Hugo Awards controversy

[Eyes of Nine]

tl;dr

Some nominees were marked as "not eligible" because North American Hugo award administrators pre-caved to what they thought the Chinese govm't might do

The 2023 Hugo Awards: A Report on Censorship and Exclusion - File 770

This report is being released simultaneously on File770 and Genre Grapevine and is also available to download as an e-book epub file and as a PDF. By Chris M. Barkley and Jason Sanford “You acquire information and you convey the information. That’s the job.” ++ National Public Radio News...

file770.com

Comments on Scalzi’s blog are interesting. A) At next WorldCon in Glasgow members could vote to “redo” the Hugos and when in Seattle in 2025 they could do both the 2023 and 2025 Hugos. Also, B) …historian Timothy Snyder’s first rule on resisting authoritarianism:

Do not obey in advance. Much of the power of authoritarianism is freely given. In times like these, individuals think ahead about what a more repressive government will want, and then start to do it without being asked. You’ve already done this, haven’t you? Stop. Anticipatory obedience teaches authorities what is possible and accelerates unfreedom.

 

[overgeeked]

Yeah. This is absolutely nuts. And they just got done with the various bigoted “puppies” controversies. Daniel Greene has been doing some coverage of this. He talks about the leaked emails in the most recent video on the topic.

 

[Umbran]

Also, B) …historian Timothy Snyder’s first rule on resisting authoritarianism:

The actual first step on resisting authoritarianism in this case would have been to make a big deal about and campaign against having Worldcon in China, citing its authoritarian abuses as the reason. I'm guessing the concom didn't do that. So, resistance wasn't their primary goal.

Once you are holding an convention in China, some acceptance of the authoritarianism is required, or your con doesn't run.

 

[eyeheartawk]

Science fiction books are often and most famously, at least in some way, about the dangers of authority in the wrong hands and run amok in some fashion.

Therefore it follows that the first step to holding a convention about these works is to hold them in an authoritian country that censors your artistic expression and you pre-emptively lick that boot.

It's only natural.

I don't know what the second step is, but obviously the third step is profit.

 

[Umbran]

I don't know what the second step is, but obviously the third step is profit.

I think most of the sites WorldCom uses are bid by not-for-profit organizations.

 

[eyeheartawk]

I think most of the sites WorldCom uses are bid by not-for-profit organizations.

Yeah, I was just making a dumb South Park reference.

 

[Umbran]

Yeah, I was just making a dumb South Park reference.

I know. But the insinuation was still there, so I felt it bore a note.

And, it is important to remember that the site for Worldcon is voted on by the membership. So, in effect, the community chose to have the con in China.

The Convention Committee then did some shenanigans, for which they should be ashamed. But the community maybe ought to think about its choice as part of the problem.

 

[eyeheartawk]

I know. But the insinuation was still there, so I felt it bore a note.

And, it is important to remember that the site for Worldcon is voted on by the membership. So, in effect, the community chose to have the con in China.

The Convention Committee then did some shenanigans, for which they should be ashamed. But the community maybe ought to think about its choice as part of the problem.

That's the thing, though. In the report they insinuate right at the beginning that alot of the votes for China had just email addresses and no physical addresses attached to them as well, which is the norm. I don't think they have proof that there was some vote pumping here, but I think that's notable.

 

[Clint_L]

The con should never have been held in China in the first place, as the voting for the locale was already highly suspect. When the first thing you do is change the rules to account for irregularities, you've already started on the downhill slope. And that's setting aside China's record as a totalitarian regime that routinely violates human rights. Just stop hosting world events in one party states.

So what followed, as detailed in that report, is shocking but not surprising. Inevitable seems like a better word.

 

[Umbran]

That's the thing, though. In the report they insinuate right at the beginning that alot of the votes for China had just email addresses and no physical addresses attached to them as well, which is the norm. I don't think they have proof that there was some vote pumping here, but I think that's notable.

Sure. I don't know that this changes the point much.

I mean, the fans of science fiction, supposedly forward-looking, after already having seen attempts to manipulate voting, didn't take steps to prevent ballot stuffing? When the point was raised at the time, DisCon allowed those ballots.

In the electronic age, if you're going to be naive about accepting ballots, you don't really get to whine that the bad guys did it to you. Own the error and fix it.