PS3 News: Turtle Rock Community Manager Fired For Twitter Comments - PS3 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

Turtle Rock Community Manager Fired For Twitter Comments

Turtle Rock gave us Left 4 Dead and they're currently working on the very promising Evolve.

But now they're in the news for a different reason.

They've fired former community manager Josh Olin after he Tweeted about embattled Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling. Sterling was recently banned for life from the NBA and given the maximum $2.5 million fine for making racial comments to his girlfriend. Olin first Tweeted that Sterling was a "victim."

Turtle Rock apologized for Olin's comments, saying they don't represent the community's values. But Olin later clarified his comments to Kotaku:

"Anyone who follows me knows my tweets were not in support of Sterling's actions. Rather, they were promoting three core tenets I believe in: 1) The harm sensational media presents to society. 2) The importance and sanctity of your privacy within your own home. And 3) The right to be whatever you want to be as an American, as long as it isn't hurting anyone else. That last point not to be confused with condoning Sterling's actions, which I don't."

Olin added that he was disappointed that Turtle Rock and 2K "bought into this hysteria without even having a conversation with me." He also added on his Twitter page that he was attacking sensational media and defending free speech, and he stands by that.

So, should he have been fired? I'm not about to jump onto that land mine but you discuss among yourselves.

Tags: josh olin, donald sterling, turtle rock studios

5/1/2014 9:25:56 PM Ben Dutka

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

Comments (65 posts)

Shauneepeak
Thursday, May 01, 2014 @ 10:50:31 PM
Reply

I think it is pretty ridiculous he got fired. Also while I don't condone Sterling's behavior it is kind of messed up he got banned for life over a private comment he made in his own home that happened to be recorded. Least he wasn't out at the NBA games shouting similar things.

But whatever it is one thing for a filthy rich guy to be banned from owning a team and attending NBA games it is another for someone I assume is not rich to be fired over some comments made online.

Last edited by Shauneepeak on 5/1/2014 11:12:16 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Bonampak
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 2:20:47 PM

First of all, Sterling was a well known slumlord in LA. And who openly discriminated against minorities. So people need to get informed before they start hanging the tag "victim" on old Sterling.

Second of all, his GF had Sterling's full permission to record his conversations. That is why Sterling has not come forward accusing her of "setting him up" or doing it illegally. They had agreed about it.

In fact, Sterling's attorneys now are saying that the recording was leaked by someone else. Not his GF. So much for the conspiracy theory that his GF was working for Magic Johnson.

THIRD and the most important fact, is that FREE SPEECH doesn't come free of CONSEQUENCES.

That is something that both Sterling and Olin are going to have to learn the hard way. Because they are free to say whatever they want. But as long as they work for organizations that don't want to be dragged into a toxic situation, they are going to have to pay the consequences for voicing (to put it like Olin said on Twitter), "unpopular opinions".

Last edited by Bonampak on 5/2/2014 2:24:33 PM

Agree with this comment 4 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Thursday, May 01, 2014 @ 11:04:59 PM
Reply

I thought Valve didn't develop L4D. It's them Turtle Rock guys who did.

Last edited by Temjin001 on 5/1/2014 11:05:10 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, May 01, 2014 @ 11:07:16 PM

I always thought they made headphones.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Thursday, May 01, 2014 @ 11:15:26 PM

you might be right. Valve probably also makes crowbars.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, May 01, 2014 @ 11:33:06 PM

Turtle Beach! lol

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, May 01, 2014 @ 11:06:58 PM
Reply

I think it's fine for Sterling to be saying any racist thing he wants to anybody but once it goes public then it's also fine for him to pay for it. You can't have someone in power that's openly racist in a position to use discriminatory practices. From there it's all business, nobody wants to work for, attend, buy merchandise from, or buy advertising during events with a man like that in charge. This isn't his first racist rodeo, he has a record of it and now it's just public. You reap what you sow.

As for Olin, same goes pretty much. Your twitter feed is watched by industry folks and you represent your studio so you can't bring hell down on them.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Shauneepeak
Thursday, May 01, 2014 @ 11:24:44 PM

This was Olin's comment it is still on his Twitter feed.
"Here's an unpopular opinion: Donald Sterling has the right as an American to be an old bigot in the security of his own home. He's a victim."

I think it would have been fine to give him a warning or something over this but it's not like he said Sterling's behavior was fine just that it was simply something said in his own home and should not have gone public. Not something I feel Olin should have been fired over.

Sterling is 81 years old the amount of racist old people I see everyday is a lot and most people I know simply shake it off as they are from another time. Hell one of my professors is like 85 and we have to keep scolding him that he is being borderline racist at times.

I did not know this was not his first time making such comments. But like I said I think it is one thing to have someone like Sterling banned it is another for a guy simply giving his opinion on the matter to be fired from his job instead of being given a warning.

IDK this just doesn't sit well with my freedom of expression belief. I understand that a company has to support the image they desire and has the right to fire those who taint that image. But Onlin's comment just doesn't seem that bad in my eyes.

Last edited by Shauneepeak on 5/1/2014 11:25:54 PM

Agree with this comment 6 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, May 01, 2014 @ 11:36:07 PM

I don't think it's that bad either, I would have warned him if I was the boss. Or maybe just said be more careful, son. But it isn't the government sensoring his freedom of expression so it really has nothing to do with being an America, he's under corporate rulership here.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

SaiyanSenpai
Thursday, May 01, 2014 @ 11:45:36 PM

I agree with you World to a point. Sterling's comments could have hurt the team and the business that surrounds it and his ban from the NBA may have been a logical business decision.

But free speech isn't free if you're getting fired from your job for posting your opinions online in your free time like in Olin's case. Maybe if the company started to see a negative reaction from the public that could impact game sales, ok I can see that, maybe.

Or if the twitter comment was regarding the company itself, then yeah, maybe there too. But I'm with Shaunee that this doesn't sit well with my freedom of expression belief. I think, like so many other things in this (American) society lately, the pendulum has swung too far.

Last edited by SaiyanSenpai on 5/1/2014 11:51:58 PM

Agree with this comment 5 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 12:24:42 AM

But your right to free speech doesn't protect you from being fired for exercising it.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

SaiyanSenpai
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 12:34:47 AM

Yeah, apparently not. Still doesn't sit right with me though. Guess I gotta watch what I say.

(o _o )...( o_ o)

Last edited by SaiyanSenpai on 5/2/2014 12:46:00 AM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 9:48:52 AM

we ALL do. If my next boss is a raging racist republican I'm gonna shut my mouth and say "yes sir"

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

FatherSun
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 10:06:18 AM

Has anyone considered that this twitter event was only a catalyst. Maybe they were looking for an excuse to fire this person. And this was it.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

telly
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 11:22:17 AM

Everything you say on Twitter is part of the public domain. I truly hope for everyone here and in the gaming community, that's the big takeaway. You have a freedom of expression, but you'll have to take responsibility for EVERYTHING you say, especially things you say in public. Be careful, ALWAYS think before you speak! (or tweet!)

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 11:27:26 AM

There are a number of things your free speech and way of living cannot be used to fire you after 3 months of employment. Examples include your political party affiliation (vote preference), creed, etc.

You are not protected in your belief of acceptable racism.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

richfiles
Sunday, May 04, 2014 @ 2:00:11 PM

Under... He is not defending racism...

He is pointing out the sensationalism of the media and the erosion of freedom of speech. He was fired for HAVING A POLITICAL VIEW!

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Sunday, May 04, 2014 @ 7:59:05 PM

I did not say he was defending racism. And that is not a political view. Don't confuse political correctness with politics. It's not the same thing. Party affiliation and vote preference have nothing to do with anything here.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Palpatations911
Thursday, May 01, 2014 @ 11:36:07 PM
Reply

Don't work in public relations and put your opinions out there if you aren't ready to deal with the consequences when you jeopardize the welfare of the company you are representing.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

telly
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 11:14:46 AM

My thoughts exactly.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

SaiyanSenpai
Thursday, May 01, 2014 @ 11:52:52 PM
Reply

What Olin said in his full tweet wasn't horrible or damning at all. Certainly the company reacted before even having the chance to see or experience any negative backlash, if any were to exist at all. Josh Olin may be able to exercise his rights and sue the company or fight to get his job back.

Last edited by SaiyanSenpai on 5/1/2014 11:54:54 PM

Agree with this comment 4 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Palpatations911
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 9:03:06 AM

Sue? You and Donald Sterling would get along GREAT.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

SaiyanSenpai
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 6:36:49 PM

(-_-) doubtful.

If you are wrongfully terminated from your job, you have options. Sterling wasn't wrongfully terminated. However, based on Olin's statement and the reaction to it, he has a good case to argue that he was.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Palpatations911
Saturday, May 03, 2014 @ 12:09:52 AM

He could say they discriminated against him, but he should just move on.

If he sues Turtle Rock, word gets out among the industry and it would be the kiss of death for his career in public relations.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 1:11:46 AM
Reply

Yeah, you need to be cautious about public comments. I think his firing is way too excessive, but it's a good example of why you can't be too careful. Especially if your role is in PR.

However, I agree with his point to a degree in that the NBA and the owners need to be extremely careful of how they try to encourage the sale of the team. I'm not American, but from what I understand, a vote from a board of directors from a league doesn't have more authority than a supreme court. When you break it down to it's roots, it boils down to something as simple as an opinion which, while insane, does not quite fall into the "hate crime" category. For that reason, it would be a huge stretch to say he broke the law, and it would make more sense the way the law is written for him to sue the league for illegally forcing him out of a major personal and private asset that is a huge source of income... especially since when you break it down, the owners are trying to force the sale due to their collective private interest, as far as the league is concerned. If they aren't careful, they might create a win/win situation for Sterling where a lawsuit could net him far more than the sale of his team would earn him. Then the victims would be the league and the owners who face the lawsuit... What's worse now, to me, is that now that the league commish has said they might try to do that, how might the tactful, cautious owners, especially those that can't afford to lose a lawsuit that size, afford to publicly be known to vote against forcing a sale?

Know where I'm going with this? If you ask me, the commish made a huge mistake not keeping every card close to his chest...

Last edited by Underdog15 on 5/2/2014 1:15:59 AM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Vivi_Gamer
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 2:26:02 AM
Reply

Once again showing how relentless social media is, we all make mistakes and regrets but in the age we live in it seems it does not allow us to recollect the fault and move on. Such a minor comment (Which if it is what was posted above is very minor) can stain ones reputation for life. What a wonderful world we live in.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Japanese_Gamer
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 4:08:39 AM
Reply

We want gaming news.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 7 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 9:59:24 AM

And... then... so... like...

yeah, here. read the article?

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 11:06:21 AM

Then go tell GameSpot, IGN, Kotaku and every other source that covered this (and the lawmaker story).

No idea what you classify as "gaming news," but yeah, this qualifies.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

telly
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 11:17:34 AM

Disregard Ben, this is most certainly gaming news (and I for one am glad to see it covered here).

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Palpatations911
Saturday, May 03, 2014 @ 12:14:14 AM

Agreed.. Some of the biggest news in sports has leaked into the gaming world.. Certainly is worth chatting about and sharing thoughts

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 5:49:00 AM
Reply

wow, to sack the guy just because of that id be throwing the brick at them!

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Palpatations911
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 7:00:31 AM
Reply

I've been fired from a zillion jobs, after all, without no struggle there is no progress. Learn from it and move on!




Last edited by Palpatations911 on 5/2/2014 7:04:07 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 10:00:09 AM

You've been fired from a zillion jobs, or is that a quote?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Palpatations911
Saturday, May 03, 2014 @ 12:07:06 AM

Its an exaggeration, but the part about struggle is from Frederick Douglas..

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

xnonsuchx
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 7:57:08 AM
Reply

I see he's yet another ignoramus who doesn't know "free speech" is only about the government not infringing upon it (within reason).

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

frostface
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 9:48:04 AM
Reply

Freedom of Speech just watch what you say!

- Ice T

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

SASSYGIRL82
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 10:59:52 AM
Reply

As long as Olin pointed out those were his views not turtle rocks views I believe we may see a lawsuit over this

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 11:29:07 AM

No, I don't think so. At least not a successful one. This topic material isn't in the list of opinions/beliefs you can't be fired for.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Palpatations911
Saturday, May 03, 2014 @ 12:03:30 AM

True, he could probably sue them and win... It will likely be cheaper than the fallout from losing customers, though.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Saturday, May 03, 2014 @ 12:32:21 AM

I hate to say it guys, but I think they have enough grounds to say his values don't align him up to be considered a good candidate for a position with their company. And since the opinion he has isn't on a topic that is protected, I think he's toast.

My source is not from a lawyer or anything, but I have been working in employment for what will be 5 years this september.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

telly
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 11:16:47 AM
Reply

I won't weigh in on whether this guy should have been fired. I will say that freedom of expression comes with a responsibility for the words you say.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

karneli lll
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 2:24:50 PM
Reply

Some of the comments here are sad. Racism is wrong, whether its in the privacy of your home or in public. I'm pretty sure no sane person sympathizes with Nazi belief so why is this any different. Calling a racist a victim shows a shared belief. I'd say we've become very desensitized to serious issues.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 3:16:32 PM

"Calling a racist a victim shows a shared belief."

No, it doesn't. Calling that person a racist for no justified reason is actually a form of prejudice.

He was called a victim because of the lack of privacy and how sensationalist media runs the country. That was Olin's opinion; he made it plain that he wasn't defending Sterling's comments. He was defending the principles behind them.

Saying we're not allowed to have those principles is the only "Nazi-esque" part of this whole situation, my friend.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 3:48:19 PM

You watch. My concern isn't about the right or wrongness of Sterling's comments. They were obviously wrong. My concern is that the media monster has such huge momentum on this that I believe the NBA and it's owners are at risk of taking action in line with popular opinion. No one would criticize!

But you know what? It -might- be against the law, no matter what the morality is. And I betcha that when it's all said and done, Sterling will not own the team anymore, but he -WILL- be further ahead than anyone. You watch. He will become more profitable because of this than if he had been respectful. And that is the fault of sensationalist media and political correctness.

That might not have been the point the turtle rock guy was making, but it is a very important reason one might side with his point of view.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

karneli lll
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 9:39:07 PM

My point was that racism is a zero tolerance item. Hiding behind freedom of speech and privacy mumbo jumbo is sympathizing with the racist

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Palpatations911
Saturday, May 03, 2014 @ 12:02:03 AM

He wasnt a victim. He has been running minorities out of his rental properties for decades, dating prostitutes and parading around at his games with them, mistreating minorities within his organization including Elgin Baylor..

His wife, Rochelle Sterling, whom also shares his same beliefs is caught on video stating she is an "inspector" for the state so she can make a tally of blacks because they "attract vermin" and "stink" and hispanics because "all they do is sit outside and drink all day"..

Defending him in any way shape or form is only going to make you look like a supporter of him.

The guy still doesnt even think he is a racist, he is quoted saying "he should have paid her off" instead of owning this problem and letting people know he feels remorse. maybe he could garner sympathy then.

Bomani Jones wrote about this A-Hole in 2006 and I think 2009. He is a career racist that will never change because he doesnt think he did anything wrong.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Saturday, May 03, 2014 @ 12:37:25 AM

Yeah, and I agree with that Karneli. You're totally right. And Palpatations is right about him not being a victim, either. He deserves any negative repercussions that come his way.

I just think he won't suffer at all due to those that oppose him dealing with it the wrong way. It's not that anyone is protecting him or considering him a victim. It's that the law may see him that way. Decisions in court aren't made based on what is moral or right. They're made based on how the law is written and adhered to.

I sincerely think the excessive public eye and the shout-from-the-rooftops approach of the NBA will serve to help him in the long run.

Remember... this board of directors for the NBA does -not- have more authority than a supreme court...

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Saturday, May 03, 2014 @ 9:42:44 PM

Sterling's an idiot. We get that. We've known it for years.

Nobody's giving him a pass, and maybe "victim" was the wrong word to use. The point is that blaming Olin is wrong, especially when he's made his beliefs clear, and he was never defending Sterling in the first place. He was simply defending principles we're SUPPOSED to have.

Saying racism is a "zero tolerance issue" doesn't override those principles. Nothing does. That's the point of a principle.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PlatformGamerNZ
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 9:08:03 PM
Reply

well that quite the interesting story(don't take the wrong way)

happy gaming =)

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

clockwyzebkny
Friday, May 02, 2014 @ 11:06:15 PM
Reply

hey guys. i've been absent in the comments section for a looooooonnngg time but i still catch most of the news.
i feel the need to weigh in with my 2 cents First of all im black(ih8 the broad use of term african american). I hate racism in all forms. Essentially, it comes down to judging a book by its cover.
What Sterling said was bigotry BUT as he was in the privacy of his own home, he is free 2 express his opinions It does become dicey given his position in the NBA But think about it...MANY people in the public eye may share similar views to other races, religions, way of life etc. It's not like he went on a publicised rant
As for Olin he pretty much summed up my thoughts on the matter
I feel like America has become too politically correct
I know i may be in the minority (no pun intended) with my opinion But i still feel like it's my right to voice them

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

richfiles
Sunday, May 04, 2014 @ 1:19:35 PM
Reply

I just think it's despicable that corporate entities think it's fine to even apply what is said in a non corporate setting to the company. It just makes people slaves to their employers, constantly treading a fine line, worried about what they can say.

I truly wish we could get some legislation that would legally define a protection for non-corporate speech from being corporately harassed.

If you speak, privately or publicly, and you do not bring up your employer or company or clients, then you deserve the same immunity from harassment, persecution, discrimination, or termination that you receive from having a particular faith or gender, etc...

If you bring, at any point, your employer, your job duties, your coworkers, or your clients into the comments... Then you've made it official. They should be allowed to react then, as it is then YOU who brought them in.

That is what I believe would be the most fair way of protecting freedom of speech.

Last edited by richfiles on 5/4/2014 1:26:56 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Monday, May 05, 2014 @ 12:07:44 AM

I agree about the private setting. It's almost an intrusion if someone uses what you say in your own living room.

As for the guy in the article... he did it on twitter. And social networking is fair game for the public. And as far as I'm concerned, if you literally publish something... I'm not sure how you can get more official than that.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

richfiles
Monday, May 05, 2014 @ 3:32:56 PM

Twitter is not a corporate channel. It does not matter if it is private, in his own living room, or public, for the world to read/see/hear. People are ALLOWED to speak both privately and publicly for their own behalf. I do not represent my employer 24/7, and it's beyond ridiculous for ANY employer to think they can control your words or actions at all times.

When you are off the clock, you are your own person, and it is reasonable to demand anti-descrimination protections against employers for that.

The base stipulations would be that employers and coworkers are not part of the speech, it is off property, and it is off time. This gives employers the right to take action if a person DOES invoke the company name, or openly discusses the company, it's policies, products, services, or coworkers, but for all other non corporate speech, would protect them.

Last edited by richfiles on 5/5/2014 3:35:31 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Monday, May 05, 2014 @ 4:16:18 PM

I respectfully disagree. I work for an organization that supports people with intellectual disabilities. If off work time I go around at home and in public calling people retards or making fun of people with intellectual disabilities, and my boss sees me do this by chance... They would have every right to fire me because I've publically made it known I am not the best fit for the position and should not be an "advocate" for the people I support and help represent.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

richfiles
Tuesday, May 06, 2014 @ 8:20:07 AM

but, you see, that WOULD be relating back to your job function, your clients, etc. I already made it clear that that would NOT be protected...

Go back and RE-READ what I wrote.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Doomsquirrel
Sunday, May 04, 2014 @ 1:42:43 PM
Reply

People here are going on about freedom of speech, freedom of speech only protects you from being censored by the gov't, not your employers. In both Sterling and Olin's case, clauses about making inappropriate statements publicly (and in Sterling's case, private conversations that were intended to be public via recording) were probably in their contracts.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

richfiles
Sunday, May 04, 2014 @ 2:21:48 PM

But there are also laws that protect from discrimination. He was discriminated against for expressing a POLITICAL VIEW and a view on a social fault. That political speech IS PROTECTED speech. NOTHING he said was racist.

I will not buy Turtle Rock products, and I've told them...

https://www.turtlerockstudios.com/our-studio/contact-us/

I have told them that I will neither buy their products, and that I would be polling my congressional candidates in the upcoming election on their stance on further protecting political speech and setting real laws protecting non corporate speech made outside of a corporate environment from discriminatory actions.

my exact words:

===

"I will not be buying "Evolve" or any OTHER further games from your company.

You fired Josh Olin for sharing his social and political views on freedom of speech, sensationalism in media, and privacy rights. NEVER, were any of his words racist.

"Anyone who follows me knows my tweets were not in support of Sterling's actions. Rather, they were promoting three core tenets I believe in: 1) The harm sensational media presents to society. 2) The importance and sanctity of your privacy within your own home. And 3) The right to be whatever you want to be as an American, as long as it isn't hurting anyone else. That last point not to be confused with condoning Sterling's actions, which I don't."

I back Olin 100%. EVERY WORD HE SAID IS VALID AND TRUE! You discriminated against Olin, because he expressed his fair and valid political and social viewpoints, OUTSIDE of corporate association!

Turtle Rock's actions were un-American!

I just think it's despicable that corporate entities like you think it's fine to even apply what is said in a non corporate setting to the company. It just makes people slaves to their employers, constantly treading a fine line, worried about what they can say. ANYWHERE!!!

I truly wish we could get some legislation that would legally define a protection for non-corporate speech from being corporately harassed. I am going to look into whether any grass roots efforts are being put forth to call upon the creation of new legislation on the subject. If there is none, I think i shall be writing to my congressional representatives.

If you speak, privately or publicly, and you do not bring up your employer or company or clients, or you expunge them from association, then you deserve the same immunity from harassment, persecution, discrimination, or termination that you receive from having a particular creed, orientation, race, or gender, etc...

If you bring, at any point, your employer, your job duties, your coworkers, or your clients into the comments... Then you've made it officially related. The affected agency should then, and ONLY then, be allowed to react, as it is then the SPEAKER who brought them in.

That is what I believe would be the most fair way of protecting freedom of speech.

Since i still have the freedom to speak, I am telling you, that I will not be purchasing ANY product you create, for as long as Olin remains discriminated upon.

This subject matter will also influence my voting choices in the coming elections, as I will seek to find the stance of various politicians on the subject matter of off the job freedom of speech.

You guys brought this level of response yourselves."

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Sunday, May 04, 2014 @ 10:26:41 PM

Except that isn't a political view. It's "politically correct", yes. But it is not to be confused with being a political view.

He represents the organization. If he doesn't share the same values that align with their company, they can dismiss him based on no longer being the best candidate so long as it doesn't fall under an illegal dismissal. And it isn't.

That is -NOT- a political view. It just isn't. If it were, a non-profit like a Christian founded organization wouldn't be allowed to say things like how you have to share their beliefs to work as a pastor.

Last edited by Underdog15 on 5/4/2014 10:37:09 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Monday, May 05, 2014 @ 12:09:28 AM

Also, having a discriminatory opinion is not illegal. Acting on what can be classified as a "hate crime" is. Very similar in a lot of ways, but in a court of law, there is a very distinct difference.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

richfiles
Monday, May 05, 2014 @ 3:16:45 PM

Underdog... How on Earth do you come to the conclusion that a personal discussion on freedom of speech, privacy rights, and over sensationalized media "isn't" political speech? Umm... What are you smoking dude? cause I DON'T want any!

He also DID NOT HAVE any manner of "discriminatory" opinion! Mr. Olin never condoned the words or actions of Mr. Sterling, nor did Mr. olin even ONCE say anything remotely discriminatory. Not. Once.

Furthermore, COMPANIES DON'T OWN YOU! You have a right to a life OUTSIDE OF WORK. Some companies do not understand this... I believe there needs to be anti discrimination legislation to protect people from their employers when they are NOT on company time or property! he represents the company, when he is on the JOB.That does not give a company the right to own him 24/7! That is why I believe there needs to be protections for people like Olin!

Again... NOTHING you said made any sense!

Last edited by richfiles on 5/5/2014 3:22:12 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Monday, May 05, 2014 @ 4:27:56 PM

Ok. Currently I support people with intellectual disabilities. At my last job, I supported youth. In both jobs, I work(ed) in employment support. A huge part of my job is educate and help employers operate with integrity and in accordance to employment laws. My job titles were "Business Liaison" and "Employment Specialist".

So I do know what I'm talking about. In fact, I've been to court a few times over such issues to give "professional opinion" testaments.

Certain things in regards to free speech are eternally protected. You can't be fired for things like your personal beliefs, you orientation, your gender, your family, etc. etc. Exceptions would be in cases where the job very much requires it, for example, you can require a pastor of a church to believe in God and you can require a crisis counseling psychologist at a women's shelter to be a woman.

You can also insist in your agreement for employment documents require that the individual represent the best interests in the company. PR contracts typically have many such requirements, and in today's age, many very much require your public presence be in line with company values. I've seen some contracts literally outline social networking behavior, and yes... this is perfectly legal to do so. You don't have to accept those requirements, but you also don't have to accept the job. If anything is outlandish, you can complain PRIOR to accepting. But you can't sign to it and then complain later.

Lastly, when it comes to "political" point of view, labour law does NOT talk about political issues, political correctness, or anything you keep ranting about. What is protected is your right to free vote. In other words, if you campaign or advocate for a particular candidate or party, (or any voting issue) that cannot be held against you. Your opinions on corporate policy -CAN- be held against you if they do not line up with what is stated in the vision/mission you sign and agree to at hire. There very much -CAN- be an expectation that employees share the employers vision and values. Public representatives are particularly vulnerable, and yes, there is typically an expectation to keep up appearances when off the clock. And it is perfectly legal. The morality of it is a completely different discussion.

I'm not smoking anything. This is the way it is. Unfortunately, whether it makes any sense to you or not is irrelevant. It is the truth.

I would encourage you to stop thinking "moral" and "legal" are aligning values. They might coexist, but they don't always.

Last edited by Underdog15 on 5/5/2014 4:29:59 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Monday, May 05, 2014 @ 4:33:47 PM

And yes, you do have a right to a life outside of work. However, social media is a public forum. You can cry from the rooftops all you want that it's a "private" account, but that doesn't change the fact that it is a public forum. And if you had to prove something in court, social media can be used for or against you when published.

We've seen it happen -ALL- the time where private emails, messages, or harassing activity on social media (or what you call "private media" apparently) are used against people. In some bullying cases, it is the only thing that is used to charge or sentence people.

You are right in that we all have the freedom to say what we're thinking. We also have the right to deal with the consequences of the things we say... or in some cases.... the right to remain silent. :p


The problem with your view is that if I decide to text or post on social media some harassing or untrue smearing of a person you love... your logic says that I can't be charged for harassment because I have the right to say what I want on my private twitter account from my own home. Or, if I say something on twitter about my boss being a (insert cruel name here), they can't act on it or even address it with me if they see a retweet somewhere... despite the fact that it would clearly affect the work environment and would need to be addressed.

That's the crazy logic here, friend. I'm just giving you facts. Don't shoot the messenger.

Unfortunately for Olin, the moment people start saying "The Turtle Rock guy said....", if has officially affected the business and they have every right in America to protect their brand. Unless you'd like to suggest he should keep his job and they simply sue him for damaging their intellectual property......

Last edited by Underdog15 on 5/5/2014 4:39:27 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

richfiles
Tuesday, May 06, 2014 @ 8:23:55 AM

And again... You are clearly NOT reading what I had typed in regards to what would and would not be protected. /)_-


Just go back and re-read it... I'm not gonna argue with someone who argues points that don't even exist.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

richfiles
Monday, May 05, 2014 @ 3:25:41 PM
Reply

I also just wanna add...

Turtle Rock...

The gaming industry and the consumers who buy and enjoy games have, for decades, been stigmatized by the VERY over sensationalist media that Olin decries, as they spout how games rot brains, or that violent games breed massacres. They try to limit games with one failed attack after another to suppress the freedom of speech of game developers.

And Turtle Rock...

Did they think they could play the same game and NOT have gamers notice? Did they fail to read the irony, and the hypocrisy in this?

Last edited by richfiles on 5/5/2014 3:27:11 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

What's your current view of the "PS4 Neo?"
Love the idea, I want it!
I'm okay with it, I think.
Well, I really need to learn more.
I'm a little disappointed.
I absolutely HATE it.

Previous Poll Results