Why Can't Apple Be Criticized?
Published in The People's Daily
(China) on 27 March 2013
by Wenfeng Wang (link to original)
On two consecutive days, March 25 and 26, People’s Daily published editorials criticizing Apple’s much-maligned after-sales service.
The U.S. media quickly got emotional. The Wall Street Journal, Forbes and others published commentaries claiming that “the Chinese Communist Party’s main propaganda outlet assailed Apple Inc.’s customer service practices” and that this is “the latest indication that China might move to check foreign companies’ domination of the country’s smartphone market.” The New York Times even wrote the headline, “China Dream, Apple Nightmare?” The U.S. media raised the matter to the level of Chinese national trade strategy, believing that People’s Daily’s criticism of Apple is a sign of trade protectionism. A number of Chinese Internet users followed suit. Micro blogs labeled People’s Daily among the mainstream media that they say are resolutely ruining foreign products and supporting domestic brands.
Why can’t Apple be criticized? Apple truly did wrong — that is a basic fact. It did not meet the reasonable needs of consumers, so it certainly can be criticized. As a member of the media, People’s Daily has full power to exercise the responsibility of overseeing corporate economic activity. One very important reason that China’s official media pay relatively high attention to this matter is that Apple’s customer base in China is very large. Apple sales in China exceeded $6.8 billion in the last year alone. The attention that People’s Daily gave to Apple is normal. It is showing concern for the vital interests of Chinese consumers from the position of Apple customers — not just because Apple is a major brand in the U.S.
The response of the U.S. media revealed prejudices against the ideology and political system of China. They believe that all official media in China, particularly People’s Daily, are under direct control of the Chinese government and speak on its behalf. They raise everything to the political level. In fact, if we imagine that some Chinese merchandise with a big market share in the U.S. went wrong, it is conceivable — and consistent with the attitude that the U.S. media have toward China — that the U.S. will seize it as a huge news story and not let it go. During the storm of Chinese toys recalled by Mattel starting in August 2007, the U.S. media had overwhelming reports on the safety problems of Chinese toys for months. Later, it was confirmed that the Chinese toys had no safety problems and what went wrong was during the design phase in the U.S. But even after the president of Mattel apologized to China, the U.S. media still went on, complaining that Mattel’s apology was flattering to China.
The global economy has been bad for the past few years. National trade protectionism is on the rise worldwide, especially in the U.S. Judging by last year’s U.S. presidential election, economic populism, with China as the enemy, is gaining popularity in the U.S. Anti-dumping and anti-acquisition policies are becoming common practice. The U.S. media’s reaction to Apple being scolded is once again a reflection of these kinds of social psychology.
In general, the U.S. media represent American society more than the voice of the U.S. government. But when it comes to national interests, the U.S. media often consciously defend the nation’s image. In other words, tolerance of domestic controversy is relatively high, but tolerance of international criticism is low, especially when it comes to the biases that the U.S. has against China. In the minds of Americans, Chinese people may not “have the authority” to criticize the U.S. about product quality. China’s criticism of high-tech products hurt the U.S.’ self-esteem a little bit this time.
As for the Chinese Internet users who delight in consciously defending the Apple’s image, as well as the images of other foreign brands that have had issues recently, including BMW and Mercedes — they should implement the strategy of setting a high demand for domestic brands in the hope that they will improve. But that is a different matter. Wrong is wrong. Whether it is Apple, BMW or our own domestic brand, a problem that arises in China should be subject to supervision and criticism from Chinese public opinion. People should also see that our domestic media are increasing supervision on all levels. Many food safety incidents, such as the “toxic milk,” are all exposed first by domestic media, not by the U.S. media.
The author is a researcher at the Chinese Institute of Contemporary International Relations.
The U.S. media quickly got emotional. The Wall Street Journal, Forbes and others published commentaries claiming that “the Chinese Communist Party’s main propaganda outlet assailed Apple Inc.’s customer service practices” and that this is “the latest indication that China might move to check foreign companies’ domination of the country’s smartphone market.” The New York Times even wrote the headline, “China Dream, Apple Nightmare?” The U.S. media raised the matter to the level of Chinese national trade strategy, believing that People’s Daily’s criticism of Apple is a sign of trade protectionism. A number of Chinese Internet users followed suit. Micro blogs labeled People’s Daily among the mainstream media that they say are resolutely ruining foreign products and supporting domestic brands.
Why can’t Apple be criticized? Apple truly did wrong — that is a basic fact. It did not meet the reasonable needs of consumers, so it certainly can be criticized. As a member of the media, People’s Daily has full power to exercise the responsibility of overseeing corporate economic activity. One very important reason that China’s official media pay relatively high attention to this matter is that Apple’s customer base in China is very large. Apple sales in China exceeded $6.8 billion in the last year alone. The attention that People’s Daily gave to Apple is normal. It is showing concern for the vital interests of Chinese consumers from the position of Apple customers — not just because Apple is a major brand in the U.S.
The response of the U.S. media revealed prejudices against the ideology and political system of China. They believe that all official media in China, particularly People’s Daily, are under direct control of the Chinese government and speak on its behalf. They raise everything to the political level. In fact, if we imagine that some Chinese merchandise with a big market share in the U.S. went wrong, it is conceivable — and consistent with the attitude that the U.S. media have toward China — that the U.S. will seize it as a huge news story and not let it go. During the storm of Chinese toys recalled by Mattel starting in August 2007, the U.S. media had overwhelming reports on the safety problems of Chinese toys for months. Later, it was confirmed that the Chinese toys had no safety problems and what went wrong was during the design phase in the U.S. But even after the president of Mattel apologized to China, the U.S. media still went on, complaining that Mattel’s apology was flattering to China.
The global economy has been bad for the past few years. National trade protectionism is on the rise worldwide, especially in the U.S. Judging by last year’s U.S. presidential election, economic populism, with China as the enemy, is gaining popularity in the U.S. Anti-dumping and anti-acquisition policies are becoming common practice. The U.S. media’s reaction to Apple being scolded is once again a reflection of these kinds of social psychology.
In general, the U.S. media represent American society more than the voice of the U.S. government. But when it comes to national interests, the U.S. media often consciously defend the nation’s image. In other words, tolerance of domestic controversy is relatively high, but tolerance of international criticism is low, especially when it comes to the biases that the U.S. has against China. In the minds of Americans, Chinese people may not “have the authority” to criticize the U.S. about product quality. China’s criticism of high-tech products hurt the U.S.’ self-esteem a little bit this time.
As for the Chinese Internet users who delight in consciously defending the Apple’s image, as well as the images of other foreign brands that have had issues recently, including BMW and Mercedes — they should implement the strategy of setting a high demand for domestic brands in the hope that they will improve. But that is a different matter. Wrong is wrong. Whether it is Apple, BMW or our own domestic brand, a problem that arises in China should be subject to supervision and criticism from Chinese public opinion. People should also see that our domestic media are increasing supervision on all levels. Many food safety incidents, such as the “toxic milk,” are all exposed first by domestic media, not by the U.S. media.
The author is a researcher at the Chinese Institute of Contemporary International Relations.
Next article![]( "Where Is the American Leader?")
