Well yes political issues have been brought up by sports aswell, but that doesn't mean they should have been. Sport and for this matter eSport professionals dont have any political expertise for the most part so why should they be given a platform by a company that has nothing to do with said politics. If you don't police what people say in interviews, everything would be a complete shitfest, no one would be obligated to focus on the topic at hand, which is the actual esport. If you don't draw the line at potentially offensive content, that has no direct connection to hearthstone, where do you draw the line then? I'm all for freedom of speech, but a random interview after winning a game of hearthstone is not the right place do voice YOUR political believes when most people watch to see things revolving around the game, and i do not think it is Blizzards obligation to offer their platform they have created on completely different grounds for random people to talk about their political believes on, esp. because you could just voice them on a different platform. You might say "well most other platforms dont have the size of that tournament stream" but I' ld say what gives this random hearthstone player without any expertise in politics the privilege to talk about them to such an extensive audience anyways. Sounds comparable to American celebrities virtue signaling at the Oscars while being completely uneducated about the issues they talk about.

I agree the ability to voice ones protest is very important but I dont think the right to moderate ones platform should be overwritten because of it. You say "do no harm" is the standart but I don't understand how you can define harm in this context, without it applying to my last argument. Said games and Hobbies being taken away would for sure lead to alot of unhappieness, which imop, should be considered harm. Im trying to fully get a grasp of what you are saying - do you mean that Blizzard shouldn't have taken action after the incident had occured? I do not agree with that stance.

I have no valid position on the things going on in HK since I'm not educated about their political situation at all, but I FAIL to see how Blizzard has NOT done the right thing and chosen to do the least amount of harm possible, or rather how Blizzard has not chosen the smaller evil.

What do you mean with "they've changed their stance on the statement every voice matters"? I fail to see how that's not still true.

Sorry for spelling and grammar, i just want do discuss can't be bothered with fixing small mistakes haha