The number of falsehoods promoted by Fox News could fill a book…nay, they could easily comprise a leather-bound volume of Encyclopedia Britannica. The hyperbolic cable outlet knows as much about video games as I do about women…which is to say, not much. So, it’s no surprise that FNC’s coverage of the National Endowment for the Arts’ 2012 Arts in Media Guidelines (which include video games for the first time) would be uninformed, shallow, and bombastic.

The “Fair and Balanced” debate starts out with a doozie as the host mindlessly ponders, “Should the video game Call of Duty get federal funding?” A cursory examination of the NEA’s 2012 Guidelines renders that question irrelevant, but FNC never lets facts get in the way of hyperbole. The guests included Brian Ambrozy (Editor-in-Chief of icrontic.com and the sacrificial lamb of this discussion), and Neal Asbury (radio talk show host), who believes that video games steal taxpayer dollars from war orphans and murder puppies (I paraphrase, of course). To his credit, Ambrozy remained calm, addressed each point logically, and acquitted himself admirably. Asbury equated video games with genocide and global famine (again, I paraphrase).

The NEA 2012 Arts in Media Guidelines allows for “digital games” with one major addendum:

“Eligible applicants are nonprofit, tax-exempt 501(c)(3), U.S. organizations; units of state or local government; or federally recognized tribal communities or tribes.”

In other words, the games featured in the report -- COD: Black Ops, Super Mario Bros., and Super Street Fighter 4 3D -- wouldn’t be eligible. The vast majority of what we refer to as “video games” wouldn't qualify either. As Ambrozy points out, the eligible recipients would mainly be indy developers who are creating low-budget educational titles -- lest we forget, $10,000 - $200,000 (the amount per recipient) does not a blockbuster make. Commercial developers also do not spend tens of millions of dollars without expecting a return on their investment.

The report devolves into a wider fiscal debate (actually, more like a one-sided diatribe, as Ambrozy clearly wasn’t representing the Republican or Democrat party line). I wouldn’t call it a true debate, however, because Ambrozy and Asbury weren’t speaking the same language. Ambrozy clarified the NEA FY 2012 Arts in Media Guidelines, while Asbury turned the “games as art” debate into a critique of President Obama’s fiscal policies. There was simply no common ground to build upon.

If Fox News wanted to strengthen their case, they could’ve cited America’s Army, which was also funded with taxpayer dollars (and at far greater expense than NEA grants). AA was to serve as a promotional device, but its impact on recruitment figures was circumstantial at best.

Moreover, there are legitimate concerns about funding artistic endeavors with taxpayer dollars and federal interference in the private sector (which is totally irrelevant in this case). But Fox News adds little to the debate when they suggest that controversial titles like COD: Black Ops are eligible for federal funding. They do the opposite: promote idiocy.

This is hardly the first time that Fox News has propagated ignorance. We’re all familiar with their special reports on Mass Effect (i.e. “frontal nudity and explicit depictions of sexual activity”) and Bulletstorm (i.e. “The increase in rapes can be attributed in large part to the playing out of [sexual] scenes in video games”). I love political debates as much as the next guy, but when my opponent can’t get basic facts straight (or even make the attempt), his opinions are irrelevant.