
Blizzard Cancels Overwatch Event - dmitrygr
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-15/blizzard-cancels-overwatch-event-as-it-tries-to-contain-backlash
======
echelon
We need to impose an 80% repatriation tax on any profits earned in China in
order to offset the damages done to our domestic freedom of speech.

China should not be able to control society outside of its own walls, yet they
have blatantly influenced the behavior of our biggest mass media companies for
years.

To be fair, they've done an outstanding job of it. They fund a huge number of
film productions. They've bought out our cinema chains and gaming companies.
All the while we never once see China portrayed as an enemy.

Games are not permitted to promote LGBT acceptance. Films sometimes bend
backwards to include China as a strong and moral ally. These aren't just one-
sided impacts of the Great Firewall - China is directly altering the media we
create domestically. They're changing the world narrative to enhance their
reputation and take power from their enemies. They'll happily fund films that
are critical of American history (and even if that's justified, it's terribly
one-sided).

And now what was once simply a chilling effect on what types of media could be
created has now manifested as proactive enforcement of China's will. How long
will it be before China can force westerners it disagrees with out of their
jobs? We never imagined something like Blizzard's treatment of Blitzchung
would be possible, yet now we're beginning to see how deep China's political
tentacles reach.

We have to stop this.

Tax companies doing business in China.

Disincentivize this blatant attack on of our freedom of speech. Don't let
China change our cultural zeitgeist.

Tax any and all domestic profits coming from China. Heavily.

~~~
moksly
> They've bought out our cinema chains and gaming companies. All the while we
> never once see China portrayed as an enemy.

I agree with most of what you say, but as a Dane who grew up watching
Hollywood movies portraying America, it’s also a little funny for this
particular part, to be happening to America.

Don’t get me wrong, I’d rather be manipulated into liking a free society than
a dictatorship, but I’m sure you follow where I’m going with this comment.

~~~
leereeves
> Hollywood movies portraying America

That's not really comparable because those are American movies. Is America
preventing Europeans from making movies that portray America negatively?

If China makes its own movies where they are the heroes, that's fine, but they
shouldn't be able to prevent anyone outside China from making movies where
they are portrayed negatively.

------
cjbprime
The huge question here is what's going to happen at BlizzCon in two weeks.
There'll be 40,000+ attendees, cameras everywhere, there are usually Q&A
panels, homemade signs for player support, cosplay, everything. How can you
host BlizzCon when you're terrified of political speech?

~~~
datapunk
How do you respond when a character from your top grossing game is turned into
a political meme? This is what Blizzard has been learning this week.

How do you handle potentially thousands of attendees, at your organization's
biggest annual event, turning it into a platform for political protest agaisnt
your biggest growing market?

There's three possible events:

 _BlizzCon is canceled._ Extremely unlikely but possible.

 _Blizzard attempts to control the narrative during the con by policing the
floors to extinguish any mention of china or Hong Kong._ Stripping those who
do of their con membership. Leading to more negative reactions from domestic
users.

 _Blizzard does nothing._ Thousands of videos and photos flood the web of
blizzcon of what looks like a sanctioned public protests by the company. China
responds by blocking all Blizzard products in their country.

This is a very awkward situation for blizzard, one they have ultimately
created, no real way they will win.

~~~
derefr
> no real way they will win

They could win everywhere _but_ China, by explicitly choosing to withdraw
their products from China.

~~~
tutiospose
Most countries, and even many in the West, don’t actually care. I think HN and
Reddit are a echo chamber in this regard. None of my friends have stopped
playing and they are now talking about the “next outrage” like Catalonia or
the Extinction Protests in London.

~~~
foobiekr
I care. I’m not going to buy anything from blizzard going forward.

------
Copyrighted
Mark Kern (ex-lead WoW dev, and dev for Starcraft/Warcraft/Diablo 2) posted a
good analysis of Blizzard's statement on Blitzchung.

[https://twitter.com/Grummz/status/1183215204525412352?ref_sr...](https://twitter.com/Grummz/status/1183215204525412352?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet)

~~~
Pfhreak
FYI, for folks who aren't familiar, Mark Kern's history also includes full
throated support of GamerGate and being removed from a CEO role at Red 5 by
the board of directors. (Allegedly for erratic and disruptive behavior.)

It's been a really, really wild ride seeing lefty twitter and righty twitter
hold hands and agree that Blizzard did the wrong thing. (Though for different
reasons.)

~~~
nyolfen
> FYI, for folks who aren't familiar, Mark Kern's history also includes full
> throated support of GamerGate and being removed from a CEO role at Red 5 by
> the board of directors. (Allegedly for erratic and disruptive behavior.)

how are these relevant to the subject at hand, particularly the second issue?
it comes across like fnords

~~~
Pfhreak
Because it's fairly common to signal boost someone who you may or may not
agree with, and having the information can be useful for someone who
previously was unaware?

~~~
nyolfen
sorry, how are rumors about what he was fired for useful information?

~~~
Pfhreak
Because there was an appeal to his authority on the matter as a blizzard dev
in the op.

------
Dan_JiuJitsu
I will never purchase another game from Activision or Blizzard unless they
recant this backwards position. American art and media should not be subject
to Chinese influence.

I've been a loyal customer over the years, but I have a long memory. Refuse to
delete my account if you will, it will never be used again.

~~~
uwuhn
First they came for the skeletons, and I did not speak out— Because I was not
a skeleton.

~~~
hannasanarion
For real though, changing character design for things like skeletons because
it has a different meaning in another culture is a perfectly normal thing to
do.

Changing characters to scrub them of LGBT characteristics that are illegal in
another country is cowardly and should have caused a much bigger outrage than
it did.

Banning players for supporting pro-democracy movements outside the game and
retroactively seizing their winnings is horrific. Nothing about their rules
says they had to do this, it was entirely at their discretion. The chinese
government didn't even threaten them over it. They chose to make an example of
Blitzchung within minutes of his statement. They went above and beyond to
endear themselves to the CCP. If they want to win their reputation back, heads
need to roll, and if that means the loss of the chinese market, too bad.

~~~
FooHentai
>The Chinese government didn't even threaten them over it.

Overtly. But this is a clear example of what is meant when people talk about
the 'soft influence' which China seeks to develop. At the crude end of the
scale, you have indoctrinated CCP people spreading out globally occupied in
various positions able to exert leverage favorable to the party. At the more
subtle end you have boards mindful of impacting their bottom line if they lose
access to a large market.

What we're seeing here could be coming from either of those ends of the soft
influence playbook. But no matter what, it's a clear example of the power of
the approach, and how confounding it can become to resist it's effect.

~~~
methodover
The chilling effect that China is having in liberal democracies like ours is
extremely disturbing.

We need our governments to do something about this. If Chinese companies want
to do business here, we need our own businesses treated with the same ruleset
in their country. We wouldn’t ban a Chinese corporation for a minor
executive’s political speech. We have laws against it. (The first amendment
protects non-citizens as well as citizens.)

China has been enjoying our markets but hasn’t been willing to extend the
favor fully. We need a new trade agreement that demands equal treatment, or we
should pull out of China and do business with friendlier countries instead.

------
falcolas
There are four primary effects of this cancelation:

1) It's given Nintendo a platform on which to distance themselves from
Blizzard. The announcement from Nintendo explicitly notes that it's Blizzard
who canceled the event.

2) It's reminded everyone that the Switch port of Overwatch is a thing,
meaning that everyone from investors to people on both side of the HK issue
will be watching its performance.

3) It's a lost opportunity for marketing for Blizzard. It's now pure cost,
with the voice actors still needing to get paid for their time.

4) Attendance was limited, so this cancellation will create ill-will for
Blizzard among those players who had obtained slots to attend.

------
vasili111
I think what happens now will be called in future as Blizzard effect.

------
mustaflex
Video games are made by creators and there is an artistic side to it. People
get emotionally attached to them and it's hard to remove this positive emotion
associated with it, but when developers and editors treat it only as a money
machine and disregard everything else it is like breaking up with your s.o.
and the love is replaced with an irreversible hatred.

I think Blizzard has definitely lost their special place in most of their
hardcore fans. The market has become global but so have the conflicts and
whether they like it or not, sometimes they will be forced to pick a side.

------
RcouF1uZ4gsC
This is a crisis point for everyone who supports political free speech.

Every corporation and business person is watching this to see which hurts
their bottom line less, suppressing free speech globally, or angering China.

As consumers, we must make sure that they get the message loud and clear that
suppressing free speech globally on behalf of China is going to hurt their
bottom line far more than China will.

Otherwise, we will live in a world where China controls what discourse goes on
in the world by controlling the corporations.

~~~
cloakandswagger
I agree with you completely, but this whole debacle has highlighted what seems
to be hypocrisy in the general public's reaction to this.

Remember when The Daily Stormer got kicked off CloudFlare and a whole host of
other platforms, to the point that no one would take their business and they
were effectively censored? The average take on that seemed to be a mix of
"Free speech doesn't apply to private companies" and "If you don't like it,
build your own CDN/DNS/Paypal/certificate authority etc"

So what's the difference with this? Again, I agree completely with the
concerns here, but what happened to TDS and a lot of other fringe sites was
even more blatant and serious: They were de facto banned from the internet,
whereas this is all over...a video game.

Did everyone come to the conclusion that corporations are powerful enough to
effectively snuff out free speech since that happened, or is it different
because this is China, or...?

~~~
Latty
The difference between neo-nazis and democratic protest?

The difference is content. I hate the tendency to fall back to arguments about
free speech when that is not the point. Yes, of course everyone should be
_able_ to express views individually, but that doesn't mean I don't care about
the content of what is being said. That doesn't mean everyone is entitled to
the ability to ram that message down everyone's throat through every possible
route.

Yeah, companies have a right to self-censor, and consumers have a right to
punish them for that.

Hell yes I support CloudFlare kicking off neo-nazis, hell no I don't support
Blizzard silencing HK protestors. No hypocrisy because what is being said
matters.

~~~
saagarjha
> I hate the tendency to fall back to arguments about free speech when that is
> not the point.

What you're saying isn't free speech at all; it's supporting the right to
express speech you agree with and being ok with views you don't being taken
down. In particular, free speech isn't "the point" _to you_.

~~~
Latty
Free speech is about not being arrested for expression. You are talking about
companies being compelled to repeat speech, and that begs a lot of questions:
what speech, by whom, how much relative time and visibility are different bits
of speech given?

~~~
flukus
Free speech is an ideal, the constitutional protection is only an
implementation and in the modern world arguably not the most important one.

As for compelling companies to do business with people they don't want to, we
crossed that line long ago, they can't refuse service to people on the ground
of race, sex, etc. Are you in favor of getting rid of anti-discrimination
laws?

~~~
triceratops
Protected characteristics i.e. things you can't use as a basis for
discrimination are things that people can't change about themselves. Refusing
to do business because you don't like what someone is saying is different from
refusing to do business on the basis of a protected characteristic.

~~~
flukus
> Protected characteristics i.e. things you can't use as a basis for
> discrimination are things that people can't change about themselves.

That's not true, the list of protected classes includes religion, gender,
familial status and veteran status. All things which people have control over.

But the point is we've already stomped all over any "right" a business has to
deny service to someone. Instead of defending this right and the new age of
corporate fascism that comes with it, why not go for something fully universal
and remove a tool for CCP manipulation at the same time?

~~~
triceratops
If you have deeply held faith in Religion A and you convert to Religion B
purely to avoid discrimination, I don't count it as a real change, and the
person themselves would probably not either. The only way to really change
your religion is to have a heartfelt change in beliefs, and who has conscious
control over that?

Gender identity doesn't seem to be consciously changeable. Some people's
gender may be different from their biological sex, but the identity itself is
pretty deeply rooted.

Familial and veteran status are also not changeable i.e. if you already have
children or are a veteran, you can't go back and change that fact. Even though
people have some degree of control over having a family in the first place or
serving/not serving, because they have been used as a dimension of
discrimination in the past, they've been lumped in as a protected
characteristic. There's also nothing _bad_ about having a family or
serving/not serving - in contrast to discrimination over a criminal record
(legal in many places AFAIK), which like familial & veteran status also can't
be changed and which people also have some degree of control over.

~~~
dragonwriter
> Familial and veteran status are also not changeable i.e. if you already have
> children or are a veteran, you can't go back and change that fact.

Familial status _is_ changeable: you can marry, have children, divorce, give
children up for adoption, and be widowed. All of which change family status.
Actually, even _aging_ of children changes family status, since the _age_ of
children is itself a factor relating to the family that is covered by
protections against family-status discrimination.

> discrimination over a criminal record ... which ... also can't be changed

Criminal record can legally be changed _in both directions_ , though neither
is under the full and exclusive control of the possessor of the record (though
they certainly have an _influence_ , in both directions)—new convictions,
expungements, and pardons are all real things.

~~~
triceratops
> you can marry, have children, divorce, give children up for adoption, and be
> widowed

Coercing someone into doing that under pain of discrimination is pretty cruel
though.

> though neither is under the full and exclusive control of the possessor of
> the record

That's why I said not entirely in one's control. I'm aware pardons,
expungements exist.

------
hartator
The worst part they made the player gave up $10,000 of tournament prize he
already won. It's a lot of money in China.

~~~
cjbprime
They reversed that decision already, and halved the amount of time of the
suspensions. It's not good enough when combined with denying any wrongdoing in
the original decision, though, and when Blizzard's own Chinese version of its
apology for Blitzchung's speech included a phrase that translates something
like "We will protect the national dignity [of China]".

\-- [https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/10/10/verified-chinese-
bli...](https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/10/10/verified-chinese-blizzard-
account-doubles-down-on-political-policy)

~~~
dtn
NetEase, their regional publisher, made that statement. It was also posted
before the controversy started.

~~~
cjbprime
Thanks, didn't know that, I'd thought it was Blizzard China.

~~~
falcolas
Net-Ease _is_ Blizzard China. All of Blizzard’s sales and marketing must occur
in partnership with NetEase; there is no other voice for Blizzard in China.

~~~
belltaco
Net-Ease isn't Blizzard China, they are a partner, not a subsidiary. Net-Ease
is not owned by Blizzard.

------
mensetmanusman
The love of money is the root of all evil.

------
Waterluvian
I hope this emboldens people as they see that their protesting actually works.
I'm often super pessimistic that large corporations are immune to protest
because people have short attention spans and get bored of being outraged.

~~~
gtirloni
I wish protesting against Blizzard would have an impact on Chinese policy but
there's zero chance of that happening.

I understand it's a long game (no pun intended), getting more and more
companies to take a stand for free speech, but the impact on the lives of the
people really affected by it is too small.

The US government has much greater means to make a really powerful impact but
I don't see that ever happening.

~~~
MrStonedOne
The goal is not to change chinese policy, it's to change the policy of how
american business interact with chinese policy.

I don't care nearly as much about how china is a draconian hellhole as I do
about that hellhole infecting how american business do shit.

~~~
gtirloni
Thanks for clarifying. I guess my brain is wired to fix root causes (China)
and not symptoms, but I completely understand what you're saying. It's a more
pragmatic perspective (influence what is within reach).

It just depresses me that, in the name of trade and the perspective of China
being some #1 global power, governments everywhere will turn a blind eye to
the human rights violations.

------
caseymarquis
Anyone know if they'll see it when I uninstall Overwatch?

~~~
judge2020
If anything, playing Overwatch more without purchasing anything else cuts more
into their ROI since you use up their servers.

~~~
enragedcacti
In a vacuum sure, but you are the product that Blizzard is selling to new
players and to players who want to show off the cool skins they got from loot
boxes. If there is no one to play with no one will buy.

------
leowoo91
I like the way how I'm hit to paywall with intention to read Blizzard news.

------
humble_engineer
I'm so sick and tired of seeing a company silence free speech, but then as
soon as someone doesn't agree with what is being said, the answer is, "but
they are a private business." Have some god damn principles, either you
support free speech, or you don't, it doesn't matter what is being said,
imbeciles.

~~~
stordoff
They are a private business means there is not legal impediment to what they
are doing. They are free to do this all day long. That doesn't mean as an
individual I have to support them. There's no contradiction between saying
there are free to do this, but I don't support it, or being against this but
allowing some other actions to that shut down some categories of free speech.
Not everyone believes in a blanket right to all speech in all situations.

------
lscotte
Paywall, can't read the article.

------
sod
deleted

~~~
falcolas
This isn't an article about the situation in Hong Kong, it's an article about
Blizzard canceling a marketing junket.

To be relevant to the article, discussion will naturally center around the
company at question. The connection of this particular article to HK is just
too tenuous to have serious discussions about HK sprout up organically.

------
ican1
When conservatives were banned en masse the liberals cheered. Their argument
was that censoring by private companies was totally acceptable. Now that their
preferred positions are being censored they've suddenly rediscovered the value
of free speech. I hope they learn the lesson from this - free speech is too
precious a right to be given up just to shut down your opponent. If your
opponents are censored today, you'll surely be tomorrow.

~~~
ekc
This isn't relevant to the article.

------
gthtjtkt
Why did the HN mods feel the need to censor the title?

------
darklajid
Apart from the global crisis this is also quite a big subject here, locally,
in Singapore and among friends in HK: Honestly I don't see how Blizzard
should've reacted instead and feel bad for them. That's not related to
"bending over for China" or "selling out to China" and has nothing to do with
the political situation in HK.

The way I see it, someone did a really, really shitty (a gas mask and
chanting?) publicity stunt on a Blizzard event (Blizzard stream, Blizzard paid
casters, Blizzard branding all over the place). Good riddance. If this is okay
(because BAD CHINA), then you open the door to more of these .. actions and
offer people a platform for their personal agenda.

I think Blizzard did the Right Thing™ (as in, they communicated quite clearly
that you cannot hijack their events for your own stuff). The problem of "Can
you say anything you want on a Blizzard stream" turned now into "You either
support HK or are supporting China" for weird reasons?

~~~
ra1n85
And seize his prize money and fire the casters? Would they have done the same
had he voiced support for BLM or Julian Assange?

Your line of thinking is predicated on the fallacy that Blizzard acted in a
principled manner. It’s also extremely suspicious to see how quickly you were
upvoted. Subtly is not your forte.

~~~
darklajid
> And seize his prize money and fire the casters?

I don't know. Personally I'd say "yes and no", but ..

> Would they have done the same had he voiced support for BLM or Julian
> Assange?

No idea.

> Your line of thinking is predicated on the fallacy that Blizzard acted in a
> principled manner.

Nope, I very much believe that Blizzard wanted to appease China. I just think
they had a good reason to ban the guy and don't support what he did.

> It’s also extremely suspicious to see how quickly you were upvoted. Subtly
> is not your forte.

Wat. The comment you replied to is below 0. Maybe put down your tinfoil hat
and explain what this is supposed to mean? IF my comment gets upvoted it's ..
because China is hijacking HN? Whereas if it's downvoted that is The Obviously
Right Thing™?

