Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Blizzard's BlizzCon Apology

GayGamer has more follow-up on yesterday's news of outcry over anti-gay slurs during the closing performance at BlizzCon 2011. They recieved an apology from Mike Morhaime, the president of Blizzard who is also apparently a member of Level 90 Elite Tauren Chieftain, the band that performed at the closing. Here's word:

Dear members of the Blizzard community,

I have read your feedback and comments about this year's BlizzCon, and I have also read the feedback to the apology from Level 90 Elite Tauren Chieftain. I'd like to respond to some of your feedback here.

As president of Blizzard, I take full responsibility for everything that occurs at BlizzCon.

It was shortsighted and insensitive to use the video at all, even in censored form. The language used in the original version, including the slurs and use of sexual orientation as an insult, is not acceptable, period. We realize now that having even an edited version at the show was counter to the standards we try to maintain in our forums and in our games. Doing so was an error in judgment, and we regret it.

The bottom line is we deeply apologize for our mistakes and for hurting or offending anyone. We want you to have fun at our events, and we want everyone to feel welcome. We're proud to be part of a huge and diverse community, and I am proud that so many aspects of the community are represented within Blizzard itself.

As a leader of Blizzard, and a member of the band, I truly hope you will accept my humblest apology.

- Mike Morhaime President, Blizzard Entertainment

Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at the bottom of the form.

104. Re: Blizzard's BlizzCon Apology Oct 29, 2011, 16:42 Bhruic
 
Generally, you don't call someone you like a "total hypocrite"

I'll assume you were using the general "you" there? Because me liking someone wouldn't stop me from calling them a total hypocrite if that's what they were being.

I'm in no way being hypocritical - I have pointed out the distinct difference in the two scenarios so the fact the you choose to persist in claiming I am is further proof you have a bone to pick with me.

You haven't done anything to demonstrate that you are not. You are relying on the first amendment to support your position that people should be able to say what they wish without being "attacked" by organizations like GLAAD. But the exact same first amendment gives the right to organizations like GLAAD to make such "attacks". If you are for the former, but against the latter, that is a hypocritical position.

The only thing you've done so far is argue the degree of severity of each case. Fine, I'll grant that GLAAD uses their freedom of speech in more extreme ways than posters here have done. But that's more a situational issue than relevant to the matter at hand. Posters here have no influence to enact the sort of repercussions that an influential organization like GLAAD can. But even if they could, but weren't, how would the severity impact on freedom of speech? Your only argument would have to be (and has been) that the free speech that GLAAD is using shouldn't be acceptable. Which just leads right back to selective free speech.

I'm a bit surprised that someone who generally debates intelligently resorts to low-brow derailing tactics rather than addressing the point.

You didn't seem interested in addressing the point, you seemed more interested in issuing insults. Once someone starts insulting me to try and make their point, I take them much less seriously.

or do you wish to keep being pithy and obnoxious?

Apparently I'm making an exception in your case.

So now, did you want to discuss something of substance

If you want people to discuss substance, perhaps you shouldn't claim that you'll stop addressing their substance if they do discuss it.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
Subject
Comment
     
 
      ;)   ;)   :(   :(   :o   :o   %)   %)   :)   :)   :|   :|   ;P   ;P   X|   X|   :D   :D   More
 
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you have a signature set up, it will be automatically appended to your comment.
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.
 
          Email me when this topic is updated.
 

Special Codes

  • b[bold text]b
  • i[italic text]i
  • u[underline text]u
  • -[strikethrough text]-
  • c[code text]c
  • +[bullet point]+
  • q[quote text (indented)]q
  • [quote="Author"]quote text (indented)[/quote]
  • [url=Link]text[/url]
  • r{red text}r
  • g{green text}g
  • b{blue text}b
  • m{maroon text}m
  • s{secret text (shows in the background colour)}s

Forum Rules

  1. Disagree all you want but attacks of a personal nature will not be tolerated.
  2. Ethnic slurs and homophobic language will not be tolerated.
  3. Do not post spam, links to warez sites, or instructions on how to obtain pirated software.
  4. Abusing the forums in any manner that could be construed as 'griefing' will not be tolerated.


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo