving a wider user base. Olson’s critique of the presumption of neutrality and the centralization of authority suggests that the inclusion of a broader community in the construction of the database’s vocabulary allows for easier access and use, as well as a more comprehensive database that resists the hierarchy of ‘the few’ over ‘the many’. Giantbomb’s non-fnancial obligations for membership establishes a low-level barrier to entry. All members are able to add to and change the database, with moderators policing the activities of the members for malicious behaviour. Following, the user base possesses the ability to change the database to refect the vocabulary of specifc communities. This system accommodates the folksonomies of different communities that co-exist through entries and cross-references. Giantbomb disavows classifcation hierarchies by omitting a database list on its front page. Initial lists under the wiki subcategory depict the entries with the newest alterations and additions. Therefore, the lists document activity and are not an indication that one entry, and what it represents, is superior to another. Moreover, each entry provides a history of its edits and changes and indicates each user responsible for the alterations, thereby providing transparency to the system and methodology. In addition, database entries that would otherwise exist on the periphery occupy an equal position with more popular entries. Although the cross-references appear in alphabetical order, the lists are ever expanding to accommodate new entries. The search function presupposes knowledge of the initial search object, with the power to create additionally entries. Following, these entries are present in the lists under the wiki tab and do not represent a qualitative judgement on either the entry or what it represents (Giantbomb). The constantly changing iJournal - Journal Vol. 4 No. 1, Fall 2018 45 Szuban / Reconstituting Vocabularies lists, and the omission of a qualitative list, discourages the promotion of a set of entries to the exclusion of all others. Trant (2006) suggests that supplementing a classifcation system with social tagging and folksonomy highlights periphery entries and creates alternative narratives to the dominant narrative of a dominant community. This mechanism depends upon the user base being given the authority to name, thereby shifting the database’s classifcation and structure to the interests of the user base. Michel Foucault’s The Order of Things stipulates that “the proper name, in this particular context, is merely an artifce: it gives us a fnger to point with, in other words, to pass surreptitiously from the space where one speaks to the space where one looks; in other words, to fold one over the other as though they were equivalents” (p. 10). Although Foucault refers to the distinction between language and image while observing Diego Velázquez’s Las Meninas, the difference between “the proper name”, and what it points to, exemplifes the relationship between controlled vocabulary and entries (p. 10). Giantbomb’s user generated database implies that the user highlights an entry through their own search and editing functions. Consequently, the controlled vocabulary is a tool to facilitate search, and its expansion promotes database searching refective of the interests of the user base. Giantbomb encourages the user base to interact with its controlled vocabulary and enact changes to the search results. The inclusion of the user base allows for the expression of alternative narratives through modifcation of entries and vocabulary. The user base readjusts the vocabulary terms that inaccurately favour a narrative that is not representative of the entire community. The mobilization of cross-references promotes a search trajectory that overcomes hierarchical assumptions of an entry, and interposes a thematic browsing tool that becomes eclectic through its scope. Giantbomb staff do not alter the search results of the user base. Moderators enforce codes of conduct to discourage malicious activities against its members and to confate superfuous entries. Although Giantbomb relies on these fgures of authority to provide judgment on the rest of the member’s activities, the database and vocabularies are the work of the entire membership. Neither the staff nor the moderators occupy a privileged position in the databases’ creation (Giantbomb, 2017). Instead, the staff and moderators function as administrators and executors of the website’s structure. The breadth of the content and community of the Giantbomb wiki database distinguishes it from smaller fan wiki databases like Bulbapedia (2018). Bulbapedia is a Pokemon wiki that mobilizes the terminology of the Pokemon community to organize and classify the different entries. Unlike Giantbomb’s wiki database, Bulbapedia focuses exclusively on Pokemon, and the tagging for entries in the database correspond to the specifc vocabulary of Pokemon. It assumes a preexisting knowledge of what the entry refers to, thereby excluding members of the iJournal - Journal Vol. 4 No. 1, Fall 2018 46 Szuban / Reconstituting Vocabularies community not familiar with the established vocabulary. The breadth of the Giantbomb wiki database encourages vocabulary that includes both the Pokemon community specifc vocabulary and the vocabulary of the larger game community. As an example, the entry for the Pokemon, Moltres, on Bulbapedia contains a static list of the Moltres’s appearances in games that have a connection to the franchise. Moreover, Moltres is listed with in relation to other Pokemon, and is classifed as one of the legendary birds—along with Articuno and Zapdos. These tags constitute the vocabulary of the informed Pokemon community member, by connecting Moltres to other entries already in the knowledge system. In contrast, Giantbomb’s entry for Moltres includes the above tags, while including under “concepts” “air manipulation,” “assist,” “bird,” “fre manipulation” and “phoenix.” These tags connect Moltres to entries outside the Pokemon vocabulary, such as “Albus Dumbledore” and “Jean Grey”. This connects Moltres to the Harry Potter and X-Men communities, providing alternative interpretations of Moltres relative to these new connections. This style of wiki database contrasts with the hierarchical databases and search engines of , such as Google. It resists the appropriation of its keywords by single narratives that perpetuate pernicious signifcation. Using Google as an example, Safya Noble’s “Google Search: Hyper-visibility as a Means of Rendering Black Women and Girls Invisible” underlines the appropriation of “black women” and “black girl” as keywords in the Google search engine, by way of pornography and racism (2013). In a Google search from 2011, Noble reveals that “black girls are sexualized or pornifed in half (50%) of the frst ten results on the keyword search ‘black girls.’ Only three of ten results (30%) are focused on aspects of social or cultural life for Black women and girls. One of the frst ten results is a U.K. music band comprised of White men, and is coded as non-racial and non-gendered” (2013). These results indicate that Google search algorithms reinforce the cultural stereotypes surrounding identities marginalized by dominant white narratives while keeping the user base a passive recipient of search results. The search results highlight a narrative to exclusion of others, and category members of the user base in a hierarchy. Google search does not provide the capabilities to change the search results aside from facets, such as “safe search” (Noble, 2013). Moreover, Google determines what “safe search” entails and what results fall under its parameters (Noble, 2013). Finally, Google engages in special relationships with sites, such as fnancial agreements or perceived importance of a particular website, to artifcially boost results to the frst page, undermining the ordering of its results according to popularity (Noble, 2013). The process is mediated through Google with diminished input from the user base. A Giantbomb style wiki database resists the appropriation of its search terms, circumventing Google’s shortcoming by enabling the community to construct alternative database meanings through additional tagging. At the same time, it rejects the hierarchical iJournal - Journal Vol. 4 No. 1, Fall 2018 47 Szuban / Reconstituting Vocabularies positioning of the Google search. Should a tag be missing, a user can add the tag, or alter existing tags to better represent the entry. The creation and maintenance of the database—in conjunction with the community—prevents the staff from encroaching on the tagging, mitigating the infuence of third parties on the database. Moreover, the tagging system resists the authority of a single narrative through its multiplicity of tags that range across the web of meaning. Giantbomb’s database enables competing narratives to emerge through the application of Trant’s (2006) social tagging and folksonomy. The database encourages additions through its interface and cross-reference system and remains appropriate for its emphasis ongoing communities and technologies. The emphasis on the user base suggests that the wiki database benefts communities otherwise underrepresented or misrepresented in more traditional forms of databases and search engines. Furthermore, the multiple tags allow for communication between disparate communities that are nevertheless united by an overarching theme, such as video games.

iJournal - Journal Vol. 4 No. 1, Fall 2018 48 Szuban / Reconstituting Vocabularies

REFERENCES Berlant, L. (2016). The commons: infrastructures for troubling times. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 34(3), 13 May 2016, 393-419. doi: 0.1177/0263775816645989 Bulbapedia. (2018). Bulbagarden, bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net Foucault, M. (2005). The Order of Things. (Tavistock/Routledge, Trans.) United Kingdom: Routledge. Furnas, G. Wi., Laundauer, T. K., Gomez, L. M., and Dumais, S. T. (1987). The vocabulary problem in human--system communication. Communications of the ACM, 964+. Academic OneFile. GameSpot. (2017). GameSpot CBS Interactive Inc., 2017, GameSpot.com. Giantbomb. (2017). GameSpot CBS Interactive Inc., 2017, giantbomb.com. Noble, S, U. (2013). Google search: hyper-visibility as a means of rendering black women and girls invisible. InVisible Culture: An Electronic Journal for Visual Culture, 19 (1). Retrieved from http://ivc.lib.rochester.edu/google-search-hyper-visibility-as-a-means-of- rendering-black-women-and-girls-invisible/#menuopen Olson, H. A. (2001). The Power to Name: Representation in Library Catalogs. Signs, 26 (3), 639–668. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3175535. Plunkett, L. (2012). Yes, a games writer was fred over review scores. . Retrieved from https://kotaku.com/5893785/yes-a-games-writer-was-fred-over-review-scores. Totilo, S. (2012). The contemptible games journalist: why so many people don’t trust the gaming press (and why they’re sometimes wrong). Kotaku. Retrieved from https://kotaku. com/5957810/the-contemptible-games-journalist-why-so-many-people-dont-trust-the- gaming-press-and-why-theyre-sometimes-wrong. Trant, J. (2006). Social Classifcation and Folksonomy in Art Museums: Early Data from the Steve.Museum Tagger Prototype. American Society for Information Science and Technology Special Interest Group in Classifcation Research, Austin, TX. Lecture.

iJournal - Journal Vol. 4 No. 1, Fall 2018 49