diz

@gtb08: Nice one!

Much respect to Mr Bain. My sincere condolences to those around him. A sad loss indeed to video games journalism and criticism.

I understand your point perfectly and that's why I think I disagree with it. Weren't you trying to discredit my claim too? Surely our claims are different, hence the disagreement. Racial, xenophobic and religious fears were not created by the Trump campaign or those nasty Russians, they preceded it. I can't find the vast swathes of specific material aimed at exploiting fears and building tensions of "white males" pre to post Trump at all. (Take Gamergate as a precursor, for example). I think is your burden to justify your perspective with some evidence (and surely there must be loads of it for your claim to be anywhere near valid), whereas I think you've been hoodwinked by the thing you have little interest in discussing.

Surely your curiosity must be satisfied when you understand that the "liberal" media had a much larger audience share for their rather specific message, which failed to steer the voters in the direction the media were aiming them. I'm repeating myself here. But people don't always take things on trust - they're not all dummies or racists. There is an increasing trend for people to go to alternative news sources to balance the views from mainstream media. It's the Yin to your Yang.

I'm using personal observation. What metrics did you use to make the original point? Preceding nominations wouldn't have gathered any significant public political sympathy for Trump. I was talking about a chilling on debate before the Trump campaign even started.

There is such a thing as the "liberal media"; in terms of the way they present some news and choose not to present other news - ever more editorialised and ever less objective. We may be in different countries but, for example, I can see what gets delivered by the major radio, paper and tv news outlets overseas and at home, since it does often get healthy discussion and criticism online.

I would regard the liberal media of spreading disinformation and suppressing information across all media channels, not only TV, radio and the papers. And these actions are on-going. I would guess Donald Trump fan areas are more popular these days because Donald Trump has a higher public profile than he used to and is appealing to nationalism. It's hard for a debate to be had without one side resorting to lies and insult to ruin their credibility. But that only serves to inform my own judgements, rather than repel me from discussion.

If I can connect the idea that you were begging the question to anything you said, it was to justify my idea that your initial statement could be patronising to Americans, since I'm sure most people would like to think they have discretion.

The increase of poor behaviour and the inability to debate things on the internet precedes USA election nominations.

But if you ignore that, it begs the question of why the traditional "liberal" media were ineffective over a larger reach of population.

I think the Trump explanation is both patronising (to Americans) and naive. I also think it sad that people don't want to engage in debate much any more and either resort to insult, outrage, or withdraw. My belief is that much of this has to do with many western standards of education these days and the way (post 1970's) generations have been increasingly raised under supervision.

How can you determine truth if you don't understand all the perspectives to an argument? How can you determine who's a "troll" unless you feed them? It's best to focus on the argument rather than attack the person anyway. I think it best to challenge poor behaviour, because at least it opens some sort of dialogue.

Are you sure? You know this "Jon" guy probably works for him, or something (- biased!). But I suppose if you'd like Cliff to follow your life advice, it is best not to call him names too, so good decision, probably! (Although remember Cliff worked for Nexon until they pulled his funding).

Sorry, I should have known you were about to drop off.

Good luck in your approach to life!

I wouldn't wish to add to your speculation - I thought I was trying to detract from it: There are a number of reasons why the announcement could have been made too quickly, aside from purposeful nastiness from Cliff Bleszinski. I don't mind about the speculation though; it's just the rather quick presumption of "total piece of s***" and "arrogant c***hood" I was trying to focus on. That, along with my lampooning the faux-rage on behalf someone who's name you couldn't even get right, then the denial that you even did defame Cliff. So I think you have more work to do here, rather than I.