Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
and here's their full ESG report: https://media.foxcorporation.com/wp-content/uploads/prod/2023/08/23105847/FOX-CSR-Report-2023.pdf
Those woke monsters at Fox News are putting gay characters in our news reports.
I've never understood how a company like Activision Blizzard can be considered "safe for investment" while running the company like a rape den.
That's the secret of ESG, provided you generate all the right reports (Governance) and aren't making a product on the banned list (weapons, alcohol or gambling) you can get away with almost anything. "As you can see here on our chart, the number of rape dens dropped by almost 30% this year."
The suggestion that ESG is forcing gay video game characters is absurd when it can't even force companies to stop abusing their staff.
Ed: I am starting to come around to the idea that companies are using 'wokeness' like an shield to cover up their bad decisions. "Oh ♥♥♥♥, we made yet another a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ live service clone. Jam it full of pride flags and we'll blame the anti-woke scolds when it fails catastrophically."
That's exactly what it is. And when someone like me, who's LGBT but hates bad games, dunks on it, apparently I'm a "traitor". Call me crazy, but I don't see how whizzing on the Flash's corpse is "safe for investment".
Well, I promise you no one from Blackrock cares or even knows which corpses are being whizzed on. There's no section of the report for that.
Trying to make ESG the bogeyman rather than the sharemarket and capitalism more generally is missing the forest for the trees. Cyberpunk 2077 got pushed out in a buggy state because missing another release date would have caused a share price collapse which might have crushed the company (through margin calls on collatoralised loans).
As soon as you realise that 'shareholder reputation' is the only product they care about, you see it everywhere. This game is a superhero game because that reads better in a press release, that's the whole reason.
I wonder if shareholder capitalism genuinely makes it so that "engagement metrics" are actually more profitable to companies than sales. Like, can a game sell few copies but still be considered a success if companies like Blackrock invest in it?
That's what I'm confused enough. Is the investment from companies like Blackrock large enough that it doesn't actually matter whether a game succeeds or fails? Does the size of the ESG investment for Suicide Squad exceed the gross profits of a game like Elden Ring?
Sent a few friend requests, of course feel free to ignore (I respect that).
Every DIE product has failed thus far. But they keep pushing it.
See everyone found out managed mutual funds are a bad investment idea, and started investing in index funds.
They needed something to scam people with again, so that they can charge commission on investments.
Then the whole climate of US started to swing, and they grabbed the opportunity to create a new scam. They actually do not care about DIE or ESG, otherwise petrol oil companies won't have the highest score. They care that people, retirees, buy into this scam, and invest on ESG, and they can get their commission.
but everyone knows what it means