adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Media

China tightens media control with tiny stakes in two Alibaba units

Published

 on

 

Alibaba completed its acquisition of video platform operator Youku Tudou in 2016. Pictured here is an old version of the Youku logo.
Sopa Images | Lightrocket | Getty Images

BEIJING — State-backed entities have taken tiny stakes in parts of two Alibaba subsidiaries that oversee a video platform and web browser.

News of the holdings in the last week raised concerns about Beijing’s influence over the U.S.-listed e-commerce giant. However, the affected subsidiaries are just two of several units under the company’s digital media and entertainment arm — an arm that accounts for 4% of Alibaba’s revenue.

Alibaba shares have gained slightly over the last five trading days.

300x250x1

The state-backed stakes reflect a progression of government directives over the last decade to increase control of media in China. The so-called golden shares, or special management shares, generally allow the state-backed entity to install a board member with the power to veto decisions — for the company the entity has taken a 1% stake in.

It will likely take a couple months to see what level of influence the state has gained, said Liqian Ren, leader of quantitative investment at WisdomTree. “So far most of the stakes announced (including in other Chinese companies) seem to be highly concentrated on media companies and media subsidiaries.”

“It’s very natural for the Chinese government to want to control how information is disseminated,” she said, “particularly if you believe China has entered a period where there will be much more frequent protests.”

Groups of Chinese held public demonstrations in late November to protest stringent Covid controls. Reports of other protests in the last several months include some Tesla owners upset with price cuts, people at a provincial capital protesting frozen bank deposits and disgruntled workers at certain factories.

Since 2020, business records show state-backed entities have taken 1% stakes in popular social media or short-video apps Weibo, ByteDance’s Douyin and Kuaishou. That’s on top of censorship that often deletes articles or freezes accounts over words deemed sensitive.

Along with media, finance and energy are the two other industries that Beijing is inclined to control, said WisdomTree’s Ren. Her firm has a fund for investing in Chinese companies that aren’t state-owned.

Alibaba is the largest holding in that fund. Ren said WisdomTree isn’t making changes to that holding at this time, because it recently completed its annual review and because it only considers state-owned enterprises as those with government ownership of more than 20%.

SoftBank is by far the largest holder of Alibaba’s U.S.-listed shares, at nearly 24%, according to S&P Capital IQ. Vanguard and BlackRock are next, each with holdings of less than 3%, the database showed.

About two-thirds of Alibaba’s annual revenue of about $125 billion comes from China commerce.

How small are the stakes?

Here’s where state-backed entities have bought in to Alibaba, according to business database Tianyancha:

  • Guangzhou Lujiao Information Technology is connected to a group of subsidiaries under Alibaba’s media arm that operate the UCWeb browser. A fund — ultimately backed by China’s cybersecurity regulator and finance ministry — took a 1% stake in Lujiao in January, leaving an Alibaba subsidiary with 99% ownership. Lujiao more than tripled its registered capital to 35 million yuan ($5.16 million) this month.
  • Youku Yingshi, which has 70.7 million yuan in registered capital, owns Youku, one of the three major video streaming platforms in China. A provincial state media group completed a 1% investment in September, leaving Alibaba’s media arm with 99% ownership.

Records showed each subsidiary also gained a new board member with the same name as an individual connected with the respective state-backed stakeholder. It was not immediately clear if they were the same person.

“Our digital media and entertainment business (such as Youku) brought in a state-owned multimedia entity as a minor strategic investor for a consolidated entity,” Alibaba said in its fiscal year report published July 26.

“This shareholder has the right to appoint a director of the relevant consolidated entity and other rights including certain veto rights over the content review processes,” the company said, warning of the impact on trading prices from market perception — and the potential of more state oversight on its content-related businesses.

Alibaba declined to comment. The Financial Times and Reuters previously reported on the government-linked stakes.

Signs of a regulatory shift

The news of the state-owned stakes comes as Alibaba shares try to recover from two years of sharp losses in the aftermath of the abrupt suspension of affiliate Ant’s IPO in November 2020. International investors have become more wary of Chinese stocks after increased regulation of China’s once freewheeling internet industry.

“There is no government as ambitious in regulating big tech as the Chinese government,” said Rogier Creemers, professor at Leiden University, and author of the paper “The Great Rectification: A New Paradigm for China’s Online Platform Economy.

He said China has finished its big changes for tech regulation, and expects other countries will be pushing out their own regulation of big tech companies.

Chinese bank and insurance regulator head Guo Shuqing told state media this month that the “rectification” of the financial businesses of 14 platform companies has been basically completed.

“Minimal, non-controlling government ownership in Chinese tech firms may be an indication that Beijing is done with tightening regulation is shifting to oversight and enforcement,” said Brian Tycangco, analyst at Stansberry Research. “It also means the government now shares, albeit minimally, in the future success of the business.”

Ant in the last few weeks also got approval to expand its consumer finance business — along with investment from a Hangzhou city-backed entity.

Didi said this week it had resolved regulatory concerns and could start to accept new user registrations.

One of the primary regulators is the Cyberspace Administration of China, which ordered a cybersecurity review of Didi shortly after its U.S. IPO. The administration has its roots in propaganda and censorship work, according to Stanford’s DigiChina Project.

State ownership of local media

“Politically speaking, China’s really unpredictable,” Creemers said. “But in terms of policy China is really predictable. It tells us what it wants to do. The problem is we confuse the one for the other. I think it is much more transparent on policy than we give it credit for.”

In the case of golden shares, public information indicates Chinese policy discussion of such special management shares began in late 2013 to help state-owned media companies to become more competitive — and better influence public opinion — while retaining government control.

The following year, authorities approved a new plan for culture and ideology work, which said special management shares for non-state-owned media would be tested. In late 2021, authorities said non-state capital would be banned from owning domestic news outlets in China.

As the government tries to balance out its role with the market, the state will likely become more apparent, said Bruce Pang, chief economist and head of research, Greater China at JLL. “The government will continue to monitor, regulate and re-train private capital to ensure its healthy development. The ‘golden shares’ is just one of the latest evidences of the updated policy stance.”

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Forget Trump — the American media is on trial in New York – The Hill

Published

 on



300x250x1

Forget Trump — the American media is on trial in New York | The Hill








The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill

It was July 2018, and Michael Avenatti was considering a presidential run. Anyone can consider running for president, I suppose. It’s just that when the lawyer for Stormy Daniels and cable news mainstay did it, important people — theoretically important, at least — in the press took it seriously.

CNN’s Jim Scuitto had Avenatti on to talk about it, and make a bit of a campaign pitch for himself, on July 4. The next day, CNN’s editor-at-large Chris Cillizza, one of the more prominent writers for the website back then, published a piece of analysis with the headline “President Michael Avenatti? Never say never!”

And sure, why not. Avenatti was riding high at the time. A couple months earlier, he was being pitched, according to the New York Times, for a “Crossfire”-like show with Anthony Scaramucci, the rapidly-defenestrated former Trump communications director, by mega-agent Jay Sures, who represents top CNN talent like Jake Tapper and Anderson Cooper. Maybe that’s why Avenatti became so ubiquitous on the network to begin with — embarrassingly so, in retrospect.

But if we look back to April, almost exactly six years ago, that’s when Avenatti truly burst onto the national scene. On April 9, 2018, the FBI raided the office of Michael Cohen, the long-time “fixer” and business associate of then-President Donald Trump. The next day, Avenatti was on Cooper’s CNN show to break it all down — from Stormy Daniels, his porn actress client, to Karen McDougal, the former Playboy playmate, to Cohen himself. It was Avenatti’s chance to craft the narrative for the media, and the media was happy to oblige.

The whole ordeal was portrayed a couple weeks later in a cringe-inducing “Saturday Night Live” cold open, with Ben Stiller playing Cohen, Jimmy Fallon playing Jared Kushner, and Stormy Daniels playing herself. (She struggled to nail the “Live from New York, it’s Saturday Night!” line at the end.)

It’s worth reflecting this week on this bizarre 2018 moment, as it serves as the prelude to the first (and possibly only) trial of Trump in 2024. The trial that officially began on Monday isn’t about “insurrection” or “espionage” or classified documents or RICO. Oh no. It’s this reality TV, trashy tabloid junk about porn stars and Playmates — stuff that belongs more in the National Enquirer than the National Broadcasting Company.

Which is ironic, of course, because the first witness in the case was David Pecker, the former executive in charge of the National Enquirer. (It’s also ironic that Avenatti is now firmly on Team Trump, saying he’d be happy to testify for the defense, although of course he’s also currently in federal prison for wire fraud and tax fraud, so…)

It’s been more than six years since that initial FBI raid, and the original Avenatti media sin. But buckle up, here we go. We’re getting to hear about the way Trump teamed up with the National Enquirer in an effort to boost his 2016 campaign. A bit like how most of the establishment press today is teaming up with the Biden campaign to stop Trump in this cycle.

You know that story about Ted Cruz’s father potentially being involved in the murder of JFK? Totally made up, to help Trump in the primary! None of this is surprising, to any discerning news consumer. But it does allow the media to get on their proverbial high horse over “checkbook journalism” — as if the crusty old legacy press hasn’t been doing a version of it for decades, when ABC or NBC wants to secure a big “get” on their morning show. But the journalistic ethics of the National Enquirer are a red herring — a distraction from the substance of the trial.

After Pecker, we’ll get Cohen, and Daniels, and McDougal as witnesses. Avenatti, at least it seems for now, will stay in prison, and not get to return to the limelight.

This trial is a circus. But the media made their choice way back in 2018. And now they too are on trial.

To get meta for a minute, when I decide to devote my weekly column to a topic, I’m not only deciding the topic to cover, but making a decision about what not to cover as well. On a far larger and more consequential scale, every single news organization makes choices every day about what to focus on, how to cover it and what gets left on the cutting room floor.

Back during the Trump years, the media spent an inordinate amount of time dissecting every last detail of this tabloid journalism fodder we’re now seeing play out in a New York City courtroom — which is meaningless to the lives of nearly every American. The trial is the culmination of the inconsequential work that ate up so many hours of cable news, and occupied so much space in the most powerful media outlets in America. So much time and energy and resources that could have been devoted to literally any other story, including many that directly relate to Donald Trump. And yet now, here we are.

This trial has to matter for the American press. If it doesn’t, it invalidates their entire existence during 2018. But if the public tunes out — and, can you even imagine if a jury in New York City actually finds Trump not guilty at the end of this thing — well, it’s as much an indictment of the Trump-obsessed Acela media as it is of the system that brought these bizarre charges and salacious case in the first place.

Steve Krakauer, a NewsNation contributor, is the author of “Uncovered: How the Media Got Cozy with Power, Abandoned Its Principles, and Lost the People” and editor and host of the Fourth Watch newsletter and podcast.

Tags

Anthony Scaramucci


Chris Cillizza


CNN


David Pecker


David Pecker


Donald Trump


Jay Sures


media


Michael Avenatti


Michael Avenatti


National Enquirer


Stormy Daniels


Stormy Daniels


Copyright 2024 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

'Nessie' photo at Scotland's Loch Ness puts Canadians in media spotlight – National Post

Published

 on


The Official Loch Ness Monster Sightings Register sent the photo to one of their experts ‘who said that it was “compelling evidence” ‘ of the creature

Article content

LONDON — Parry Malm and Shannon Wiseman weren’t expecting a “pivotal moment” in their sons’ lives when they visited Scotland’s Loch Ness earlier this month, but that’s exactly what happened.

“Our youngest is turning three next week,” said Wiseman from the family’s home in London, England. “And he tells everyone there have been two pivotal moments in his life: Seeing the world’s largest dinosaur, which he did at the Natural History Museum in January, and seeing Nessie.

Advertisement 2

Article content

Article content

“He tells everyone he encounters. He tells the postman, he tells the guys in the shops and the cafes.”

Malm and Wiseman have been thrust into the limelight after a photo they took during their family vacation showed a shadowy figure poking above the waterline, something that the couple’s children _ and others — firmly believe is the latest sighting of the famed Loch Ness monster.

Malm and Wiseman, who are from Coquitlam B.C., and Calgary respectively, moved to England in 2006.

The couple said the original plan for the spring vacation was to take a boat ride in Loch Ness because their children were “completely captivated by the concept of Nessie.”

“We’d even packed shortbread cookies, which we were told from these books was Nessie’s favourite treat,” Wiseman quipped. “Turned out shortbread cookies were not necessary.”

That’s because the family spotted something sticking out of the water while visiting a lookout at nearby Urquhart Castle.

“We just started watching it more and more, and we could see its head craning above water,” Malm said. “And then it was swimming against the current towards the castle, slowly but surely, like very fastidiously going over the waves (and) coming closer and closer. And then it submerged and disappeared.”

Article content

Advertisement 3

Article content

Recommended from Editorial

  1. FILE - This undated file photo shows a shadowy shape that some people say is a the Loch Ness monster in Scotland, later debunked as a hoax. The Loch Ness Centre in Scotland is calling for

    New search for Loch Ness monster largest since 1972

  2. In a blow to Nessie hunters, they found no evidence of reptilian DNA, ruling out past theories of a Jurassic-era plesiosaur.

    Could the Loch Ness Monster just be a really giant eel?

Malm said the family took a photo of what they saw and decided “for a bit of a laugh” to send the picture to the Official Loch Ness Monster Sightings Register, which he stumbled upon while surfing the internet.

“They got in touch within 24 hours,” Malm recalled. “They were super excited. They sent it to one of their Loch Ness experts who said that it was ‘compelling evidence,’ I believe was the exact phrase.

“And just one thing led to another. I mean, it’s been incredible.”

Since the photo submission, Malm and Wiseman have been featured in British tabloids such as The Sun and the Daily Mirror and digital publication LADbible.

On the Official Loch Ness Monster Sightings Register, the encounter has been recorded as the first Nessie sighting of 2024.

“We’ve both got texts from people who we haven’t heard from in quite some time going, ‘Guess who I just saw on TV?”‘ Malm said.

“I’m just glad that we hit the national media in Canada for spotting the Loch Ness monster and not being on Crime Stoppers.”

Advertisement 4

Article content

Both Malm and Wiseman said they are happy their experience is bringing some positivity to the daily news cycle, and at least one person they have spoken with thanked them for the picture.

“Our son’s school’s headmaster is Scottish,” Malm said. “And he pulls me aside at pick up one day and he goes, ‘You know what, Perry? You’ve done more for Scottish tourism than anybody else in my lifetime.’

“So, hopefully some people will be inspired to come visit Scotland.”

What isn’t certain, however, is what they actually encountered on that cold April morning on the shore of Loch Ness.

“We don’t know what we saw,” Wiseman said. “Our children believe we saw Nessie, and I believe it for them.

“I believe that we saw something that could be Nessie, and that is a very broad possibility.”

Malm said the wonder that the sighting has inspired in his children, and others resonating with the photo, is more important than the question of what they encountered.

“It’s really charming,” he said of the outpouring of reactions. “Because in a world where the news is about a war here and an atrocity there, it’s just nice that people are interested in something that’s just lighthearted, a little bit silly and a little bit unbelievable.”

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.

Article content

Comments

Join the Conversation

This Week in Flyers

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

B.C. online harms bill on hold after deal with social media firms

Published

 on

The British Columbia government is putting its proposed online harms legislation on hold after reaching an agreement with some of the largest social media platforms to increase safety online.

Premier David Eby says in a joint statement with representatives of the firms Meta, TikTok, X and Snapchat that they will form an online safety action table, where they’ll discuss “tangible steps” toward protecting people from online harms.

Eby added the proposed legislation remains, and the province will reactivate it into law if necessary.

“The agreement that we’ve struck with these companies is that we’re going to move quickly and effectively, and that we need meaningful results before the end of the term of this government, so that if it’s necessary for us to bring the bill back then we will,” Eby said Tuesday.

300x250x1

The province says the social media companies have agreed to work collaboratively with the province on preventing harm, while Meta will also commit to working with B.C.’s emergency management officials to help amplify official information during natural disasters and other events.

The announcement to put the Bill 12, also known as the Public Health Accountability and Cost Recovery Act, on hold is a sharp turn for the government, after Eby announced in March that social media companies were among the “wrongdoers” that would pay for health-related costs linked to their platforms.

At the time, Eby compared social media harms to those caused by tobacco and opioids, saying the legislation was similar to previous laws that allowed the province to sue companies selling those products.

A white man and woman weep at a podium, while a white man behind them holds a picture of a young boy.
Premier David Eby is pictured with Ryan Cleland and Nicola Smith, parents of Carson Cleland, during a news conference announcing Bill 12. (Ben Nelms/CBC)

Eby said one of the key drivers for legislation targeting online harm was the death of Carson Cleland, the 12-year-old Prince George, B.C., boy who died by suicide last October after falling victim to online sextortion.

“In the real world we would never allow a company to set up a space for kids where grown adults could be invited in to contact them, encourage them to share photographs and then threaten to distribute those photographs to their family and friends,” Eby said when announcing the legislation.

The premier said previously that companies would be shut down and their owners would face jail terms if their products were connected to harms to young people.

In announcing the pause, the province says that bringing social media companies to the table for discussion achieves the same purpose of protecting youth from online harm.

“Our commitment to every parent is that we will do everything we can to keep their families safe online and in our communities,” said Eby.

Ryan Cleland, Carson’s father, said in a statement on Tuesday that he “has faith” in Eby and the decision to suspend the legislation.

“I don’t think he is looking at it from a political standpoint as much as he is looking at it as a dad,” he said of Eby. “I think getting the social media giants together to come up with a solution is a step in the right direction.”

Business groups were opposed

On Monday, the opposition B.C. United called for a pause to Bill 12, citing potential “serious legal and economic consequences for local businesses.”

Opposition Leader Kevin Falcon said in a statement that his party pushed Eby’s government to change course, noting the legislation’s vague language on who the province can sue “would have had severe unintended consequences” for local businesses and the economy.

“The government’s latest retreat is not only a win for the business community but for every British Columbian who values fairness and clarity in the law,” Falcon said.

A white man wearing a blue tie speaks in a legislature building.
B.C. United Leader Kevin Falcon says that Bill 12 could have had unintended consequences. (Chad Hipolito/The Canadian Press)

The Greater Vancouver Board of Trade said they are pleased to see the legislation put on hold, given the “potential ramifications” of the proposal’s “expansive interpretation.”

“We hope that the government chooses not to pursue Bill 12 in the future,” said board president and CEO Bridgitte Anderson in a statement. “Instead, we would welcome the opportunity to work with the government to develop measures that are well-targeted and effective, ensuring they protect British Columbians without causing unintended consequences.”

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending