Talk:Collective Shout

Relevancy to CRW

I would argue that the article is relevant here due to the activist group having a history of attempting to or preemptively blocking customers' ability to otherwise engage in lawful transactions because CS finds something offensive. The ability to obtain something ought to be taken into consideration, even though it might not be nearly as important to the focus of this wiki as having said thing and then having it altered in an anti-consumer manner. — Sojourna (talk) 05:38, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Agreed, their tantrums towards payment processors should be evidence enough to say that their actions are harming consumers. Their actions have been responsible for developers on itch.io and Steam to not get paid in general JamesTDG (talk) 07:06, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

I will agree with Sojourna and James as well. I will give @DzLamme one week to respond to this talk page for his side. If no response is given, the deletion notice will be removed. Mr Pollo (talk) 00:51, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

I have read that some NSFW games got de-indexed due to lobbying and pressure on payment processors. I'm not for censorship, in general. I don't agree with many of the stances the group takes, however their intentions were framed as though they are just an anti-consumer group. The article gave the following reason for the groups actions in 2014:

the video game encouraged players to "murder women for entertainment."

The article came across hostile, like calling their lobbying, tantrums, while leaving out any responsibility Itch has towards its customers and indie developers.

I was unable to find a history of anti-consumer rights, I am not in Australia and have not done a deep dive on them so I may be ignorant of some things. DzLD (talk) 06:50, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Well their entire purpose is to censor anything they don't like, which would severely restrict the consumer's ability to purchase legal things, so I would say that their goals are quite anti-consumer. Lowspeedguy (talk) 14:07, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Not to mention, they want to ensure that these games that they are protesting against, are not distributed at all, meaning it also hurts consumers who have paid for these games as well. Just imagine paying for some mature title, only to have it be revoked from your library, because some Karen in Australia got upset over the wrong things JamesTDG (talk) 14:11, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Looking more into it, it does sound like being anti-consumer is their entire point. They're lobbyists wanting to take down media that goes against their values.

From the archived website: "Collective Shout is a grassroots movement challenging the objectification of women and sexualisation of girls in media, advertising and popular culture. We target corporations, advertisers, marketers and media which exploit the bodies of women and girls to sell products and services and campaign to change their behaviour." Beanie Bo (talk) 14:53, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

This is the description of the game they specifically wanted gone from a newsweek article:

No Mercy appeared on the PC gaming platform Steam in early April. The game allowed players to control a character who rapes, tortures and kills women. It did not carry an age rating or content warning and was described by some users and critics as a 'rape simulator.'

No Mercy features scenes in which the player rapes a woman, who then becomes pregnant, gives birth to a baby, and is then murdered along with her newborn. DzLD (talk) 15:08, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Apparently the protesting of NSFW/Mature video games started specifically against No Mercy. Itch de-indexed the games, as far as I can tell it wasn't because of any new legislation, they did it without notifying any customers. I disagree with much of CS's positions, but Itch wasn't forced to do what they did the way they did it. They chose profit over their customers, it would cost money to go through each title one by one. The games that I found CS reference besides GTA are games I don't want to describe on this wiki.

Which payment processors are involved, I can't find a name? DzLD (talk) 15:00, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

At least for itch.io, it's visa and mastercard. Lowspeedguy (talk) 16:11, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

This incidents opens up the debate about financial censorship, the role of payment processors as content moderators, and the impact on creative freedom. They don't want to get rid of every game ever, the games in question are objectively for adults only. Daddy, Say My Name, Sex Education With Richard And Mr. Dickson, Short Horns, based on the descriptions, the games content and themes violated the credit co. policies. The group is not main antagonist. I really wanna make it clear that I'm not defending their positions i.e. porn, abortion, etc. DzLD (talk) 15:49, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

They also want to take down games like gta, which means many, if not most, games that aren't porn are under their scope. Lowspeedguy (talk) 16:14, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

It's like if an environmentalist lobbies and gets laws passed ending the production of combustion engines to save the planet. You cant buy a gas engine anymore, but you can still buy a car. DzLD (talk) 16:48, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

I think this group is a bit fascist and only incidentally anti-consumer. DzLD (talk) 16:59, 5 September 2025 (UTC)