Leaked emails show organizers of the prestigious Hugo Awards vetted writers’ work and comments with regard to China, where last year’s awards were held.

Organizers of the Hugo Awards, one of the most prominent literary awards in science fiction, excluded multiple authors from shortlists last year over concerns their work or public comments could be offensive to China, leaked emails show.

Questions had been raised as to why writers including Neil Gaiman, R.F. Kuang, Xiran Jay Zhao and Paul Weimer had been deemed ineligible as finalists despite earning enough votes according to information published last month by awards organizers. Emails released this week revealed that they were concerned about how some authors might be perceived in China, where the Hugo Awards were held last year for the first time.

    • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      78
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      The Hugos have always been a clusterfuck. Explaining all the nuance is beyond a single comment (I can’t even find a good writeup) but it boils down to the voting committee largely being opt/buy-in. If you buy a membership to the World Science Fiction Society, you get to vote on where WorldCon will be held which means you are voting on where The Hugos will be held. You ALSO get to vote in the Hugos themselves

      Yes, that sounds really shitty but it is also why the Hugos are a lot more prestigious than a Goodreads award. People need to give enough of a shit which, historically, has resulted in more people who actually have read multiple entrants.

      Of course, a couple years back we had the “sad puppies” incident where a bunch of racist incels basically voted as a bloc to shut down people of color and non CISHET male voices.

      And… a lot of signs point toward “China” having gamed the system again. Whether that is a focused effort by the CCP or just passionate Chinese SFF fans is up for debate*.

      As for excluding authors? I very much assume that is just a function of operating in China. The CCP cracking down on the event would not end well for anyone involved.

      Personally? I think this is yet another indication that the Hugos, like most “old guard” SFF, can fuck off. It was just a few years back that George R R Martin rambled and talked about the good old days while butchering every single “ethnic” name on the ballot. I think the issue of “who gets to vote” is still a major issue but I also think there is absolutely zero reason that an event about celebrating forward thinking should restrict itself to an in-person gala. That shit should be going above and beyond vtubers and focusing on new voices who might have a day job because being “a full time author” is increasingly impossible for any newbies.

      *: Because China actually has a ridiculously strong SFF community. In large part because there are authors who are very much pushing the boundaries of what they can and can’t say to actually tell interesting and thought provoking stories in the way SFF has always been able to.

        • Optional@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          Indeed. Quite decent.

          See, Chinese fandom is relatively isolated from western fandom. And the convention committee didn’t realize that there was this thing called the WSFS Constitution which set out rules for stuff they had to do. I gather they didn’t even realize they were responsible for organizing the nomination and voting process for the Hugo awards, commissioning the award design, and organizing an awards ceremony, until about 12 months before the convention (which is short notice for two rounds of voting. commissioning a competition between artists to design the Hugo award base for that year, and so on). So everything ran months too late, and they had to delay the convention, and most of the students who’d pitched in to buy those bids could no longer attend because of bad timing, and worse … they began picking up an international buzz, which in turn drew the attention of the local Communist Party, in the middle of the authoritarian clamp-down that’s been intensifying for the past couple of years. (Remember, it takes a decade to organize a successful worldcon from initial team-building to running the event. And who imagined our existing world of 2023 back in 2013?)

          The organizers appear to have panicked.

          • Optional@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            lolyikes

            The fallout from Chengdu has probably sunk several other future worldcon bids—and it’s not as if there are a lot of teams competing for the privilege of working themselves to death: Glasgow and Seattle (2024 and 2025) both won their bidding by default because they had experienced, existing worldcon teams and nobody else could be bothered turning up. So the Ugandan worldcon bid has collapsed (and good riddance, many fans would vote NO WORLDCON in preference to a worldcon in a nation that recently passed a law making homosexuality a capital offense). The Saudi Arabian bid also withered on the vine, but took longer to finally die. They shifted their venue to Cairo in a desperate attempt to overcome Prince Bone-saw’s negative PR optics, but it hit the buffers when the Egyptian authorities refused to give them the necessary permits. Then there’s the Tel Aviv bid. Tel Aviv fans are lovely people, but I can’t see an Israeli worldcon being possible in the foreseeable future (too many genocide cooties right now). Don’t ask about Kiev (before February 2022 they were considering bidding for the Eurocon). And in the USA, the prognosis for successful Texas and Florida worldcon bids are poor (book banning does not go down well with SF fans).

      • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Weird that the Hugos wouldn’t have excluded John Ringo and crew for being literal fascists, unless they open their slackened jaws for… Not even criticizing China? Depicting mecha Wu Zetian?

        • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          ringo and the sad puppies were only “acknowledged” because of the mass backlash. Otherwise, it was business as usual.

          That is why I think the issue is less the works and more the venue. Because having a racist piece of shit present is one thing. People get mad. They move on because they need the blurb to get another printing from their publisher. But if the CCP gets angry? People start disappearing faster than Jack Ma.

      • sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        I did not know any of that. I always just figured Hugo award books would at least be good, and that was about as far as my thinking went.

        • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          I mean, they almost always are. You just have to understand that, much like with the Oscars (?), it is the SFF (mostly SFF writers) community voting on themselves. And, memes aside, good movies usually win at the Oscars. Sure they favor period pieces and character studies but those are generally well acted and directed. They may just not be “entertaining” to the masses.

          That said, ever since Martin decided he should talk about how great a bunch of transphobes and racists were while butchering the names of up and coming authors because he couldn’t be bothered to read a pronunciation guide, a lot of great authors have started doing their own “awards” blog posts. Which are always nice.

    • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      6 months ago

      The worst thing is that the organization censored things that even the CCP doesn’t - several of the excluded books are freely sold in China. Self-censorship is a hell of a drug.

    • randon31415@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Same way Jeremy Corbyn became leader of the labor party: Only those with paid memberships can vote on stuff (e.g. where the awards will be presented in the future). China paid for enough new memberships to flood the vote with people that voted to hold it in China.

      • Guntrigger@feddit.ch
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        Weird comparison. I don’t think the least Tory-lite leader of the Labour Party in the last 30 years was voted in as a Chinese conspiracy, as you are implying.

        • randon31415@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          No, China didn’t have anything to do with Corbyn. Just, right before he took control of the party, the party leaders tried to vote him out. There are over 10 million labor voters, but at the time there were only 100,000 paid labor memberships, who were responsible for voting in the party leader. Corbyn got 50,000 (out of the 10 million) new paying members on the rolls and went over night from being on the edge of being expelled to becoming the party leader.

          Same thing happened here: a very large group (all scifi readers) assuming that paying members would have ideals proportional to the larger group - but that smaller group can be manipulated through a large influx of single issue voters.

          • Guntrigger@feddit.ch
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Firstly, I’m not really sure where you are getting your figures. There were 200,000 paid members under the previous leader and it went up to 600,000 just before he was elected.

            Secondly, it seems like you’re attributing this sharp increase to a third party nefarious action. I would assume that it were simply a larger portion of those 10m voters deciding to register membership in order to vote in a leader more in tune with their party values.

            I take the point that a small group only needing paid membership to vote is open to manipulation. However, I don’t really see a comparison between these two events.

            • randon31415@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              I misremembered the number of members - looks like it went up much more drastically than I recalled. And I never said that either were “nefarious actions”, just that a huge influx of new voters with different opinions can alter outcomes.

      • GhostFence@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        Oh man, how long before China has enough global power to censor what we watch in American cinema/TV? Or are we already at that point??? 😱

        • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          We kind of are? Although, it is mostly at the same level the US has been. Mainstream movies aren’t going to have things that will anger significant markets. Similarly, a decent number of the long living live service games have “china” versions that do stuff like get rid of skeletons and so forth.

          It is obviously speculation, but a LOT of what went wrong with Rise of Skywalker has strong hints of being about the Chinese market.

          • Even the people who hated TLJ with every fiber of their being kind of noticed that Rose Tico almost completely disappeared. And… part of that is speculated to be because Kelly Marie Tran was getting a lot of traction due to the constant bigotry and hatred thrown at her for being asian in a “white” franchise. Except… she is ethnically Vietnamese.
          • The force ghosts don’t have their blue tint which is speculated to be about making it less obvious they are spirits/ghosts
          • TLJ literally ended with “Our elders fucked up and the world is possibly a worse place than it was before The War. But now we are rallying behind a former slave, a scoundrel, and some homeless chick all while force powers are being spread among the proletariat”. ROS IMMEDIATELY retconned all that to “The slave is a goober who belongs with his own people and that homeless chick has a direct connection to the ruling class. Also, the real heroes are our ancestors”.

          Which… again, kind of mirrors how the US and its holy concepts are treated. Take a look at mainstream action movies from basically the 70s to the 10s. The enemy might be a rogue general or CIA operative but you’ll have a heroic US soldier/marine around to counter that out and show that the vast majority of the military are good people (and we still see the impact of that with people trying to reconcile the US military waiting to see how Jan 6 would shake out…). Same with how Democracy is good and amazing and only ever fails because of outright fraud rather than gerrymandering and stupidity/bigotry.

          Just… the main difference is that you can still watch a movie about a squad of US Marines raping and murdering their way through a warzone in the US. Whereas that gets outright banned in China and can lead to a visit to the reeducation camps if the creator lives in China.

    • fedroxx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      32
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      China doesn’t have human rights? Interesting. Lived there for some time and I’d definitely say they’re doing better than my home country of the US.

      • khannie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        I don’t even know where to start with this it’s so nonsensical. Sure there are rights in China but to compare it favourably to the US smells so bad I find it hard to believe anyone could genuinely believe it.

        I’ve spent about 6 months in both countries over the course of my life (I’m old) and China is far, far more oppressed than the US. The population there are entirely cowed, can’t express themselves freely on social media, until recently couldn’t even decide the number of children they could have, can’t protest in numbers, can’t send end to end encrypted messages, can’t access the full internet, can’t use a VPN without risk of being prosecuted and on and on and on.

        Sure the US has it’s flaws but trying to say China is doing better from a rights perspective is just bananas.

      • mellowheat@suppo.fi
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago
        1. Freedom of Speech and Expression

        2. Freedom of Press

        3. Freedom of Religion

        4. Right to Peaceful Assembly

        5. Right to Fair Trial

        Aren’t all of these rights quite a lot weaker in China? None of this is a problem of course if you keep your head down or be a bootlicker, but not having to lick boots is pretty much the motivation for human rights.

      • baseless_discourse@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        You can say “death” on youtube videos in the U.S. … Please find a popular bilibili video uses 死 (actual character for “death”) in the subtitle, instead of 亖 (pronouned the same, but means “four”).

        U.S. definitely is not a country that respects basic human rights, but at least they don’t need repos like these to speak on the internet: https://github.com/houbb/sensitive-word/ . You can find the sensitive words here: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/houbb/sensitive-word/master/src/main/resources/dict.txt

        Most of these are sexual words, but it is not hard to see that basically everything related to politics is a sensitive word, including names of politicians, current or past; political organization, position no matter they are pro or anti CCP; and political events, anywhere from massacre, protest, to just congressional meetings.

        Many other words related to human right and economics. For example, words like 中国孤儿院 (chinese orphanage), 中国民主 (Chinese democracy), 中国特色 (Chinese specialty), 中国石油腰斩 (Chinese oil stock lowered 50%), 你乃人民 (you are the people) and many many more.

        • winterayars@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          YouTube censors thousands of words, including ones relating to death, so that may not be the best point of comparison.

          And before you say, “they don’t censor them they just demonetize them!” that’s functionally the same thing in a capitalist society.

          Censorship is more than just outright deletion, suppression and control can also be censorship. You lack a lot of freedom of speech in both platforms, it just plays out differently.

          (Also YouTube does outright delete a lot of content for pretty suspicious reasons so don’t get too excited even then.)

      • Coreidan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Did you forget about tiananmen square? Hong Kong protests? I think you did. Or you’re a boot licker.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      63
      ·
      6 months ago

      These events keep getting held in places like China and Saudi Arabia, where the organizers know they are going to have to make major concessions to those governments, because the organizers care far more about money than they do the event. At least that’s my theory.

    • Wrrzag@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’s a better argument to not trust the awards admin with anything from now in, given that they did that independently and removed a ton of Chinese authors from the ballots.

      • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        This isn’t the first time the Hugo has been subject to controversy, about a decade ago most of the awards went to “no award” and the nominees got “asterisk awards” because a group openly coordinated to nominate a slate of works (which they claimed others were doing less publicly in the past). The voting rules were changed over this one.

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I mean, that depends.

      There was a campaign from 2013 to 2017 by rightwingers to game the Hugos by buying non-attending memberships to worldcon and nominating works they deemed to be sufficiently non-woke. Thing is, there’s one nominee they couldn’t game: “none of these.”

      So most of the time where the only nominees were gamed, membership voted that there was to be no award in that category that year. The exceptions were authors that likely would have been nominated anyway due to name recognition, like Neil Gaiman.

      The award can maintain its integrity despite the committee’s lack thereof if Worldcon members vote for no award to be given in the categories leadership fucked with.

      • khannie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        That’s a great example and entirely valid.

        On the flip side though I can’t imagine many countries where awards would be vetted simply because it might upset the host. It’s a terrible idea IMO and does take away from whoever actually won this year. They’ll be left to question whether they won fairly because a competitor was excluded for China’s benefit.

        I think this specific example does damage the integrity of the awards.

  • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    105
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    I really used to think highly of the Hugo Awards. Now I just see them as an empty scheme to make rich people richer. The Hugo awards should not be taken seriously at this point.

    • deweydecibel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      49
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      No awards should if they’re connected to industry insiders.

      I’m legitimately flabbergasted every single year by the sheer number of people who think shit like the Oscars or the Emmy’s mean anything given the degree of bullshit that goes on behind the scenes, and some of it out in the open.

      They’re industry circle jerks for marketing and giving favors to friends. It’s insane we give them any credit at all. But if the Game Awards have proven anything, it’s that the only thing you need to make an award show “legitimate” is a lot of money to market it enough year after year.

      • whoelectroplateuntil@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        It’s amazing how often people are told, en masse, to like something or give it credence simply because it’s being marketed as something that they should like or trust, and they just sort of go along with it. Of course, if it didn’t work, the advertising/marketing industry wouldn’t be as big as it is…

  • 5in1k@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    6 months ago

    Fuck China and their censorship, the Hugos should be ashamed to bow down to it. Literally the genre that calls their nonsense out.

    • redhorsejacket@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Fwiw, this is not a case of China stepping in and censoring anything about the awards. Rather, it’s a case of the Hugo administration in the West self-censoring their nominees because they feared China might step in if they didn’t get ahead of the curve.

      Of course, that doesn’t really change the situation, but we shouldnt get the story twisted here. The blame falls on the administrators who were so afraid of a threat that they imagined that they caved to non-existent demands, rather than the Chinese (at least for direct fault, since you could argue the Chinese government’s policies indirectly led to this situation and I wouldn’t fight you on that).

    • Wrrzag@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      China didn’t have anything to do with it. They censored books that were already translated and selling in china, and Chinese authors.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        -1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        China = Censorship.

        It’s impossible to believe that a pro-China author might have been censored at a western organized and operated media event. There’s no way that a wildly popular domestically written and published and Galaxy Award winning sci-fi novel “We Live In Nanjing” got left off the list because it was too pro-China!

        No. If novels and authors were excluded from the list - if R. F. Kuang and Jiang Bo didn’t make the list - it must be due to the villainous Chinese censors doing Evil China Stuff, and not a bunch of elderly Euro-Americans felt like trimming the pool back to an almost exclusively western and white author pool.

  • Nobody@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Organizers also flagged comments that authors, including Barkley and Sanford, had made about the merits of holding the awards in Chengdu and whether they signed or shared the open letter.

    Even if you don’t criticize China explicitly in your works, you are still subject to the Chinese social credit score for everything you say online.

    Science fiction is supposed to be about looking to the future in creative ways. Stifling creativity for state interests is repugnant.

  • feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    6 months ago

    “she was dimly aware of somebody screaming, and after a few moments realised the sound was coming from her” - Neil Gaiman; every book.

  • whoelectroplateuntil@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Since most industries treat their awards ceremonies as no more respectable than industry galas + appointing lists of insider-approved “most notable content” awards, I treat them that way! IE I got back into sci fi this year after a hiatus of many years. I looked over the Hugos from the last ten years to find some interesting titles to get me started. While I wasn’t disappointed in the slightest by any of them, I could also tell there’s no way these were actually the best of the best sci-fi from the last 10 years.

    And, you know, if the people throwing the gala are smart, they’ll understand it as an advertising event for the whole industry, so the dog and pony show counts, unfortunately. They can, and many do, shit out lists of recent notable titles put together by editors for advertising purposes, but who checks those? Who cares? But holding an award ceremony with judges, that’s something you can get media coverage of. There are pictures to take, controversies to be had, etc. The more unique and interesting it is, and the more credible the dog and pony show, the more excited people get about it.

    You can’t sustain that angle of an awards ceremony if it’s obviously just wheeling and dealing. But since it’s all just wheeling and dealing these days, what can you do but throw out the baby with the bathwater? ¯_(ツ)_/¯

    • ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I’d agree. Redshirts and Three Body Problem was my Rubicon moment when the Hugos became irrelevant.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 months ago

    from the excellent antipope article posted earlier:

    A commenter just drew my attention to this news item on China.org.cn, dated October 23rd, 2023, right after the worldcon. It begins:

    Investment deals valued at approximately $1.09 billion were signed during the 81st World Science Fiction Convention (Worldcon) held in Chengdu, Sichuan province, last week at its inaugural industrial development summit, marking significant progress in the advancement of sci-fi development in China.

    The deals included 21 sci-fi industry projects involving companies that produce films, parks, and immersive sci-fi experiences …"

    That’s a metric fuckton of moolah in play, and it would totally account for the fan-run convention folks being discreetly elbowed out of the way and the entire event being stage-managed as a backdrop for a major industrial event to bootstrap creative industries (film, TV, and games) in Chengdu. And—looking for the most charitable interpretation here—the hapless western WSFS people being carried along for the ride to provide a veneer of worldcon-ness to what was basically Chinese venture capital hijacking the event and then sanitizing it politically.

    Follow the money.

  • Richard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    6 months ago

    Can someone tell me whether Cixin Liu’s Three Body Problem series is stained by Chinese communist propaganda? Because I find the story very appealing, but am wary of the many awards that the series won in Communist Pseudo-China. Are there any undertones I missed?

    • feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I was amazed he got away with the first part of the first book which describes aspects of the Cultural Revolution in great detail and doesn’t shy away from the whole teenagers murdering their teachers aspect. He is publically pro-goverment in the way you’d better be as a public figure in China. The books, especially the first one, are good.

      • Marin_Rider@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        I liked the ideas in the books more than the books itself. as a peice of literature I thought the writing was mediocre at best, characters with the depth of cardboard. maybe some nuance is lost in translation, but I don’t quite understand the hype. but the concepts like I said, fantastic

        • Dojan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          I think the concepts are what is getting people. Like you say, the characters are shallow, but the ideas are food for thought and feel decently novel, at least to me.

    • chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I don’t recall any overt tones. I think it is so highly awarded because it isn’t anti-CCP, though I don’t remember ever feeling like it took any time away saying it was good, either.

    • Axiochus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’d say that it’s substantially about the cultural revolution and imo gives it an overall negative treatment that happens to align with the present transition away from hardcore Maoism in China. Cultures are not so monolithic as to be functions of their local propaganda. Much like, say, the US is producing a lot of good science fiction despite having an unhealthy love of capitalism.

    • ridago@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      You can tell the book is written from within China. It has some different perspectives to what you’d normally find in a “western” book, but not in a propaganda way. Worth the read

    • iknowitwheniseeit@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      I believe it was the third book of the series where he essentially describes a unified humanity that was basically a mix of China and the USA. I’m doubtful that aligns well with the expectations of the Communist Party of China, but maybe? 😆