Connect with us

International

China Limits Kids to 3 Hours of Video Games Per Week While Cracking Down on Big Tech

Published

on

The moves come after months of rulings and changes that seek to address work-life imbalances within Chinese society, alongside wealth and education inequities.


Less Gaming for Kids

Chinese authorities have enacted sweeping changes across most aspects of society over the past week in hopes of reducing student stress and improving people’s work-life balance, though some of the changes are likely to face backlash.

Among the least popular changes, at least for those they affect, are restrictions regarding the amount of time minors can spend playing video games. New rules enacted on Friday now state that minors are only allowed to play video games on Friday, Saturday, Sunday, or on holidays for one hour per night between 8 p.m. and 9 p.m. The government hopes to reduce the time children spend gaming so they can instead focus on other activities that are seen as more productive to a healthy lifestyle, such as sports and extracurriculars.

The changes are stricter than a past law, which limited playtime to 1.5 hours during the week and three hours on the weekends and holidays. However, minors were able to largely circumvent the rules. Gaming in China requires using an I.D., so children would simply use an adult’s I.D., such as their parents, to play as long as they’d like. That practice is likely to continue for some time, at least until tech companies can comply with new laws that force them to implement systems to verify who is playing the game. One such system in development by the gaming giant Tencent would have facial recognition technology to continuously monitor who is playing.

It’s unclear if the changes will actually encourage minors to engage in other activities, but it will clearly impact the country’s growing esports scenes, as most players start when they are minors.

Aside from gaming restrictions, other changes include moving forward with plans to ban exams for children between the ages of six and seven. In a statement Friday, the Ministry of Education said exams harm the “physical and mental health” of such young students. It has also limited the number of exams other students can take, writing, “First and second grades of elementary school will not need to take paper-based exams.”

“For other grades, the school can organize a final exam every semester. Mid-term exams are allowed for junior high.”

The Ministry added that students were not allowed to organize their own exams and said, “examinations disguised under various names like academic research is also not allowed.”

All of these changes follow a ban on homework for young children and a 1.5 hour nightly limit on homework for older kids. Additionally, the country moved last month to ban for-profit private tutoring, a major industry in China that was criticized for placing undue pressure on low-income families who felt they needed the services so their children could “compete” with wealthier students when it came to college entrance exams.

Overall, officials hope that education inequities, and the related wealth inequity, within Chinese society will diminish with what is viewed as a more “even” playing field.

996 Schedule Scrutiny

The changes to education have a direct effect on China’s tech industry, as many of the industry giants had established lucrative subsidiaries in the space. However, the government has sought to curb the power of these companies. Beyond limits to for-profit tutoring, agencies have also moved to ban other practices that they view are detrimental to the lives of everyday people.

Of particular concern is the industry’s use of 996, or the practice of forcing employees to work 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. six days a week. While Chinese law allows for some mandatory overtime, 996 practices blatantly break the law and push employees into experiencing extremely unhealthy work-life balances.

Following months of criticism by current and former officials, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the practice was illegal. It, alongside the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, issued a warning to employers about continuing the use of 996, leading many to assume the government is serious about cracking down on the practice.

According to an interview conducted by The South China Morning Post with Lou Jiwei, a former finance minister, tech companies saw the 996 schedule as a “gift” to employees, despite the fact that it clearly violated Chinese labor laws.

“If there is no proper regulation, everyone will adopt 996, which will reduce jobs and be harmful to society,” he continued.

Meanwhile, tech moguls like Jack Ma, founder of Alibaba, have defended the schedule. In fact, Ma claimed in an essay that 996 was a “gift” that allowed Alibaba, Tencent, and other tech giants to grow into the behemoths they are today.

Read what others are saying: (BBC) (South China Morning Post) (The Guardian)

International

Israel Relaxes Abortion Restrictions in Response to U.S. Supreme Court Ruling

Published

on

The reforms follow similar moves by France and Germany as leaders across the political spectrum denounce the court’s decision.


Health Minister Makes Announcement

Israel is easing access to abortion in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s repeal of Roe v. Wade, Nitzan Horowitz, the country’s health minister and head of the small left-wing Meretz party, announced Monday.

“The U.S. Supreme Court’s move to deny a woman the right to abortion is a dark move,” he said in the announcement, “oppressing women and returning the leader of the free and liberal world a hundred years backward.”

The new rules, approved by a majority in the parliamentary committee, grant women access to abortion pills through the universal health system. Women will be able to obtain the pills at local health centers rather than only hospitals and surgical clinics.

The new policy also removes the decades-old requirement for women to physically appear before a special committee that must grant approval to terminate a pregnancy.

While women will still need to get approval, the process will become digitized, the application form will be simplified, and the requirement to meet a social worker will become optional.

The committee will only conduct hearings in the rare case it initially denies the abortion procedure.

Israel’s 1977 abortion law stipulates four criteria for termination of pregnancy: If the woman is under 18 or over 40, if the fetus is in danger, if the pregnancy is the result of rape, incest, or an “illicit union,” including extramarital affairs, and if the woman’s mental or physical health is at risk.

All of the changes will take effect over the next three months.

The World Reacts

Politicians across the political spectrum from Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson have denounced the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision since it was announced Friday.

On Saturday, French Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne expressed support for a bill proposed by parliament that would enshrine the right to an abortion in the country’s constitution.

“For all women, for human rights, we must set this gain in stone,” she wrote on Twitter. “Parliament must be able to unite overwhelmingly over this text.”

Germany scrapped a Nazi-era law prohibiting the promotion of abortion Friday, just hours before the U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

In Israel, abortion is a far less controversial issue than it is for Americans. Around 98% of people who apply for an abortion get one, according to the country’s Central Bureau of Statistics.

Part of the reason for Israel’s relatively easy access to abortion is that many residents interpret Jewish law to condone, or at least not prohibit, the procedure.

In the United States, several Jewish organizations including the American Jewish Committee, Hillel International, and the Women’s Rabbinic Network have expressed opposition to the court ruling, and some Jews have protested it as a violation of their religious freedom.

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (ABC News) (The Guardian)

Continue Reading

International

Flight Deporting Refugees From U.K. to Rwanda Canceled at Last Hour

Published

on

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights said the U.K.’s asylum policy sets a “catastrophic” precedent.


Saved By The Bell

The inaugural flight in the U.K. government’s plan to deport some asylum seekers to Rwanda was canceled about an hour and a half before it was supposed to take off Tuesday evening.

A last-minute legal intervention by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) halted the flight. Tuesday’s flight originally included 37 people, but after a string of legal challenges that number dwindled to just seven.

In its ruling for one of the seven passengers, a 54-year-old Iraqi man, the court said he cannot be deported until three weeks after the delivery of the final domestic decision in his ongoing judicial review proceedings.

Another asylum seeker, a 26-year-old Albanian man, told The Guardian he was in a “very bad mental state” and did not want to go to Rwanda, a country he knows nothing about.

“I was exploited by traffickers in Albania for six months,” he said. “They trafficked me to France. I did not know which country I was being taken to.”

A final domestic effort to block the flight in the Court of Appeals failed on Monday. The High Court will make a ruling on the asylum policy next month.

Britains Divided by Controversial Policy

U.K. Home Secretary Priti Patel spoke to lawmakers after the flight was canceled, defending the asylum policy and saying preparations for the next flight will begin immediately.

“We cannot keep on spending nearly £5 million a day on accommodation including that of hotels,” she said. “We cannot accept this intolerable pressure on public services and local communities.”

“It makes us less safe as a nation because those who come here illegally do not have the regularized checks or even the regularized status, and because evil people-smuggling gangs use the proceeds of their ill-gotten gains to fund other appalling crimes that undermine the security of our country,” she continued.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Filippo Grandi, told CBC the policy sets a “catastrophic” precedent.

“We believe that this is all wrong,” he said. “This is all wrong. I mean, saving people from dangerous journeys is great, is absolutely great. But is that the right way to do it? Is that the right, is that the real motivation for this deal to happen? I don’t think so. I think it’s… I don’t know what it is.”

An Iranian asylum seeker in a British detention center who was told to prepare for deportation before being granted a late reprieve was asked by ABC whether he ever thought the U.K. would send him to Africa.

“I thought in the U.K. there were human rights,” he said. “But so far I haven’t seen any evidence.”

The Conservative government’s plan was announced in April, when it said it would resettle some asylum seekers 4,000 miles away in Rwanda, where they can seek permanent refugee status, apply to settle there on other grounds, or seek asylum in a safe third country.

The scheme was meant to deter migrants from illegally smuggling themselves into the country by boat or truck.

Migrants have long made the dangerous journey from Northern France across the English Channel, with over 28,000 entering the U.K. in boats last year, up from around 8,500 the year prior. Dozens of people have died making the trek, including 27 who drowned last November when a single boat capsized.

See what others are saying: (BBC) (The Guardian) (CNN)

Continue Reading

International

Ryanair Draws Outrage, Accusations of Racism After Making South Africans Take Test in Afrikaans

Published

on

Afrikaans, which is only spoken as a first language by around 13% of South Africa, has not been the country’s national language since apartheid came to an end in 1994.


Airline Won’t Explain Discrimination

Ryanair, Europe’s largest airline, has received widespread criticism and accusations of racism after it began requiring South African nationals to complete a test in Afrikaans to prove their passport isn’t fraudulent.

The airline told BBC the new policy was implemented because of “substantially increased cases of fraudulent South African passports being used to enter the U.K.”

Among other questions, the test asks passengers to name South Africa’s president, its capital city, and one national public holiday.

Ryanair has not said why it chose Afrikaans, the Dutch colonial language that many associate with white minority rule, for the test.

There are 11 official languages in South Africa, and Afrikaans ranks third for usage below Zulu and IsiXhosa. Only around 13% of South Africans speak Afrikaans as their first language.

“They’re using this in a manner that is utterly absurd,” Conrad Steenkamp, CEO of the Afrikaans Language Council, told reporters. “Afrikaans, you have roughly 20% of the population of South Africa understand Afrikaans. But the rest don’t, so you’re sitting with roughly 50 million people who do not understand Afrikaans.”

“Ryanair should be careful,” he continued. “Language is a sensitive issue. They may well end up in front of the Human Rights Commission with this.”

Ryanair’s policy only applies to South African passengers flying to the United Kingdom from within Europe, since it does not fly out of South Africa.

The British government has said in a statement that it does not require the test.

Anyone who cannot complete the test will be blocked from traveling and given a refund.

Memories of Apartheid Resurface

“The question requiring a person to name a public holiday is particularly on the nose given that SA has a whole public holiday NEXT WEEK commemorating an historic protest that started in response to language-based discrimination,” one person tweeted.

South African citizen Dinesh Joseph told the BBC that he was “seething” with anger when asked to take the test.

“It was the language of apartheid,” he said, adding that it was a trigger for him.

Officials in the country were also surprised by Ryanair’s decision.

We are taken aback by the decision of this airline because the Department regularly communicates with all airlines to update them on how to validate South African passports, including the look and feel,” South Africa’s Department of Home Affairs said in a statement.

Any airline found to have flown a passenger with a fake passport to the U.K. faces a fine of £2,000 from authorities there. Ryanair has also not said whether it requires similar tests for any other nationalities.

Many people expressed outrage at Ryanair’s policy and some told stories of being declined service because they did not pass the test.

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (BBC) (Al Jazeera)

Continue Reading