Blizzard's Face Plant Creates Marketing Opportunity For Companies With A Spine

from the one-man's-bumble-is-another-man's-boon dept

Blizzard’s decision to pander to the Chinese government is a PR headache that simply isn’t going away. Last week, games giant Blizzard stepped in a minefield when it severely punished a Hearthstone player for supporting the protests in Hong Kong during a championship live stream. The reaction was swift, justified, and severe, with everyone from gamers to Blizzard employees accusing the company of prioritizing profits over principles.

After days of silence, Blizzard ultimately issued a statement on the decision and, while public backlash forced it to retreat from some of the player’s more severe punishments, the company doubled down on its decision to censor players for political opinions, ignoring most of the criticisms leveled by human rights organizations like Access Now. It also tried to claim with a straight face that its financial interests in China played no role in the decision:

The specific views expressed by blitzchung were NOT a factor in the decision we made. I want to be clear: our relationships in China had no influence on our decision. We have these rules to keep the focus on the game and on the tournament to the benefit of a global audience, and that was the only consideration in the actions we took.

Sure, Jan. While the gamer violated tournament rules by injecting political opinion, Blizzard’s over-reaction (the gamer lost all awards and prizes and faced a one year ban from competition) showcased a company absolutely terrified of losing out on Chinese cash. It could have adhered to its rules by applying a more modest punishment. Instead it behaved in a way that made it clear to everybody that Blizzard’s principles like Every Voice Matters–etched at the base of a statue at the company’s headquarters–couldn’t hold a candle to the potential money to be made in China.

But one company’s disastrous face plant is another company’s marketing opportunity. Fortnite developer Epic Games utilized the PR fracas to proclaim that it would not censor gamers simply for having political opinions, insisting companies can walk (embrace fundamental human rights) and chew gum (make a living selling games and game stream ads) at the same time:

Fortnite developer Epic Games said in a statement that it will not ban players or content creators for political speech. The message comes after Blizzard caught fire this week for banning a professional Hearthstone player for shouting a statement associated with Hong Kong protesters.

?Epic supports everyone?s right to express their views on politics and human rights. We wouldn?t ban or punish a Fortnite player or content creator for speaking on these topics,? an Epic Games spokesperson told The Verge.

That statement came despite the fact that Chinese tech giant Tencent has held had a 40 percent stake in Epic since 2011. In contrast, Riot Games, developer of League of Legends, is now 100 percent owned by Tencent. On Friday it effectively sided with Blizzard, proclaiming that broadcasters should “refrain” from discussing “sensitive topics” during game streams. Because, you know, god forbid some kid playing a game express something akin to empathy, while an authoritarian government threatens to “crush the bodies and shatter the bones of Hong Kong residents“:

“As a general rule, we want to keep our broadcasts focused on the game, the sport, and the players,? John Needham, the global head of League of Legends e-sports said in a statement. ?We serve fans from many different countries and cultures, and we believe this opportunity comes with a responsibility to keep personal views on sensitives issues (political, religious, or otherwise) separate.”

Upsetting China’s authoritarian government means potentially losing billions for companies dreaming of international expansion, so, more often than not, cutesy purported principles like “every voice matters” are going to hold up like tissue paper in a thunderstorm. Still, there’s a marketing opportunity here for companies interested in showing how having a spine and respecting basic human rights isn’t inherently “bad for business.” Either way, with protests planned for Blizzard’s BlizzCon convention early next month, this was an unforced error that’s not going away anytime soon.

Filed Under: , , ,
Companies: blizzard, epic games, riot games

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Blizzard's Face Plant Creates Marketing Opportunity For Companies With A Spine”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
31 Comments
This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
That One Guy (profile) says:

Words are cheap. Actions less so

“Epic supports everyone’s right to express their views on politics and human rights. We wouldn’t ban or punish a Fortnite player or content creator for speaking on these topics,” an Epic Games spokesperson told The Verge.

If they actually uphold that position when(because let’s be honest, they might as well have begged someone to test it with that statement) it comes up that would certainly improve my impression of the company, but given past actions(‘We are pro-indie dev!’/’Indies that don’t sign exclusivity deals aren’t welcome on our platform’) I’m not exactly putting high odds of them sticking to their guns there.

Still though, as has been pointed out before when even Epic is slamming you you know you seriously screwed up.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re:

Epic is still a rather polarizing company (as well it should be) and nothing it does in response to the Blizzard shitstorm — ShitBlizzard? — will undo everything it did to earn criticism and scorn and a bad reputation. But when Epic can credibly hand Blizzard its ass on a silver platter adorned with American flags, I can’t help but laugh.

That One Guy (profile) says:

Re: Re: Words are cheap. Actions less so

5% and 40% for Blizzard and Epic respectively I believe, but what matters ultimately is what the higher-ups decide to do in a situation like this if the amount of the company owned isn’t enough to issue demands, and while Blizzard’s execs have made crystal clear that they will bend over backwards to appease china the CEO of Epic(Tim Sweeny I think?) has at least said that he values free speech more than appeasing a bunch of thin-skinned tyrants.

Tim Sweeny however has said many things in the past, some of them aging rather poorly, leaving the question of whether he will follow through with that statement still up in the air until it’s actually put to the test.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Quoting Jim Sterling again:

Blizzard claims any divisive statement is punishable. But what if, say, Blitzchung had spoken up for LGBTQ rights or asylum seekers or anything that can be argued in the exact same way to be divisive and deliberate and offensive to someone, somewhere? There’s no way in hell that Blizzard would suspend Blitzchung for yelling “trans rights” and they shouldn’t suspend anyone for yelling “trans rights” (trans rights, by the way) even as it would inevitably create an outcry from fucking assholes.

Blizzard claims it’s behavior had nothing to do with China. It just happened that this behavior mirrored exactly what dozens of other corporations have been doing to appease China. Sure, Blizzard, we all fucking believe you~. And I’m sure the fact that Blitzchung himself now says he’ll be more careful about expressing his Hong Kong opinions totally isn’t the chilling effect you were going for~. But well, I’m just saying it’s fitting that your name is Blizzard.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

finger "guns" are now a felony says:

And just exactly where do you draw the line?

showing how having a spine and

That would be shunning all trade with Communist China, the same regime that murdered at least 70 million people, and which is today killing prisoners on demand to sell their organs. The West should NEVER have traded with China. — You kids just ignore fundamentals! It’s simply not within your ability to advocate ZERO trade with China. You put out stoopy little pieces like this only to position yourselves as moral and promoting human rights, but you’re not.

respecting basic human rights isn’t inherently "bad for business."

Pffft! Show three examples on scale of Blizzard.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

finger "guns" are now a felony says:

Re: And just exactly where do you draw the line?

Corporations and capitalism are SOLELY concerned with money and power. You kids tacitly claim to be socialist / humanist, but never attack corporations except as here, only criticizing this as a public relations gaffe! You are corporatists.

Yet to be proven that any corporation acts as a moral "person" too. They are legal fictions. You are not only supporting fictions but going on to justify them by asserting they’ll implement your humanism — and thereby prosper. That’s simply not common sense, let alone provable by any example.

Also, you kids have been telling me for years that — largely through CDA Section 230 — corporations are to and do have total arbitrary control of message on "platforms" and can enforce EULA too. By your prior assertions this is Blizzard’s Section 230 "right" and a clear violation of EULA.YET when serves purpose, Techdirt flatly contradicts itself.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

It’s Blizzard’s right to "moderate" as they see fit. On the other hand, Section 230 doesn’t protect Blizzard from other people disagreeing and calling it stupid for their China-sucking behavior.

But nah, why have a nuanced discussion on the issue, when you can bitch about Techdirt supporting a corporation on an article where Techdirt literally criticizes a corporation.

Nice try, blue, but you lose.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re:

The law allows Blizzard to suspend Blitzchung. The law also allows everyone else to call Blizzard out for its ridiculous behavior. The two concepts aren’t mutually exclusive.

And pointing out that corporations have rights like Blizzard’s right to suspend Blitzchung is not kissing their asses (or whatever you think we’re doing when we say that). Your ignorance, be it feigned or real, will not find comfort here.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

The law allows Blizzard to suspend Blitzchung.

Yes, but taking away a prize is questionable. They’re advertising that the winner of a contest will get a prize, and then the fine print says they can avoid paying it for any reason whatsoever (because there’s no way to win a contest without offending somebody, and anyway, Blizzard has sole judgment re: offense). It’s an unconscionable and possibly fraudulent contract.

Anonymous Coward says:

Reaching peak capitalism here where an American company is just bending over backwards for an authoritative communist state since they want those sweet sweet Pooh-Bucks.

Although Epic Games message is a bit… over the top. While I’m sure they’d be fine with a quick "hey here’s my quick mostly non offensive (to anyone other than government entities) stance on a thing!" I doubt they’d want to be a platform for some Jordan Peterson circle-jerker just pontificating for an hour about how veganism is communism because it rhymes and that’s why women shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re:

I doubt they’d want to be a platform for some Jordan Peterson circle-jerker just pontificating for an hour about how veganism is communism because it rhymes and that’s why women shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

We might agree that Epic has the right to kick that asshole off — and that we dislike the asshole’s message. But if Epic Games does something to kick that circlejerker off an Epic-owned platform, we’ll call out that hypocrisy, too.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

I agree it’s hypocrisy because of their over the top statement saying they support all sorts of free speech, speech all you like!

I can see announcing support for a movement or a political figure would be usually a fine thing to say you are in support of.

The problem is not all "political speech" is so sterile and mostly harmless to a large entity that exists to make money. Ok that dude likes Hilary I’m not going to kick him off for that. OKAY that dude during our streamed game tournament is going on about how we should all dress up like wizards and kill black people. Banning this dude.

Yes, this person is calling out for violence directly but there are plenty of dog whistle ways to say the same thing and pretend you had only the best intentions while saying it.

My main contention is… Epic is dumb and blatantly so here. They are just jumping on some outrage bandwagon real quick to get people to like them.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

The problem is not all "political speech" is so sterile and mostly harmless to a large entity that exists to make money. Ok that dude likes Hilary I’m not going to kick him off for that. OKAY that dude during our streamed game tournament is going on about how we should all dress up like wizards and kill black people. Banning this dude.

The difference between those two examples is easy to spot: Only one of those statements is calling for (arguably politically motivated) violence.

If two separate streamers say on-stream that they’re voting for two different candidates (e.g., “I’m voting for Trump” vs. “I’m voting for Bernie”), you can write that off as benign. If one of those streamers then says something that can be construed as a call to violence (dogwhistled or not), that cannot be similarly written off — no matter which streamer said it.

Epic could easily allow for a wide berth of political speech while also banning “harmful” or hateful speech. It can also distance itself from any such speech by saying the opinions expressed by streamers don’t represent the views of Epic as a company or any of its individual employees. And that still gives it room to punish any speech that crosses the line into advocacy for hatred and violence — on both “sides” of the political aisle.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Edgar Wallace Cooper says:

Hong Kong Protest

So are the headlines about a Hong Kong Protest, or are they asking – Is Hong Kong Pro Test? I mean if you say "Hong Kong, Pro-test?", then just maybe they’re keen on exams in part of Hong Kong. At least the Hong Kong Pro-test part of Hong Kong.

And will they be keeping giant apes off the buildings?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

jessshawn (profile) says:

Manage Your Vanilla Visa Gift Card Online Gift Card Balance

Having access to the information of your gift card is something very important. This is why there is a need to have on the ground an easy route through which you get any information that you may have need of on your gift card. These Onevanilla Gift Cards are for everyone. Manage Your Vanilla Visa Gift Card Online. https://www.checkvanillabalanceonline.com

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »