Safeguarding in Esports and Video Gaming: Defining the Problem (Part 1)

Esports have gradually gained recognition as a significant economic market worldwide.^[1] The substantial economic growth has led to a steady rise in the population of gamers.^[2] Furthermore, this growth has contributed to enabling professional esports players to sustain their livelihoods^[3] through participation in esports competitions, securing sponsorship contracts with businesses,^[4] and live streaming on online platform providers such as Twitch and YouTube.^[5] Esports is now firmly established as a global commercial market.

With the economic expansion of the esports industry, professional players are confronted with a range of challenges, encompassing sexual abuse and harassment in online gaming as well as the prevalence of discriminatory language in online conversations.^[6]

In this series of articles, the author will consider the necessity of safeguarding in esports and video games, similar to discussions prevalent within the sports society.^[7] In this context, it is crucial to acknowledge that the esports ecosystem involves diverse stakeholders, encompassing video game developers/publishers (or video game companies), third party organisers (including esports federations as well as league and tournament organisers), online platform providers, sponsoring companies, and gamers and esports players.^[8]

Across this series, the author examines how three categories of stakeholders — video game publishers, esports federations, and online platform providers — have responded to those challenges, and considers whether a more unified safeguarding framework is needed across the esports ecosystem.

However, it is important to note that this article will not cover safeguarding initiatives undertaken by major third-party organisers, such as ESL FACEIT Group, and by esports teams and organisations, such as Fnatic and Team Liquid.^[9] These stakeholders fall outside the scope of this series.

This series of three articles is structured as follows:

• Part 1 (this article) defines ‘safeguarding’ in esports and video gaming and identifies three interconnected categories of harm: sexual abuse and harassment, cyberbullying, and physical and mental health problems; before mapping the key stakeholders in the esports ecosystem;
• Part 2 will examine the practical self-regulatory responses of video game publishers and esports federations, and assesses whether those initiatives adequately address the identified harms; and
• Part 3 will examine the safeguarding initiatives of online platform providers, with a focus on Twitch and YouTube, before setting out overarching recommendations for a more unified safeguarding framework across the esports ecosystem as a whole.