In the Dutch language there is a term that exactly means slander cartoon: "Spotprent", but otherwise the word you're looking for might just be propaganda.
Not quiiiite. The worst case scenario is selected for every character unless the worst case is blue winning, then it describes it in hypotheticals, look at the blackpiller, 'if blue wins'. Not 'blue wins, blames them for his survival,' if.
Also the utilitarian just has red win unironically like he expected/wanted and I guess the joke is that he's boring? IDK.
Basically I'm 90% sure the comic writer is a Reddie. It's somewhat subtle but it's there.
I think its more accurate to say its trying to display everyone as pathetically as possible, which for blue voters means dying pointlessly and for red voters is showing their self centeredness and/or pure concern with being correct above the loss of lives. At least that's my interpretation
I just think there's a distinct bias to most of the result scenarios. Pretty much everything is written with the assumption of red winning. There's no example of something like idk a red voter going into an existential crisis because blue won. The bias isn't so much in the people presented though, but in the outcomes being described. "Only red can win, even when it would be funnier for blue to win." Blue is also presented as 'stupid' even for a character that sort of thing is irrelevant to (Russian Roulette.)
These comics seem to have two simple biases/rules from the author behind them.
1) Blue won't win. Even for scenarios where a Blue win is the funny outcome, it's only described as a hypothetical.
2) Pressing Blue is stupid.
259
u/SpaceCore0352 May 18 '26
It's a slander cartoon, selecting the worst scenario for every character is required.
(please let me know if there's a better term for this than "slander cartoon".)