Another reason is access to the Chinese market. Congress can't really do anything to stop companies from complying with the Chinese government so that they can publish their games in the Chinese market.
It's an intl trade issue, it's impossible to expect every company to stand up to the CCP when they use access to one of the biggest markets in the world as a weapon
China has an interest in their global censorship, American companies don't have the same impetus towards free speech. China has roughly 4x the population of the United States, and, as their GDP per capita raises, they will increasingly start to fulfill the American role: vacuuming up trade surpluses. It would be a poor business decision for Western companies to not seek the larger, emerging market.
These companies don't have nations, they just have the pursuit of shareholder value. You're fooling yourself if they're going to express any sort of value system contrary to that stated goal.
That's because you reduce it to the word "freedom of speech", and then expand it again, to all sorts of other things. Call it freedom to criticize governments, totalitarianism, murder, and so on, and there will be no issue.
https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/.premium.MAGAZINE-a-milli...
Most people don't want to be treated like this. So, either they are against it, or they don't get to speak anything on the matter, being hypocrites. A double standard is no standard. It really is that simple.
When specifically talking about Blizzard, yes, but not when you think of companies like Riot.
The point is, this is a long term issue of national security. US companies bolstering a foreign authoritarian regime by facilitating it's propaganda and censorship gives aid an comfort to a regime incompatible with our values.
The rank and file employees who by all accounts had nothing to do with this decision, and don't support it?
I generally agree with the position against censorship on behest of an authoritarian government, but I find the harassment of Blizzard employee's appalling.
The employees by and large who are attending BlizzCon want to do so to celebrate their hardwork and interact with their fanbase. I hardly think they deserve to feel dread.
If you're referring to GP's comment "They should be dreading it" then yes, obviously. They are and absolutely should be dreading this event. I would be. Wouldn't you?
> I generally agree with the position against censorship on behest of an authoritarian government, but I find the harassment of Blizzard employee's appalling.
No one has said anything about harassing Blizzard employees. What on Earth are you talking about?
> The employees by and large who are attending BlizzCon want to do so to celebrate their hardwork and interact with their fanbase. I hardly think they deserve to feel dread.
Too bad. They should be dreading this event. Blizzard have publicly fucked up in a very big way, and now the people that represent Blizzard are going to have to deal with that.
"Employees said they have fielded venomous backlash on social media and in emails and been confronted by passersby while wearing company apparel off Blizzard’s campus."
From the article in question.
> Too bad. They should be dreading this event. Blizzard have publicly fucked up in a very big way, and now the people that represent Blizzard are going to have to deal with that.
What do you think the Blizzard employees are going to "have to deal with" if not harassment at BlizzCon?
None of this is harassment. You can't just use the word "harassment" any time someone challenges you or says something you don't like.
Certainly, a simple protest is not harassment, nor is asking pointed questions. But all it takes is one unhinged person to make it turn violent.
Likely? Not really. But certainly not outside the realm of possibility.
If your fans want to ask why you are betraying the values you espouse, then they're gonna ask it. And this is not harassment.
They will have to deal with negative publicity and people not liking their events, and refusing to buy their games, therefore causes them to be less successful?
Why shouldn't they deserve to receive negative financial impact, as a company, for doing stuff that pisses off customers?
maybe just annoyed at having to do lots of video editing to hide it from the CCP overlords.
Yes, them. Exactly them. They're likely going to be faced with protestors and other types of pushback, and it seems rational to not look forward to that. They're at the event representing their company, and so they must face the conequences of those decisions.
They should not, themselves, be directly blamed, but it's their job to front for the company, and that won't be a comfortable thing to do right now. Now though, if they decide to keep working for the company, they are complicit In it's actions because now they know better. I wouldn't expect them all to quit at once, but if they don't start looking around for other opportunities then they share an increasing part of the blame.
We all face this in our work. Decisions we disagree with, we must decide if it's something we can live with it not. If we decide we can live it then some level of culpability accrues to us. Certainly this can be mitigated by working to change things from within, but it's still a factor.
Every employee tacitly uses their labor to support the actions their company performs. They obviously don't have 100% culpability for everything the corporation does, but it's definitely not 0% either.
At the end of the day, while china is a huge market, it isn't the whole market.
That does mean, however, if you think that Blizzard's actions are immoral, then vote with your wallet. This doesn't work in every case (particularly where companies have practical monopolies on essential goods and services), but at the end of the day, Blizzard is a company that peddles luxury products.
0. https://investor.activision.com/news-releases/news-release-d...
Blizzard though set themselves up as being a bastion of western values, the turned against that when it came to Chinese criticism.
why is it immoral to play by the rules of a country in order to access that country's population? the country's people should decide for themselves how they should be governed. or do you think you know better?
In some countries, beating your wife is completely legal. Certainly you wouldn't argue that it's moral.
Laws aren't written by average people, they're written by politicians who do immoral things and get away with it. They allow immorality for their own benefits.
Businesses should have no power except to sell their products and services (Not even indirect power that helps them sell their products and services better)