WotC WotC blacklist. Discussion


log in or register to remove this ad

The hold advanced pressers for other media outlets regularly. None which are included in the surveys, so they aren't considered thought leaders like EN World. But, they still get early access and exclusive interviews.

Yeah, Polygon and Comic Book Resources were nor name checked in the survey, but they get invites to advance press events by WotC all the time.

We're actually better positioned not part of that PR schedule. We're not bound by embargoes and can post news when we learn it (which is almost always before that date). The actual information in those articles is generally compiled here within minutes, so the advance access doesn't actually have a real value. It gives us a real flexibility. Most of the larger outlets aren't really interested in the level of detail we're used to anyway--the articles are more for a broad audience than the more hard core fans who read TTRPG news sites.

So, per Morrus - I don't think, "Not invited to get information you already had gotten yourself beforehand," counts as being, "blacklisted".
 

It’s barely “a thing” in the US either, but certain talking heads have made a concerted effort to use the term to describe anything vaguely progressive and work their followers up into a frenzy over the idea of it being “taught in schools.”

It is a highly political thing here in the US, so anything more than stating what it is will violate the rules here. It is taught/discussed in some colleges, but that is about it.
 



Liked CBR better when it was a dedicated comics site, instead of yet another listicle factory. Only reason I still visit there is the extant community, still chugging along on forum software two generations out of date.
CBR sold to an entertainment platform several years back, and that is the change you're noting. Prior ownership was top notch. Current ownership I don't know, other than to say they're less personally invested in the site.
 

Curious what he meant about a blacklist, then.

Maybe he meant more the media blackout list he has now referred to, as something they do not have to worry about because they are not part of the PR for upcoming products? A blacklist of people/companies not to share previews/promos with is a lot different than a blacklist of companies/people they will not hire or work with.
 

Curious what he meant about a blacklist, then.

I assume he was talking about WotC having a informal list of individuals who caused sufficient issues as to not be worth working with in the future. And by informal list, I mean that it likely isn't written down anywhere - it might be institutional knowledge. From context, it sounds like it might have some former employees, contractors, and freelancers on it? Like, "Joe Schmoe? He blew his deadlines over and over, and only gave us excuses. Don't pitch work his way any more."

I can see the fear some might have - that if an abuser had influence on who was "on the list", that could enable their abuse - anyone who complained about the abuser would wind up "on the list".

To my knowledge, there has been no conflict between WotC and EN World or Morrus, such that we'd be on such a list.
 


The OP quotes Morrus. Obviously the quote doesn't mean he is saying EnWorld is blacklisted, but it could look like that. And I believe the discussion is more generally about WotC having a blacklist.

Now that fact the Morrus hasn't clarified the statement makes one question it to some degree.

EDIT: Personally I think having blacklist is fine. The issue is how you use such a list and how one gets on or off the list.
Yeah, there's a MUCH smarter way of doing it. You create a list of preferred vendors, a WHITELIST, and put people on it with whom product people (or whomever makes these calls) are automatically cleared to work with. If they have some really good reason they need some non-approved people, they can make the case for that with vendor management or whatever, and either add people to the list or make an exception. Vendor management itself MIGHT keep a list of 'non-preferred providers' that you probably won't get approved to work with. That's how most bigger companies do it. Nobody is actually blacklisted, and any preference for/against is limited to a very specific context.

The problem with just making lists of 'bad people' is obviously how easy it is to abuse, but also how fraught it is. If I find out I've been put on your list, I may very well have a cause for action against you! OTOH a whitelist is completely uncontroversial, its just 'supply chain management'.
 

Remove ads

Top