Summary
Herschel ‘Guy’ Beahm is one of the biggest streamers in the world, but you probably know him best asDr DisRespect. His wig-and-glasses with bulletproof vest combo is iconic to the younger generation, and his hyper-macho persona attracted millions of viewers to his streams of games likeCall of Duty: WarzoneandEscape From Tarkov.
Beahm wasdropped from Twitch in 2020, but neither party revealed why. Rumours spiralled and fans guessed, but the prolific content creator switched to rival platform YouTube and continued his career unabashed.
Yesterday, it was revealed byThe VergeandBloombergthat Beahm had “exchanged sexually explicit messages with a minor through the service’s direct chat feature” in 2017. The reporting surfaced aftera tweet from a former Twitch employeerehashed allegations that had been circulating for a number of years.
“He got banned because got caught sexting a minor in the then existing Twitch whispers product. He was trying to meet up with her at TwitchCon. The powers that be could read in plain text.” – Cody Conners, former Twitch employee.
A number of journalists mentioned in the wake of this tweet that they’d heard similar stories. So why hadn’t they reported on it until now?
Ethical Reporting In Journalism
Former Washington Post reporter and founder of independent gaming news website Aftermath Nathan Graysonquoted Conners’ tweet, adding: “this is not the first time I have heard basically this explanation. nor is it the second, or third”. This isn’t a brag, he’s not trying to tell his followers that he already knew something they didn’t. He’s saying that he was working on the story, but couldn’t gather enough evidence to make it stick.
His followup tweet explains the situation. “a caveat: all of the sources I spoke to were secondhand,” he writes. “they were not in the room when it happened, nor could they provide documentation. in other words, this is NOT confirmation”.
Grayson provided yet more context in a post onAftermath. “Sources have told me over the years that Twitch did not execute Beahm’s ban through standard channels, and only a small handful of employees were present when the decision was made.
“Documentation was also exceedingly scant. Without access to firsthand sources – who could have given away their identity simply by being the lone person out of such a small group to speak – these accusations were too severe to publish. They did not pass legal muster and involved a victim who could potentially be endangered, which left reporters in the difficult situation of knowing about something without being able to state it publicly.”
If you want a far more comprehensive explanation of “legal muster” and the rigorous reporting that journalists must adhere to, I recommend reading Bloomberg reporterJason Schreier’s Reddit post on sourcing.
Former esports journalist Rod ‘Slasher’ Breslautweeted something similarin 2020, when Beahm was banned. Essentially, both journalists (or the publications they were writing for) decided that there wasn’t enough evidence – whether that was screenshots of messages or firsthand witnesses from the small team that banned Beahm – to publish the story. As Grayson puts it, the accusations did not pass legal muster.
So What Changed?
Put simply, Conners’ tweet encouraged more sources to come forward, and for the first time, these were firsthand sources.
“Though Conners was not a firsthand source, a version of the story was out there, which motivated sources with actual knowledge of the situation to speak more candidly,“ explains Grayson.
The Verge journalist who broke the story, Ash Parrish, took to Twitter to confirm that this is exactly what happened. She highlighted this sentence from Grayson’s article and said, “This was how I and [Bloomberg reporter Cecilia D’Anastasio] were able to report what we did.”
While neither Conners’ tweet alone, nor his testimony, were enough for journalists working on the report to break the story, his account encouraged others to speak. Their firsthand accounts allowed this story to see the light of day. Due to the small team that banned Beahm, these people may be risking their anonymity, their careers, and may face streams of online vitriol, but they’re doing the right thing nonetheless.
Now Beahm himselfhas addressed (and confirmed) the allegations, three days after initially denying them. The streamer is taking an “extended” break with his daughter and wife, the latter of whom he admitted to cheating on in 2017. But his impropriety wouldn’t have come to light without the hard work of countless journalists, without the bravery of sources who spoke to journalists, and without years of reporting to get to this point.
There’s an incredibly high bar for journalists to publish reports. Their sourcing has to be impeccable, they have to pass legal muster. This is why it’s taken four years for the truth to be revealed, not because of any conspiracy or profit-based motivation. It’s now the time for you to decide: do you want ethics in journalism or not?
