Gamespot doing literal propaganda for the US Army

@efesell: Standard toxic Twitch behavior, definitely. What's somewhat ironic here is that while Twitch can and often does ignore shitty behavior, the servicemembers responsible can actually be held accountable under the UCMJ here. The UCMJ has broad powers to restrict the free speech of servicemembers. Twitch could say this is toxic; the Navy brass who sees this could actually take punitive actions against the sailors who allowed this to reflect on negatively on the Navy.

Edit: Anyways, you wanna see some real cringe-inducing shit, check out military TikTok.

I'd imagine social media management and streaming is a relatively new thing for them. The kind of job a fuck-up would get.

They aren’t targeting gamers they are targeting 18-26 year olds. Same reason why you see advertising in sports. It’s just ads. And frankly it’s a lot less gross than getting advertising for a university or something. It’s a step towards a career. In many cases a very fruitful one. That gives young people the opportunity to build a better life. And this ad is for the National guard. So they will have a more direct involvement in their communities.

God damn it. I have been struggling with being part of giant Bomb lately. I used to love it here, but lately this community is getting unbearable. you people are the types that think you are so much smarter than everyone else. Well you aren’t. “Oh my stars! THE PROPAGANDA!” fuck off. It’s advertising. They have the right to advertise. People that want to join will join those that don’t won’t. You think you are superior to everyone. “Oh I’m too smart to fall for the ads but the poor Imbeciles that are below me! “ Fuck man. This is no different than getting fucking McDonald’s advertising. Actually, I’d say it’s better. More people die of heart disease and obesity every year than they do in all branches of the military. It’s actually a lot harder to enlist than most people think.

I think I’m done with this place.

That number goes up a bit if you add in all the civilians harmed in Yemen or some other garbage conflict the US gets involved with for reasons(oil). The youth today can also be part of the forever war just like my family and feel the joy of fighting the ethereal Forever-foe known as "Terrorism". And those youth can feel the tension grow over the years as some family members struggle to justify a useless war while others feel betrayed by supporting it. And all the PTSD that prevents the service member from visiting some family members that live in cities. 1 out of 10, do not recommend at all.

It isn't that some of us think we are smarter, it is that we have had a vastly difference experience with the military and the eternal sunken loss fallacy that is the forever-war.

Important to keep in mind that by offering a chance to build a better life for those who participate the military isn't being kind-hearted, they're being predatory. They specifically target marginalized groups such as those from poorer neighbourhoods or victims of systemic racism and offer them an opportunity they would not have access to otherwise.

Of course, in exchange for this opportunity they demand total obedience while risking your life in pointless conflicts and undergoing severe mental trauma along the way. Fighting for one's beliefs (sometimes even one's country) can be a very noble thing, but these people are often done wrong by the governments they swore to protect.

Agreed.

Then again how deeply in bed EA, Activision, Ubisoft and other are with their ex-military "consultants" should scare everyone too. Let's all just admit that gamers will NEVER see a nuanced or shades of grey story from EA, Activision, or Ubisoft because they are afraid of their ex-military consultants will not working with them...or worse they consultants will say their game "lack authenticity". The teams making miliary shoots do not want their game's authenticity will be called into question. A few 'consultants' calling your game 'not authentic' can cost your shareholders billions.

Ever notice that the most critical game about the military or the police in the last 15 years comes from GTA 4, and ist mostly set up as a joke? That joke is less funny in 2020.

"...My name is Brian O'Toole. I wanted to fight the War on Terror, but I don't read so good. Most careers were closed to me. That's why I joined the LCPD. Now I'm on the front lines, helping tourists and fighting terrorists. I rifle through people's bags on the subway to protect freedom. I arrest protesters at political conventions for straying outside the free speech zone. Being a cop used to be about stopping crime. Now, thanks to politicians, it's about fighting terrorists, one old lady at a time. I'm protecting freedom, whatever the cost. I'm a hero, and I know it."

Sorry to hear that, and to each their own, but it really sounds like your response escalated from 0 to 100 in 0.3 seconds.

No one here is saying "The US Military Has No Right to Advertise!" No one is saying they're smarter than anyone who joins the military.

What people ARE saying is that the US Military using harmless leisure activities (video gaming) to hock their recruitment camps is sketchy as hell (even though it's ALWAYS been one of their venues). Implying, "Killing people in video games is fun! Killing people in real life will be just as fun!" is a shitty marketing angle.

Also, coming from a military family, I will 100% contest you on the "The Military gives you life skills and is a career advancement tool", because that's the *intent*, but in practice, that's often complete bullshit. The military MIGHT help your career advance IF you toe their line AND you don't make any waves. If, however, you rock the boat, like my cousin (honorably discharged with the rank of Captain in the Army) who reported a superior officer for sexual abuse, you'll be harassed for years after you've returned to civilian life. If you're like my brother-in-law, who suffered spinal damage and a brain injury on his second tour in Iraq, you might be offered a job as a US Army Recruiter - and if, like him, you refuse the job because of moral objections, you'll be told "you're on your own".

Like so many others in this thread have pointed out, the US Military is NOT recruiting gamers because they think they'll be solid, noble warriors of a modern military. They're recruiting gamers because they see them as young, easily manipulated, emotionally immature and coming with a built-in romanticism for fighting things.

The U.S. military is scum.

When I was in high school and planning to go to college for graphic design, an army recruiter in my home town kept calling to pressure me into joining.

When I told him what I was going for, they said that I could do that when I enlist in the army and can design their brochures and other materials. Bullshit propaganda imo.

I'm glad I didn't join because I know now there's no way enlisting would have aided in my design skills and they probably have an outside marketing team designing this junk.

I need to see if the Brits are at this as well. It'd be refreshing to see a recruiter sounding off on stream about how they're more likely to be putting flood defences together in Carlisle than shooting bad guys.

@shindig: If they did that it’d be shady as hell as well, considering that there remains British troops stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Face it, the Brits are just as complicit with western imperialism as the Yanks. And I say that as a Canadian who is sick of our country’s forces advertising as a disaster relief organization. In my opinion that’s far more gross than the American hoo-rah approach. At least those guys are being honest about the point of their enterprise.

@navster15: Just as complicit is certainly a way to put it. One might argue that they kinda set up the game plan entirely.

@efesell: As a South Asian man I could write a book on the British “setting up the game”, but I imagine that this forum has character limits. Thought I’d keep it to recent history for conciseness.

@shindig: Bearing in mind the UK is currently set to remove itself from the signatories of the European Convention on Human Rights(ECHR), ostensibly to be able to treat migrants more harshly and avoid prosecutions on UK military from non-UK courts, it feels like those recruits would either be propping up floodplains in the UK a whole lot more...or that flood defences become a distant memory to them.

I'm saying, if the UK sends the message their soldiers are above the law, there might be a whole lot less countries that let them in - or, bearing in mind the Mad King of the Back Office is holding up Reagan-era U.S. notes on reforming the military in front of the press for them to say "Oh I'm so proud of myself for noticing that piece of paper he pointed at me", the UK military might not be what you think it is for long.

That implies this current UK government can formulate and execute on any sort of plan at the moment.

@dasakamov: Well, I think a LOT of people in this thread very much are saying the military does not have a right to advertise and I am not entirely sure I disagree with them.

I THINK what @mattimus_prime was getting at was similar to what I said on the first page of this thread: This is really no different than any other advertisement/sponsorship and we already have some pretty sinister levels of this in almost all forms of media. But, as with everything on the internet, understanding the distinctions between "should" and "is" goes over most people's heads and this thread largely became about the "should" aspect of whether the military should target gamers (and violate the constitution by banning people (and have fraudulent giveaways (and make laughably offensive edgy jokes about war crimes))) while sidestepping the "they already do that"

@shindig: To which I would say your answer highlights the danger of focusing on the pantomime of a PM who ruffles his hair every time he walks in front of people to look incompetent, and ignoring how their “failures” are only failures if you want to mark them down for the human cost. A cost which I am unconvinced the people who back governments with the wealth of publishing empires and the people who hire ministers when they quit politics care about. Maybe a bullet point in the appendix.

The UK government just won a parliamentary vote to press ahead on doing something that is either described as “But this is illegal” or “Don’t you want to be patriotic and blissful” in order to break up with a larger government because they were aghast that EU regulations would mean all UK bank account names had to be revealed, while screaming “Pip-pip everyone, the foreigners are the ones hiding your opportunity; we just have to rattle them loose”. Point being, the drive to look at them as harmless nerds being corralled by the worst uncle at the “most unprecedented of times” has been incredibly dangerous so far.

They are winning, while lying on their back, and cultivating an image of being simply too stupid to do anything. Can’t imagine why that would be necessary.

@north6: Supporting the military industrial complex is a bipartisan effort. For evidence, see the coverage of pulling troops out of Iraq(which was set by an agreement with Iraq’s government) and how the Republicans claimed the President was surrendering. This is also the same group gutting veteran’s healthcare right now.

The key is to start a war with no clear goal and then kick the can down the road for 20 years, all while leveraging the “Support the Troops” to make sure they have the best, newest equipment over seas and terrible healthcare back home.

@mattimus_prime: Among many things, I find your post to be a little histrionic, but by all means if you're done with the community you shouldn't stay, as it isn't worth it if it makes you unhappy. Without digging too deep into your whataboutisms about advertisement in general (although I agree in many ways particularly regarding college advertisements), I will say that comparison is kind of foolish. Neither college nor any restaurant force you into a 4 to 8 year commitment that you basically cannot get out of without good reason. There are debt considerations to take into account with college, sure, but it's also a service you are paying for, not a commitment you're entering into. With McDonalds, you are saying you want a hamburger, not a hamburger every day over the course of an extended period of time. You also get the hamburger. With college you are saying you want the next level of education as well as sometimes a place to live while partaking in it, and you are free to quit when you want. These are not options with the military, short of going back to school, but that's only under the pretense that you will return to service.

Anyway, I'm not entirely sure why THIS particular thread upset you so much, and I'm not really interested in trying to convince you about my personally perspective on this and why I think these examples are different, just wanted to provide it for context.

I guess since this kind of became a catch all thread for military advertising in video game streams

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/y3z9aj/a-national-guard-twitch-streamer-said-6-million-wasnt-enough-on-stream

Benefit of the doubt, the guy probably was just reading names and not thinking through why you shouldn't. Most of that goes out the window when you read up and see he is kind of a racist shitbag but... yeah

But the last bit of that article likely covers why this seems so different compared to previous advertisement campaigns

It was insidiously easy to get a member of the Army National Guard to repeat antisemitic speech without realizing it. It was also easy for a Guardsman like Torres—who has posted on his Facebook page about how welfare is destroying black families and shares misinformation about LGBTQ people—to become the face of the military.

Generally when we see military adverts they are highly polished and produced clips of navy seals storming a beach or people hugging kids and going to school and blah blah blah. It builds up the image of this being a heroic endeavor that will give you a career.

Similarly, when we see it in movies it is ridiculously handsome men and women who love the military and are fighting against evil terrorists and space aliens.

But once you take away that scripting and production it highlights the people aspect and it is a lot harder to sand off the rough edges. Whether the vast majority of the military are racist shitbags who take pride in war crimes is a very different discussion. But it is so easy for the ones that are to become the face of the org in the same way that Gamers are the face of gaming.

This guy didn't just happen to be the recruiter by chance. He was chosen to be and that's with all his racists sentiments known.

I agree with your post overall but I just think you're letting him and them off the hook a little too much even. Him being chosen is a sign of rot in those above.

@plan6:Of course. People are so partisan today though in a way that can be exploited so easily, that a seemingly obvious conclusion to ending the war with garbage public support in Afghanistan and complete pulling troops out is suspect because of a natural refusal to support anything Trump wants. You could make the same argument in reverse 8 years ago, or 20 when Bush started it, but its out of control right now. The news / war machine that props up the incredibly flimsy recurring russian bounties / trump cemetery stories in response to the pullout are exhausting, transparent, and embarrassing to watch. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, just give him the W.

@gundato: The idea that the military doesn't have the right to advertise is interesting, and seems to run counter to the idea of a voluntary military. I'd suspect that the obvious repercussion is the eventual need for a draft again, or some sort of mandatory service. Would people be more happy with that? - edit, reread your post and it doesn't seem like you're arguing against military advertising, but the way this thread reads it seems like a good deal of people are against it, so i'll leave this here.

I don't understand the connection between if there is no advertising then there must be mandatory service or a draft again. Especially in this era we live in where the general response to military service is genuflecting. It seems entirely possible for the military to offer reasonable outlines of what service both can cost and what it offers. It is a long commitment, you will be paid this amount, these are the expectations, etc...to me, there is a large gulf between what the military does, which is basically propaganda, and what an average job listing does.

It boils down to, if military service is so great, they won't have to advertise it. We don't need to act like the military isn't perhaps the most ubiquitous thing in the US outside of religion.

@north6: The problem is that I'm more politically informed than most people by this magical thing called reading. So know that saying "We are leaving the Afghanistan by election day" is A: likely not true and B: conflicts with information coming from diplomats. And not for nothing, the peace agreement that is being signed likely won't hold or is just a farce. But I fully expect the President to lie about the peace deal he worked out that no one else could do while the Taliban and Afghan Government shoot at each other.

So I don't want troops to remain, but I also don't want them to leave the area in violent conflict while yelling "Mission Accomplished" as an election stunt. Both of those things are bad. Just like pulling troops out of Germany, our ally of 70 years, because he doesn't like Angela Merkel is bad. So no, I don't need to give him the win, because it isn't a win. Its just a different flavor of losing.

Also, he fucking threatens Iran all the time, just like every other trash politician who wants too appear tough.