AFTER THE FACT. You seem to very conveniently ignore that part of it.
They have let people use the platform to push gay pride and transgender rights before, but now all of a sudden its a problem when basic human rights are being supported against a country that is trying to suppress them?
How is that standing by the principle âevery voice mattersâ why is it okay to push gay pride and transgender rights on their streaming platforms, but not to push basic human rights on their streaming platforms?
There are plenty of american companies that have committed human rights violations. Here are just a few off the top of my head: Chevron, Nestle, Coca Cola, Pfizer, and Caterpillar.
IBM was doing business with N@zis during ww2, I think that is significantly worse than banning a guy for half a year from a video game.
Basically put, your voice can still matter even if they decline to act as a platform for it. Businesses like Blizzard have reasons to exercise discretion regarding views they will take stances on or actions they will condone, it doesnât mean they necessarily disagree with the content of the message or are saying that the message has no worth, just that they have their own reasons not to act as a platform for it.
In this case, Blitzchung made a politically charged statement broadcast live to millions of Chinese in the middle of a violent revolution. This puts Blizzard between a rock and a hard place as a company, because even if they agree with Blitzchung and wish to support Hong Kong it will come at the cost of many livelihoods and possibly at the threat of their employees lives. If they take a political stance they could be branded as subversive anti-government propagandists by China, have their company banned, let go of hundreds of employees across China, drop service to millions of Chinese players just like Blitzchung, and worse possibly have their Shanghai offices raided or face criminal detention in addition to hefty fines.
Again, just because they choose not to allow Blitzchung to make statements like this on their platform doesnât mean they donât agree with him or think his opinion is worthless, just that they have their own perfectly sound rationale for why they canât allow their platforms to be used for them. This is why they have harsh penalties codified in their rules that players agree to beforehand. Blitzchung himself already has come to the conclusion that it would be more appropriate to use his own personal platforms for his messages in the future, as he has likely only now after the fact come to the realization how broadly damaging and dangerous his actions could unwittingly be for Blizzard and its employees across China.
In other words there are risks involved, and itâs at Blizzardâs discretion just like any other business or even individual which risks theyâre willing or able to take. Those risks, however, shouldnât be foisted upon them by someone else against their will and without their consent, as Blitzchung did in dragging Blizzard into the crosshairs of an authoritarian regime in the middle of an ongoing conflict.
so every voice matters, unless we disagree essentially?
that reason being they value money more than their morality, principles, and basic human rights.
Just as blizzard has made politically charged statements about supporting gay pride and transgender rights on their platform live to millions in a very murky and political climate.
no what put them between a rock and a hard place was the constant pandering and virtue signaling they did that put them in a position where they are expected to back up what they claim to be.
Nobody would be expecting blizzard to take sides if they stayed apolitical, but they didnât, they virtue signaled and pandered to get a positive view in the public eye, and now people expect them to uphold that image they have placed on themselves.
which is why a business shouldnât have been virtue signaling and painting themselves as some progressive icon. Because now they have the fallout of being liars and hypocrites that only care about money, and donât stand for anything they claimed to have.
Youre right, but the statement they put out on their Chinese social media saying they denounce what blitzchung said and stand with the Chinese government does.
that rationale being they are a lying money hungry company who only ever pretended to care about people and rights to make more money.
and they took the risk of virtue signaling, and now are seen as the lying fakes they are for it.
When you constantly virtue signal, pander, and pretend to be progressive and all about human rights, you should expect people to use your platform to advocate for human rights.
I thought it was obvious that I was referring to the ones who publicly commit human rights violations and said violations are within the country.
WW2 was a whole different era dude. Plus, UN Human rights declaration wasnât even until 1948.
Iâm pretty sure theyâve been boycotted before. Then again, I canât really say anything to how itâs going now but I will say my teacher and some of my friends still wonât buy anything from Nestle. Either way, Iâm just saying that assuming that thereâs no negatives to disregarding human rights as a business is just wrong, which is what Link was insinuating.
US Sen. Wyden, AOC, Rubio, Gallagher and Malinowski pen letter to Blizzard CEO Robert Kotick condemning the companyâs decision to ban a professional Hearthstone player for voicing support for the Hong Kong protests.
Like I said before, whether or not a company decides to make a stand and assume the concomitant risks/costs is entirely their purview. Thereâs no reason it must be a hard-line binary decision between either completely staying out of politics or going all in, companies are allowed to be flexible with where and when and on what topics they wish to do so. Youâre entitled to interpret that as some manner of shrewd situational morality, but to me itâs the reality of wanting to reach a broad audience in an imperfect world with competing views without alienating people and losing any chance to do good in the first place.
Even if they canât reasonably do so in all situations, I think itâs nevertheless commendable that Blizzard has promoted what values of diversity and inclusivity around the world they can, even within the restrictions of different countries and cultures. Theyâve certainly done more to bring such Western values to countries like China than you or I, and may very well have already helped lay the foundations for future generational change in the region, no different from how the consumption of international cinema and entertainment in post-WWII Japan nurtured them into the shining example of progressive Westernized democracy they are today. Blizzard could have been morally puritanical in their business relationships and never entered the Chinese market in the first place, but if they hadnât then players like Blitzchung would never have had the opportunity or platform to achieve what they have. Thereâs such a thing as cutting off the arm to spite the finger, you know.
You told a fellow poster that his government would never allow him to run a business if he committed human rights violations.
All I did was list some companies that have/or are currently committing human rights violations. . The five I mentioned have done it publicly, it really isnât hard to look them up.
As far as I know, none of them are outright, publicly supporting the idea of violating human rights and the alleged human rights violations are usually not even in the country.
Also, I checked the five companies and I couldnât find anything specific (human rights violations) for Chevron, Coca Cola was alleged to have violated it, Pfizer, again, nothing and Caterpillar just did business with a paramilitary group that was supposedly violating human rights. How people use their products isnât exactly their responsibility tbh.
By publicly, I mean that they openly did it and made the public aware. No company would ever stab themselves in the foot like that.
Of course nestle isnât going to come out and say we are guilty of forcing children into labor. But they are still doing it, so to me at least, they are supporting it (because they are literally doing it).
Now you are admitting that nestle is doing it, but itâs somehow ok, because they are not supporting it???
We arenât going to come to an agreement on this, so have a good one my friend.
Yeah because theyâre not publicly supporting it and arenât doing it within the country. Itâs still wrong but it would be difficult for any government to try and convict them of anything. Though, they do have a pretty poor international reputation. In simpler terms, a government would not let any company who sanctions human rights violations be run if they can convict said company. Itâs a harsh world we live in.
Fair enough. Sounds like my point was not worded good enough. Iâll take that.
but there is one. they literally write it into their rules. They just ignore those rules when its convenient so they can pander for cash.
no its not around the world. its where it wont lose them money. everywhere they would get into any type of trouble for it they censor it and make the characters straight. so the diversity isnât actually there. its just changed to pander to each country.
except they havenât, because they change the lore and story to keep that out of areas like china.
Like I said before, there was already a post by a Chinese person about how Tracer and Soldier are still gay in China:
And again, Blizzard can be flexible with how they themselves want to be when it comes to taking or not take political stances. The rules they codified in this situation, however, are intended for actions beyond their personal official control, i.e. other people, to prevent the company from being unintentionally dragged into political controversy that they may not be seeking.
and you also conveniently leave out the part where because they are gay in the comic in china, the comic was banned.
and they very intentionally have no mention of them being gay in game so the game wont get taken down either, so for all intents and purposes no there is nothing in china currently that explicitly says they are gay.
You can try to misrepresent things all you want, but I actually know the full story here.
lol so blizzard can cherry pick when they want to be a progressive company?
I also want to make it clear that Chinas isnt the only voice in this. Speak up, we matter too, not just chyna. Blizzard, we exist. Do not sell our values.
Even tho bobby kotic will never listen to any of us, ever â even the US senators/congress members who sent him letters: dont even try; hes a waste of mass (hes the universes pun on wasted carbon) â maybe someone will.
. The five I mentioned have done it publicly, it really isnât hard to look them up.
