Beijing Asks Alibaba To Shed Its Media Assets (wsj.com) 84
China's government has asked Alibaba Group to dispose of its media assets, as officials grow more concerned about the technology giant's sway over public opinion in the country, WSJ reported Monday, citing people familiar with the matter. From a report: Discussions over the matter have been held since early this year, after Chinese regulators reviewed a list of media assets owned by the Hangzhou-headquartered company, whose mainstay business is online retail. Officials were appalled at how expansive Alibaba's media interests have become and asked the company to come up with a plan to substantially curtail its media holdings, the people said. Alibaba, founded by billionaire Jack Ma, has throughout the years assembled a formidable portfolio of media assets that span print, broadcast, digital, social media and advertising. Notable holdings include stakes in the Twitter-like Weibo platform and several popular Chinese digital and print news outlets, as well as the South China Morning Post, the premier English-language newspaper in Hong Kong. Several of these holdings are in U.S.-listed companies. Such influence is seen as posing serious challenges to the Chinese Communist Party and its own powerful propaganda apparatus, the people said.
China wants to avoid US scenario (Score:3, Insightful)
Meanwhile, in US the Glorious Co-Leaders Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg released the updated list of cancelled children's books for this week's book burning event.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Freedom of speech and freedom of thought are dire threats to Communists, news at 11....
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Except they aren't communists, they are capitalists looking at how this big company is distorting the market and using it's combined media and retail arms to squeeze out competition.
Re:China wants to avoid US scenario (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Just to be clear in the basics, politics cannot be divided into a simple left or rights.
The most basic political overview I how found is probably the Political Compas. They talk about 2 full dimensions (left/right and authority/liberty). From my point of view, this is also a gross simplification, since you can easily put in extra dimensions, and divert from the basic politcal ideas, like view on immigration.
So, communism is a
Re: (Score:2)
Just to be clear in the basics, politics cannot be divided into a simple left or rights.
The most basic political overview I how found is probably the Political Compas. They talk about 2 full dimensions (left/right and authority/liberty). From my point of view, this is also a gross simplification, since you can easily put in extra dimensions, and divert from the basic politcal ideas, like view on immigration.
Reductio ad absurdum, there are as many political views as there are people on plant Earth. If a categorization system fails in one context does not mean it is useless in all contexts. Part of the limitation of our left/right system is that people are encourage to self-identify and that we keep moving the definition as time goes on and attitudes change.
The point of a left/right political spectrum is not to quickly sum up stances on abortion, death penalty, gun control, and every other hot button issue. If p
loony labels for a loony world (Score:2)
Far right wing (fringe, but with a loud voice) = theocracy and/or fascism
Far left wing (basically no power to exercise in US) = fascism and/or centrally planned one-party communism.
The US is not moving in either of those directions. We're split on:
Conservative-libertarian (mainstream US conservative) = kleptocracy and/or oligarchy; and a plutocracy. under the guise of nationalism and populist
Neo-liberal (mainstream US liberal) = oligarchy and/or minimal indirect democracy for some, special privileges for ot
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If we take your word for it that the CCP controls everything in China and forces companies like Alibaba to have party members on the board, and can simply kidnap and murder Jack Ma whenever they feel like it, then why would they be at all concerned about Alibaba?
If anything they would see Alibaba has an opportunity to have more power and control for themselves, would they not?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. This is about control, not freedom.
It is also a personal attack on Jack Ma, who has spoken out against CCP interference in finance and business.
Ma's treatment will serve as an example to others. Sha ji jing hou (Kill chicken, scare monkey).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They are not capitalists at all. They allow some forms of private capital ownership but the state still exerts and massive amount of control over those assets; and in many cases capital is state owned and just privately managed.
It might be fair to call the CCP some kind of social-fascist hybrid but capitalist in any traditional sense they are not.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You should visit China and see for yourself.
It's even more capitalist than some European countries, e.g. things that are nationalized in Europe are privately run in China.
Of course, like every capitalist country, there is regulation and government involvement at various levels. The mechanisms are similar to the West, e.g. a central bank.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nah they just don't want competition. Neither Facebook nor Twitter represent freedom of anything.
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly free speech also means people are free to become mindless drones for propagandists and political cults. Social norms usually make these behaviors self-regulating, but when a large group rejects social norms and declares a culture war there is not much you can do to reason with them.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
But...but...but that is different...very different....awesomely different. It's different because they only want the best just like the CCP leaders want for their glorious nation and people.
Did you get this offended for Crystal Pepsi too? (Score:1)
Meanwhile, in US the Glorious Co-Leaders Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg released the updated list of cancelled children's books for this week's book burning event.
What happened to the free market, comrad? Corporate "Cancel Culture" is self-inflicted. Twitter didn't pressure the Dr Seuss Estate to stop printing those books. They voluntarily decided they don't want to print them any more. They're kinda racist. I don't think Geisel meant any offense, he just drew what he knew...and even during his lifetime, he realized that drawing a Chinese person yellow is ignorant and racist. He ordered to reprint his own book with the Chinese character flesh printed.
I though
Re: (Score:1)
We need fucking conservative ideas...good ones...to effectively lead America in the 21st century.
I would disagree with both your contention that there are good conservative ideas, or that we need the fucking conservatives.
That said, the Democrats are a conservative party with some moderates; they've shifted far to the right from the good old days and are pretty similar to the old Rockefeller Republicans. Ideally the Republicans will shrivel into nothingness and the Democrats will split in two, but so far Republican gerrymandering and their other efforts to eliminate free and fair elections have kept t
Re: (Score:2)
Except those books did sell, until the cancel culture mob came for them. Just like lots comedians and performers were popular too until the mob came. When you can get more or less kick out of folk band for promoting a journalists book - I call that cancel culture and I call it very real.
This isnt about stuff that does not sell. Its about a mob that threatens to harass anyone who associates someone with or users a product that might not align with their views. Its about a certain groups making things not sel
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You seem to have been brainwashed by Conservative media.
Publishers/IP holders decide to stop producing new books or running reruns of Old TV shows is a far cry from the Book Burning of Politically Correct Content.
Most of these cases of so Called LiBeRaL Counter Culture crap. Is just a business realizing that particular product is not profitable enough or will get in the way of the marketing messaging they want to give.
These companies are not being forced by anyone to show or not show the data, they are dec
Re: (Score:2)
This is why China is "winning", or catching up (Score:3, Insightful)
China is advancing more quickly than the US because they don't hem and haw. They just do shit.
Sometimes there are negative side effects, but their government has turned those into benefits... for its own self-perpetuation.
Here in the US we flail wildly and waste time through lack of preparation, and conflicting efforts. Our nation is crumbling while China is building up.
I wouldn't choose to live in China because I am a nail that sticks out, and that would not be a healthy environment for me. I'm not in love with China. But I'm equally not in love with our general incompetence and wasted effort.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Totalitarian dictatorships are great if so long as I get to be the dictator."
Re:This is why China is "winning", or catching up (Score:5, Insightful)
China is a fascist shithole that kills anyone who disobeys.
Re:This is why China is "winning", or catching up (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, that's the problem. It isn't a shithole, at least for the majority of citizens.
Most Chinese have seen their wealth and quality of life massively increase over the last few decades. Speaking to them they are really happy that the government has improved their country so much, and that there is so little crime.
In time I expect they will want democracy and transparency, but for now things are improving so fast that they are still comparing to the old way of life, or the lives their parents lived.
Re:This is why China is "winning", or catching up (Score:4, Interesting)
The post-WW2 case was prosperity, standards of living, and personal freedoms.
Except for any sort of minorities, who were discriminated against, and often subject to a combination of de facto and de jure limits on the prosperity, standards of living, and personal freedoms they got to enjoy, and who in some cases were told that their existence was illegal.
In US standards of living have been dropping for 20 years
More like 40 years. (And to some extent the postwar prosperity of the US was built on other countries having been wrecked during the war; it took a long while to rebuild and get moving again.)
prosperity is all went to top 1%
Yeah; we deregulated the financial markets, we lowered income taxes, and we generally stopped enforcing antitrust laws. If you want to reverse the trend, go after all three factors and institute a wealth tax too.
and now personal freedoms are also under attack from the cancel thought police.
Oh? Are the Cancel Thought Police a federal agency or do they operate at the state and local levels? Are they part of DHS or DOJ or what? If you run afoul of them, what statute does the prosecutor go after you on, and what statutes define the penalties the judge or jury might assign?
Or is it just that some people are assholes and other people are fed up with assholes and the latter group are exercising their politeness, common sense, and right to freely associate or disassociate to not have to put up with assholes? Because if it's the latter, what's the problem? No one is stopping anyone from being an asshole (though they might have to do it using their own time and resources rather than relying on others') but social opprobrium is normal human behavior.
Re: (Score:2)
Social justice is mob justice.
It's interesting you mention that, since conservatives invented cancel culture. It was often practiced by mobs with burning torches, and nooses.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, woke is what's causing all our problems. Getting rid of woke will fix everything.
Re: (Score:2)
It would certainly relieve us of at least one of them.
Re: (Score:3)
Conservatives invented cancel culture.
Now your chickens have come home.
Enjoy.
Re: This is why China is "winning", or catching up (Score:2)
What are you talking about?
Re: (Score:3)
In time I expect they will want democracy and transparency
"In time"? [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Good point, I should have said that the majority will want democracy, not just some students.
It could be a long way off, especially considering how Hong Kong is going.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
"We"
Is that inclusive of the protesters and those who called for reform, defunding the police, and yelling that black lives matter?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: This is why China is "winning", or catching up (Score:2)
Choose one (Score:2)
So choose one. Freedom is great, especially for "nails that stick out". But freedom is also messy and inefficient. It requires tolerating people with different opinions. It means every 4 or 8 years the entire government changes direction and undoes nearly everything the last one
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't choose to live in China because I am a nail that sticks out, and that would not be a healthy environment for me. I'm not in love with China. But I'm equally not in love with our general incompetence and wasted effort.
Well drinkypoo - that is the rub isnt it. While to much top down management means a lack of diversity of ideas that usually results in challenges when adaptability are required to much 'freedom' also means a lot of wasted effort. Every 'nail that sticks out' means the rest of us have to invest effort into avoiding get caught on it. We used to have good balance in this country. We had government that let people make their own choices as far as using nails or screws but if you let your fasteners stick out to
Re: (Score:2)
The Constitution is intentionally crippling and inefficient, designed to keep the government from having too much control over its citizens.
We The People are responsible for how well this country does - NOT the government. The buck stops in our own hands - not some political bureaucrat in D.C. (or Beijing).
Sometimes there are negative side effects
Seriously?? You mean like starving millions on a leader's whim? Displacing millions more from their homes for "the common good"? Lying to their own people with a
Re: (Score:1)
Lying to their own people with an overwhelming propaganda machine?
Do they even get Tucker Carlson in China?
Re: (Score:2)
LOLOL - I've never been compared to that lying, hypocritical, corporate shilling sack of shit, but damn - well played. I suppose it sounds a little like him when he's mixing a dash of wisdom in between his market tested, folksy, xenophobic turds.
Re: (Score:1)
US per-family income is still notably larger. As China approaches the same level, it's quite possible they will plateau like other industrial nations have. And authoritarian states tend to plateau earlier than open democracies.
As far as "falling apart", USA infrastructure is indeed falling apart. What has to happen is for states to realize the Federal Gov't is too bogged down in culture wars to do anything about it, and make state-based initiatives for infr
Re: (Score:1)
China is advancing more quickly than the US because they don't hem and haw. .
The UN sponsored "economic plan for China" that ignited the 10 year 25% yearly growth in their economy came after a whole lot of hemming and hawing don't you think?
Re: (Score:3)
Washington has become a fortress city, because the ruling class now lives in terror. They are sure an insurrection will happen at any moment and they are probably right.
Works for me. That's just where I like 'em.
Asked? No, they told them. (Score:4, Informative)
When the CCP "asks" you to do something, it's like a mob boss "asking" you to do something because refusing to do what they ask is exceptionally bad for your health.
Re: (Score:1)
In the USA, we call those "perfect phone calls".
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, the real issue is Jack Ma said some mildly anti-loyal things and disappeared for a few months. Now he's back but doesn't get to control anything powerful.
If he had STFU, he probably could have kept gobbling up media entities.
Translation: mild dissent is too scary to us (Score:4, Insightful)
So, Jack Ma, who is hardly a radical, expresses some very mild discontent with certain aspects of the Chinese economy. And the powers in control freak out. But since Alibaba is very important economically, they can't simply shut him/it down like they would an inconsequential individual or a small company. So, this is the plan instead.
Re: (Score:1)
They aren't just regulating Alibaba. They are REGULATING ALL ECOMMERCE. The fact is that these companies were stating that they were tech companies, in order to not be regulated as banks, despite the fact that they were lending money like banks creating a huge issue in the shadow banking industry. They would take money from actual state banks, and then lend it out unregulated. China started cracking down last year heavily on the shadow banking industry. When Jack Ma found out he was going to be regulat
"Asks"? I don't think so (Score:3)
"Would you mind shedding your media assets? It's just that otherwise we will have to kill you and harvest your organs. Thanks for your cooperation."
Fascism at work.
Tencent (Score:3)
China seems perfectly happy to encourage Tencent, a comparably sized company, to grow in exactly the ways they're complaining about Alibaba growing.
Re: (Score:1)
https://google.com/search?q=ch... [google.com]
How the fuck did you get modded up?
Re: (Score:2)
That's the US cracking down on Tencent, not the Chinese.
This story is about China cracking down on Alibaba, not the US.
Re: (Score:1)
Bezos should shed the Washington Post (Score:2)
If this is OK, then Jeff Bezos should shed the Washington Post. We can't allow a large e-commerce company with media holdings.