CNBC Argues That 'Call Of Duty' Keeps Guys From Finding Dates

from the slow-news-day? dept

Look, we know a couple things about all the cable news networks. First, they suck. Argue all you want for your preferred vendor of nonsense, but you’re wrong, forever and ever, amen. Second, the reason they suck is that there isn’t enough actual news to fill a twenty-four hour cycle, which is why you end up getting the exact same information fed to you from a series of barely discernible personalities (I use that term lightly) hour after mind-numbing hour. Oh, gee, I wonder if Neil Cavuto’s take on what the latest Honey Boo Boo episode has to say about the national debt fight in Egyptian-Syria will be different than Sean Hannity’s. Great. And, finally, we know that the moment any of these networks begin a story that in any way involves video games, we should change the channel, hit the power button, or take an axe to the power outlet. Often times, it may be advisable to do all three.

So if you’re the kind of person that worries you might miss actual stories about games in the media, stop. If you need to be reminded why you should stop, just check out this wonderful exchange on CNBC, which dives into the important topic of whether or not Call of Duty will end the human race by ceasing copulation. Seriously. We’ll barely even mention that the entire premise here is that only men play Call of Duty. While that may be the majority, the three women “debating” this act as if no woman has ever considered playing, let alone actually ever played the game. It doesn’t even enter the conversation:

Let’s start out with the guest host of The Kudlow Report, who lets us know that 100 million CoD players have logged over 2.85 million years in the game, while human beings have only existed for 250k years. And that statistic is vitally important because… yeah, it’s not. I could go into the math and make a complicated case for why that amount of time compared with humans walking around and scratching ourselves doesn’t mean anything, but if you don’t know that inherently, such an analysis will only make you soil yourself, so whatever.

Chiming in on this worthless topic first is Lori Zaslow, whose qualifications include founding dating site Project Soulmate and finding herself alphabetically last in every classroom she ever attended, which, judging by her comments in the video, probably wasn’t all that many. Why is CoD a problem, oh Cupid-wizard?

“It’s easier to connect to technology than reality. It really is. You’re not going to get rejected by technology. And it’s a one on one thing, so you’re avoiding intimacy. You can be Rambo in Call of Duty, but you can’t necessarily be Rambo if you feel scrawny and insecure.”

Whoo-boy, where to start? First off, does getting my head blown off in games count as rejection? I don’t know, but it might. Secondly, I wasn’t aware that the Call of Duty franchise had shuttered its multiplayer functions. And before anyone starts shouting about how social interactions in multiplayer games aren’t the same as IRL socializing, remember that Zaslow runs an online dating site, so lob those verbal grenades at her, too. Once you’re done doing that, put in a call to your grandpa and let him know that the feminist movement of the 70’s has been successfully nullified. He’ll probably be happy to know that all women want these days is a slack-jawed guy with an oversized gun shooting the shit out of everything. At least, that’s how I remember Rambo. I wasn’t really aware that’s what the ladies were looking for these days, but hey, good to know confirmed-female Zaslow. On the other hand, those 100 million CoD players you just insulted? You know, the ones that certainly aren’t universally scrawny, insecure, or even male? I’m pretty sure they won’t care for your gross mischaracterization.

Unfortunately, CNBC’s Caroll Roth, who could have played the hero in this equation, stumbled through her own dumb offerings.

“I’m not upset at guys who play video games, I’m upset at guys who wax. Everything in moderation, including moderation.”

Er, okay. I see we’re still going with the 7th century attraction standards, ladies? The waxing thing may sound funny, but turn it around and ask yourself what the reaction would be if a male guest said: “I’m not upset at women who play video games, I’m upset at women who don’t shave their legs and don’t have my hot meal on the table when I get home. After all, you’re just women.” Stupid, right? Oh, and before I forget, “everything in moderation, including moderation” is one of those phrases that could shut down your brain and cause it to reboot if you think about it too hard, so don’t. Spend more than ten seconds trying to figure out how that sentence is not a complete negation of itself will put you at risk for severe head injury.

But not as much as the comments Zaslow gives when its tossed back to her with the question of whether all the technology of the modern world is making intimacy, which Rambo would call copulation, more difficult.

“I think it’s absolutely tearing people apart, because think about it. If you’re getting addicted to playing a game, you’re not engaging with people. It’s definitely not like playing ping pong or pool or tennis. You’re not talking when you’re playing Call of Duty. Truly. You’re calling into not-reality.”

Actually, no, not “truly.” Falsely. Because lots of people play Call of Duty while talking to others. And I’m not sure yelling “service” and grunting and swearing each time you miss the ball really counts as “talking” while playing tennis either.

The host laughs, before asking about Facebook. You know, technology.

“Facebook definitely brings people together, hence Facebook.”

I, uh…you know, no. Just no. You’re not allowed to one-eighty like that while simultaneously uttering a sentence so devoid of intelligence that it actually makes me dumber for having heard it. Instead, you’re convicted in the eyes of the Supreme Court of the Internet and sentenced to a lifetime of guest appearances on cable news networks. Because this whole conversation is stupid. Video games are just entertainment. And, like apparently every other kind of entertainment, they get maligned, lambasted, and all the other words that mean they’re attacked by those that don’t enjoy them. CoD is no more anti-social than watching television, or movies, or reading a book (Super-solitary!!! Death to books!).

Thus ends your reminder as to why you should never watch cable news, hence cable news.

Filed Under: , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “CNBC Argues That 'Call Of Duty' Keeps Guys From Finding Dates”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
67 Comments
Ninja (profile) says:

I’ll just leave this here:

http://metro.co.uk/2013/04/04/xbox-players-better-in-bed-than-playstation-and-wii-rivals-study-finds-3582709/

WHAT IF YOU HAVE ALL 3 CONSOLES?!?!?!

Back on topic, ignoring the fact that girls also play Call of Duty (and I know a smokin’ hot girl that plays and brings hell into the battlefield) she should actually talk to Cod players before making any assumptions. I’ll bet she would be surprised. But no, let’s just buy into the popular belief that gamers are asexual beings.

Disclaimer: I don’t like 1st-person shooters ๐Ÿ˜‰

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: ???

No, frankly it’s not misleading. The premise of half of feminism is that girls can take care of themselves. Anything to make their lives easier is therefore dumbing things down for them.

If the tagline is “anything boys can do girls can do better” they can go ahead and mine our coal and chop our wood instead of us.

Ninja (profile) says:

Re: Re: ???

I always thought about it. I do agree that there’s a lot of chauvinism in the world and a lot of discrimination against women in general but… Feminists tend to exaggerate and generalize. They like to be dominant? Fine, there are men that like being dominated. But there are women that are naturally submissive. And this is NOT an issue or something to be corrected. Same with the submissive men. It’s a personality trait. If the girl asks you to pull her hair and spank her in the butt what is the freaking problem with that as long as it’s consensual and you don’t hurt her for real?

Sure there’s prejudice. From both parties nowadays.

ltlw0lf (profile) says:

Its not the game, its how you use it...

So much fail. In my experience, World of Warcraft has destroyed more relationships than Call of Duty has. If you are more interested in playing a game than dating or spending time with your significant other, then it really doesn’t matter whether you are playing CoD or Whirly-word.

Of course, I suspect, WoW has also brought folks together as well. Games can be highly social events… I just can’t wait to hear what the media will think of an OASIS like full immersion game system.

Anonymous Coward says:

It's not playing the games that makes one stupid

It’s repeatedly bending over and taking it from the gaming companies that’s incredibly stupid. I’m sure, somewhere in the executive suites at EA and Sony and Microsoft et.al., they’re laughing themselves silly while trying to figure out how they can screw gamers over AGAIN and profit from it.

And you know: they’re probably right. If EA asked gamers to cut off their left nut in order to play their next release, some gamers would do it. (Don’t tell me they wouldn’t. Look at what they’ve ALREADY done.)

The games are, well, bleh: “Call of Duty” appeals to infantile, inferior people with markedly-diminished intelligence. But none of the others are any better, yet the scam keeps working. (See “laughter” above.) So I suggest that the real game, the one that matters, has nothing to do with video or controllers or anything else: it’s the way these companies are readily manipulating large numbers of gamers.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: It's not playing the games that makes one stupid

Really? You’re actually going to contend that anybody equipped with more than room-temperature intelligence would lower themselves to playing “Call of Duty” or any of the other mindlessly-repetitive games that are designed to be as addictive as possible?

Please. Spare me. There is certainly value in some forms of gaming (chess, for example, is a very challenging intellectual exercise; parkour is demanding and builds endurance, coordination and strength) but you must surely recognize that all that value has been carefully engineered out of “Call of Duty” and its ilk because the intention is to maximize profits…and effort expended on anything else diminishes ROI.

Here’s an exercise for you. Go count the number of first-person shooter games out there. You don’t have to count them all. An estimate will suffice. Now try to figure out why it is that, as you’re reading this, there are MULTIPLE companies out there working very hard on creating, releasing and promoting their first-person shooter…which of course per them is different from allll the other ones, but in reality is the same-old same-old.

Why would they do such a thing?

Because it’s profitable. Because every 10,000 hours of player time they chew up means the cash register ringing for them. And thus they will do anything/everything they possibly can to maximize those profits — obviously including DRM and other draconian licensing measures — but also including making them appeal to the lowest common denominator. (Games which appeal only to people in the 95th percentile aren’t going to be very profitable.) “Call of Duty” reduces to “Me. Gun. Shoot! Shoot! Shoot!” which is well within the intellectual grasp of even the most dull, worthless, ignorant, vapid junior-high dropout, and that is EXACTLY the audience they’ve targeted it for…because, as I began the paragraph, it’s profitable.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: It's not playing the games that makes one stupid

Wow you are really something. So smug. People have different opinions and my opinion is that chess is quite boring. And the fact that you don’t think shooters can be challenging for the mind just goes to prove that you know nothing about them. The ability to predict and react needs to be trained heavily in order to be good and if you ever play in a clan then your tactical abilities really makes a huge difference. I would actually say that you train more skills than in chess.
Another thing is the fact that you seem to think that every thing we do, needs to be about learning a lesson. Some times people need to relax and chill out, you don’t need every little thing in life to be a “challenging intellectual exercise” or to “build endurance, coordination and strength”.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: It's not playing the games that makes one stupid

https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/content/how-might-video-games-be-good-us

Actually no, video games can improve, desirable physical and psychological traits and apparently do so to the majority that play games.

Video game playing tied to creativity

NPR: Video Games Boost Brain Power, Multitasking Skills

They are also used as a training ground for social interactions which improve real life interactions, if you fail online in the game, you don’t get beaten, you don’t get threatened, you just disconnect and create another persona and try again and again until you get it right, if your screen name becomes toxic to other players you learn that you did something wrong and try to rectify that mistake so you can find partners to play with, a useful skill for finding and maintaining jobs and one that start being learned early on in a safe environment that allows experimentation.

It also have been suggested that for the elderly it can help them keep a healthy mind by stimulating cognition functions, games like COD are not easy to beat, you need a brain to devise strategies against other players, you have to notice things on the virtual environment that may help you achive those goals etc.

Further playing games can be educational too, if you are playing historical battles, you learn about history and discoveries that those civilizations made, if you are playing a game that you have to recognize plants that may help you achieve something you are learning biology and so forth.

There I crushed your points, can you show the research that was done proving your point?

No?
GTFO then, because you just got fragged dude.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 It's not playing the games that makes one stupid

Seriously though CoD is a horrible game. It is not hard, even on hard. Online play is really only so-so at best, the single campaign on CoD Black ops special forces 8 ultra whatever number they are up to these days, is what? 6 hours maybe? It’s really just a bad game, and while I don’t agree with all the over generalizations of the other AC, it is a fairly basic game marketed for the most possible people. But hey they have to play games too, so nothing really wrong with that.

Play some stalker, then go back and play any CoD and you’ll be like “lol wut” as you’re picking people off left and right while never getting hit once.

A lot of this probably is based on the community in general that typically plays CoD games, which seems to be younger folk and casuals. So. It is what it is.

guest says:

Re: Re: Re: It's not playing the games that makes one stupid

This is some unenlightened commentary. Just because you don’t have an appreciation of a form of entertainment doesn’t mean it’s puerile or worthless. I imagine that whatever you enjoy doing to relax could be perceived as equally worthless by someone else with a different point.

Something some commentators are missing here is that entertainment is a luxury, and one that people choose to spend their money and time one. Also, businesses exist to make profit so that they can employ people — who can then turn around and spend the money they make on whatever entertainment they choose.

Just because you don’t understand the depth and complexity of a game doesn’t make it simple, either — in some ways CoD has the complexity and patterns of a game like chess, and just like chess you have to master low-level play before you can begin to understand what this means.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: It's not playing the games that makes one stupid

“But none of the others are any better,”

Indeed – they are all the same. No need to look further because we have the definitive fact presented to us right here.

And this is not limited to just video games is it? This universal escape mechanism has the potential to save much effort and can easily be applied to all facets of life. For example, whenever one is upset just claim that everything sucks and you hate everything. This is a very mature response and will surely get you many dates.

DannyB (profile) says:

It seems to have escaped their notice

First, their comparison with man-years of game playing with number of years of human existence was utterly stupid and properly sets the tone for everything that follows.

Maybe the hosts’ concern stems from inability to find the kind of men they want to date?

It seems to have completely escaped their notice that some (not all) men who play call of duty might already date . . . other men who play call of duty. But I suspect their imagination is too limited to conceive of that possibility.

Anonymous Coward says:

Are these gamers such eligible batchelors elites desirable enough that these women miss them on the dating scene? I doubt it.

If they are, maybe the easiest way to catch one is to buy CoD, a headset and just play a few games.

And third, shut the hell up and let people choose their own hobbies. Men rarely complain that all the shopping and spa-visits take women away from the market, right? Same thing.

Anonymous Coward says:

Oh, and before I forget, “everything in moderation, including moderation” is one of those phrases that could shut down your brain and cause it to reboot if you think about it too hard, so don’t.

All she was saying here was that every now and then it’s ok for people to splurge on something. It may not be the best phrasing but it wasn’t that hard to figure out.

davebarnes (profile) says:

False!

“there isn?t enough actual news to fill a twenty-four hour cycle” is flat out incorrect.
There is plenty of news.
News from China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Europe, etc.
The problems are:
1. The TV-watching hoi polloi in the USA don’t give a crap about news from other countries.
2. It would cost the cable networks money to cover these foreign stories.

DCX2 says:

Am I the only one bothered by this?

Chiming in on this worthless topic first is Lori Zaslow, whose qualifications include founding dating site Project Soulmate and finding herself alphabetically last in every classroom she ever attended, which, judging by her comments in the video, probably wasn?t all that many.

I understand you were going for comedic effect, but was that really necessary? Feels very ad-hom. To quote a particular someone,

And that statistic is vitally important because? yeah, it’s not.

Reggie (profile) says:

Re: Guys keep guys from finding dates

… I am an introverted, geeky, nervous wreck of a guy and I am one of those who cannot find dates because I am my own worst enemy. — Zakida Paul

How do I tell you this? … There are women (girls) out there who will fight to the death to beat some other woman out to date, mate and take you for her own. I know! I own one.

Bengie says:

Sexist

Since they’re getting all sexist and think they they’re entitled to men who lick their feet, I’m going to say that they need to get home and make a sammich.

But really, where does one even find decent women? The only time I saw educated women was in college. Once you’re out in the real world, there’s few places to look.

Anonymous Coward says:

What tickles me in the wrong spot is the fact that there are a bunch of people who believe that there is only 1 way to live life: Focus every minute of your life on your image, dating, boozing and making money. It’s okay to focus on these things but I say live your life the way you find enjoyable.
As an introvert I don’t enjoy parties, I don’t enjoy the constant managing of my image and I don’t enjoy facebook. Instead of partying I would much rather read a good book, play a game or watch a movie at home. I am not sad, depressed or crying in the corner but instead I enjoy it. I love people, I just don’t want to be surrounded by them all the time.
Even if I am this way, there are plenty of women who feel the same way and we can enjoy it together and most of my relationships have lasted years.
My point is that condemning a certain way of life simply because it doesn’t fit you, is plain and simply wrong. Dear cable tv news hosts and guests you are simple minded fools with that opinion.

Alt0 says:

Really?

I met my wife playing a video game.
I know several other couples who also met while playing video games.
I have PROOF (my three kids) that video games do NOT keep people from intimacy. And while this is not the majority, video games have in my case added to the population.

OK people say…You could have met your wife “playing Pool, or Darts, or at the laundromat, but unless I was willing to haul my laundry from Philly to Boston then nope wouldn’t have happened.

online Massive Multi-player games have a LONG history (EQ is like 14 years old now) of bringing people together.
With single player “console” games I can see a slight argument from their skewed perspective. But not with an online game. Most even force you to play with a group or party.
but then again…

“Thus ends your reminder as to why you should never watch cable news, hence cable news.”

you warned me.

aldestrawk says:

Re: Really?

no, no, you can’t not watch cable news! you must watch this!

http://www.hlntv.com/video/2013/08/07/california-amber-alert-james-lee-dimaggio-ex-wife-speaks-video-games

Herein, Nancy Grace proclaims, with great disgust, that she would immediately divorce any man who played that viking game, Everquest.

I swear I don’t normally watch cable news. I was just researching the Hannah Anderson kidnap case. It turns out James Dimaggio was addicted to Everquest and his wife divorced him. I am just surprised no one, yet, has jumped on the “blame Everquest for real life violence bandwagon.”

Anonymous Coward says:

@#34

“Focus every minute of your life on your image, dating, boozing and making money.”

That basically seems to be what these CNBC news anchors are saying “Men” should do rather than live their life how they want to. Also I wonder if it ever occurred to them that men simply aren’t interested because of how some women are.

You’d get much better results by telling men where to go to find acceptable women.

Anonymous Coward says:

And this is why mainstream media’s ratings are dropping.

First off, instead of real news, we have lies, propaganda, and nonsense. If some random Tumblr user or Youtube vblogger can convincingly debunk your main point ten minutes after it aired, then you’re in trouble. Furthermore, many of the topics that matter the most get little or no coverage, and yet they think we care about some celebrity giving birth to someone who will grow up to be a nobody anyway.

Secondly, much of the younger, more libertarian (both left and right wing) audiences feel they have no voice (and when someone who represents them finally get to speak out, it ends up being edited, truncated, taken out of context, berated, or ruined by a rude interviewer). Watching extremists force their viewpoints on you feels too much like state-run propaganda (and as of recent events, it actually is).

Third, people aren’t going to continue contributing ratings and ad revenue just for the “privilege” of being called a loser, an idiot, a pervert, and/or a terrorist. Even as a teenager, the “dumb daddy” commercials alone made me want to give up on television altogether. All these people demonizing violent video games and making the people who play them look like the most stereotypical loser imaginable and/or the next school shooter isn’t helping.

Overall, it’s legalized torture.

Anonymous Coward says:

Nice reference...

“Oh, and before I forget, “everything in moderation, including moderation” is one of those phrases that could shut down your brain and cause it to reboot if you think about it too hard, so don’t. Spend more than ten seconds trying to figure out how that sentence is not a complete negation of itself will put you at risk for severe head injury. “

Good to see you are a Lewis Black fan too Tim.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop ยป

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...