Fox News Attacks NEA for Classifying Games as Art

[Calbeck]

In a display of manipulative journalism...Fox News attempts to debate

Perhaps you missed it in Journalism 101, but "debate" is part of the same "commentary" side of news that's been in your local newspaper since forever...and on cable news networks ever since commentary shows became popular.

They don't fall under the nom de plume journalism, nor its rules...and never have.

Instead, categorize it (and all the same kinds of shows from MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, Comedy Central, ad nauseum) as "those who take this seriously deserve to".

 

[-|-]

THEY are not balanced, but they gave both men an equal opportunity. You can't blame one for being more charasmatic than the other (even if he was crazy). If you want to hear your ideals praised, go watch MSNBC. Fox (as long as it isn't an actual newscast) can push whatever agenda they want.

Go read about a little about discourse analysis. Seriously,

 

[RatRace123]

I really want to post a rage filled rant about why I absolutely hate FOX news, but I've already said it before. Everyone's said it.

They're not fair and balanced, they're barely a news channel, they are evil. There's no hiding it anymore, they're evil, plain and simple.
I'm not saying that out of anger, but as a fact: FOX news is evil.

OK, that might possibly be hyperbole, but as a gamer, it's very clear that FOX just loves to attack our chosen hobby and everyone who enjoys it. They paint with a broad brush, describing us all as violent, mentally unbalanced monsters.
Frankly I'm tired of it, I'm really really tired of it.

 

[KezzieZ]

Well, I should've known Fox News would be along to foul up my mood again.

I noticed that in the article here it's pointed out that the debate shown was either ignorant or intentionally manipulative. I'm of the opinion that it's intentionally ignorant. Since when has Fox ever had anything decent, or even true, to say about video games?

Any time I think of Fox doing their so-called "fair an balanced" reporting, I'm reminded of their baseless attack on Mass Effect. You know, the one where they said the game is a rape simulator that's like "Star Wars meets Debbie Does Dallas"? Those charlatans will never earn my respect.

 

[Demitri Kamoraz]

I would argue that however much that bald shouty guy gets paid in a year is total waste, and America should save its money. His very first argument was along the lines of "there are too many people without jobs", to which the big geek guys counter was "this is how you make jobs"...Is he really a professional radio host, or just someone they found on the street shouting at a parking meter?

If you've ever heard his 'show', you'd see he is leaning towards the random guy shouting at a parking meter side of the radar.

 

[bomblord]

One guy said blatant facts then the other said video games are like ping pong and obama's raising our taxes to pay for video games I mean seriously how is this even related to the subject at hand they also gave a lot more screen time to the man on the right for him to spout nothing but hate and try to make people think they're taxes are being raised to pay for the next call of duty. The news reporter even said that its going to call of Duty and showed images from that games most violent scenes almost all the way through it

 

[LarenzoAOG]

Is there ANYTHING Fox News likes?

White male upper-middle-class christian right-wing conservative republican set-in-their-ways fear/hate mongering ignorant... people.

I think that about sums it up, but then again I only watch Fox News while waiting in the pharmacy because it the only thing on that damn TV and they won't change it, so that might just be my outsider's view of it.

 

[Do4600]

Of course they attacked the NEA for considering video games as art. Bashing video games is at least 30% of what FOX news uses to fill time when literally NOTHING "reportable" is happening in the world. If video games are art they just look even more like assholes for bashing it.

 

[Therumancer]

One guy said blatant facts then the other said video games are like ping pong and obama's raising our taxes to pay for video games I mean seriously how is this even related to the subject at hand they also gave a lot more screen time to the man on the right for him to spout nothing but hate and try to make people think they're taxes are being raised to pay for the next call of duty. The news reporter even said that its going to call of Duty and showed images from that games most violent scenes almost all the way through it

Not quite. What he said was that he feels that games are trivial entertainment, and that he objects to the goverment spending any money on projects like this at all. Most of his ranting was about taxes.

It was the failure of "our guy" to do anything other than pretty much quote the press release given when video games got acknowlegement.

Fox News did sensationalize the case to get hype to the "debate" but they took no side, both guys got to say their piece, and neither of them seemed to be spending much time acknowledging the other. A lot of gamers want to act like this was Fox maligning video games, I do not think it was in this case, such complaints are simply borrowing trouble. Was Fox News making the "Call Of Duty" connections a bit out there? Yes it was, but that's what sensationalism is all about, and it wasn't totally uncalled for because someone COULD make a game like Call Of Duty if they could justify it being artistic. The use of the CoD name being to get attention more than anything, they also used scenes of things like Street Fighter and Mario Brothers, all well known games as well, during the debate simply because they are video games people would recognize.

In the end we'll doubtlessly have to agree to disagree, but I really found nothing wrong with this other than the simple fact that Fox failed to actually create the debate that it was hyping. It pretty much played host to two guys who just didn't belong "on stage". We had a video game advocate who acted like a deer caught in headlights, and a guy who wanted to use video games as an excuse to complain about goverment spending.

Also remember the anti- guy, was representing the "against" side, nothing he says is going to win the support of those of us who are strongly FOR video games. You can blame our dude for not doing a better job of confronting him on the issues, not Fox for simply giving him a platform. Do I agree with him video games are like Ping Pong? Of course not. But then again I wasn't the guy whose job it was to argue that point with him.

Both of these guys knew they were going on TV, and "our guy" seemed unprepared, and the other guy might have mentioned games, but as I said, it was only as a means to complain about the spending, I don't think the topic he was there for would have mattered. If he was debating tax breaks for farmers or something he probably would have been saying the same basic thing. That's just my opinion based on what I saw though, there is no concrete way of putting that.

 

[Andy of Comix Inc]

The Fox News segment can be viewed here [http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e80_1305997846]

...sorry, I'd like to keep my sanity intact, if it's all the same to you...

 

[cheesyman987]

I love how its titles "fair and balanced debate." I don't think fox understands those two words

I don't think Fox News understands the word "and."

 

[Eremiel]

The intent of the segment seems as if it was meant to take a dig at the current leaders of the U.S. government using factually incorrect information and an over-animated critic, rather than a look at what's actually occurring in reality.

Welcome to Fox News.

 

[cfehunter]

Trust fox to go for the most mass marketed trash that has no educational or artistic value (COD).

To be fair to the guy they got to speak on behalf of the NEA, he did say exactly what most of us are thinking.
This has got nothing to do with top-budget aaa games that are created with the goal to generate as much cash as possible and everything to do with indie games developers who don't care about profit and just want to create art and educate the masses through an interactive medium.

Fox news, you disgust me. you push your hate and scare mongering in an attempt to boost your ratings at the expense of art and education? you vile soulless pieces of human refuse.

I'm all for freedom of speech, but when you're deliberately aiding the spread of ignorance, misunderstanding and hate in the name of profit, you deserve to be pulled off the air.
somebody pull fox news off the air....

 

[Brandon237]

Anyone fancy helping me blow up the Fox News building?

*Grabs Shotgun and C4 charges*

(For people with no sense of humour, this was a joke -.-)

What? Why? That is not cool, why is this a joke? It is a seriously good idea. (Unfortunately not a joke).

Wow, just wow, do they not have anything better to complain about? Fox news isn't great at the best of times, but this is just... vomit-inducing.

 

[Korne]

The talk show guy didn't really have much of an argument. He just said some random stuff in a confident manner. He could have easily made a good case (and sort of tried) against games meeting the requirement for this grant, or the fact that the grant is wasteful, but he spent his short opportunity sounding like a campaign speech.

 

[RyQ_TMC]

I love how its titles "fair and balanced debate." I don't think fox understands those two words

Reminds me of how communist regimes always label themselves "democratic".

So far, I've been avoiding watching anything from Fox News, seeing how a lot of netfolk rage as soon as they're mentioned. I thought they were just, you know, your standard TV channel with an agenda - like every other channel out there - and the rage was mostly due to people not agreeing with most of it. Well, except the infamous Sexx Effect, but the amount of backlash that received should have been a lesson.

But this was a travesty. Not just saying "fair and balanced debate", not just starting off with Call of Duty, but constant repeats of "video games such as Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto", pretending no other games exist, and one thing I hate most about democracy - a loud ass spouting "ironic commentary", knowing full well that the average viewer will listen to him, not the quiet guy who tries to make arguments.

Let me put it this way - some people I know frown at me "wasting time playing video games". One of my close friends actually replied to my happy announcement that I bought a PS3 with "Seriously, a console? How old do you think you are?" My dad actually called me out on "not accomplishing anything, but playing games instead". That was just after I graduated with honours from one of the world's top universities and received a letter of admission for postgrad study at an even higher ranking one.

This attitude doesn't come from nowhere. I usually put that down to the usual lack of acceptance for new things, but I see more and more evidence that mass media are actually working to perpetuate it.

 

[Ukomba]

Why do video games need government money at all?

Because many devs are too lazy to make up the funds themselves, and so push it on everyone else to fork out on their behalf.

I don't think that's the case. Bear in mind that the NEA will only grant funding to "artsy" or "public good" video game projects which are not-for-profit. If you can't profit from your project, then you'll have difficulty funding that sort of venture (you're unlikely to obtain venture capital because there's no for-profit venture involved and therefore no return for investors). That's the main reason for NEA funding.

That's nice. So what you're really saying is government money allows companies to make s***y games. That should be enough reason not to give NEA money to video games.

You can have artsy games just fine, and they have. What you need to balance that with is making the games fun and engaging for people to play. Here are you're two options:

1. You make an artsy game that's fun and people buy it. That kind of game doesn't need NEA money because it's good enough to stand on it's own legs.

2. You make an artsy game that no one wants to play. That kind of game does need NEA money but it would be wasted since, with no one playing it, no one is being exposed to the art.

And do you really want the government deciding what is and isn't a good game? When have they ever shown they were capable of making that derision? Hell, they can't even choose good normal art. Most of NEA money is wasted on pure c***. I say cut off all NEA money and just have artists make things people actually want. Video games have done just fine with out it up to now.

 

[Ukomba]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrQEMBN8DNU

Comedy but that's the kind of thing I really would expect to get from government sponsored video games.

 

[JDKJ]

Why do video games need government money at all?

Because many devs are too lazy to make up the funds themselves, and so push it on everyone else to fork out on their behalf.

I don't think that's the case. Bear in mind that the NEA will only grant funding to "artsy" or "public good" video game projects which are not-for-profit. If you can't profit from your project, then you'll have difficulty funding that sort of venture (you're unlikely to obtain venture capital because there's no for-profit venture involved and therefore no return for investors). That's the main reason for NEA funding.

That's nice. So what you're really saying is government money allows companies to make s***y games. That should be enough reason not to give NEA money to video games.

You can have artsy games just fine, and they have. What you need to balance that with is making the games fun and engaging for people to play. Here are you're two options:

1. You make an artsy game that's fun and people buy it. That kind of game doesn't need NEA money because it's good enough to stand on it's own legs.

2. You make an artsy game that no one wants to play. That kind of game does need NEA money but it would be wasted since, with no one playing it, no one is being exposed to the art.

And do you really want the government deciding what is and isn't a good game? When have they ever shown they were capable of making that derision? Hell, they can't even choose good normal art. Most of NEA money is wasted on pure c***. I say cut off all NEA money and just have artists make things people actually want. Video games have done just fine with out it up to now.

There are examples in England of what you get when government money is put into video games.

I never said "shitty" games. I said "artsy" or "public good" video games that, by their very nature, will never appeal to a broad commercial market. That doesn't meant they're "shitty." In fact, that they don't have mass appeal may very well mean that they have value of some sort. The masses aren't well known for their ability to discern the finer points of anything.

Your two options make no sense. You can't make the artsy game that's either fun to play and people buy it or that no one wants to play and no one buys it. Artsy games don't get private funding and therefore would never get made. Not without public funding

And the NEA has funded many artist who are far from "crap" and have become recognized as Masters. To cite but one example, Robert Mapplethorpe, now recognized as being among the Masters of American photography, wouldn't have flourished without NEA funding. There's very little of his work that was considered "commercial" at the time he was producing it but, ironically, his photographs can fetch upwards of half a million dollars now that he's dead.

A large part of the value inherent in NEA funding of art is that it allows artists to explore taboo subjects that normally would not make much commercial sense to explore. "Piss Christ" by Andres Serrano is a perfect example.