BEIJING (Reuters) – Tang Yue, a 27-year-old teacher from the city of Guilin in southwest China, steam-presses a blue dress and takes dozens of photographs before picking one to clinch her 200th online sale.
For a growing number of Chinese like Tang, hit by job losses, furloughs and salary cuts, the consumer economy has begun to spin in reverse. They are no longer buying – they are selling.
Instead of emerging from the coronavirus epidemic and returning to the shopping habits that helped drive the world’s second-largest economy, many young people are offloading possessions and embracing a new-found ethic for hard times: less is more.
With Tang’s monthly salary of about 7,000 yuan ($988), the self-described shopaholic said she has bought everything from Chanel lipsticks to Apple’s (AAPL.O) latest iPad in the past three years.
But the adrenaline rush that comes with binge-shopping is gone, said Tang, whose wages have been slashed with the suspension of all the classes on tourism management she usually teaches.
“The coronavirus outbreak was a wake-up call,” she said. “When I saw the collapse of so many industries, I realised I had no financial buffer should something unfortunate happen to me.”
There is no guarantee that the nascent minimalist trend will continue once the coronavirus crisis is fully over, but if it does, it could seriously damage China’s consumer sector and hurt thousands of businesses from big retailers to street-corner restaurants, gyms and beauty salons.
To be sure, there are signs that pent-up demand will drive a rush of spending as authorities reopen malls, leisure venues and tourist spots. In South Korea, the first major economy outside of China to be hit by the virus, people thronged malls this weekend to go “revenge shopping” to make up for time lost in lockdown.,
There are some signs that a similar trend will take hold in China, where some upscale malls are starting to get busy, although luxury firm Kering SA (PRTP.PA) – which owns Gucci, Balenciaga and other fashion brands – has said it is hard to predict how or when sales in China might come back.
A recent McKinsey & Co survey showed that between 20% and 30% of respondents in China said they would continue to be cautious, either consuming slightly less or, in a few cases, a lot less.
“The lockdown provided consumers with a lot of time and reasons to reflect and consider what is important to them,” said Mark Tanner, managing director at Shanghai-based research and marketing consultancy China Skinny.
“With much more of their days spent in their homes, consumers also have more time and reasons to sort through things they don’t feel they need – so they’re not living around clutter that is common in many apartments.”
#DITCHYOURSTUFF
Tang made a spreadsheet to keep track of her nearly 200 cosmetic products and hundreds of pieces of clothing. She then marked a few essentials in red that she wanted to keep. In the past two months, she has sold items worth nearly 5,000 yuan on second-hand marketplaces online.
Bargain-hunting online has become a new habit for some Chinese as the stigma that once hung over second-hand goods has begun to fade.
Idle Fish, China’s biggest online site for used goods, hit a record daily transaction volume in March, its parent company Alibaba (BABA.N) told Reuters.
Government researchers predict that transactions for used goods in China may top 1 trillion yuan ($141 billion) this year.
Posts with the hashtag #ditchyourstuff have trended on Chinese social media in recent weeks, garnering more than 140 million views.
Jiang Zhuoyue, 31, who works as an accountant at a traditional Chinese medicine company in Beijing – one of the few industries that may benefit from the health crisis – has also decided to turn to a simpler life.
“I used to shop too much and could be easily lured by discounts,” said Jiang. “One time Sephora offered 20% off for all goods, I then bought a lot of cosmetics because I feel I’m losing money if I don’t.”
Jiang, the mother of a 9-month-old baby, said she recently sold nearly 50 pieces of used clothing as the lockdown gave her the opportunity to clear things out. “It also offered me a chance to rethink what’s essential to me, and the importance of doing financial planning,” she said.
Eleven Li, a 23-year-old flight attendant, said she used to spend her money on all manner of celebrity-endorsed facial masks, snacks, concert tickets and social media activity, but now has no way to fund her spending.
“I just found a new job late last year, then COVID-19 came along, and I haven’t been able to fly once since I joined, and I’ve gotten no salary at all,” said Li, who said she was trying to sell her Kindle.
Some are even selling their pets, as they consider leaving big cities like Beijing and Shanghai where the high cost of living is finally catching up with them.
NO RETURN TO OLD WAYS?
As the coronavirus comes under control in China, the government is gradually releasing cities from lockdown, easing transport restrictions and encouraging consumers to venture back into malls and restaurants by giving out billions-worth of cash vouchers, worth between 10 yuan and 100 yuan.
But many people say they are still worried about job security and potential wage cuts because of the struggling economy. Nationwide retail sales have plunged every month so far this year.
Xu Chi, a Shanghai-based senior strategic analyst with Zhongtai Securities, said some Chinese consumers may prove the ‘21 Day Habit Theory,’ a popular scientific proposition that it only takes that long to establish new habits.
“We believe people’s spending patterns follow the well-known theory, which means most people in China, having been cooped-up at home for more than a month and not having binge-shopped, may break the habit and not return to their old ways,” Xu said.
Jiang said she was determined not to return to her free-spending ways and planned to cook more at home.
“I’ll turn to cheaper goods for some luxury brands,” she said. “I’ll choose Huawei’s smartphone, because (Apple’s) iPhone has too much brand premium.”
Tang, who has recently used 100 yuan of shopping coupons to stock up on food, is going to hold the purse strings even tighter.
“I’ve set my monthly budget at 1,000 yuan,” she said. “Including one – and just one – bottle of bubble tea.”
Source: Reuters
CHINDIA ALERT: You'll be living in their world, very soon 
India and Pakistan: How the war was fought in TV studios
As tensions between India and Pakistan escalated following a deadly suicide attack last month, there was another battle being played out on the airwaves. Television stations in both countries were accused of sensationalism and partiality. But how far did they take it? The BBC’s Rajini Vaidyanathan in Delhi and Secunder Kermani in Islamabad take a look.
It was drama that was almost made for television.
The relationship between India and Pakistan – tense at the best of times – came to a head on 26 February when India announced it had launched airstrikes on militant camps in Pakistan’s Balakot region as “retaliation” for a suicide attack that had killed 40 troops in Indian-administered Kashmir almost two weeks earlier.
A day later, on 27 February, Pakistan shot down an Indian jet fighter and captured its pilot.
Abhinandan Varthaman was freed as a “peace gesture”, and Pakistan PM Imran Khan warned that neither country could afford a miscalculation, with a nuclear arsenal on each side.
Suddenly people were hooked, India’s TV journalists included.
So were they more patriots than journalists?
Rajini Vaidyanathan: Indian television networks showed no restraint when it came to their breathless coverage of the story. Rolling news was at fever pitch.
The coverage often fell into jingoism and nationalism, with headlines such as “Pakistan teaches India a lesson”, “Dastardly Pakistan”, and “Stay Calm and Back India” prominently displayed on screens.
Some reporters and commentators called for India to use missiles and strike back. One reporter in south India hosted an entire segment dressed in combat fatigues, holding a toy gun.
And while I was reporting on the return of the Indian pilot at the international border between the two countries in the northern city of Amritsar, I saw a woman getting an Indian flag painted on her cheek. “I’m a journalist too,” she said, as she smiled at me in slight embarrassment.
Print journalist Salil Tripathi wrote a scathing critique of the way reporters in both India and Pakistan covered the events, arguing they had lost all sense of impartiality and perspective. “Not one of the fulminating television-news anchors exhibited the criticality demanded of their profession,” she said.
Secunder Kermani: Shortly after shooting down at least one Indian plane last week, the Pakistani military held a press conference.
As it ended, the journalists there began chanting “Pakistan Zindabad” (Long Live Pakistan). It wasn’t the only example of “journalistic patriotism” during the recent crisis.
Two anchors from private channel 92 News donned military uniforms as they presented the news – though other Pakistani journalists criticised their decision.
But on the whole, while Indian TV presenters angrily demanded military action, journalists in Pakistan were more restrained, with many mocking what they called the “war mongering and hysteria” across the border.
In response to Indian media reports about farmers refusing to export tomatoes to Pakistan anymore for instance, one popular presenter tweeted about a “Tomatical strike” – a reference to Indian claims they carried out a “surgical strike” in 2016 during another period of conflict between the countries.
Media analyst Adnan Rehmat noted that while the Pakistani media did play a “peace monger as opposed to a warmonger” role, in doing so, it was following the lead of Pakistani officials who warned against the risks of escalation, which “served as a cue for the media.”
What were they reporting?
Rajini Vaidyanathan: As TV networks furiously broadcast bulletins from makeshift “war rooms” complete with virtual reality missiles, questions were raised not just about the reporters but what they were reporting.
Indian channels were quick to swallow the government version of events, rather than question or challenge it, said Shailaja Bajpai, media editor at The Print. “The media has stopped asking any kind of legitimate questions, by and large,” she said. “There’s no pretence of objectiveness.”
In recent years in fact, a handful of commentators have complained about the lack of critical questioning in the Indian media.
“For some in the Indian press corps the very thought of challenging the ‘official version’ of events is the equivalent of being anti-national”, said Ms Bajpai. “We know there have been intelligence lapses but nobody is questioning that.”
Senior defence and science reporter Pallava Bagla agreed. “The first casualty in a war is always factual information. Sometimes nationalistic fervour can make facts fade away,” he said.
This critique isn’t unique to India, or even this period in time. During the 2003 Iraq war, western journalists embedded with their country’s militaries were also, on many occasions, simply reporting the official narrative.
Secunder Kermani: In Pakistan, both media and public reacted with scepticism to Indian claims about the damage caused by the airstrikes in Balakot, which India claimed killed a large number of Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) militants in a training camp.
Hamid Mir, one of the most influential TV anchors in the country travelled to the area and proclaimed, “We haven’t seen any such (militant) infrastructure… we haven’t seen any bodies, any funerals.”
“Actually,” he paused, “We have found one body… this crow.” The camera panned down to a dead crow, while Mr Mir asked viewers if the crow “looks like a terrorist or not?”
There seems to be no evidence to substantiate Indian claims that a militant training camp was hit, but other journalists working for international outlets, including the BBC, found evidence of a madrassa, linked to JeM, near the site.
A photo of a signpost giving directions to the madrassa even surfaced on social media. It described the madrassa as being “under the supervision of Masood Azhar”. Mr Azhar is the founder of JeM.
The signpost’s existence was confirmed by a BBC reporter and Al Jazeera, though by the time Reuters visited it had apparently been removed. Despite this, the madrassa and its links received little to no coverage in the Pakistani press.
Media analyst Adnan Rehmat told the BBC that “there was no emphasis on investigating independently or thoroughly enough” the status of the madrassa.
In Pakistan, reporting on alleged links between the intelligence services and militant groups is often seen as a “red line”. Journalists fear for their physical safety, whilst editors know their newspapers or TV channels could face severe pressure if they publish anything that could be construed as “anti-state”.
Who did it better: Khan or Modi?
Rajini Vaidyanathan: With a general election due in a few months, PM Narendra Modi continued with his campaign schedule, mentioning the crisis in some of his stump speeches. But he never directly addressed the ongoing tensions through an address to the nation or a press conference.
This was not a surprise. Mr Modi rarely holds news conference or gives interviews to the media. When news of the suicide attack broke, Mr Modi was criticised for continuing with a photo shoot.
The leader of the main opposition Congress party, Rahul Gandhi, dubbed him a “Prime Time Minister” claiming the PM had carried on filming for three hours. PM Modi has also been accused of managing his military response as a way to court votes.
At a campaign rally in his home state of Gujarat he seemed unflustered by his critics, quipping “they’re busy with strikes on Modi, and Modi is launching strikes on terror.”
Secunder Kermani: Imran Khan won praise even from many of his critics in Pakistan, for his measured approach to the conflict. In two appearances on state TV, and one in parliament, he appeared firm, but also called for dialogue with India.
His stance helped set the comparatively more measured tone for Pakistani media coverage.
Officials in Islamabad, buoyed by Mr Khan’s decision to release the captured Indian pilot, have portrayed themselves as the more responsible side, which made overtures for peace.
On Twitter, a hashtag calling for Mr Khan to be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize was trending for a while. But his lack of specific references to JeM, mean internationally there is likely to be scepticism, at least initially, about his claims that Pakistan will no longer tolerate militant groups targeting India.
Source: The BBC
Posted in Adnan Rehmat, airstrikes, airwaves, Al Jazeera, Balakot, BBC, BBC reporter, campaign schedule, casualty, combat fatigues, commentators, congress party, critical questioning, Dastardly Pakistan, Delhi, escalation, factual information, fought, general election, Hamid Mir, hashtag, Imran Khan, India alert, Indian jet fighter, international border, Islamabad, Islamist militant groups, Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM), JeM, jingoism and nationalism, Journalist, Kashmir, madrassa, Masood Azhar, Media analyst, media editor, militant camps, militants, missiles, nationalistic fervour, Nobel Peace Prize, Pakistan, Pakistani, Pakistani military, Pallava Bagla, pilot, PM Narendra Modi, press, press conference, Prime Time Minister, rahul gandhi, Rajini Vaidyanathan, red line, retaliation, Reuters, Salil Tripathi, Secunder Kermani, Senior defence and science reporter, sensationalism and partiality, Shailaja Bajpai, signpost's, suicide attack, Surgical strike, The Print, Tomatical strike, toy gun, training camp, TV anchors, TV journalists, TV studios, Twitter, Uncategorized, war, war mongering and hysteria, warmonger, Wg Cdr Abhinandan Varthaman | Leave a Comment »