Young Chinese are getting paid to be 'full-time children' as jobs become harder to find | CNN Business
www.cnn.com
Exhausted by the pressure to succeed as a photographer, Litsky Li accepted a better offer: quit work to become one of China’s growing legions of children paid by their families to stay home.

CNN wrote that China has an employment problem because the jobless rate for 16 to 24 year olds in urban areas hit 21.3% last month, a record high.

When read uncritically this sounds pretty bad, and CNN relies on the fact that the readers will not analyze this statement further. Let’s take a look at how absurd the argument in the article actually is.

First, why are they counting from 16 years old. I realize that child labour is being normalized in US right now, but in civilized countries kids don’t work and they go to school. A serious unemployment statistic wouldn’t include children.

Second, the article presents this as an abnormal situation, but is it actually.What is the situation like in Europe for example?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/613670/youth-unemployment-rates-in-europe/

Turns out that it’s pretty comparable, yet we don’t see CNN writing sensational articles about a youth unemployment crisis in Europe.

To sum up, CNN created a story out of whole cloth that relies on the readers not being curious enough to read it critically.

This is what much of reporting in western media looks like. Yet, a lot of people genuinely think that the media they consume is factual and unbiased allowing it to shape their views of the world.

  • RedClouds@lemmygrad.ml
    1·
    1 year ago

    I like how the only stat they throw, as you said, is basically a made up problem, but the rest of the article is just a clear attack piece on kids that “don’t want to work”. Even if you think they are being lazy, cherry picking like this can go either way. It’s anecdotal, but how many articles talk about how lazy kids are (Only every generation for the last 100+ years).

    And in the 3ns, isn’t it a good thing kids don’t work? They can get an education, spend time with family, you know, live life while they are young. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
      31·
      1 year ago

      Right, like when you parse all that bullshit, what the article really says is that Chinese families are financially secure enough to allow kids to take time to figure out what they want to do, get higher education, etc. instead of being rushed to work. They try to present it like some ominous thing, but it’s clearly the opposite in practice.

      • Eat_Yo_Vegetables69@lemmygrad.ml
        0·
        1 year ago

        Decades ago when not everyone could afford to send their kids to study, many would drop out early to work and support their family.

        Nowadays there are so many university students as more families can afford to, the competition for jobs amongst them is fierce.

        So by this article’s standards, being poor and destitute, and working multiple low wage jobs to scrape by is the way to go. Of course if this were still the situation we’d get an article on how education is only a privelege for the elite and the poor plebs have to scrape away in a failed gommie state.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
          21·
          1 year ago

          Basically this quote from Parenti

          During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.