Summary
According to “Nike, H&M face China fury over Xinjiang cotton concerns” (2021), Nike and H&M have been boycotted by Chinese after they announced a statement separately that they were concerned at using cotton picked in Xinjiang by Uighurs. Their statements were made because of the reports that Uighurs have been forced by China to work in Xinjiang’s cotton fields, which is a human rights violation. However, China denied this and posted videos on Weibo to show that the Uighur have not been forced, but they work for high earnings. Nike and H&M statements made Chinese angry , and they fought back against both companies by boycotting and posting messages with the hashtag “I support Xinjiang cotton”, then the main Chinese e-commerce platforms stopped selling H&M’s products. In addition, Chinese celebrities also announced to terminate their contract with the brands to protect China's dignity.
______________________
Response
After reading “Nike, H&M face China fury over Xinjiang cotton 'concerns'” I think it is very interesting because China is the biggest market in the world that all brands want to break into and both companies are already success in China and one of their main revenue is from China, so announcing the statement to express their concern about the Uighurs who was reported that they have been forced to pick cotton in Xinjiang might have negative effects to them.
I do agree with the branding policies according to China violated the Uighur Muslims human rights by forcing them into manual labour in Xinjiang’s cotton fields, which is an unlawful action to abuse the labour. They need to be treated equally. Moreover, China claims that illegal actions such as forcing Uighur Muslims to work hadn't been done, as in my perspective, It is very suspicious that China denies the accusation but later on the state media CGTN shared a video on Weibo to show that the labor fought for this jobs and were not forced to do it. Therefore, I do believe that the labour had been abused by China and it needs to cease, so I do agree with the branding policies.
In addition, I admire Nike and H&M, according to the BBC, they got bad effects by Chinese such as boycotts and also were withdrawn from the top three Chinese online platforms. Both companies will be affected by the lower revenue or in the worst case all their revenue in China will be gone. However, in my opinion this action still has some good sides for the brands, especially for Nike. In the past they had a scandal that Nike had child labour in their factory in Indonesia, so this action shows that Nike does not support and does not ignore human rights violation, which is a good image for the brand.
In conclusion, I do agree with Nike and H&M to show their concern about the Uighur Muslims human rights even though they got negative effects from their statement. And I hope the Uighurs will be treated as humans soon.
______________________
Question
If you were the CEO of Nike, would you announce the statement to express the concern about the Uighur?
______________________
Reference
- Nike, H&M face China fury over Xinjiang cotton 'concerns'. (2021, March 25). BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-56519411
Following her summary, I largely agree with the points that Gubgib makes regarding China's suspected use of forced labour to produce cotton. The one point I'm not sure about is that it "is an unlawful action to abuse the labour." I don't know Chinese law, but suspect that whatever is being done might in fact be legal under Chinese law. But even if it is perfectly legal, that does not make it right; the law is often unjust. This is not a problem that is true only of China, which is also forcing unjust law on the people of Hongkong. Many nations, probably all nations, have made up laws that are unjust and should be changed. This seems to me one reason why strong protection of and respect for free speech is so essential: if the laws or other elements of society cannot be questioned, then it the errors and injustices cannot be corrected. This makes me very suspicious of everything that the law does not allow to be freely discussed, even laughed at and abused. China is a good example, as Gubgib's thoughtful post reminds us. If they were confident that they were not committing wrongs, they would welcome more independent journalists and others to investigate and report. They do not. Instead, they censor the internet so that Chinese people can have a fully informed understanding of Chinese affairs, which suggests to me that they are hiding something very rotten: censorship is always, in every case, done to keep other people uninformed about the topic, issue or person being censored. That does not seem to me a healthy foundation for a society.
ReplyDeleteI remembered I saw an article said China has laws and regulations against forced labour. As you said even that’s legal in China, it’s not make it right. And I do agree with you all. People should have the freedom to speak and know what’s actually happening in their country to make things right or better.
Delete