This week on the Pixel Street Podcast:
John gives his review of Pokemon Sword and Shield while Connor and Joel give their thoughts on Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order. We also predict the winners of each categories from The Game Awards as well as discuss Google Stadia’s poor launch.
Be sure to follow @pixelstreetpod on Twitter and let us know what you think of the show!
Elon Musk unveiled the latest electric vehicle option from Tesla on Thursday night – the Cybertruck. It looks like something straight from a futuristic sci-fi film, a la Bladerunner, and Musk (in classic Musk fashion) has already said he doesn’t care whether people like it or not.
How is the new electric truck line from Tesla being received in the media?
Here’s how it’s being covered by journalists since the announcement:
Hot takes as opinion cools on Tesla Cybertruck
Tesla Cybertruck will have solar roof option to add 15 miles of ranger per day
We have five questions about Tesla’s Cybertruck
Tesla Cybertruck Impressions & First Drive – Video by Marques Brownlee
Between the tank-like design, kind-of-maybe shatterproof glass, and options to extend range and uses it seems like a fairly cool futuristic vehicle option on the market.
Here are the specs for the Single Motor RWD model:
| 0-60 MPH | <6.5 SECONDS |
| RANGE | 250+ MILES |
| DRIVETRAIN | REAR-WHEEL DRIVE |
| STORAGE | 100 FT3 |
| VAULT LENGTH | 6.5 FT |
| TOWING CAPACITY | 7,500+ LBS |
| AUTOPILOT | STANDARD |
| ADAPTIVE AIR SUSPENSION | STANDARD |
| GROUND CLEARANCE | UP TO 16″ |
| APPROACH ANGLE | 35 DEGREES |
| DEPARTURE ANGLE | 28 DEGREES |
The New York Mets and general manager Brodie Van Wagenen flirted seriously with trading Noah Syndergaard at the July 31 trade deadline. With the club floundering at three games below .500, out of the race for the National League East and behind several teams for a Wild Card spot, part of a moderate teardown with an eye toward contending in 2020 was listening to offers for Syndergaard and Zack Wheeler.
Taking offers for Wheeler, a pending free agent, made sense. Syndergaard was more complicated. A reasonable question to ask was why the Mets, hoping to contend and with a 27-year-old power arm under team control for two more seasons, would even think about trading Syndergaard. A simple explanation is that he would yield the biggest return based on those very factors. Still, it’s understandable to stop and wonder if there are underlying issues that teams would not see until they unwrap the box to play with their shiny new toy.
Rather than trade anyone other than the superfluous (Jason Vargas), the Mets instead chose to add by acquiring Marcus Stroman from the Toronto Blue Jays. With the very real prospect of losing Wheeler, a Syndergaard trade left them with not one but two giant holes to fill in their starting rotation for 2020.
For the Mets and Syndergaard, it’s not as simple as one answer as to why they’ve headed in this direction. There is a combination of factors that made him available to begin with and led to the Mets, according to a Van Wagenen pronouncement that he would not be traded, ultimately deciding to retain him for 2020.
The free agent market for starting pitchers is relatively flush, but the Mets’ holes are many and given the contracts already on the books, their financial wiggle room is limited. Unless a team caved to their demands – think Forrest Whitley and Kyle Tucker from the Houston Astros – it made precious little sense to deal Syndergaard. Had they signed Wheeler to an extension at the deadline as they tried to do, either they would not have traded for Stroman or they would have traded Syndergaard, likely the latter.
Syndergaard can be a handful. He speaks his mind. He is out and about in New York City, enjoying the attention he attracts with his 6’6” frame and long blonde mane. On the field, it’s not as obvious that his ceiling is as limitless as was once believed. He surrenders an inordinate number of hits for a pitcher with his power arsenal; his command has been lacking; and his complaints about Wilson Ramos’ framing skills and overall defense sounded eerily close to blaming everyone – Ramos, the organization for pairing him with Ramos, the tightly wound baseballs – other than himself.
In the positive category, FanGraphs has the average velocity of his fastball at 97.7 mph; the rise in home runs and reduction in velocity and movement on his slider could easily have been attributed to the changes to the baseball itself; and he did come within 2.1 innings of reaching 200 for the first time in his career.
Obviously, the relationship had reached a nadir as the Mets listened to trade offers. It was leaked that Syndergaard was unhappy with Ramos’ defense and the Mets paired him with Ramos anyway. Now, with the Mets telling teams he’s no longer available, clearly the sides came together and reached a détente for the foreseeable future. Regardless of all other considerations, with the still unsettled situation of Wheeler and the reality that the Mets are not signing Gerrit Cole, Stephen Strasburg, Madison Bumgarner or any of the big names from other teams, they need Syndergaard’s innings even if they’re attached to 2019’s up and down performance. Unless a comparable pitcher was coming back in the Syndergaard trade as well as top-tier prospects to sweeten it, how can they trade him and sell an idea that they’re trying to win in 2020 or that it’s best for the organization to deal him?
For Syndergaard’s part, a trade could benefit him if he’s sent to the right place as Cole was. But Cole might have remained the enigmatic and frustrating entity he was at the tail end of his tenure with the Pirates had he been traded to the Yankees instead of the Astros. Now, after two masterful seasons in Houston, Cole is set to receive between $35 million and $40 million annually. Syndergaard knows that. There is a chance, however, that if the Mets trade him, he could wind up in a locale that is unappealing to him professionally and boring personally. A bored Syndergaard could cause more trouble than he’s worth.
For the benefit of the club and the player, they are staying together in a marriage of convenience. Each can get what they want and then amicably split when the time comes. It’s the logical conclusion and best for all parties if they stick to that script, which by statement and action, they appear primed to do.
Ambassador Gordon Sondland gave his updated testimony for the impeachment inquiry today and said that he ‘followed the president’s orders’ in Ukraine. Ambassador Sondland’s testimony called into question the President’s defense of his ‘perfect’ call with the Ukrainian president.
Here is what other news outlets are saying:
Trump: ‘If This Were a Prizefight, They’d Stop It!’
Ambassador Sondland says he ‘followed the president’s orders’ in Ukraine
Judge Napolitano: Sondland ‘Most Compelling’ Yet
EU ambassador testifies there was a quid pro quo in impeachment investigation
Here’s a snapshot of which news outlets are covering Ambassador Gordon Sondland and his testimony the most over the previous 90 days.
Pokémon Sword and Shield are the first mainline games in the series available on a home console. Pokémon is right at home on the Nintendo Switch. Last year’s Let’s Go Pikachu and Eevee were decent games for casual fans, but people have been eagerly waiting for a chance to get that core Pokémon experience the franchise is famous for.
Pokémon Sword and Shield do a good job of delivering that classic gameplay with a few thoughtful revisions. It would have been nice to see them try some additional new things, but this still ends up being one of the best Pokémon games made yet.
For what feels like the first time in my life, Pokémon has some controversy surrounding it. The controversy stems from quality concerns and the lack of being able to transfer national Pokémon to your game.
Starting with the national Pokémon issue first, I have personally never taken advantage of that function in the past. I always like going into Pokémon games to build up my team from that game. I acknowledge that this prevents people from playing with their favorite Pokémon from the past, but I think the new selection of monsters added to the game more than makes up for the missing feature. I constantly was finding new Pokémon I wanted to add to my party. There were always good choices in the wild that would better my team. The Galar Pokédex is filled with great choices that should keep you continually invested in changing your team out. It did for me, at least.
Now for the quality concerns. At E3 this year, one of the reasons given for the lack of national Pokémon was that Game Freak could not fit in all the updated designs and animations and have the game come out on time. Outraged fans have also pointed to graphics not being up to par and performance issues.
As for the designs and animations, I would have liked to see a step forward towards a definitive home console experience. Of course, the Switch is not the most powerful thing in the world, but the dev team could have spent more time at least making battles more cinematic. There are a few examples where they went above and beyond, but they’re far and in-between.
Graphically, the game looks like a Pokémon game. This is disappointing because Sword and Shield do not feel like they have left behind their mobile days in this way. I wonder how much effort it would take to get this game running on a 3DS. Don’t get me wrong, the games look fine. That is what is disappointing. Graphically, the 8th generation does not stand out from what came before it. However, the Galar region might be my favorite region yet. The England inspiration is very apparent, and I think they pulled off the look, and it feels brilliant.
People were looking for the first Pokémon games on a home console to take the series to new heights like Breath of the Wild did for Legend of Zelda, and it does not do that. While I do not agree with all the hate Game Freak has received lately, I do notice where they could have put more effort into making Sword and Shield stand out. As they are now, they are interchangeable with other Pokémon games from a design and performance standpoint.
One of the best things the 8th generation of Pokémon has done is to make a streamlined experience of past annoyances in the series.
HMs once again are not in the game, which is still one of the best moves Game Freak ever made. You can also access your Box of stored Pokémon at any time, and pressing the “X” button in wild encounters will bring up your Pokéballs instantly. Sword and Shield have the best set-up for their controls and features.
Wild Pokémon have also never been handled better in the series. The best thing to come from Let’s Go Pikachu and Eevee was wild Pokémon appearing in the world. That returns here with a combination of wild encounters. When walking through tall grass, an exclamation point will pop up. If you decide you don’t want to have a random encounter, you can walk around it. If you do want the battle, just walk into it. It’s simple and works brilliantly for whatever mood you are in while not sacrificing the way the world feels better populated with Pokémon living in the world.
One of the things I enjoyed most is flying to towns doesn’t have an animation that pops up every time you do it. The game mentions that Corviknight taxi you around and the only indication of that is a short loading screen. Selecting a town to travel to in the past, and seeing the same scene countless times was always annoying. For having as many questions as they do above, Pokémon Sword and Shield are the best games in the series for traversing the world and stand above and beyond what came before them from that standpoint.
Finally, we can start talking about the new features of this generation of Pokémon. Dynamaxing is the process of turning your Pokémon into giant forms of themselves. Every Pokémon can be dynamaxed, but only once per battle and only for three turns. What it does is buff your Pokémon to be stronger and have new moves depending on the types of moves they currently know.
At first, these moves look awesome and are very powerful. After using them just a few times, though, you realize how limited dynamaxing is. There is one move for each type in the game, and they lose their luster quick. They are very powerful and influence the field or the stats of the Pokémon, but outside of that I struggle to find a way that Dynamax was a proper replacement for mega evolutions.
A select few Pokémon can change their design when they Dynamax. This is called Gigantamaxing. Outside of the design change, nothing is separate from another Pokémon going Dynamax. The same moves are used, and stat changes are the same. While it is cool seeing Pikachu’s original design come back for this function, it largely feels more like a gimmick than a feature to build a game off of.
As you travel throughout Galar, you will encounter many people talking about Dynamax as a part of the region’s culture. It is routinely hit over your head, and every gym battle features it, but at the end of the day, it does not feel special.
Galar, for the most part, is set up like past regions. It remains a linear experience as you travel north and progress through gyms on your way to becoming champion. What is different is a section mixed into the different towns called the Wild Area. This area is filled with Pokémon, Dynamax Raid battles, and other trainers if you are connected to the internet.
Raid battles have you team up with three others and battle a Dynamax Pokémon. If you can defeat the Pokémon before ten turns or it makes your team’s Pokémon faint four times you will be able to catch it. I do not believe it is possible to miss when you beat it.
I found the raid battles to be a lot of fun and helpful with building my party with powerful Pokémon. Unfortunately, Nintendo’s struggles with online play carry over here. It was difficult to find a full team to go into the battles every time. Either I was disconnected from the others, or I would go into battles with AI teammates. While it is nice having the game fill my team, too many times I had bad Pokémon AI to fight alongside me. For example, Wobbuffet is not a good raid Pokémon because it is a reactionary fighter. Jolteon, who is an electric type, being chosen to go up against a ground type Pokémon also leaves you at a stark disadvantage. Going into raid battles with AI seems to be a flip of the coin.
Outside of raids, Pokémon are everywhere in the wild area. The beautiful thing about these Pokémon is they will change out along with the weather. One moment you can find bug Pokémon in a certain area, and when you return later, something completely different could be in its place with a thunderstorm changing the battle itself. If you want to fill out your Pokédex, the wild area is the best spot to explore.
However, spending time in the wild area has limited reliability before you reach the endgame. As you progress, you will find powerful Pokémon in the wild area who are on main paths. They are removed from others in the grass to stand out. Until you have all of the badges, there will be Pokémon at a certain level you cannot catch. This inclusion is the worst update to the game. I would hit moments where a Pokémon I had on my team was a higher level than the one I was battling, and I couldn’t catch it. For example, my Cinderace was level 42 as I was fighting a level 40 Machoke. The game refused to let me catch it until I went and got the next badge. I understand them trying to hold off you catching overpowered Pokémon concerning your current gym level, but if my Pokémon are already surpassing that, you should allow me to catch it.
My final point I want to bring up here is synonymous with Pokémon anymore. Pokémon Sword and Shield are incredibly easy. Throughout my 25+ hours of game time, I did not lose one single battle and only got close to losing in the championship match and once in the endgame. I understand Pokémon is made for children first, so it will always be an easier experience, but I think the game could benefit from adding in a new difficulty mode. Something where opposing trainers have higher level Pokémon or damage is decreased. Too many times my battles came down to one hit KO’s.
In conclusion, Pokémon Sword and Shield do not stand out apart from other entries in the series, but still, deliver one of the best experiences yet in the franchise. If you can get by the early controversy from disgruntled fans, you will truly enjoy yourself. It is a Pokémon game on a home console that you can take anywhere. That novelty alone makes it worth purchasing. It fits perfectly on the Switch and is a must-buy for any Nintendo fan that is looking for that end of the year blockbuster game to spend their time on.
This week on the Pixel Street Podcast:
John and Connor discuss the reviews and controversy surrounding Pokemon Sword and Shield, the Sonic the Hedgehog movie redesign, and their first impressions while using the Disney+ streaming service.
Be sure to follow @pixelstreetpod on Twitter and let us know what you think of the show!
The impeachment inquiry of President Trump has gone from the private hearings phase to the open hearings phase before the House Intelligence Committee. These public hearings are taking place Wednesday, November 12, and Friday, November 15.
Democrats have been investigating whether President Trump abused his power by placing his own personal interests above the national security interests of the United States. This all stems from his communications with the Ukrainian president.
Here are the names most commonly being mentioned by the top 100+ news outlets over the previous 90 days. 
You can click on each name in the table below to be taken to the media coverage page for each person.
| Person | # Mentions Previous 90 Days |
| president trump | 275 |
| adam schiff | 102 |
| john bolton | 89 |
| rick perry | 72 |
| mick mulvaney | 69 |
| nancy pelosi | 61 |
| joe biden | 54 |
| lindsey graham | 52 |
| rudy giuliani | 51 |
| gordon sondland | 47 |
| ivanka trump | 42 |
| bill taylor | 42 |
| elijah cummings | 37 |
| trey gowdy | 27 |
| jim jordan | 23 |
| mitch mcconnell | 23 |
| william taylor | 20 |
| fiona hill | 19 |
| zelensky | 19 |
| bill clinton | 18 |
| mike pence | 18 |
| rand paul | 17 |
| marie yovanovitch | 17 |
| newt gingrich | 16 |
| matt gaetz | 16 |
| liz cheney | 16 |
| kurt volker | 15 |
Given the recent death of ISIS leader Abu al-Baghadi by American forces it would stand to reason plenty of publications would cover that. But, to have RT and other non-U.S. news publications covering ‘terrorism’ more frequently and with more depth than American media – it just seems unexpected.
America has been fighting its global ‘War on Terror’ for nearly 20 years now, having launched its Global War on Terrorism campaign after the September 11 attacks. Yet, when it comes to media coverage of terrorism at large, American media seems to really miss the mark. Both in terms of coverage and the depth of that coverage.
Here’s a look at the English-speaking media outlets across the world and their frequency of coverage on “terrorism” over the previous 90 days.
There are literally two American publications ranked sixth and eighth, respectively, and an American-run conspiracy and fake news site between them.
Do we, warriors of freedom and fighters of global terrorism, not find value in reporting as heavily on the threat of global terrorism as our counterparts across the Atlantic Ocean?
Based on 2017 data, there were a total of 10,900 terrorist-related incidents across the globe. Just 65 of those incidents occurred within the United States – accounting for just over half of one percent of all incidents. Of the 26,445 reported deaths due to terrorist incidents that year there were 95 deaths in the United States linked to terrorist incidents. Accounting for an even smaller share of the havoc wreaked at 0.36%.
Since RT has been leading the volume of coverage on terrorism for the past 90 days we’ll use them as a comparison. Russia, in 2017, experienced 33 terrorism incidents and 61 deaths.
How is it that the leading Russian news site RT has shown a more consistent interest and willingness to cover terrorism than American news outlets?
Is terrorism too scary for Americans? Are we simply tired of perpetual war and tune out media coverage of it – and in doing so American news outlets just don’t cover it as prominently in the news cycle?
Or, perhaps it’s a result of experiencing a different type of terrorism in the United States versus what Russia likely stares down most days. Most terrorist incidents that occur in the U.S. are of the domestic variety; mass shootings specifically. Russia, on the other hand, has borders surrounded by countries that are a breeding ground for terrorists, terrorist activity, and just terrorism as a way of life.
There’s all of Europe which deals with it’s fair share of terrorism incidents. The Middle East pumps out terrorism like candy on Halloween. Africa has its own thing going on with warlords, unstable governments, and corruption just as badly (if not worse) than the Middle East does.
Maybe the answer to why American news outlets don’t cover terrorism and extremism as prominently as foreign news outlets is because we just don’t care as much as we say we do. Plus, we’re more likely to be killed by a white man with a gun in than we are by a brown man with a bomb strapped to his chest in the United States.
When it comes to politics, there is an irony that resembles the ‘catch 22’ dilemma. How do you attract media attention without a good showing in polls, and how do you reach voters without media coverage?
It appears the 2020 Democratic field, with only 3 months left until the Iowa caucus, have cemented their contenders. Barring a major upset in the early primary elections, or a floor fight at the convention, one of these three candidates will become the democratic nominee for president.
Did you know? Just three candidates represent 74% of the Democratic Caucus.
There has been little fanfare for this crop of presidential candidates, most being lamented for being too establishment or not well enough credentialed. Couple this with a decade marred by hyper-partisan gridlock and you have a recipe for a mundane democratic candidate.
Of the 1,000+ top news publisher we monitored for the Democratic primary field, just 10 represent a majority (55%) of all media consumption. Less surprising is that a large portion of the democrats’ media coverage comes from right-leaning news sources.
Do polls drive the media coverage, or does media coverage drive the polls? That’s a good question for another time…
Former Secretary of State, Senator, and Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has been trending in the news of late. She went from being a minor blip in the daily news cycle to spiking on October 18 – the same day her and Hawaii Congresswoman and Presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard had a heated exchange after journalists interpreted something Clinton said as accusing Gabbard of being a “Russian asset”. That interpretation has since been debunked as Clinton was actually saying that Gabbard was actually a favorite of Republicans right now and they were the ones likely grooming her for an independent run.
That correction took a full week to be issued by multiple major news outlets.
The New York Times ran this correction late Wednesday night:
“An earlier version of this article described incorrectly an element of Hillary Clinton’s recent comments about Representative Tulsi Gabbard. While Mrs. Clinton said that a Democratic presidential candidate was ‘the favorite of the Russians,’ and an aide later confirmed the reference was to Ms. Gabbard, Mrs. Clinton’s remark about the ‘grooming’ of a third-party candidate in the 2020 race was in response to a question about the Republicans’ strategy, not about Russian intervention.”
It makes you wonder if Gabbard would have made the statements about Clinton that she did had the accurate interpretation of Clinton’s words would have been reported.
Since then Gabbard has fought back hard against Clinton, before news outlets ran their correction, and those allegations which haven’t been corroborated or proven to this point. Afterwards, the Clinton hype train began to pick up steam and so did Gabbard’s. In a span of one week Gabbard has stepped up her efforts to focus solely on her presidential campaign by announcing she wasn’t seeking re-election to Congress. In that same period of time Clinton is now being mentioned in the news as having not completely ruled out a 2020 run for president.
As you can see from the media mentions above over the previous 90 days both Gabbard and Clinton received a healthy spike in media coverage on October 18. Since then Clinton has steadily trended back down while Gabbard has continued to remain in the news cycle.
Is that one dust up with the Congresswoman from Hawaii all it takes to get someone like Clinton and Gabbard trending in the news – even if for just one moment? Not necessarily, which is why it’s important to look at which news outlets they are both actively being covered by and why.
Which news publications are the ones providing the most news coverage for Clinton in this short time period?
The top two are heavy right-wing media outlets and the third, Before it’s News, being a source for fake news and conspiracy-peddling.
It makes sense that conservative outlets, in any form, would want to provide media coverage to Clinton if there’s an opportunity to highlight conflict within the democratic party or cast her in a poor light. But, what about more favorable or neutral outlets?
MSNBC has spent so little time covering Clinton compared to other topics that she doesn’t even crack the top 10 most covered topics by the organization. Same thing goes for news orgs such as Huff Post and The Hill.
For Gabbard her major sources of news coverage come from the same top three sources as Clinton. However, she’s clearly more heavily covered by those outlets and other right-leaning outlets.
Gabbard being suggested as a potential “Russian Asset” provides the context around why RT has also covered her. But there are plenty of rumors suggesting Gabbard is going to run as a third-party candidate if she doesn’t secure the democratic nomination. Just as there are rumors suggesting she’s angling for an on-air job with Fox News once her campaign ends.
Given Gabbard’s more independent or moderate-right views on specific issues relative to the mainstream democratic party, it’s really no surprise some of these accusations or rumors persist. It’s also certainly not surprising that specific news outlets would take advantage of moments like these.
What is surprising is this one dust up between her and Clinton, even with Clinton being a prominent figure within the democratic party and American politics, sparked some steady coverage for Gabbard where she wasn’t receiving much at all before.
The main question here is did their exchange of accusations and insults matter enough to provide sustainable momentum for continued media coverage? Or, rather, did specific media entities amplify that first spark and keep the story going, as well as others, because it’s something these few outlets were able to push out to a large enough number of people to sew uncertainty or a bit of drama into democratic politics?
If anything, it at least appears that the overall reach outlets like Fox News, Breitbart, and even online conspiracy sites have can play a dramatic role in shaping our perceptions and opinions. This is only amplified further by how well some are able to leverage social media to reach even more people in the country and push their stories.
With the Russian and Iranian governments making efforts to disrupt our elections and news feeds, along with a host of other foreign powers, there’s also something else American citizens must be mindful of.
Figuring out why our own news by our own domestic media outlets are covering issues and politicians that matter to the general public the way they are. When something begins trending in the news we’re consuming, no matter how short-lived, it’s important for people to be able to easily identify why it’s trending and what that means to them.
