Current Events > OK, I don't understand how Blizzard was in the wrong

(+) Yeah! (+)

People are going crazy about this and are burying Blizzard but I dont understand why. Do these people not have real jobs? When you are employed by a company... you represent that company. You cant say/do anything that hurts the company. People say Blizzard is suppressing Freedom of Speech. Not really. If you arent employed by Blizzard then you are free to say whatever you want. That is freedom.

If I work for a company, and I slander that company or their partner, I shouldnt be surprised if Im terminated. That is without it blowing up.

To be clear, me saying this doesnt mean Im against what he actually said. Im all for it. However, him getting disciplined for say something like that while representing a company is the real world
---

He didn't slander the company. He expressed support for a group trying to get Democratic rights from the Chinese government.

Full withdrawal of the extradition bill

A commission of inquiry into alleged police brutality

Retracting the classification of protesters as rioters

Amnesty for arrested protesters

Dual universal suffrage, meaning for both the Legislative Council and the Chief Executive

Which one of those is "controversial"?
---

What do you plan to do with the extra 100 social credit points you get from making this topic?
---

known2FAIL posted...

People say Blizzard is suppressing Freedom of Speech

people dont understand what freedom of speech means
---

Blizzard is partnered with China? Chinese companies maybe, but the entire country?

---

So, why did they also have to take away his prize money?
---

They can do whatever they want. Firing that guy is fine but what they made them stand for has consequences.
---

I can understand why they did what they did to the player. I don't like it but I get it.

It's the commentators getting the boot that bothers me.
---

Squall28 posted...

He didn't slander the company. He expressed support for a group trying to get Democratic rights from the Chinese government.

Full withdrawal of the extradition bill

A commission of inquiry into alleged police brutality

Retracting the classification of protesters as rioters

Amnesty for arrested protesters

Dual universal suffrage, meaning for both the Legislative Council and the Chief Executive

Which one of those is "controversial"?

Dont hang on that world Slander. If you hurt the company in any way then you will get punished. Blizzard is partially owned by a Chinese company. If they are unhappy the you are hurting the company. In fact, even if China wasnt involved directly with the company itself, Blizzard still has a very strong footprint in China. If that is jeopardized then you are still hurting the company
---

Solar_Crimson posted...

So, why did they also have to take away his prize money?

Its in the contract
---

Blizzard only cares about that China money.

Sackgurl posted...

known2FAIL posted...

People say Blizzard is suppressing Freedom of Speech

people dont understand what freedom of speech means

"Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence" only applies when the left says it applies
---

MudKip_Master posted...

Blizzard only cares about that China money.

Correct. Just like most companies. And he jeopardized that.
---

Do they have the right to do what they did? Sure

Were they in the right to do what they did? No

Blizzard can be legally allowed to do what they did and still appear shitty for having basically taken a political stance on this issue.
---

CyricZ posted...

Blizzard can be legally allowed to do what they did and still appear shitty for having basically taken a political stance on this issue.

Here is the thing... People assumed they took a political stance. They didnt. They took a business stance. China is a MASSIVE market. Billions of dollars are on the line. The situation is VERY SIMILAR to the recent NBA issue with China. Almost identical. They reacted the same way for a reason
---

known2FAIL posted...

Here is the thing... People assumed they took a political stance. They didnt. They took a business stance. China is a MASSIVE market. Billions of dollars are on the line. The situation is VERY SIMILAR to the recent NBA issue with China. Almost identical. They reacted the same way for a reason

The NBA has said they'll live with the economic consequences of what was said.

---

codey posted...

known2FAIL posted...

Here is the thing... People assumed they took a political stance. They didnt. They took a business stance. China is a MASSIVE market. Billions of dollars are on the line. The situation is VERY SIMILAR to the recent NBA issue with China. Almost identical. They reacted the same way for a reason

The NBA has said they'll live with the economic consequences of what was said.

Lol yeah, how is that acting the same way? That's the exact fucking opposite way

known2FAIL posted...

CyricZ posted...

Blizzard can be legally allowed to do what they did and still appear shitty for having basically taken a political stance on this issue.

Here is the thing... People assumed they took a political stance. They didnt. They took a business stance. China is a MASSIVE market. Billions of dollars are on the line. The situation is VERY SIMILAR to the recent NBA issue with China. Almost identical. They reacted the same way for a reason

Companies should not enable China for the sake of money.
---

DarthAragorn posted...

Lol yeah, how is that acting the same way? That's the exact fucking opposite way

Yeah, Adam Silver even released a statement saying that it was not the NBAs job to adjudicate different viewpoints.

---

codey posted...

known2FAIL posted...

Here is the thing... People assumed they took a political stance. They didnt. They took a business stance. China is a MASSIVE market. Billions of dollars are on the line. The situation is VERY SIMILAR to the recent NBA issue with China. Almost identical. They reacted the same way for a reason

The NBA has said they'll live with the economic consequences of what was said.

I didnt know they came out and made that statement. Very interesting. They were always a very activist type of company. They fund the WNBA while it looses tons of money every year. That is a special case. A vast majority of companies are willing to do that and it makes sense
---

Blizzard is free to do what they want. He technically broke their rules.

It just shows they care more about appeasing Chinese authorities than the human rights of those in Hong Kong.

They also cut ties with the gentlemen who were doing commentary on the match. Those guys even tried to duck out of the way to not be part of it. Why punish the guys who literally did nothing wrong?
---

They didn't do anything legally wrong, this is more of an ethics thing.

I just think it's disgusting that this big powerful company is willing to bend knee and censor people not because of their own values but just to appease a shitty foreign government.
---

Jeff AKA Snoopy posted...

Blizzard is free to do what they want. He technically broke their rules.

It just shows they care more about appeasing Chinese authorities than the human rights of those in Hong Kong.

They also cut ties with the gentlemen who were doing commentary on the match. Those guys even tried to duck out of the way to not be part of it. Why punish the guys who literally did nothing wrong?

Precisely this. They broke no laws, but what they did is the moral equivalent of swamp ass.
---

Jeff AKA Snoopy posted...

Blizzard is free to do what they want. He technically broke their rules.

It just shows they care more about appeasing Chinese authorities than the human rights of those in Hong Kong.

They also cut ties with the gentlemen who were doing commentary on the match. Those guys even tried to duck out of the way to not be part of it. Why punish the guys who literally did nothing wrong?

I heard they knew what he was going to say ahead of time but I cant confirm it. Even if they did... firing them for that seems pretty shitty.
---

known2FAIL posted...

CyricZ posted...

Blizzard can be legally allowed to do what they did and still appear shitty for having basically taken a political stance on this issue.

Here is the thing... People assumed they took a political stance. They didnt. They took a business stance. China is a MASSIVE market. Billions of dollars are on the line. The situation is VERY SIMILAR to the recent NBA issue with China. Almost identical. They reacted the same way for a reason

Their motivation was business and money. The result was political.

Optics are a very important thing for business.

On the subject of rights issues, saying "yeah but money though" is not a virtuous stance.
---