The CEO of Blizzard responded to the Hearthstone issue with Blitzchung. Cortyn, however, finds the response to be a bad joke.
Last week was quite a PR disaster for Blizzard. What started as a relatively unremarkable ban of a Hearthstone player turned into a massive boycott movement, supported tens of thousands of times across various forums.
A brief recap: The Hearthstone player Blitzchung wore a gas mask during a stream and expressed support for the protests in Hong Kong. Blizzard subsequently banned the player and the two casters of the interview. Blitzchung was banned for 1 year and his prize money was withheld, the casters were banned for life.
This caused days of uproar on social media until we received a message from J. Allen Brack, the CEO of Blizzard. The punishment was reduced to 6 months for casters and players, and the prize money will be paid out.
Moreover, there is a very long justification regarding the “decision-making” and repeated references to Blizzard’s “Core Values, ” which are the guiding principles of the company.
However, the response from Blizzard CEO J. Allen Brack to the fans’ protests is meager and, in my opinion, simply unbelievable.
I want to clarify: I do not understand all the nuances of the China-Hong Kong conflict and do not want to give the impression that I can contribute an expert opinion in this situation. The topic is politically sensitive and reducing it to “Hong Kong wants to be free and China wants to integrate Hong Kong into the state” would be an extreme oversimplification. So this will only be touched upon briefly.
Blizzard’s statement is purely damage control without value
At first glance, J. Allen Brack’s statement is nothing special. He comments on the “Core Values,” stating that they stand by them clearly. He then explains in many detailed steps why they judged the way they did and what will be changed.
My favorite passage is the following (translated):
At Blizzard, we pursue the vision of “bringing the world together through epic entertainment.” And we have guiding values that apply here: ‘Think globally’, ‘Lead responsibly’, and importantly: ‘Every voice matters’, which we want to encourage everyone to express their perspective. Our actions over the weekend made people question whether we still stand by these values. We absolutely do, and I will explain that.
Yet exactly that is what he fails to do: Brack doesn’t explain how Blizzard stands by these core values.
Expressed somewhat exaggeratedly, he essentially says that everyone should express their opinion, but only on other channels. When opinions and perspectives can only be expressed on channels not belonging to the company, then that is simply not a company value.
The rest of the statement mainly discusses that Blitzchung should receive his money because he played fairly and that the punishments were relaxed. He also explains the roles of all involved – both casters and players – in great detail and what their tasks are in a stream.
You can read the complete statement in the original English here.
By the way: The statement is in no way an admission of guilt or an apology, which many players would have wished for. There are no words like “We apologize”, “We are sorry” or “We made a mistake”. And that becomes important shortly.
In summary, Blizzard does not want to be a platform for “controversial social and political views” and will continue to enforce this through tournament rules.
So far, so logical and clear. Right?
The Chinese statement says the exact opposite
What many do not know is that the statement from J. Allen Brack is not the only one that Blizzard has published.
Through the Chinese service Weibo, Blizzard’s official Hearthstone account also issued a statement. Blizzard operates in China with partner Netease, which is nonetheless Blizzard’s mouthpiece. In this post, they state that they are “very angry” about what happened. But especially the last sentence is particularly impressive, as it translates to:
We will always respect and defend the pride of our country.
If you want to position yourself as a neutral, global company, it is highly questionable if one of your statements is to “defend the pride of the country”.
This has also caught the attention of the community. The corresponding post still exists today and has not been deleted. It is very easy to say that you are politically neutral when in the respective countries you take sides where it is desired to appease the government.
This is not neutral. This is not apolitical.
Oddities in the statement itself
There are also a few details that might require one to put on their foil hats a bit tighter. The publication of Brack’s statement is dated October 12. However, at the time of publication, it was still October 11 in America. In some other time zones – like China – October 12 had already begun.
Moreover, many native English speakers say that Brack’s statement reads strangely. It contains phrases and expressions that one would not typically use if one is a native speaker.
Is this alone terrible? No. It is only logical that one meets with partners in China after such an incident to agree on strategy and weigh carefully what to say. But this reinforces the impression that it does not genuinely represent the words of the Blizzard CEO, whose opinion was so eagerly awaited, but rather a document crafted carefully with dozens of people to appease all sides and not offend anyone.
This would also explain why the statement does not mention at any point an admission of guilt or that a mistake was made. Because that could again be interpreted as being “against China”.
In general, Blizzard had a year full of shitstorms in 2019.
No politics in Blizzard games and their streams?
I also find another stance a bit hypocritical.
Yes, the Grandmasters signed a contract that states that penalties apply if they make statements that could offend any group. However, this clause is so vaguely worded that Blizzard could essentially interpret any sentence that way if they want.
In this specific case with politics, it would have been quite clear.
But this absence of politics is not something Blizzard adheres to in its own events either. Politics is simply a topic that permeates almost every event, especially for a globally operating company. An example? Blizzard, especially Overwatch, celebrated “Pride Day” quite strongly. It is mainly about the rights and equal treatment of LGBTQ+ individuals.
While I personally find the positioning and support, also through Overwatch’s lore, absolutely commendable, it is still a political statement. I believe that this could very well anger a demographic in countries like Russia or other more conservatively minded nations.
Blizzard: “We are not a platform for social or political views.” Also Blizzard: from r/hearthstone
Nevertheless, casters are allowed to moderate in rainbow colors and the Overwatch League even distributed sweatbands in Pride colors on-site.
And that is precisely why I find J. Allen Brack’s statement so annoying. Politics and political statements have always been part of the gaming environment, sometimes more, sometimes less explicitly. Why is a Pride armband acceptable but a call for “Free Hong Kong” is not? Both are definitely political.
The answer is at least clear to me: With support for the Pride movement, one is primarily on the side of the fans. The overwhelming majority of the younger generation would likely support and approve of such things.
With “Free Hong Kong”, however, there is concern about losing access to a market because in China, the state only needs to give a thumbs down, and Blizzard loses access to the entire country.
If J. Allen Brack stands up and says that they are not a platform for “controversial social or political views”, then in my eyes, that is nothing but hypocrisy.
I can absolutely understand that Blizzard does not want to lose the Chinese market and therefore behaves the way they do. But don’t try to sell the rest of the world as fools. Your players are not that stupid.
What do you all think about it?
