Supanova sees sponsorship agreement dissolve over Adam Baldwin row

The Ledger Awards’ organising committee took to the event’s Facebook page to today confirm they will not be continuing on with a sponsorship agreement with the Supanova Pop Culture Expo.

“The Ledger Awards Organising Committee would like to advise that last year’s Platinum Sponsor, Supanova, will not be returning for this year’s awards. We thank them for their support and participation in last year’s awards. We are seeking new sponsors at the Gold, Silver and Bronze level to financially support this event and to join several of last year’s sponsors in acknowledging excellence in Australian comics.”

Speaking with Kotaku, the Awards’ Gary Chaloner said the move was due to Supanova’s decision to keep GamerGate figure Adam Baldwin as part of their Sydney and Perth events.

“Hopefully our actions speak for themselves,” Chaloner said, “but the Organising Committee have to make decisions that best reflect the aims and values of the Awards and what they represent.”

Kotaku’s same article also points to two other figures, comic Kirsty Mac and cosplayer Eve Beauregard, asserting that “many” in comic book and cosplay spheres are boycotting the event.

“The argument that we’re being exclusive by being inclusive is vacuous and exactly the opposite of the historical mentality of the creative communities represented at Supanova,” Daniel Zachariou of Supanova offered in reply to Kotaku’s piece.

This article may contain affiliate links, meaning we could earn a small commission if you click-through and make a purchase. Stevivor is an independent outlet and our journalism is in no way influenced by any advertiser or commercial initiative.

About the author

Steve Wright

Steve's the owner of this very site and an active games journalist for the past ten years. He's a Canadian-Australian gay gaming geek, ice hockey player and fan. Husband to Matt and cat dad to Wally and Quinn.


Click here to post a comment

  • Baldwin and Supanova should be ashamed of supporting the cyberbullying and slut-shaming of some obscure indie developer by her bitter ex-boyfriend.

    • I have a few counterpoints to your argument.
      The first is that Supanova does not support us, Gamergate. Their only “crime” is allowing Baldwin’s presence at their event to continue. Guilt by association. The second is with slut shaming. I have been in Gamergate since before it was called Gamergate, back in the Quinnspiracy days, and I have not seen one example of slut shaming. You can see for yourself, slut shaming has nothing to do with this. As for the “cyberbullying” I will admit a few people have behaved badly under our banner, but the community has always condemned this. And don’t make the mistake of thinking your side is any better. Now then, “obscure indie developer”, obscure enough to have her game featured out of the fifty listed on this article?

      • No slut-shaming? Please, this WHOLE thing started because a bitter ex-boyfriend made unfounded accusations about his ex-girlfriend using sex for reviews. And the ONLY evidence for this is the article you linked which shows her game being listed in an article as one out of FIFTY others!

        Baldwin was responsible for turning what should have been a personal dispute into a public shitstorm that send a mob of misogynistic trolls after this woman. He coined the term Gamergate in the same tweet where he spread the nonsense accusations against Zoe herself.

        • Criticizing sex for reviews isn’t slut shaming, it’s criticism of a conflict of interest. If a journalist is going to cover the work of someone that they are romantically or sexually involved with, then they should either:
          1) Disclose the relationship
          2) Not cover their spouse’s work
          As for whether or not they were having a relationship;

          Read these and decide for yourself. Either way, it’s obvious they were close, if not lovers, then friends. And giving your friend’s game coverage without disclosing it is just as bad as covering your lover’s/sexual partner’s game.

 (the one I used above)

          After controversy stirred up, Milo leaked a secret mailing list proving that journalists were colluding to write a narrative. See the “Gamers are Dead” articles.

          I would add more, but I gtg now. When I get back I will add more evidence.

          • Now for a rebuttal to the paragraph beginning with “Baldwin”. Gamergate was never about a personal dispute, a journalist got caught. People began questioning whether they could trust game journalism and the new media anymore, what happened was the people they were criticizing all colluded to create a narrative of slander, and we were censored.

            You seem to have the misconception that Baldwin is the leader of our movement. Many, I would even go so far as to say most, of people in Gamergate were involved before Baldwin even coined the term gamergate.

          • Haha, holy crap you people actually care about this shit. You actually think two people talking to each other proves one’s bribing the other with sex for…what? Being mentioned along with ~50 other games in an article? If you guys weren’t ruining the lives of women over this nonsense, it would be funny.

          • Again, the article on Rock Paper Shotgun does more than make a passing mention. It’s named after her game, and Grayson highlights it.

            As for us ruining women’s lives, has it ever been proven? All the screenshots of supposed Gamergate harassment that I see is just anonymous folks on twitter throwaway accounts who know they’re gonna be banned. They can be literally anyone. And it’s happening to us too.

    • Private events have the right to exclude whoever they wish based on whatever they want. Potential attendees have the right to call for the inclusion or exclusion of whoever they wish. Nobody is pointing a gun at Baldwin or Supanova’s head. Therefore, it’s not censorship.