Slashdot Mirror


Xiaomi Investigated For Using Superlatives In Advertising, Now Illegal In China

An anonymous reader writes: Chinese smartphone maker Xiaomi is under investigation for using superlative messaging on its website, according to a leaked document from the Beijing Ministry of Industry and Commerce. A new Chinese law states that adjectives used to promote products must not mislead consumers. The Xiaomi investigation [Chinese] follows claims made by rival Cong that the company used phrases such as 'the best' and 'the most advanced', in its online campaigns and therefore violated the country's advertising law. (The law against suprelatives doesn't seem to apply to communications by the government, about the government.)

5 of 109 comments (clear)

  1. Everyone Is Guilty, Only Enemies Will Be Indicted by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Here is the full text of the newly amended law. Here is the WIPO listing the deltas with the older 1994 version of the law (click expand notes). It appears that this is the first change in this law since 1994. Also the WIPO provides a PDF of their English version which seems to be slightly different. I also found a definition of the extent of what is regulated advertising by the PRC. Here's the WIPO's full list of defined restrictions:

    1) Overt or covert use of national flag, anthem or emblem of People’s Republic of China or military flag, anthem or emblem;
    2) Overt or covert use of the name or image of national public institute or staff of national public institute;
    3) Use of words such as “national-level”, “the most” and “the best”, among others;
    4) Causing detriment to national dignity or interests, or disclosing national secrets;
    5) Interfering with social stability, or causing detriment to social and public interests;
    6) Harming personal or property safety, or disclosing privacy;
    7) Interfering with social public order, or going against good social norm;
    8) Containing obscene, pornographic, gambling, superstitious, terrifying, or violent content;
    9) Containing discrimination based on nationality, race, religion, or gender;
    10) Affecting protection of environment, natural resources or cultural heritage;
    11) Other situations prohibited by laws and regulations.

    Merely sounds like another tool for the Party to deal with companies that are not state owned. Most companies will be found guilty of some section of this but they won't be prosecuted until they run afoul of the Party. In China (and increasingly in the US) everyone is guilty of something but only those that the state wants to be prosecuted will be prosecuted.

    So looking at the story, we have a new law enacted a month ago and whose head is on the chopping block today? Xiaomi? Well from wikipedia:

    Xiaomi Inc. is a privately owned Chinese electronics company headquartered in Beijing, China, that is the world's 4th[4] largest smartphone maker. Xiaomi designs, develops, and sells smartphones, mobile apps, and related consumer electronics.[5]

    Aaaaaand there's your problem. Wake me up when a state owned company is prosecuted under these new laws. Xiaomi's true crime was probably doing better than Huawei.

    --
    My work here is dung.
  2. Re:Nazis didn't like them either by Wootery · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Interesting trivia, but I hope you're not trying to say that's a reason not to ban it.

    Nazis used trains, too. Should we ban trains?

  3. Re:Nazis didn't like them either by Nrrqshrr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Nazis did a lot of things wrong, but they also did many things right. Their wrongs shouldn't keep us from learning from their rights.

  4. Re:Everyone Is Guilty, Only Enemies Will Be Indict by eldavojohn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you are a leftist, beating the shit out of private companies is well and good. Remember: corporations are evil! Prosecuting them is only a good thing. Are you a corporate shill?

    I am neither a leftist nor a corporate shill. I believe in beating the shit out of private companies that deserve to have the "shit beat out" of them. You need only look at the lengthy history of consumer protection in the United States to find instances where this was and is necessary. Take, for example, Debt Collection Practices. Please, please, please "beat the shit out" of unscrupulous collection agencies. Please "beat the shit" out of the companies that call my grandmother to deliver unsolicited advertisements about a "warranty extension" on her car. There are plenty of private companies that should have this done to them. The issue I take with China's implementation is 1) that it will never target a state owned business and 2) the guidelines are by no means clearly laid out and can be ambiguously interpreted. Who will interpret them? When will they interpret them? Why just in time and by the same state body that made them. Please tell me, how can I prove that my product's advertising does not "Cause detriment to national dignity"?

    --
    My work here is dung.
  5. Re:Who did they forget to pay off? by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    little used law is pulled out to harass someone...must be some sort of underlying politics at work here.

    It's called "communism".

    Granted, we have stupid laws and stupid judges also, and so are not entirely immune, but at least we have more ways to challenge such, including blogs and the press.