{"title":"“Our world is worth fighting for”: Gas mask agency, copypasta sit-ins, and the material-discursive practices of the Blitzchung controversy","authors":"Elizabeth F. Chamberlain","doi":"10.1016/j.compcom.2022.102725","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In 2019, video game giant Blizzard banned a competitive e-sports player who made a pro-Hong Kong statement during a post-game interview. The international game community responded with outrage, organizing both on- and offline actions to provoke change within the organization. This article examines the #BoycottBlizzard gaming counterpublic via deceptively discrete mixed methods: a new materialist investigation of protest gear and a distant reading of a Reddit dataset of 3500 posts between October 7 and 10, 2019. The investigation concludes that gas masks demonstrate nonhuman aleatory agency in the #BoycottBlizzard protest movement, by inserting subversive subtext into costumes and gameplay. Online, protestors relied heavily on other resistance tactics, including using Twitch copypasta spam; this article suggests this form of resistance functions similarly to a sit-in. Finally, the article iconographically tracks the rise and dissemination of a particular meme image representing the movement's appointed mascot, a Chinese climatologist named Mei. Ultimately, the Blitzchung counterpublic achieved only modest success; the player's ban was reversed and his prize money reinstated, but many protestors considered Blizzard's response milquetoast. However, this analysis proposes that the Blitzchung counterpublic likely emboldened the 2021 #BoycottBlizzard movement and may in some measure be responsible for its success.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":35773,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Composition","volume":"65 ","pages":"Article 102725"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers and Composition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S8755461522000330","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In 2019, video game giant Blizzard banned a competitive e-sports player who made a pro-Hong Kong statement during a post-game interview. The international game community responded with outrage, organizing both on- and offline actions to provoke change within the organization. This article examines the #BoycottBlizzard gaming counterpublic via deceptively discrete mixed methods: a new materialist investigation of protest gear and a distant reading of a Reddit dataset of 3500 posts between October 7 and 10, 2019. The investigation concludes that gas masks demonstrate nonhuman aleatory agency in the #BoycottBlizzard protest movement, by inserting subversive subtext into costumes and gameplay. Online, protestors relied heavily on other resistance tactics, including using Twitch copypasta spam; this article suggests this form of resistance functions similarly to a sit-in. Finally, the article iconographically tracks the rise and dissemination of a particular meme image representing the movement's appointed mascot, a Chinese climatologist named Mei. Ultimately, the Blitzchung counterpublic achieved only modest success; the player's ban was reversed and his prize money reinstated, but many protestors considered Blizzard's response milquetoast. However, this analysis proposes that the Blitzchung counterpublic likely emboldened the 2021 #BoycottBlizzard movement and may in some measure be responsible for its success.
期刊介绍:
Computers and Composition: An International Journal is devoted to exploring the use of computers in writing classes, writing programs, and writing research. It provides a forum for discussing issues connected with writing and computer use. It also offers information about integrating computers into writing programs on the basis of sound theoretical and pedagogical decisions, and empirical evidence. It welcomes articles, reviews, and letters to the Editors that may be of interest to readers, including descriptions of computer-aided writing and/or reading instruction, discussions of topics related to computer use of software development; explorations of controversial ethical, legal, or social issues related to the use of computers in writing programs.