3 ms·

I don't see any way they could have addressed that without the hysteria still spinning it negatively. Because it's not like they mention that out of nowhere: T

I don't see any way they could have addressed that without the hysteria still spinning it negatively. Because it's not like they mention that out of nowhere: They are directly referring to accusations that they were pressured into shutting that particular player down by the Chinese government. There's a whole lot of people out there who will not be satisfied with any answer contradicting that narrative. Heck, even if Blizzard went out there and would fully admit "The Chinese government pressured us to shut this particular player down", then people would complain how Blizzard could ever buckle to those demands in the first place. The reality is that nobody needed to pressure Blizzard because its competitive scene has already seen quite a number of bans, some controversial, many not, over players using the spotlight to share their particular political messages. It's nothing new and just like they explain in the statement: They do this regardless of the political views being aired, they just consider it not a platform for that. Very comparable to how the Olympics are supposed to be an "unpolitical event", at least in theory.

PudgePacket 7y ago
> I don't see any way they could have addressed that without the hysteria still spinning it negatively. > There's a whole lot of people out there who will not be satisfied with any answer contradicting that narrative. > Heck, even if Blizzard went out there and would fully admit "The Chinese government pressured us to shut this particular player down", then people would complain how Blizzard could ever buckle to those demands in the first place. Exactly. They did a shit thing and now there's shit on their face, of course it's going to be a negative outcome. There isn't always magic words they can say to make everything better again.
wpietri 7y ago
Blizzard's construction of "unpolitical" is itself very political. The notion that people should hide who they are and what matters to them except as it's compatible with profit maximization is stridently political. Ditto the notion that even if people are killed six inches outside the venue for political reasons, everybody inside the venue should pretend everything's fine. I do give points to Blizzard for the amount of Orwellian doublespeak here. They were just compelled to punish and deplatform because of their values of "Thinking Globally, Leading Responsibly, and Every Voice Matters!" Certainly nothing political about that!
- freeflight 7y ago
  > The notion that people should hide who they are and what matters to them except as it's compatible with profit maximization is stridently political. Yet that's exactly what most major publishers have been doing with their crackdown on toxicity. We've created these "safe spaces" where anything that could be interpreted as even remotely controversial is off-limits and ban-worthy because profit maximation is the only actual goal for a company like Blizzard.
ethbro 7y ago
> Heck, even if Blizzard went out there and would fully admit "The Chinese government pressured us to shut this particular player down", then people would complain how Blizzard could ever buckle to those demands in the first place. No. There are two fan axes here: agreement and respect. Companies (and your comment) seem to focus on the former, while being completely oblivious to the latter. If Blizzard had said "Our Chinese economic interests pressured us into doing this" they would have faced intense disagreement. But, they would have retained as least a modicum of respect. Instead, they forfeited both. And really? Putting out equivocal PR fluff in response to an issue in 2019? Activision-Blizzard's entire Communications department should be sacked.
- freeflight 7y ago
  > Instead, they forfeited both. How did they forfeit both? Do we have any evidence for Blizzard being pressured do this? We absolutely have not, all we have is a bunch of social-media hysteria were this claim originally came from, in complete ignorance of the fact that Blizzard has banned plenty of pro-players before for voicing "negative speech" [0]. In that context your response is exactly what I was referring to: People are not interested in what actually happened, people only want to hear what they THINK happened, even if there's zilch evidence backing it up and it never actually happened. Again: What evidence is there that Blizzard was pressured into doing this and as such debunking their reaction as a straight-faced lie? There is none, while there's a long list of other competitive players who've been banned for exactly the same reason. I do not even understand why this is so controversial on HN out of all places. This whole comment section reads like Reddit, lots of appeals to emotions, very little sticking to the facts at hand. [0] https://liquipedia.net/overwatch/Banned_players https://liquipedia.net/overwatch/Banned_players
  - ethbro 7y ago
    You're taking a company's statement, that avoids any mention of money, economic interests, or China, at face value? I hear your point, but what would a smoking gun look like? An email or recorded conversation from the CCP about the actions they would take if Blizzard didn't keep the ban in place? That positive confirmation bar seems unreasonably high.
mirimir 7y ago
> The reality is that nobody needed to pressure Blizzard because its competitive scene has already seen quite a number of bans, some controversial, many not, over players using the spotlight to share their particular political messages. Please share some examples. I vaguely recall stuff over the years about the Olympics. But I don't follow gaming.
- freeflight 7y ago
  A list for Overwatch can be found here [0]. They've banned people for "unsportsmanlike conduct" and "negative speech", as a separate thing from "toxcitiy" [1] which they have been trying to clamp down heavily on for years now, like most major publishers. As somebody following gaming, this has much more to do with "safe space" culture than Blizzard being pressured to do anything by external actors. These are massive corporations, they do not need an external force pushing them to keep everything they do as "uncontroversial" as possible. Having your sponsored event be the spotlight for political statements is the exact opposite of that. Something too many people here completely ignore because they happen to agree with that particular political statement. But I doubt these same people would support similar freedom of speech, in that situation, if a player used their spotlight to prostylze for a religion, or tell the world about their personal views on things like homosexuality. [0] https://liquipedia.net/overwatch/Banned_players https://liquipedia.net/overwatch/Banned_players [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2018/01/29/blizzard-courts-controversy-with-new-overwatch-anti-toxicity-measures/#335a8c43ad6b https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2018/01/29/blizzard-co...

PudgePacket 7y ago

> I don't see any way they could have addressed that without the hysteria still spinning it negatively. > There's a whole lot of people out there who will not be satisfied with any answer contradicting that narrative. > Heck, even if Blizzard went out there and would fully admit "The Chinese government pressured us to shut this particular player down", then people would complain how Blizzard could ever buckle to those demands in the first place. Exactly. They did a shit thing and now there's shit on their face, of course it's going to be a negative outcome. There isn't always magic words they can say to make everything better again.

wpietri 7y ago

Blizzard's construction of "unpolitical" is itself very political. The notion that people should hide who they are and what matters to them except as it's compatible with profit maximization is stridently political. Ditto the notion that even if people are killed six inches outside the venue for political reasons, everybody inside the venue should pretend everything's fine. I do give points to Blizzard for the amount of Orwellian doublespeak here. They were just compelled to punish and deplatform because of their values of "Thinking Globally, Leading Responsibly, and Every Voice Matters!" Certainly nothing political about that!

freeflight 7y ago
> The notion that people should hide who they are and what matters to them except as it's compatible with profit maximization is stridently political. Yet that's exactly what most major publishers have been doing with their crackdown on toxicity. We've created these "safe spaces" where anything that could be interpreted as even remotely controversial is off-limits and ban-worthy because profit maximation is the only actual goal for a company like Blizzard.

ethbro 7y ago

> Heck, even if Blizzard went out there and would fully admit "The Chinese government pressured us to shut this particular player down", then people would complain how Blizzard could ever buckle to those demands in the first place. No. There are two fan axes here: agreement and respect. Companies (and your comment) seem to focus on the former, while being completely oblivious to the latter. If Blizzard had said "Our Chinese economic interests pressured us into doing this" they would have faced intense disagreement. But, they would have retained as least a modicum of respect. Instead, they forfeited both. And really? Putting out equivocal PR fluff in response to an issue in 2019? Activision-Blizzard's entire Communications department should be sacked.

freeflight 7y ago
> Instead, they forfeited both. How did they forfeit both? Do we have any evidence for Blizzard being pressured do this? We absolutely have not, all we have is a bunch of social-media hysteria were this claim originally came from, in complete ignorance of the fact that Blizzard has banned plenty of pro-players before for voicing "negative speech" [0]. In that context your response is exactly what I was referring to: People are not interested in what actually happened, people only want to hear what they THINK happened, even if there's zilch evidence backing it up and it never actually happened. Again: What evidence is there that Blizzard was pressured into doing this and as such debunking their reaction as a straight-faced lie? There is none, while there's a long list of other competitive players who've been banned for exactly the same reason. I do not even understand why this is so controversial on HN out of all places. This whole comment section reads like Reddit, lots of appeals to emotions, very little sticking to the facts at hand. [0] https://liquipedia.net/overwatch/Banned_players https://liquipedia.net/overwatch/Banned_players
- ethbro 7y ago
  You're taking a company's statement, that avoids any mention of money, economic interests, or China, at face value? I hear your point, but what would a smoking gun look like? An email or recorded conversation from the CCP about the actions they would take if Blizzard didn't keep the ban in place? That positive confirmation bar seems unreasonably high.

mirimir 7y ago

> The reality is that nobody needed to pressure Blizzard because its competitive scene has already seen quite a number of bans, some controversial, many not, over players using the spotlight to share their particular political messages. Please share some examples. I vaguely recall stuff over the years about the Olympics. But I don't follow gaming.

freeflight 7y ago
A list for Overwatch can be found here [0]. They've banned people for "unsportsmanlike conduct" and "negative speech", as a separate thing from "toxcitiy" [1] which they have been trying to clamp down heavily on for years now, like most major publishers. As somebody following gaming, this has much more to do with "safe space" culture than Blizzard being pressured to do anything by external actors. These are massive corporations, they do not need an external force pushing them to keep everything they do as "uncontroversial" as possible. Having your sponsored event be the spotlight for political statements is the exact opposite of that. Something too many people here completely ignore because they happen to agree with that particular political statement. But I doubt these same people would support similar freedom of speech, in that situation, if a player used their spotlight to prostylze for a religion, or tell the world about their personal views on things like homosexuality. [0] https://liquipedia.net/overwatch/Banned_players https://liquipedia.net/overwatch/Banned_players [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2018/01/29/blizzard-courts-controversy-with-new-overwatch-anti-toxicity-measures/#335a8c43ad6b https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2018/01/29/blizzard-co...