Connect with us

Business

China Expands Crackdown on Western Retailers Refusing To Buy Materials From Xinjiang

Published

on

  • China has extended a massive crackdown it originally placed on Swedish retailer H&M to include other foreign retailers, such as Nike, Adidas, Calvin Klein, and more.
  • The crackdown is in response to the companies’ refusals to source material from the Xinjiang region, where more than 1 million minority Muslims are being held in forced labor camps. 
  • Products for those companies have been blocked from appearing in online searches, and potential customers have even been prevented from hailing rides to their physical stores.
  • While most brick-and-mortar stores do remain open, some were forced to shut down and have had their logos covered. 
  • Meanwhile, other foreign companies — including MUJI, Zara, and Hugo Boss — have seemingly reversed their stances on using materials from Xinjiang in an apparent attempt to avoid the crackdown. 

China Widens Retailer Crackdown

After blocking online search results for Swedish clothing retailer H&M on Wednesday, China extended its crackdown on Western retailers to include Nike, Adidas, Burberry, Calvin Klein, and more. 

Amid other restrictions, Chinese residents are unable to hail taxis to brick-and-mortar stores for the companies as of Friday. While most physical stores remain open, some have been shuttered. In fact, one photo from a Chinese media agency shows an H&M outlet in Urumqi, Xinjiang, closed with its logo covered.

China is targeting each of these companies because of their refusal to buy materials made in the Xinjiang region, where over a million minority Muslims have been detained in “re-education” camps. Those camps, more commonly referred to as internment camps outside of China, have been widely condemned for forced labor practices, for sterilizing women, and for genocide. 

Frustrations Began With H&M

The boycotts started Wednesday when Chinese state media singled out H&M over a statement it made in September.

“H&M Group is deeply concerned by reports from civil society organisations and media that include accusations of forced labour and discrimination of ethnoreligious minorities in” Xinjiang, the statement read. H&M added that its third-party suppliers would no longer be sourcing cotton from farms in the region. 

It’s unclear exactly why state media resurfaced these comments, but it may be connected to a fresh round of sanctions against Chinese officials made by Britain, Canada, the European Union, and the United States on Monday. 

When China first launched its assault again H&M, it initially blocked searches for the retailer on the country’s largest online shopping platforms, including Alibaba. Searches for brick-and-mortar stores on online maps also no longer pulled up results. The same day, two Chinese brand ambassadors for H&M said they were cutting ties with the company, arguing that it was smearing lies against China.

Along with China’s more official crackdown, many social media users also began calling for full boycotts of the company.

In an online statement, H&M China said it respects Chinese consumers and that its practices as a brand “do not represent any political position.”

That statement didn’t seem to calm the rage, as calls for boycotts began extending to other brands, such as Nike, Adidas, Tommy Hilfiger, Converse, and Calvin Klein. Notably, like H&M, all five have also lost brand ambassadors. 

Meanwhile, British luxury retailer Burberry was forced to give up a video game partnership it had with Tencent. 

On Thursday, those brands all seemed to fall under the same online restrictions that had been employed against H&M. Now, many in China are urging consumers to only buy from domestic retailers that source materials from Xinjiang, including companies like Li Ning, Anta, Peak, and Meters/bonwe. 

In the last two days, many of these companies have even trended positively on Weibo, China’s popular social media platform. Both Li Ning and Anta have also seen their stock shares surge amidst support from Chinese consumers.

Some Foreign Retailers Seemingly Change Stances on Using Xinjiang Materials

Among the foreign brands facing calls for a boycott was Japanese retailer MUJI; however, its Chinese branch stressed Thursday that it currently uses — and will continue to use — Xinjiang cotton. 

In another move that has been interpreted to avoid a boycott or crackdown, Inditex — the parent company of Spanish retailer Zara — has reportedly deleted a previous statement it made calling reports of forced labor in Xinjiang “highly concerning.”

While German retailer Hugo Boss told NBC News in September that it requires its suppliers to prove they don’t use Xinjiang cotton, this week, the Chinese arm of the company seemingly reversed course when it told its Chinese market that it currently uses Xinjiang cotton.

Xinjiang’s long-stapled cotton is one of the best in the world,” the company said on Chinese social media. “We will continue to purchase and support Xinjiang cotton.”

As a result, some have accused all three companies of hypocrisy and turning a blind eye to human rights abuses in order to continue operating in China’s massive consumer market. 

See what others are saying: (BBC) (NBC News) (South China Morning Post)

Business

TikTok to Require Labels on Manipulated Media, Ban Deepfakes of Children

Published

on

The social media platform says it wants to embrace the creativity AI can offer while being cautious of the “societal and individual risks” that come with it.


TikTok is rolling out a slew of limitations regarding synthetic deepfake videos, including a ban on deepfake content of children.

In an update on Tuesday, the social media platform said it wants welcome “the creativity that new artificial intelligence and other digital technologies may unlock” while also being careful of the “societal and individual risks” that come with it. To mitigate those risks, TikTok will require users to label manipulated media depicting “realistic scenes.” Users can do so in stickers, captions, or other means that make it clear the video is “synthetic,” “fake,” “not real,” or “altered.”

On top of that, there are new restrictions about who can be the subject of these manipulated videos. TikTok will not allow deepfake media that shows the likeness of a “young person” or any private person, including adults. It is also barring deepfakes that depict adult public figures giving political or commercial endorsements, as well as deepfakes that violate one of the platform’s other rules.

“While we provide more latitude for public figures, we do not want them to be the subject of abuse, or for people to be misled about political or financial issues,” the company’s updated guidelines say. 

As TikTok’s policies previously stated, synthetic media that has been edited to mislead audiences about real-world events is also not allowed on the platform. 

As far as what kind of deepfake media is allowed on TikTok, the company said videos showing adult public figures in “certain contexts, including artistic and educational content,” get the green light. This can include a video of a celebrity doing a TikTok dance, or a historical figure being depicted in a history lesson. 

The rules will be enforced starting April 21. Between now and then, TikTok says it will be training its moderators to better implement the guidelines.

See what others are saying: (The Verge) (The Associated Press) (TechCrunch)

Continue Reading

Business

Adidas Financial Woes Continue, Company on Track for First Annual Loss in Decades

Published

on

Adidas has labeled 2023 a “transition year” for the company. 


Yeezy Surplus 

Adidas’ split with musician Kanye West has left the company with financial problems due to surplus Yeezy products, putting the sportswear giant in the position to potentially suffer its first annual loss in over 30 years. 

Adidas dropped West last year after he made a series of antisemitic remarks on social media and other broadcasts. His Yeezy line was a staple for Adidas, and the surplus product is due, in part, to the brand’s own decision to continue production during the split.

According to CEO Bjorn Gulden, Adidas continued production of only the items already in the pipeline to prevent thousands of people from losing their jobs. However, that has led to the unfortunate overabundance of Yeezy sneakers and clothes. 

On Wednesday, Gulden said that selling the shoes and donating the proceeds makes more sense than giving them away due to the Yeezy resale market — which has reportedly shot up 30% since October.

“If we sell it, I promise that the people who have been hurt by this will also get something good out of this,” Gulden said in a statement to the press. 

However, Gulden also said that West is entitled to a portion of the proceeds of the sale of Yeezys per his royalty agreement.

The Numbers 

Adidas announced in February that, following its divergence from West, it is facing potential sales losses totaling around $1.2 billion and profit losses of around $500 million. 

If it decides to not sell any more Yeezy products, Adidas is facing a projected annual loss of over $700 million.

Outside of West, Adidas has taken several heavy profit blows recently. Its operating profit reportedly fell by 66% last year, a total of more than $700 million. It also pulled out of Russia after the country’s invasion of Ukraine last year, which cost Adidas nearly $60 million dollars. Additionally, China’s “Zero Covid” lockdowns last year caused in part a 36% drop in revenue for Adidas compared to years prior.

As a step towards a solution, Gulden announced that the company is slashing its dividends from 3.30 euros to 0.70 euro cents per share pending shareholder approval. 

Adidas has labeled 2023 a “transition year” for the company. 

“Adidas has all the ingredients to be successful. But we need to put our focus back on our core: product, consumers, retail partners, and athletes,” Gulden said. “I am convinced that over time we will make Adidas shine again. But we need some time.”

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (The New York Times) (CNN)

Continue Reading

Business

Elon Musk Bashes Disabled Ex-Twitter Employee, Gets Blowback

Published

on

After Musk claimed the former employee “did no actual work,” the staffer calmly directed passive-aggressive insults right back at the billionaire.


Excuse Me, Do I Still Work Here?

Elon Musk brawled online with a former Twitter employee who didn’t know whether he was fired Tuesday, accusing the staffer of exploiting his disability.

Haraldur “Halli” Thorleifsson, who has muscular dystrophy, joined Twitter in 2021 after it acquired the creative agency he founded: Ueno.

He said on Twitter that he was unable to confirm whether he was still a Twitter employee nine days after being locked out of his work computer, despite reaching out to the head of HR and Musk himself through email.

At the time, Twitter had laid off at least 200 workers, or some 10% of its remaining workforce.

In search of an answer, Thorleifsson tweeted at Musk, who responded with the question: “What work have you been doing?”

After being given permission by Musk to break confidentiality, Thorleifsson listed several of his accomplishments, including leading “design crits to help level up design across the company.”

“Level up from what design to what? Pics or it didn’t happen,” Musk replied.

We haven’t hired design roles in 4 months. What changes did you make to help with the youths?”

Thorleifsson reminded Musk that he couldn’t access any pictures because he was locked out of his work computer.

Musk stopped replying to the tweets, but hours later he returned to the platform to lob invective at his former employee.

Musk Vs. Halli

“The reality is that this guy (who is independently wealthy) did no actual work, claimed as his excuse that he had a disability that prevented him from typing, yet was simultaneously tweeting up a storm,” Musk tweeted, apparently referring to Thorleifsson. “Can’t say I have a lot of respect for that.”

“But was he fired? No, you can’t be fired if you weren’t working in the first place,” he added.

In a later Twitter thread, Thorleifsson said he could type for one or two hours at a time before his hands cramped, but that in pre-Musk Twitter, that wasn’t a problem because he was a senior director.

He added that despite his crippling disability, he worked hard for years to build Ueno.

“We grew fast and made money,” he said. “I think that’s what you are referring to when you say independently wealthy? That I independently made my money, as opposed to say, inherited an emerald mine.”

Thorleifsson made several more passive-aggressive jabs at Musk.

“I joined at a time when the company was growing fast,” he wrote. “You kind of did the opposite. The company had a fair amount of issues, but then again, most bigger companies do. Or even small companies, like Twitter today.”

Thorleifsson said that immediately following his back-and-forth with Musk, Twitter’s head of HR confirmed that he had indeed been fired from the company.

See what others are saying: (Business Insider) (CNN) (Yahoo)

Continue Reading