Fox News Attacks Environmentally Conscious Games

[Tyler Meiburg]

they are concerned about the "liberal agenda"???
sigh..... not even trying to hide how republican they are
this is why i hate fox

 

[Frankster]

Can't blame Fox, have any of you actually played Fate of the world (you should btw, its an awesome game)?

It is the most depressing game ever and after failing in game so hard with a global agency that has the backing and support of the entire world, you wonder what chance we have irl and can only conclude the human race is screwed one way or another.

Btw fox must have failed hard at the game, solar and wind power in fate of the world are awesome for low emissions, but it takes ages to set up enough of a supply line to serve as substantial source of fuel and it's really expensive to the point it cripples your eco if you really try to just rely on solar+wind everywhere.
Nuclear is actually a good power source for certain countries in the game just as it's a viable strat to partially rely on oil while you're in an energy transition to something else.

If anything the game's biggest lesson is ban most dangerous emission like clatharates (really not worth it) and make transition to coal free industry ASAP.

 

[KAPTAINmORGANnWo4life]

So Sim City saying putting houses right next to underfunded nuclear power plants is a bad idea is wrong?

In real life, it's only a bad idea for a culture just starting on nuclear technology. By now, the U.S. refined nuclear power to be several dozen folds more efficient, making proximity a non-issue and nuclear waste a minor problem.

Well, (A) The key word was "underfunded", (B) Even without leaks, it's still a terrible idea for many reasons, and (C) That "minor problem" gives people cancer and utterly destroys everything it touches for more than a few seconds.


Oh, and since Sim City is just being built up, so it is just starting on nuclear technology. I don't remember any nationality attached to Sim City.

I have one question. Most of the time--now unlike you I actually watch the network, so I can safely say--most of the time, a Fox News program will have one guy arguing one side, and another guy arguing the other side.

So everybody, please tell me one thing; how does the stupid, reactionary, racist opinion represent what Fox News says, but the other side that The Escapist might agree on does not?

Now this particular example is an exception, sure. But it's not like it matters. I remember another Fox thing Escapist make a pissy fuss about, the "should someone get a grant to make Call of Duty??!" thing. There was another guy, on that show, saying what we all agree with. But what, he doesn't count? Well, he wasn't the host of the show, but he was still on the show.

Besides, there are times where the only people talking are on the left-wing side. Seriously, do you know who this is? http://www.mensjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/headshot_smith.jpg
This is Shepard Smith. He is mostly liberal. He is one of the biggest names on Fox News.

What about this guy? http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_nnNX4rkBg6U/Rhcz_BUmVUI/AAAAAAAAAHk/7GtI827c6eo/s400/Geraldo.jpg
Everybody knows Geraldo Rivera, probably for the big, dramatic failures and stumbles he's suffered. He's a right-wing nut, right? No, he more liberal than conservative, actually.

And what about this fucking guy??? http://www.wpsl.com/img/alan-colmes.jpg
Every time, every episode, for about fourteen years; Sean Hannity starts up with his right-wing opinions, and then Alan Colmes fights back with his left-wing opinions and full force. I even remember a book/audiobook he made, and the subtitle was: "Why left is right and right is wrong." He doesn't have a full time show anymore, but he still appears occasionally.
And there's plenty more liberals on Fox, those are just the most famous I can think of off the top of my head.

So, The Escapist community, tell me, why don't we cheer on these guys?

I'm going to have to be totally honest, this is not, AT ALL about politics. About who's on which side. It's about jumping to unreasonable conclusions. If the articles all said "Such and such newscaster (who happens to be on Fox News) says something stupid." And all the witty comments made jokes about THAT GUY, then there'd be no problem.

People resent the network because most of their programming distort statistics, use inflammatory language, and sometimes outright lie about many things. Having some perceivable Lefties does not change the fact that the network is incredibly biased and has a very great deal of sway with their audience. They promote harmful stances, such as anti-environmentalism, and are part of the horribly misguided Right Wing of American politics.

I'm not against any political view, nor am I an American, but the polarized, stagnant, ineffectual state of affairs in America are harming the rest of the world, and Fox is a part of that.

 

[celestine]

LMAO. People at FOX should read the new S.T.A.L.K.E.R. book. It will turn their opinion upside down.

 

[Sansha]

This is the final nail in the coffin that Fox is no longer a news agency, rather a conservative political party.

 

[DTWolfwood]

What, so its ok to push the Conservative Agenda and not the Liberal Agenda?

I demand the federal government bring back the FAIRNESS DOCTRINE. Yeah news will be boring as hell, but at least you get to hear both sides of story!

wait news isn't suppose to be entertaining!

 

[Talvrae]

It's a conservative channel, what you expect... while they are hard to fault when it come to economics topics, being adept of the only econimic system that work (oepn market). When it comes to social issue it'S really not the same... I can only hope they arent all like that on that channel, but i would have an hard time to judge the whole programation since i can't watch it.

 

[General Vagueness]

I guess you guys didn't hear about how they recently called out Spongebob for mentioning global warming (in what seems like a throwaway line for a joke).
I get it now. They're on a 24-hour news network with a conservative/republican/right-leaning spin, as much as I want to detest the anchors, it's becoming evident to me they're just doing their job. The people that deserve our ire are the people that write the text on the teleprompters (which I'm guessing are the same people that write the paper copies the anchors read before they're on camera and lay out the structure of what to talk about).
So hey, Fox News teleprompter writer guy. Screw you. Oh and hey, that guy's boss. Screw you too.
As for energy sources, we should ban coal ASAP and get cracking on fusion.

 

[tg851]

i knew faux news was stupid but this? this is pure 100% concentrated weapons grade stupid in its purest form.i can kinda understand the rag on cod and violent videogames but raging on something like this?

 

[jmarquiso]

I think this is a great thing. Why? They are admitting that games are a medium of art by which authors can and will express opinions. Dangerous opinions. Lock-up-your kids opinions.

They should take a look at certain religious games to see what conservative values-based games can be. Or Call of Duty.

Or, gasp

Bioshock.

 

[Verlander]

And I bet they don't even see the irony in all of this...

 

[ssgt splatter]

Really? Really? Are Fox news just extremist conservative idiots just for the sake of being extremist conservative idiots?

Yes. Yes they are. 'nuff said.

 

[PaganFury]

If enviromental games = liberal agenda then wouldn't all those violent games they love to hate be conservative agenda?

Show you support for Mitt Romney today by teabagging some kid on COD

 

[NKnight]

I'm speechless.... I hope fox goes bankrupt.

Yeah me too. But what are the chances of that happening? That piece of **** makes more money than God!...almost.

That's the big "I can't believe it" thing when dealing with Fox, It's not the stupidity. People say stupid things all the time. It's the number of poeple buying into that crap that astonishes me.

 

[Beryl77]

Meh, just the usual idiocy. I do wonder though, how some people take them seriously and think that they're only reporting facts.

 

[hexFrank202]

So... nobody is going to respond to my post? XD

Edit: Excuse me somebody DID respond, it just didn't appear in my inbox! Let me read it now.

I demand the federal government bring back the FAIRNESS DOCTRINE. Yeah news will be boring as hell, but at least you get to hear both sides of story!

You particularly need to read my post.

 

[hexFrank202]

People resent the network because most of their programming distort statistics,

How many distort statistics? Did you get statistics on this?

use inflammatory language,

What shows use inflammatory language?
I'm sure some nasty comments have surfaced sometimes, but can the home of MovieBob and Yahtzee really be preaching the gospel of clean tongues?

and sometimes outright lie about many things.

What are some of their outright lies?

Having some perceivable Lefties does not change the fact that the network is incredibly biased and has a very great deal of sway with their audience.

It doesn't change the fact that FN is biased? Okay, prove that fact to me in the first place. Show me a list of all the things Fox does recently. Prove to me that the right-wing people significantly outweigh the left-wing people.

They promote harmful stances, such as anti-environmentalism,

What exactly is the definition of 'environmentalism' here?

I'm not against any political view,

Except for anti-environmentalism.

and are part of the horribly misguided Right Wing of American politics...the polarized, stagnant, ineffectual state of affairs in America are harming the rest of the world, and Fox is a part of that.

So what you're saying is, Fox News should not present extremely right-wing ideals or give them any voice at all. Or at least very little? What about extremely left-wing ideals?

 

[Monsterfurby]

I am still confused by the American use of "liberal" and "conservative". Around here, the so-called "liberals" are way further right-wing than the "conservatives".

I can't be sure, but I'm guessing you're from Australia? Perhaps?

Liberal is a very messy and broad term, but in most cases around the world, when applied to politics, it means 'progressive' (ie, supportive of changing things up to improve them, rather than thinking things are fine as they are. Say, legalizing same-sex marriage).

Germany, but I think it's more of a European or European-influenced thing.

I would say the political cultures of the US and Germany just judge liberalism from different viewpoints.

In the German interpretation, liberalism stands for deregulation and a clear focus on individual freedom, as contrasted with the other end of the spectrum, socialism, being total government regulation. One could argue that the German political spectrum is defined by the aspect of individualism, starting with The Left (propagating quasi-socialism), the Social Democrats (supporting government responsibility and welfare), the Christian-Democrats/Conservatives (supporting a strong government with major economic freedom for its citizens) and the Free Democrats/Liberals (supporting deregulation above everything and often regarded as siding with "big business" against the welfare state).

As for the US, I can only guess for the most part, but since there is little to no social democrat tradition and a strong sense of moralism throughout major parts of society (which some label the "Puritan tradition", at least there was when these designations developed), the main focus for considering a party "conservative" or "liberal" are morals. Conservative obviously standing for the traditional values as observed and propagated by the GOP/Republicans, while Liberals are generally considered to be more, well, liberal in the observation of "traditional" morals and allowing greater "moral" freedom.

It is interesting, though, and probably owed to the political spectrum extending way further left in most of Europe. Though the designation "socialists=liberals" as found in some more conservative US media is pretty wrong due to the aforementioned reasons. Communism, on the other hand, would be pretty close to what "true" liberalism aims for.

 

[Clonekiller]

The study covers general reporting. On another note, have any videos not done by a comedian, who makes a living off of context corruption? (Context corruption: When you take what someone says out of context, making them say what ever you want them to say)

Show that what he said was taken out of context. It doesn't seem like he was. And where has he taken people out of context before?

"It doesn't seem like he was". That's the point. That's the point of context corruption, to make someone say whatever you want them to say, so that your audience will believe it. That's part of the humor value, since "omg-i-cant-believe-he-said-that-lol" is a pretty standard reaction to his kind of show. Unfortunately, proving this style wrong is rather difficult, since I would need a copy of the original broadcast that Pat was quoting.

As for telltale signs, Pat uses lots of incomplete quotes in his show. If I were to go on national television and say something like this: "Believing african americans are stupid is idiotic. African americans are very intelligent people." If Pat decided he didn't like me, he could trim the video so that the only remaining quote was "african americans are stupid". The result is obvious, taking a statement that was originally an advocation for equal rights, and making it a highly racist statement. If you didn't have my original quote, and you took Pat's word for it, you would think I was an uber racist. There are a lot of incomplete quotes in that show.

Unfortunately, the only way to check the context is to find the original show and check it against what Pat says. That would take much more time than I am willing to spend, so I can't provide proof. However, if it's that big a deal to you, you could probably do it yourself.

 

[SimpleJack]

It's almost as if they've run out of video games to argue about, and now they're picking on the games that have done nothing wrong.

I was sort of impartial towards fox until now, but this is disgusting.