|
On July 24 2011 15:18 SxYSpAz wrote:It seems like a lot of people (not saying op... at all) are confusing "it was inevitable, this marks a point in esports, it's good for the growth of starcraft" as EG having acceptable behavior. Yes, EG taught a lesson to esports that would inevitably happen if players were continually not on contracts. It was completely within legal bounds and as competition it is a logical move to make. It's still unethical. Really, the only thing EG sacrificed here, IMO, is respect. I will respect them much less as a company now, other companies will respect them less, and i'm sure a lot of other TL posters and the SC community will agree. If they're out to make money and do it legally, i guess that shouldn't matter to them but there are other teams and organizations that wouldn't do this, and those teams have a much bigger place in meh heart. <3 TL! Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 12:49 ComusLoM wrote:
1. Buy Player disregarding the players native culture
2. Either leave him in Korea or bring him to an incomplete team house without coaching or suitably skilled practice partners (eg says they have something planned not sure what)
3. Have player represent you either in Korea (good luck) or foreign events where he will be beaten by Koreans on real teams.
I just don't understand what EG is thinking with this kind of move Puma will be terrible in 3 months if he stays outside of the Korean practice ethos with coach and partners. And they'll be left where they started. I was wondering the same thing. Although more than this being a stupid move by EG, it seems like a stupid move by puma. EG wants a player with fame, check. A player that can help their players play well, check. Lastly a player that is better than the ones they have recruited, check. Puma doesn't have to keep winning tournaments, cause the players they have now aren't winning any as it is, but if he helps the team get better, bulks up their lineup and brings them attention, and even if he happens to drop in skill level, he can still maintain being better than a lot of the EG guys, and is all-in-all a great deal for EG. Alex did say that he wouldn't sign him if he didn't believe that he could support and nurture his talent as well. I think the best option would be for him to stay in korea honestly, and that would still be worse than being in a house full of korean players... So ultimately, it would seem the SK deal is much more reasonable. I will be waiting to see what mystical practice plans they have lined up for Puma though.
The only actual lessons to take from this whole situation is these two:
- Follow up the discussion the player & coach has. EG took Puma at his word, which apparently was accurate, but the Coach wasn't happy after the fact.
- Coach Lee pulled a completely bush-league move whining to the public. At this point, it was just whining. And, while I'd wouldn't be too happy, you don't go whining to the media. You call up and yell at EG.
The truth is that EG was approaching players, they find out that a guy in Ro4 @ NASL, who 3-killed Prime the week before (including Polt & MKP), was under no form of contract. They talk more, map out what they can do for Puma, and agree he should talk to his Coach about the offer. This, in every facet of life, is good business practice. The problem is the Coach took it well, then didn't take it well.
The real big problem was that Coach Lee went to the media, rather than calling up Alex and yelling at him. Airing a grievance in public, especially since the main issue is your own short-sightedness, just isn't good business or a good move, period. If he hadn't caught EG flatfooted (which they definitely were, same with the SOTG situation), most here would be raging hard at TSL. Coach Lee told Puma he was okay with him going to EG, throws a "going away" party for Puma, then goes crying to the Korean SC2 sites, complaining about the mean-old foreign company buying up a player he didn't have under contract. While he may be an emotional guy and a solid player coach (from all accounts), his business sense is really, really bad. TSL simply won't survive much longer, more than likely, if he likes to back-stab people like that.
So, this actually will, in the end, be a good thing for the scene. SC2con has to start acting smarter and the Korean teams will have to step up their business side of things.
|
On July 23 2011 02:12 VGhost wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2011 00:16 IslandLife wrote:On July 22 2011 22:44 VGhost wrote:On July 22 2011 16:42 IslandLife wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 22 2011 15:15 Dayrlan wrote:(This will be somewhat long. Please choose to read it all before responding to any piece of it.) I think this article/post makes many excellent points, but it ignores one significant piece: The display of international business ethics (or in my opinion, lack thereof) from Evil Geniuses. Indeed, if you re-watch the recent Weapon of Choice episode and trace the conversation, it is easily to notice that the conversation originally was a debate over TSL Coach Lee Won Jae's anger at EG's behavior. The salient observation is that after Milkis (convincingly) made the point that EG's behavior was extremely rude and improper by Korean cultural standards, Mr. Garfield of EG changed the entire direction of the conversation towards his insinuation that Milkis was at fault for damaging EG. Indeed, as a previous poster points out, Mr. Garfield has significant experience and skill with PR compared to Milkis, and in my opinion, he specifically leveraged this advantage to deflect the fact that Evil Geniuses blatantly disrespected Team TSL (at least, we can all presumably agree: "by Korean standards"). So while the OP brings up a number of "lessons" from this whole event (highlighted in bold), allow me to claim another: As Starcraft 2 ESPORTS grows to a global scale, managers and other ESPORTS agents must strive to be aware of and (reasonably) sensitive to individual countries' cultural values.And a corollary: If you ignore or disregard a culture's values, you're digging your own grave.[[For the next chunk, I'm going to make an assumption about international business ethics that I believe is true, but I'll briefly address "if you believe something else" right afterward. Look after the first set of dashes separating sections for that.]] From the perspective of an international businessman interested in signing a player in Korea, you have to take the (general) perspective that you're a non-native purchasing an asset in a foreign country. Necessarily, this is going to involve some type of interaction with the people of that country. After all, you're entering another country in order to do business. Thought experiment time: Imagine that a foreign company enters your country to do business and sets up a factory a mile from your hometown. Then suppose they dump all types of industrial pollutants into the environment, including toxic waste into a river that supplies your town with drinking water. As a result, many of your friends become sick. Your mother comes down with a severe fever and must go to the hospital for two weeks to recover. Obviously, this company is in the ethical wrong, yes? Of course if your country has domestic environmental policy laws forbidding this behavior, the company would be in the legal wrong too. But let's even suppose that no such laws exist. Still -- What would your reaction be? (Feel free to insert alternate culturally/ethically offensive behavior by this hypothetical company as desired.) I think you'd be pissed. I think you'd be mad as hell. I think you'd be right. No one's argued with the fact that it's a cultural expectation in Korea that if a team is interested in recruiting the player, that the manager of that team speak with the manager of the player's team directly. In my opinion, EG blatantly violated this, a cultural value of Korea, in allowing the negotiations regarding Puma to go as far as they did before contacting TSL management directly. --- On the other hand, there's the tacit response: "Look. This is Business; stop being so naive. Business is a cut-throat, no-holds-barred, cold-hearted thing, where money talks, and that's that." So hey, let's throw ethics entirely out the window (or, perhaps, just disagree with me about whether it's Korea's ethics that should be respected (despite the fact that, well, this is a Korean player previously on a Korean team we're discussing)). What's the bare-bones utilitarian outcome of this entire thing? Frankly, even if EG profits considerably by adding Puma to their roster (even with all of this dramatic ado), they've still seriously damaged their relationship with Coach Lee Woon Jae, their relationship with Team TSL, and their reputation in the eyes of some (if not many) Korean fans. A clear consequence is that EG cannot continue behaving this way repeatedly. If they do, they risk alienating a greater and greater segment of the SC2 community. Cut off one friend. Cut off another. Eventually, you won't have any friends. ( This means you, EG.) --- That all said, I tend to agree with djWHEAT's commentary at the end of the Weapon of Choice episode (as well as the general theme of the OP): Despite everything going on here, Puma should end up ahead, and that's a GOOD thing. But importantly, don't let that distract you from the fact that there's a possible world out there, where EG behaves more appropriately, TSL's coach keeps his dignity, and Puma still gets the same great outcome in the end. Saying it is a cultural expectation that you talk with the coach first is ludicrous. I haven't read the whole thing, but I don't think eSports is mentioned in the "Analects of Confucius". Tell you what, set up a poll and ask all the employees over at Samsung if they think it'd be cool to, just, you know, hang out and work without a contract so they can sleep on a 요 and eat 만두 and 냉면 all summer. Mmmmm 냉면. To tell you the truth, I think EG will be one of the few teams to survive as this scene becomes more and more popular. At least they have an inkling of business sense. Consider: 1) In the NFL, MLB, etc. we routinely get media drama when another team's management has allegedly been talking to a player without anybody telling his current team. So even going by the standards of (American) pro sports, EG was out of line here (assuming for the sake of argument that everything went down as TSL alleges). 2) From what I know of Korean culture, the "community" reigns supreme, whether that "community" is the country, the business you work for, your school, church, etc. - and especially given the esports model Korea is used to TSL clearly would have expected any negotiations to go through them even if Puma wasn't under a formal contract. So the long and the short of it is that EG screwed up on a politeness/PR standpoint, even though they didn't do anything illegal or even underhanded (from what I know now). On the other hand, TSL has been repeatedly in the news do to player dissatisfaction, leading several times to players leaving, so I'm inclined to doubt that the screw-ups are all on EG's side. 1) Well yeah, that's because those players are under contract. This is like a team complaining that someone "stole" the water boy who happened to get in the fourth quarter after a bunch of injuries and throw a winning touchdown pass. Just doesn't add up. 2) Yes, you are absolutely correct that there is a large emphasis on the "community", but it doesn't apply in this case. There is no such thing as talking with a potential employee's boss/manager when hiring in Korea. The potential employee doesn't have to say anything, and could put in their notice for any reason (scary thing is it's very common for Korean bosses to immediately fire people who give notice). If you have good rapport with your boss, though, he/she is very likely to beat the offer of the other company if they wish to keep you. It isn't seen as a betrayal or insult. If you really want to run with the "community" thing, why in the world would that coach say anything before that poor kid signed with EG? Can you even imagine what Puma is going through in his head? Listen, I've dealt with enough Korean bosses to see this as a guy who was angry with himself for not having money to sign Puma, and he lashed out without considering Puma's feelings or future for even a second. Doubt Puma has even gone through mandatory military service yet. With all that in my mind at that age I would crack! I mentioned this in a post in another thread, but it's applicable here, too. Go look up the history of iPhone releases in Korea and I think you'll see the general Korean response to foreign competition. Both you and Grimsong replied to (1) and (2) as though they were separate points, while they were intended as premises leading up to my conclusion of, "So the long and the short of it is that EG screwed up on a politeness/PR standpoint, even though they didn't do anything illegal or even underhanded (from what I know now)." I'm sorry if that was unclear, so let me restate my argument in shorter terms: - It's generally accepted in (established) sports that the team has some say in player negotiations - This has applied in Korean esports as well even though contracts aren't as prevalent (or mandated) - Therefore, EG/Puma, based on available information did cross a line with regards to "politeness" or "business culture", even though what they did was apparently perfectly legal and had no bad intent.
Well I've been trying to be delicate but I'll just try to sum up what I've been trying to say in multiple threads. TSL cannot simultaneously have kids on their team without a contract and claim they have a right to be contacted about transfers.
If you would like a terribly in-depth explanation PM me and I'd be happy to send you one, but absolutely no Korean businesses work like that. I completely understand your reasoning, but it only works with a contract. There are no cultural grounds or precedence for claiming you have a say in an employee's decisions if they are not under contract. Because they are not an employee! And I will blatantly say that I think most Korean teams would not have reacted the way coach Lee did.
His team is failing, he did not act like an adult, and quite frankly he is bending the truth to put it nicely. Take a second and put yourself in his shoes. Would you spoil a kid's chance to make a living doing what he loves, spoil a kid's chance to broaden his cultural horizons, and injure a kid's image in the eyes of the SC2 community? I think a responsible adult would keep his mouth shut and be happy that a young kid has an opportunity that you couldn't provide him.
|
Really great article. I agree with almost 99% in the article. Good work
|
Just because it's legal doesn't mean we can't say it was still a dick move.
|
On July 23 2011 02:12 Hawk wrote:
while the whole think with milkis on the show wasnt exactly handled great, he absolutely has a responsibility as a writer of Teamliquid--which has starcraft progamming news very clearly under the banner--to reach out to EG for an official comment. Just because there's no official release doesn't mean you just drop one side of the story and let it be without any fact checking, even if you're a translator. Shit, even fucking deadspin adheres to the very basic news rule of reaching out for comment by the party that's about to be a subject in a big controversy
This is wrong in just about every sense. The story is that Puma left TSL for EG. There is no opinion or spin necessary. All issues of motivation are background that are always released after the news breaks. That's the reality of modern news.
What's more, the news was not broken by Milkis, but by the Korean sites he translated and summarized for this community. His role is entirely removed from that of reporting, his responsibility is to be accurate in his translation, nothing more.
And, as if that wasn't enough, Milkis asked SirScoots to say something about it on twitter, fulfilling the role that EG has improperly assigned to him. But all we got for the many hours between OP and WoC was trolling from scoots and incontrol on twitter, and complete silence. Not the actions you can take on your way to claiming victim status.
|
On July 24 2011 17:16 Taf the Ghost wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2011 15:18 SxYSpAz wrote:It seems like a lot of people (not saying op... at all) are confusing "it was inevitable, this marks a point in esports, it's good for the growth of starcraft" as EG having acceptable behavior. Yes, EG taught a lesson to esports that would inevitably happen if players were continually not on contracts. It was completely within legal bounds and as competition it is a logical move to make. It's still unethical. Really, the only thing EG sacrificed here, IMO, is respect. I will respect them much less as a company now, other companies will respect them less, and i'm sure a lot of other TL posters and the SC community will agree. If they're out to make money and do it legally, i guess that shouldn't matter to them but there are other teams and organizations that wouldn't do this, and those teams have a much bigger place in meh heart. <3 TL! On July 22 2011 12:49 ComusLoM wrote:
1. Buy Player disregarding the players native culture
2. Either leave him in Korea or bring him to an incomplete team house without coaching or suitably skilled practice partners (eg says they have something planned not sure what)
3. Have player represent you either in Korea (good luck) or foreign events where he will be beaten by Koreans on real teams.
I just don't understand what EG is thinking with this kind of move Puma will be terrible in 3 months if he stays outside of the Korean practice ethos with coach and partners. And they'll be left where they started. I was wondering the same thing. Although more than this being a stupid move by EG, it seems like a stupid move by puma. EG wants a player with fame, check. A player that can help their players play well, check. Lastly a player that is better than the ones they have recruited, check. Puma doesn't have to keep winning tournaments, cause the players they have now aren't winning any as it is, but if he helps the team get better, bulks up their lineup and brings them attention, and even if he happens to drop in skill level, he can still maintain being better than a lot of the EG guys, and is all-in-all a great deal for EG. Alex did say that he wouldn't sign him if he didn't believe that he could support and nurture his talent as well. I think the best option would be for him to stay in korea honestly, and that would still be worse than being in a house full of korean players... So ultimately, it would seem the SK deal is much more reasonable. I will be waiting to see what mystical practice plans they have lined up for Puma though. The only actual lessons to take from this whole situation is these two: - Follow up the discussion the player & coach has. EG took Puma at his word, which apparently was accurate, but the Coach wasn't happy after the fact. - Coach Lee pulled a completely bush-league move whining to the public. At this point, it was just whining. And, while I'd wouldn't be too happy, you don't go whining to the media. You call up and yell at EG. The truth is that EG was approaching players, they find out that a guy in Ro4 @ NASL, who 3-killed Prime the week before (including Polt & MKP), was under no form of contract. They talk more, map out what they can do for Puma, and agree he should talk to his Coach about the offer. This, in every facet of life, is good business practice. The problem is the Coach took it well, then didn't take it well. The real big problem was that Coach Lee went to the media, rather than calling up Alex and yelling at him. Airing a grievance in public, especially since the main issue is your own short-sightedness, just isn't good business or a good move, period. If he hadn't caught EG flatfooted (which they definitely were, same with the SOTG situation), most here would be raging hard at TSL. Coach Lee told Puma he was okay with him going to EG, throws a "going away" party for Puma, then goes crying to the Korean SC2 sites, complaining about the mean-old foreign company buying up a player he didn't have under contract. While he may be an emotional guy and a solid player coach (from all accounts), his business sense is really, really bad. TSL simply won't survive much longer, more than likely, if he likes to back-stab people like that. So, this actually will, in the end, be a good thing for the scene. SC2con has to start acting smarter and the Korean teams will have to step up their business side of things.
I dont get how people claim that coach Lee's "whining" was a bad move. It was an excellent move. According to Americans, its all business, ethics has no place in today's society. If we take that stance Coach Lee definitely won with his "whining". I can guarantee you a lot more people will be supporting TSL now, including myself. I used to see them as a failing team but now I want them to be the underdog and prove themselves.
In terms of EG, sure they poached an A-class player by abusing the Korean trust system but they sure as hell didn't get him for free. Coach Lee literally destroyed them. Most koreans hate them. Most Foreigners (according to polls) also seem to have an unfavorable view of EG and their conduct. Puma will have a hard time developing due to Language barrier/different skill levels, if anything he will go back a few steps in terms of development. Puma's relationship with Koreans is forever tarnished aka less practice partners, even FD who also ditched TSL (in a more manly manner) had stuff to say to him.
If anything Coach Lee's "whining" was a definite win for TSL and a major blow to EG given the circumstances. They also deserve it. If anything, its EG that has a poor/short-sighted business approach. Lets poach a player from the center of Sc2 talent and make them hate us. Then we blame them for destroying e-sports. I'm sure that's good business for the future. Then again, not surprised since its Alex Garfield who has continuously done this without remorse time and time again from game to game.
|
-Let's call it for example International ESports Federation
-IEF sanctioned tournaments would be the best tournaments with the biggest prize money because of benefits/prestige to tournament organizer (what exactly, i do not know)
-All pro players and teams that want to be part of IEF tournaments must join IEF. There would be some nominal yearly fee, nothing big.
-IEF can ban, warn players or teams (puma controversy)
-IEF can set rules that players and teams must obey (contact coach lee first
-If you don't like how IEF handle things, you can put up your own association to compete against it. Extreme example of this is boxing with multiple competing associations.
This is a system most sports use. And some other poster said korea has an association like this but it is not global.
Can this be supported right now? I dunno, eSports is still really small.
|
On July 22 2011 12:07 57 Corvette wrote:
I don't see why things are so different with Starcraft 2 teams compared to teams from Brood war. Was there many/any conflicts like this in the past?
Why all of a sudden is this all important to people?
Because eSports wasn't quite as popular in the BW high, Now that it's gaining interest, it will be more corporatized, like an actual physical sport.
|
On July 25 2011 07:38 FluffyBinLaden wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 12:07 57 Corvette wrote:
I don't see why things are so different with Starcraft 2 teams compared to teams from Brood war. Was there many/any conflicts like this in the past?
Why all of a sudden is this all important to people? Because eSports wasn't quite as popular in the BW high, Now that it's gaining interest, it will be more corporatized, like an actual physical sport.
I would argue that BW is and has been MORE formalized and corporate for quite some time. Teams can't just have players stick around with no contract or license - if you thought KESPA-run B-teamers had the short end of the stick, it's arguable that young SC2 B-teamers are even worse off if they don't have contracts or salaries AT ALL.
Personally, I'm really happy to see this article - I was worried that I was the only one who saw the EG-TSL-Puma incident play out and was wondering some of the things that this article points out - that the lack of contracts sucks for both the players AND the teams. Puma's no newbie to formal team contracts with a background as a pretty strong BW B-teamer - he's experienced enough to make this decision, even though it apparently frustrated and saddened him. If this is what it takes for TSL to realize that verbal promises and agreements don't give their players the same security as a contract, so be it. It's not pretty, but it is what it is - a business, a formal sport with professional players on formalized teams. Hopefully TSL's realization will carry over to the rest of the Korean SC2 teams.
|
I think that in a roundabout way AG does have a point, he's just not phrasing it particularly well. The OP is correct in that Journalists "get things wrong" all the time, but you the article do not always gets laughed away and updated with a factually correct version.
If a newspaper publishes a factually incorrect article which cause damage to an organization or an individual then that newspaper is liable for defamation. If an organization suffers financial loss (or perceived financial loss) due to the error then they are within their rights to try to claim back these losses from the publication (although in the US, the first amendment offers some weighty protection to publishers).
The article printed on TL did contain errors that misrepresented AG's company. If this article directly - or indirectly - results in Puma pulling out of the deal then this would have a direct impact on EG's business, and there could be perceived financial loss.
I think the mistake AG made was attacking Milkis, who had no culpability whatsoever and was in no way at fault. If anyone is "to blame" it is TeamLiqiuid as in this scenario they are the publishers and are responsible for the factual content of what they publish. But then of course you get into this whole minefield of "what is news and what is the forum?" and the argument descends into mudslinging.
I would agree with AG that TL does need to show a degree of responsibility when publishing articles, even if said articles were originally from the forum or blogsphere. However I think that with TL's heritage as a community portal and with the open nature of the internet that there is always going to be close-to-the-knuckle journalism and you would be naive to think otherwise.
|
What errors did TL publish?
They simply published a translation of a report from Korea which was predominately quotes from Coach Lee. If Coach Lee is wrong, then he'd be liable for defamation (or libel, depending on your region) since, should EG be able to prove damage in court that their brand has been damaged, truth is not a defense to defamation in South Korea.
TL hasn't done anything wrong by publishing the comments of a coach, even if the coach's assertions are incorrect. You would have a hard time proving that what the coach says is wrong, especially since he has information inaccessible to anyone that wasn't directly involved. Furthermore, in some countries, you would also have difficulty proving that Coach Lee knew what he said was wrong, as opposed to expressing his opinion on the matter (First Amendment people?).
Think about the reverse of what you're saying: does TL mine through every article to see if the comments within are factually incorrect AND damaging to somebody's reputation?
It's unrealistic, unethical (because it makes TL a shell for the whim of companies who want to abuse community websites for their own PR purposes) and simply does not reflect how business, or journalism, is conducted on the internet.
I've already mentioned before that an article can go up and then be edited later to reflect both sides of the story. This is already done by most major news corporations. Look at the coverage of the Norway bombings, for example. News.com.au, a company under the wing of News Ltd, the Australian operations of News Corp, updated their coverage with timestamps.
In short: the article wasn't wrong, because the article didn't make any factual errors. It simply reposted the comments of someone who was wrong in his assertions. Blaming TL is nothing more than a cop-out and brings it into an area on conflict that should be squarely between EG and TSL.
|
Truthfully I think we could have gone without lumping in the journalism issue into this particular thread, but it was stated in the OP so it has grounds for discussion here, definitely. I think, however, that's a much smaller facet to really debate about as opposed to taking a look at the scale of the SC2 Scene and realizing that there is a huge reservoir of untapped potential primed for picking.
We also need to stop continually debating the EG/TSL issue here. This isn't the venue - there are two other massive threads that detail every little possible perspective on it. This isn't the place for it.
As a whole, this thread has alot of strong input that I think if looked and, you could definitely make a case for the need for there to be some type of committee or group that is a kind of guiding hand for the direction fo E-Sports. in particular SC2 on an international level. Just yesterday I was watching the Shoutcraft invitational which featured NA and EU. It's a huge step in the right direction.
It is short sighted to say that E-Sports is better off without Koreas involvement, and vice versa. As strong as Korea has always been in the SC scene, that has all gone out the window with SC2, essentially. The rest of the world took to it quicker than Korea did, and that is in no small part because of the presence of Kespa and BW. It would be best for the rest of the SC2 community to work with Korea, as opposed to working as two separate entities, but it seems the cultural gap is so huge that it would be impossible. Whether right or wrong, it is unfortunate for the E-Sport of SC2.
Truthfully, I think there definitely needs to be a comittee to oversee the sport as a whole. One that represents the players best interest, the teams best interests, the fans best interests, and above all else the game at a competitive level's best interest. A committee to drive progress as opposed to accepting complacency. The E-Sports world is evolving rapidly, remaining stagnant in such a fresh and interesting market is detrimental. There is, for the most part, an audience waiting for the SC2 scene to feed them content. It's high in demand.
High quality competition and content is a high demand in the SC2 community.
I believe there are a ton of fresh ideas yet to be expanded on within the professional community, and some ideas that have been touched on that have yet to realize their full potential. A huge step in the right direction is to add Koreas involvement in the open market, as opposed to solely theirs.
|
On July 25 2011 17:00 supeROLL wrote:
I think that in a roundabout way AG does have a point, he's just not phrasing it particularly well. The OP is correct in that Journalists "get things wrong" all the time, but you the article do not always gets laughed away and updated with a factually correct version.
If a newspaper publishes a factually incorrect article which cause damage to an organization or an individual then that newspaper is liable for defamation. If an organization suffers financial loss (or perceived financial loss) due to the error then they are within their rights to try to claim back these losses from the publication (although in the US, the first amendment offers some weighty protection to publishers).
The article printed on TL did contain errors that misrepresented AG's company. If this article directly - or indirectly - results in Puma pulling out of the deal then this would have a direct impact on EG's business, and there could be perceived financial loss.
I think the mistake AG made was attacking Milkis, who had no culpability whatsoever and was in no way at fault. If anyone is "to blame" it is TeamLiqiuid as in this scenario they are the publishers and are responsible for the factual content of what they publish. But then of course you get into this whole minefield of "what is news and what is the forum?" and the argument descends into mudslinging.
I would agree with AG that TL does need to show a degree of responsibility when publishing articles, even if said articles were originally from the forum or blogsphere. However I think that with TL's heritage as a community portal and with the open nature of the internet that there is always going to be close-to-the-knuckle journalism and you would be naive to think otherwise.
except 'making someone look bad' is not defamation unless it's false. nothing stated here was false, ergo it's not defamation. you are allowed to publicly say 'i think alex garfield is a disgusting piece of shit' (for example) but that's not defamation. if you were to say that alex garfield is a rapist, that would be defamation, because it's not a matter of opinion.
|
Very good read. I'd have to agree with pretty much everything you brought up. Fact is most of the budding player pool at the moment is a bunch of kids who just wanna play video games, rules and protocols need to be put in place legally to protect all parties involved and allow the industry to continue growth.
|
You're right, in this case the article was just a translation of a coach, and I couldn't say whether it was factually incorrect or not (although AG claimed that there were errors on WoC). Either way, TL couldn't be held liable for quoting someone else, nor is coach lee at fault for voicing an opinion.
But the argument wasn't strictly about this particular incident, it was about the culpability of journalists in general, even when those journalists are operating over the internet or in a "voluntary" capability. My point is that AG was incorrect, the journalist would never be liable regardless of the story, because - as you and many others have pointed out - this makes no sense.
The publisher though is a different story. I'm not a solicitor, so I couldn't tell you how (or if) these laws apply to the internet, when an article is considered "news" and when it isn't, or the how the rules change between each region. But just imagine for one moment if TL published a factually incorrect article on the home page under a big banner that says "Intel processors cause house fires". Maybe TL would have nothing worry about when Intel's legal team came knocking - "it's a community site" - or maybe they would. Personally, I wouldn't want to be the one to find out.
Now fast forward 12, 24, 36 months and replace the Intel story with a large e-sports team who have just lost a $1,000,000 valued deal due to an incorrect or poorly timed article. TL is not just a forum any more, that's the point, and whether they like it or not they have to accept the responsibility that the headlines they stick on the front page have a direct effect on people's business and people's livelihoods. You say that "regular newspapers don't give a shit" but I don't agree that this is entirely correct, and unless you have any factual insight into the real workings of a major news publisher then I think we might just have to agree to disagree.
|
On July 26 2011 01:08 Shiori wrote:
except 'making someone look bad' is not defamation unless it's false. nothing stated here was false, ergo it's not defamation. you are allowed to publicly say 'i think alex garfield is a disgusting piece of shit' (for example) but that's not defamation. if you were to say that alex garfield is a rapist, that would be defamation, because it's not a matter of opinion.
that's not the case in south korea; truth is not a defense against defamation/libel.
Republic of Korea
Korea is interesting as truth is not important with defamation; any words harming another can be considered illegal and may be punishable with fines and imprisonment. “Defamation” is covered by several laws in Korea, civil law, traditional criminal law & modern internet criminal law-under the 'Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Data Protection, etc.' (internet and email related laws) – 2005 CHAPTER IX Article 61 (Penal Provisions) This shows defamation varies significantly from North American laws and in general by country and by case. As image and 'public face' is very important in East Asia, it is incredibly easy to sue for 'loss of face' (defamation) in Korea. Even middle school students are active with cases (Little Suzie said my son was 'stupid', etc.).
taken from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation#Republic_of_Korea
|
How can Milkis be at fault for EG not making a statement in a timely fashion? Coach Lee made a statement, Milkis translated it for us all out of his own generosity, and EG says Milkis is guilty of defamation. I would think it's EG's responsibility to provide us with EG's statement and facts.
I dont' think you can really say "I wasn't ready". If you're EG in this situation, and everyone is waiting to hear your side, you had better hop to it and release something--and not flame TL Journalism.
Edit: Listening to Weapon of choice now. I don't think the Journalistic Integrity is the problem in the first place. Using the Puma events as an example, I don't think the issue is weather or not Milkis would have done well to reach out to EG, I think it's that EG hadn't came out with anything themselves. If you've got something on this level brewing, you'd better be prepared to speak about it. From what I know, I would agree that everything happened very quickly... you wake up and there's postings and tweets everywhere.... EG can't control that, but it's not the translators job to put anything on hold to check here and there and see if there's anyone in the world that would like to add a statement. EG MUST be the ones who respond, and they need to do it quickly. I know Garfield wasn't accusatory, it's just the example at hand.
If an natural gas line bursts, ignites, and burns down 10 city blocks in a fiery inferno, they gas company can't be upset that they didn't know it was going to happen... They should have worked to prevent it in the first place, and in the event it does happen, because shit does happen, they'd better have a good PR Department to smooth it over. In the Puma incident, shit happened, EG can't ask anyone to be accountable (not that they did), nobody's journalistic integrity can be questioned (because there isn't any to be expected at a forum, this isn't the New Your Times), and EG had better work quickly and display some finesse to smooth things over (Which I think they are doing).
|
Russian Federation1893 Posts
Only when players will become strong enough to contribute real deal to e-sports it will be established.
It is like you are cool businessman and you make football donations.
Future businessmen of us may find it rather "cool and funny" to donate in e-sports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
