as big as it got on twitter (roughly 3 million tweets in a month period), and a current 60k subscriber base on their reddit, some staticians found that of the accounts that tweet gamer-gate related material, only .1 of .1 percent were of the harassment kind, which in totall amounted to like, 50 people? It's the same logic that everyone on 4chan are all a bunch of lawless, unstoppable hackers.
It was a fucking ploy to try by the media sites to get the crowds off their back, and it worked. it worked so fucking well that whenever something bad or unfarable happens, they have the perfect boogeyman to blame for it.
I'm going to give you a recent example. A pro-gamergate twitter account found that Nintendo PR executive Allison Rapp wrote a college essay arguing for more lenient child porn laws. This person on twitter was disgusted, and got an anti-child abuse foundation, the Wayne foundation, to contact nintendo.
2 months later, Allison Rapp was fired, and told various gaming news sites that it was because gamergate dug up her personal information (the cp thesis) and sent it to nintendo. a huge wave of articles came out attacking gamergate (the quickest came from Jesse Signal and Patrick Klepek, who had pages of articles ready only minutes after the announcement she was fired, meaning that this was something planned.)
However, Nintendo said that she was fired due to having a second job, which is a firable offense at Nintendo. She came out and said yes, but moonlighting a 2nd job was alright at Nintendo, and that she was really fired because they didn't like her 2nd job (underwear modelling, some with her holding a 3ds), but still claimed gg was to blame. another site Kiwi Farms found that Allison Rapp was actually moonlighting as an escort, which was why she was fired.
Do you know how many sites updated their original attack articles with this new information? take a guess.
I can go into more detail about the websites/journalists if interested.