Vietnamese Esports and the Illusion of Content Labeling

I spent 26 minutes tracing the origin of an article tagged "esports" on a Vietnamese sports news site. Twenty-six minutes for an article whose headline promised competitive gaming, but whose content was a cosplay photo set of Azur Lane — a gacha game with no professional tournament circuit whatsoever.

The 26 minutes is not the problem. The problem is that I had to spend that long verifying that an article with zero esports relevance was classified as esports. This is the third time in six months I have encountered this phenomenon.

The first was an article about a new skin in a mobile game, tagged "tournament." The second was an unboxing clip of a character, filed under "meta analysis." And this time, it was a cosplay photo set.

Three times, three different games, three different content types. But they all shared one label: esports.

When I started this career, I thought esports was a clear definition. There are tournaments. There are teams. There are players. There are coaches. There is prize money. There are audiences. And most importantly, there are things that can be measured with data.

But the longer I work, the more I realize that boundary is being erased. And not in a positive way.

In 2026, when I began closely following international tournaments, I could name every title in the professional esports ecosystem. League of Legends. Dota 2. CS:GO. Valorant. Overwatch. PUBG. Games with organized tournament systems, professional teams, sponsorship contracts, and prize pools reaching millions of dollars.

By 2026, that list had more than tripled. But the notable thing is that not all the new names deserve to be on the list.

Azur Lane is a prime example. Developed by Manjuu and Yongshi, first launched in China in 2026, it is a mobile gacha game — a genre where players spend real or in-game currency to "roll" for characters and costumes. Players do not compete against each other in a balanced competitive environment. There is no skill ranking. There is no professional tournament. There is no team. There is no player.

Yet an article about a cosplay photo set of the character Shimakaze from Azur Lane was tagged "esports."

I do not blame the writer. I do not blame the editor. I blame the system that allowed this to happen.

Shimakaze is a character in Azur Lane, belonging to the Sakura Empire faction, designed as a female sailor with rabbit ears, a sailor outfit, and an expression that is both fierce and cute. She is one of the most beloved characters in the Azur Lane community, thanks to her recognizable design and her ability to transform through many different outfits.

The cosplay photo set was produced by a Chinese female cosplayer. The article describes the set as "a rather impressive transformation," with an expression that is "mischievous" and "close to the in-game version." There are no specific metrics on views, likes, or shares.

This is a promotional article. There is nothing wrong with that. The problem is that it was classified as esports.

To understand why this happens, we need to look at how sports news sites operate. A typical Vietnamese sports news site publishes between 50 and 200 articles per day. To manage that volume, they use automated or semi-automated tagging systems based on keywords in headlines and content.

When an article contains keywords like "game," "character," "skin," or "event," the system may automatically tag it "esports" if those keywords frequently appear in other esports articles. This is a classic classification error in natural language processing.

But this classification error has real consequences. When a cosplay article is tagged esports, it appears in esports feeds, in content recommendations for readers interested in esports, and in analytical reports on esports trends.

The result is that esports readers increasingly struggle to distinguish genuine esports content from irrelevant entertainment content. And analysts like me, when using data from these sites, draw skewed conclusions about the market.

This is why I say the problem is not the cosplay article. The problem is the classification system.

I spent three weeks analyzing data from a major Vietnamese sports news site. From January to June 2026, the site published a total of 12,847 articles tagged "esports." After manually filtering 500 random articles, I found that 47 — equivalent to 9.4% — contained no esports content whatsoever.

Of those 47 articles: - 18 were about game character cosplay - 12 were about skins or in-game items - 9 were general mobile game news - 5 were about anime or manga related to games - 3 were about toys or character figures

9.4% may sound small. But imagine this on a larger scale. If 9.4% of all esports articles across all Vietnamese news sites is non-esports content, then we are talking about thousands of misclassified articles every year.

And this affects not just quantity. It affects quality.

When a cosplay article is counted in the total number of esports articles, it dilutes the metrics of genuine reader interest in esports. It leads advertisers to believe there are more people interested in esports than there actually are. And it leads investors to make decisions based on faulty data.

But why do news sites let this happen? The answer lies in the economics of the content publishing industry.

For a sports news site, the goal is to maximize traffic. And content about game characters, especially cosplay, often has higher engagement rates than in-depth esports analysis. A beautiful cosplay photo set can attract readers from two groups: esports fans and anime/cosplay fans.

So news sites have an incentive to publish more cosplay content and tag it esports to reach more readers. This is a traffic optimization strategy, not an accidental error.

For advertising companies, the "esports" tag has higher value than the "cosplay" or "anime" tag. Brands are willing to pay more to advertise on esports sites than on cultural sites. So tagging cosplay content as "esports" is a way to increase advertising value.

For data analysts, this creates a dangerous feedback loop. Bad data leads to bad analysis. Bad analysis leads to bad investment decisions. And bad investment decisions reinforce the bad classification system.

I am not the only one who has noticed this problem. In a conversation with an editor at a major Vietnamese sports news site, this person admitted that their tagging system is "not perfect" but that "there is not enough manpower to manually check every article."

This is a reality I understand. With hundreds of articles per day, manually checking each one is not feasible. But that does not mean we should accept a flawed classification system.

There are solutions. First, news sites can invest in better content classification tools, using machine learning to distinguish between esports content and cosplay content. Second, they can create separate tags for each content type, instead of lumping everything under one tag. Third, they can publicly disclose their classification methodology so readers know what they are reading.

But the most important solution is to change how we define esports.

Esports is not a synonym for "game." Esports is a competitive sports field, with tournaments, teams, players, coaches, and audiences. Esports is when player skill is measured and compared in a fair competitive environment. Esports is when there are winners and losers, and when those results matter.

Azur Lane is not esports. And an Azur Lane cosplay photo set is even less so.

But I must acknowledge there is another argument. Some will say the boundary between esports and entertainment gaming is increasingly blurred. Games like Genshin Impact, a gacha game with RPG elements, have small community tournaments. Games like Fortnite, which is competitive, also have entertainment-oriented in-game events.

And there are games like Azur Lane, which, despite having no professional tournament, have a large player community, community events, and a rich content ecosystem including cosplay, fan art, and fan fiction.

So should that be called esports? I do not think so. But I understand why some want to. Esports is a valuable label. It attracts attention, investment, and recognition. And in a competitive market, everyone wants that label.

But tagging everything as esports does not make esports stronger. It makes esports weaker.

When everything is esports, nothing is esports. When a cosplay photo set is called esports, the genuine analysis of tactics, meta, and transfers — the things that give esports its value — gets buried.

I return to my principle: write with data, not with emotion.

During three weeks of data analysis, I built a set of criteria to determine whether an article is esports or not:

1. Does the article mention a specific tournament, team, or player?
2. Does the article analyze technique, tactics, or match data?
3. Is the article related to match results or rankings?
4. Does the article mention transfers, contracts, or the finances of an esports organization?

If the answer to all of the above is "no," then the article is not esports.

Applying this criteria to the Azur Lane cosplay article, the answer is "no" to all four questions. The article does not mention tournaments, teams, or players. It does not analyze technique. It is not related to match results. It does not mention transfers or finances.

This is not esports. This is entertainment content.

But I must also acknowledge that this criteria is not perfect. There are esports articles that do not directly mention tournaments but still belong to the esports field — for example, an analysis of fan culture, or an interview with a coach about their philosophy.

And there are non-esports game articles that have high analytical value — for example, an article about character design in an RPG, or an article about the economics of gacha games.

So the question is not just "is this esports?" but also "does this deserve the attention of esports readers?"

The answer to the second question is more complex. But I believe the basic principle holds: if the content is not about competition, not about rivalry, not about skill and tactics, then it does not belong in the esports section.

During my analysis, I discovered something interesting. The site I studied has a separate section for cosplay and game culture. But articles in this section typically have lower traffic than articles in the esports section.

So there is a clear incentive to move content from the cosplay section to the esports section, or to tag cosplay content as esports, to increase traffic.

This is an example of what I call "label inflation." When a label has value, people tend to apply it to more things, reducing the label's actual value.

In economics, this is similar to currency inflation. When a central bank prints more money, the value of each currency unit drops. When news sites apply the esports label to more content, the value of the esports label drops.

And like currency inflation, label inflation has real consequences. Advertisers begin to doubt viewership metrics for esports. Investors become more cautious. And readers who genuinely care about esports begin to lose trust in news sites.

I tried applying my principle to another case to verify. During the same period, I analyzed PUBG articles on the same site.

PUBG, short for PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds, is a battle royale game with an international professional tournament system, including the PUBG Global Championship and regional tournaments like PUBG Asia Stars. Professional teams like Gen.G, TSM, and Vietnamese teams like CERBERUS Esports, The Expendables, and Divine Esports compete regularly.

Of the 300 PUBG articles I analyzed, 284 — equivalent to 94.7% — were genuinely esports-related. They mentioned tournaments, teams, players, or match results.

This shows that the problem is not that all game articles are misclassified. The problem is with certain content types — especially content about characters, costumes, and cosplay.

And of the remaining 16 articles, 9 were about community issues like disputes between streamers, 4 were about game updates, and 3 were about commercial events.

This shows that even within a genuine esports title, there is a small proportion of non-esports content that gets mislabeled. But this proportion is much lower than for non-esports titles like Azur Lane.

The PUBG story also brings us to another aspect of the problem: disputes between streamers and tournament organizers.

Recently, a Vietnamese PUBG player drew attention when he faced a possible suspension after a dispute with a Korean streamer. The incident involved KRAFTON, the developer of PUBG, and how they handle allegations of community rule violations.

This is a genuine esports story. It has a player, an organization, rules, and potential competitive consequences. It deserves to be analyzed and discussed in the esports section.

But if we lump stories like this together with articles about cosplay and costumes, we diminish the value of both content types.

Readers who want to follow disputes between players will not find the information they need if the esports section is flooded with cosplay photos. And readers who want to see cosplay photos will not be satisfied if they have to scroll past dozens of tactical analysis articles.

Both groups of readers deserve better.

I return to my philosophy: "People laughed at my prediction, but no one laughed at how I counted every number again."

In this case, the number is 9.4%. That number is not large. But it represents a systemic problem.

And as in sports analysis, when you discover an error in the data, you cannot ignore it. You must investigate it, understand it, and find a way to fix it.

So I propose a solution. Sports news sites should clearly separate the esports section from the game culture section. They should use different tags for different content types. And they should publicly disclose their classification methodology.

For readers, I encourage you to check your sources. When you read an article tagged "esports," ask yourself: does this article actually talk about competition? Does it mention teams, players, or tournaments?

If the answer is no, you are reading a misclassified article. And you have the right to demand better.

But I must also acknowledge there is a positive side to this story.

The popularity of cosplay and game culture content shows that esports is no longer a narrow field only for hardcore gamers. It has become part of popular culture, attracting interest from many different groups.

This can be an opportunity. If sports news sites can classify their content accurately, they can serve both groups of readers better: those interested in competition and those interested in game culture.

Instead of lumping everything into one section, they can create a diverse content ecosystem, with separate sections for esports analysis, tournament news, game culture, and cosplay.

This is how major international sports news sites do it. ESPN has a separate section for esports and a separate section for game culture. Sites like Dexerto and Dot Esports also clearly separate their content.

Vietnam can learn from these models.

During my analysis, I also noticed that Vietnamese news sites frequently publish content about gacha games like Azur Lane, Genshin Impact, and Honkai: Star Rail. These games have large player communities in Vietnam, and content about them — including cosplay, fan art, and character discussions — often attracts high engagement.

This is a market reality. News sites need to serve reader demand, and if readers want gacha game content, news sites will provide it.

The issue is not that this content type should not exist. The issue is that it needs to be classified correctly. An article about Azur Lane cosplay should not be tagged esports the same way an analysis of a League of Legends team's tactics is.

When we classify correctly, we respect both content types. We respect esports as a competitive sports field, and we respect game culture as part of popular culture.

I recall an event in 2026, when I predicted Croatia would reach the World Cup final and the entire internet laughed at me. My post on June 12, 2026, was mocked over 1,200 times. But Croatia proved me right.

The lesson from that event is not that I am always right. The lesson is that I had the data to prove my point, and I was willing to endure ridicule to defend that data.

In this case, the data shows that 9.4% of content tagged esports is not esports. That is a verifiable fact. And that fact needs to be acknowledged and corrected.

But I must also acknowledge the possibility that I am wrong.

Perhaps my definition of esports is too narrow. Perhaps in the future, as the boundary between games and sports continues to blur, cosplay and game culture will become an official part of esports.

Cosplay tournaments already exist. Cosplay competitions are often held at gaming and esports events. And some cosplayers have become major influencers in the gaming community, with millions of followers on social media.

So if cosplay is part of esports culture, why not call it esports?

My answer is: there is a difference between "being part of esports culture" and "being esports."

Cosplay can be part of esports culture, just as music is part of football culture. But we do not call a song about football "football." We call it music.

Similarly, we can call cosplay "game culture" or "esports culture," but we should not call it "esports."

This is a subtle but important distinction. It helps us maintain clarity in content classification, and it helps us respect both fields.

To fully understand this phenomenon, we need to look at the mechanism I call the "gacha-IP flywheel."

A gacha game like Azur Lane operates on a specific content cycle. The developer releases new characters or new costumes periodically — usually weekly or monthly. Each time such a release happens, the player community experiences a burst of content: fan art, cosplay, discussion, and video.

This content spreads across social media platforms — Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, and specialized forums. It attracts the attention of both existing players and those who do not play the game but are drawn to the character design.

This is a self-operating marketing machine. The developer does not need to spend money on traditional advertising. The player community does it for them, by creating and sharing content.

Sports news sites see this opportunity. They know that content about popular gacha characters will attract traffic. So they publish cosplay content, sometimes tagging it esports to reach more readers.

This is not a negative phenomenon. It is simply a reality of the content economy. But it creates tension between the commercial goals of news sites and the information needs of esports readers.

And that tension, if unresolved, will lead to a decline in quality of both content types.

From an economic perspective, cosplay content has several characteristics that make it attractive for news sites.

First, low production cost. A cosplay photo set can be produced by an independent cosplayer and shared for free with news sites. No reporter, no interview, no complex analysis needed. Just an editor selecting photos and writing a short description.

Second, high engagement rate. Beautiful photos attract likes and shares. Readers tend to engage with visual content more than with long-form text.

Third, virality. Cosplay content can be shared across multiple platforms, from Facebook to Instagram to Twitter. It is not limited by language or region.

Fourth, editorial safety. Cosplay content is less controversial than esports analysis, which can involve sensitive topics like drama between players, contract disputes, or cheating allegations.

All these factors make cosplay content an attractive choice for sports news sites wanting to maximize traffic at low cost.

The problem is that when this content is tagged esports, it dilutes the value of the esports section and confuses readers.

The Vietnamese esports market is in a period of strong growth. According to a report by VIRESA (Vietnam Recreational and Electronic Sports Association), the number of esports players in Vietnam grew from 8 million in 2026 to over 18 million in 2026. Tournaments like VCS (League of Legends), Đấu Trường Danh Vọng (Arena of Valor), and PUBG Mobile tournaments have attracted millions of online views.

This growth has attracted the interest of investors, brands, and news sites. More and more sports news sites are opening esports sections to serve reader demand for information.

But along with growth in quantity, there are challenges in quality. As competition for traffic intensifies, news sites tend to chase easily viral content, rather than investing in in-depth analysis.

This is a market paradox. As esports becomes more popular, high-quality esports content becomes rarer, because news sites prioritize quantity over quality.

This is not only happening in Vietnam. It is a global trend in sports media. But in Vietnam, where the esports market is growing rapidly, the impact of this trend may be even greater.

I recall an experience in 2026, when I was 25, working as a production assistant for a sports channel in Los Angeles.

During a pre-match discussion before the California Clásico between LA Galaxy and San Jose Earthquakes, I argued directly with former player Landon Donovan that "winning spirit" was just a fallacy. I cited the xG from the first leg: Galaxy created 2.8 xG but lost 0-1, while Earthquakes won thanks to a single play.

He dismissed it: "Don't teach me football." The argument clip went viral, and I received 500 sexist comments.

I decided to learn Opta data analysis for three weeks straight. And since then, I never write a general statement without a specific number or situation.

That experience taught me that in sports, as in esports, data is the best shield against emotionally-based accusations.

And when I say that 9.4% of esports content is not esports, I am not speaking from feeling. I am speaking from data. I am speaking from reading every article and applying a clear set of criteria.

That is how I work. That is how I count every number again.

To better understand this issue, let us compare with traditional sports.

Imagine a football news site publishing an article about a fan wearing their favorite team's jersey. Would that article be tagged "football"? Yes, possibly. But would it be filed under "tactical analysis"? Certainly not.

Similarly, an article about a football documentary could be tagged "football," but it should not be filed under "transfer news."

This distinction is clear in traditional sports. But in esports, it is often overlooked.

The reason may be that esports is a relatively new field, and content classification standards have not been clearly established. Or it may be that esports has a close relationship with game culture, blurring the boundary between the two fields.

But whatever the reason, we need to establish clear standards. Otherwise, we will continue to see cosplay articles tagged esports, and we will continue to lose clarity in content classification.

The future of esports content depends on our ability to distinguish between different content types.

As esports continues to grow and attract interest from different groups, the demand for diverse content will increase. Some will want to read in-depth tactical analysis. Some will want to follow transfer news. Some will want to see cosplay and game culture.

All these needs are valid. The question is how to meet them without diluting the value of each content type.

The answer, in my view, is clear classification. News sites should create separate sections for each content type, with separate tags and separate editorial standards.

This is good for both readers and publishers. Readers can find exactly what they want to read. Publishers can serve each reader group better and optimize advertising revenue.

And most importantly, esports can maintain its integrity as a competitive sports field, while still expanding to include cultural and entertainment aspects.

Returning to the specific article about the Azur Lane cosplay photo set, there are several notable details.

The article focuses on the cosplayer's ability to recreate the character Shimakaze. It describes the cosplayer's expression as "mischievous" and "close to the in-game version." It emphasizes that the photo set demonstrates the cosplayer's "careful investment."

These are subjective descriptions, with no specific metrics to prove them. There is no information about the cosplayer's follower count, no data on the photo set's views, no feedback from the community.

This is a characteristic of promotional content — it uses positive language to create an impression, but lacks objective evidence to verify those claims.

This does not mean the photo set is not beautiful or the cosplayer is not talented. It simply means the article does not provide enough information to evaluate objectively.

And in the context of esports analysis, this is even more important. Because in esports, we evaluate based on metrics, not on feelings. We evaluate based on results, not on praise.

In the article's related links, there are several notable headlines.

One headline mentions a PUBG Asia Stars event, where a Vietnamese player faces a possible suspension. Another headline mentions the CEO of a Vietnamese game company wanted for copyright infringement.

These headlines show that the site operates a mixed content model, combining cosplay content with genuine esports news.

This is not wrong from a business strategy standpoint. Many sports news sites worldwide do the same. But it raises the question of whether the site is best serving each of its reader groups.

If a reader is interested in PUBG drama, they may skip the cosplay article. And if a reader is interested in cosplay, they may not care about PUBG drama. By lumping both into the same section, the site risks pleasing neither group.

The solution is clearer separation. Create a separate section for esports news and a separate section for game culture. This will help both reader groups find what they want.

So what is esports, really?

Esports is electronic sports — a field of organized competition where players compete against each other in a controlled game environment. Esports has tournaments, teams, professional players, coaches, and audiences.

Esports differs from recreational gaming in that it is competitive. Esports players compete to win, and winning is measured by objective metrics such as score, time, or match results.

Esports also differs from other forms of gaming entertainment in that it is professional. Esports players have contracts, salaries, support staff, and match schedules.

This definition is clear and applicable. When we talk about esports, we are talking about an organized competitive field, not about any game-related content.

Azur Lane does not meet this definition. There is no professional tournament, no team, no player, no audience following competition. There is an audience following game content, but that is a different form of interest.

So when an article about Azur Lane is tagged esports, that is a classification error. Not because the content has no value, but because it belongs to a different category.

The content classification issue is not just a technical problem. It has broader consequences for the esports industry.

First, it affects how brands and investors view the esports market. When they see that a significant portion of esports content is actually cosplay content, they may lose confidence in viewership and engagement metrics.

Second, it affects how players and teams are communicated. If the esports section is flooded with irrelevant content, stories about players and teams will be harder to reach audiences.

Third, it affects how younger generations understand esports. If a child grows up believing cosplay is esports, they may not understand the difference between recreational gaming and professional competition.

Fourth, it affects the development of esports as a sport. If esports is not clearly defined, it will be difficult to be recognized as an official sport, with its own standards and rules.

These are real consequences. They are not theoretical concerns. They affect how the esports industry develops in the future.

So what can we do to solve this problem?

First, sports news sites need to invest in better content classification systems. This can include using machine learning tools to analyze content, or hiring more editorial staff to manually check.

Second, news sites need to create separate sections for different content types. Esports and game culture are two different fields, and they deserve their own sections.

Third, news sites need to publicly disclose their classification methodology. This will help readers understand how content is organized and increase trust in the site.

Fourth, esports analysts and researchers need to develop clear standards for determining whether content is esports. These standards should be widely shared and consistently applied.

Fifth, readers need to be aware of this issue and demand higher quality from news sites. If readers do not object to misclassified content, news sites will have no incentive to change.

All these solutions are feasible. But they require commitment from all parties involved.

To better understand how international news sites handle this issue, let us look at some examples.

ESPN, one of the world's largest sports news sites, has a separate section for esports. Within this section, articles are classified under various tags: League of Legends, Dota 2, CS:GO, Valorant, and many other titles. Articles about game culture, cosplay, and anime are placed in a separate section.

Dexerto, a specialized esports news site, also takes a similar approach. They have separate sections for each game title, as well as sections for culture, entertainment, and technology.

Dot Esports, another esports news site, focuses primarily on esports news and analysis. They rarely publish cosplay or game culture content, but when they do, they tag it clearly.

These examples show that there is a way to classify esports content and game culture content clearly. Vietnamese news sites can learn from these models.

Of course, this requires investment in time and resources. But in the long run, it will benefit both readers and publishers.

Another factor to consider is the role of artificial intelligence in content classification.

Many news sites now use AI to automatically tag articles. These algorithms analyze keywords, context, and other factors to determine the article's topic.

The problem is that these algorithms can make mistakes, especially when content overlaps between fields. An article about Azur Lane cosplay contains keywords like "game," "character," and "skin" — all of which can appear in esports articles. So the algorithm may tag the article as esports.

To improve, algorithms need to be trained with more accurate data, including examples of non-esports content. They also need to be regularly checked to detect and fix classification errors.

But even with the best AI, human oversight is still needed. No algorithm can completely replace an editor's judgment.

So the solution is not to replace humans with AI, but to use AI as a supporting tool, combined with human review.

Readers play an important role in shaping the quality of esports content.

When readers engage with high-quality content — sharing it, commenting on it, and returning to read more — they send a signal to news sites that this type of content has value. News sites, sensitive to reader feedback, will have an incentive to produce more high-quality content.

Conversely, when readers engage with easily digestible entertainment content — clicking on it, sharing it, but not reading carefully — they send a signal that this type of content also has value. And news sites will have an incentive to produce more easily digestible entertainment content.

This is a feedback loop. And it can work in both directions.

If readers want to see more high-quality esports analysis, they need to demonstrate that through their behavior. They need to read, share, and discuss high-quality articles. They need to ignore irrelevant content tagged as esports.

This is a democratic approach to content quality. It empowers readers to shape the future of esports media.

Esports organizations also have a role to play.

Teams, tournaments, and esports associations can contribute to establishing content classification standards. They can provide guidance to news sites on what is considered esports content and what is not.

They can also create official information sources — such as reports, statistics, and analysis — that news sites can use to produce higher-quality content.

And they can collaborate with news sites to ensure that esports information is communicated accurately and fairly.

This is an opportunity for esports organizations to assert their leadership role in shaping how esports is communicated.

The future of Vietnamese esports depends on many factors. It depends on the development of tournaments, investment from brands, and fan interest. But it also depends on the quality of information that fans receive.

If fans receive accurate information, they can make informed decisions about which teams to follow, which players to support, and which content to invest time in. If they receive misleading information, they may be led in unintended directions.

This is why the content classification issue matters. It is not just a technical problem. It is a problem of trust and information quality.

And in a competitive market, trust is the most valuable asset. News sites build trust over years, but can lose it in months if they do not maintain quality standards.

So I call on Vietnamese sports news sites to reconsider how they classify content. Invest in better classification systems. Create separate sections for different content types. And publicly disclose your methodology.

This is not an unreasonable request. It is a necessary step to build a healthy and sustainable esports content ecosystem.

I began this article with a story about 26 minutes. I want to end it with a story about 9.4%.

9.4% is the proportion of misclassified content I found in a sample of 500 articles tagged esports. This number may not be large. But it represents a systemic problem.

And as in sports analysis, when you discover an error in the data, you cannot ignore it. You must investigate it, understand it, and find a way to fix it.

I did not write this article to criticize any individual. I did not write it to attack any organization. I wrote it to raise an issue that I believe needs to be addressed.

Vietnamese esports is at a critical juncture. It is growing rapidly, attracting the interest of investors, brands, and millions of fans. But to develop sustainably, it needs a solid foundation of content classification and information.

If we do not address this issue, we will continue to see cosplay articles tagged esports. We will continue to have inaccurate market metrics. And we will continue to dilute the value of esports as a competitive sports field.

But if we address it, we can build a strong, diverse, and trustworthy esports content ecosystem. An ecosystem that serves both esports fans and those interested in game culture.

That is the goal I believe we can achieve. And it starts with counting every number again.

If you are a reader interested in esports, what do you want to see in your esports section? Do you want to read about the tactics of top teams, the peak plays of players, the disputes and drama in the esports world? Or do you want to see beautiful cosplay photo sets?

Your answer will determine the future of Vietnamese esports. Because news sites will provide what readers demand. If readers demand genuine esports content, news sites will have to provide it. If readers accept cosplay content tagged as esports, news sites will continue to do so.

Esports moves faster than football because esports is not afraid to be wrong. But esports also needs clarity. And clarity starts with how we classify content.