Step into a world where the focus is keenly set on Big Tech Layoffs. Within the confines of this article, a tapestry of references to Big Tech Layoffs awaits your exploration. If your pursuit involves unraveling the depths of Big Tech Layoffs, you've arrived at the perfect destination.
Our narrative unfolds with a wealth of insights surrounding Big Tech Layoffs. This is not just a standard article; it's a curated journey into the facets and intricacies of Big Tech Layoffs. Whether you're thirsting for comprehensive knowledge or just a glimpse into the universe of Big Tech Layoffs, this promises to be an enriching experience.
The spotlight is firmly on Big Tech Layoffs, and as you navigate through the text on these digital pages, you'll discover an extensive array of information centered around Big Tech Layoffs. This is more than mere information; it's an invitation to immerse yourself in the enthralling world of Big Tech Layoffs.
So, if you're eager to satisfy your curiosity about Big Tech Layoffs, your journey commences here. Let's embark together on a captivating odyssey through the myriad dimensions of Big Tech Layoffs.
Big Tech's danger to kids finally aligns Democrats, Republicans
Big Tech's danger to kids finally aligns Democrats, Republicans
More than once over the course of a five-hour hearing before Congress on Thursday, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg's parenting style became a point of focus for angry lawmakers. One House Republican asked if he had issues with his young daughters watching YouTube. Another asked if he lets them use Facebook's own services.
"My daughters are five and three, and they don't use our products," Zuckerberg said, before adding that he lets his older child use Facebook's chat app for kids.
The exchange typified a common refrain as the leaders of Facebook, Google and Twitter weathered a grilling from Congress -- the fourth such event in the last year where a Big Tech CEO took the hot seat -- over the misinformation that flows through their platforms. While lawmakers tried to advance their disparate agendas, one bipartisan theme emerged among Democrats and Republicans who are usually bitterly divided: the danger of Silicon Valley's services on children.
"Big tech is essentially handing our children a lit cigarette and hoping they stay addicted for life," said Rep. Bill Johnson, an Ohio Republican. Rep. Kathy Castor, a Democrat from Florida, peppered the CEOs with statistics that show a rising level of depression and suicidal thoughts among adolescents that coincides with the rise of social media.
Historically, Big Tech products have been reserved for people 13 and older. But in the past few years, companies like Google and Facebook have tried to push the bounds of those limits, creating services for younger and younger kids. (Twitter, primarily used by older users, evaded scrutiny on the issue.)
YouTube Kids, launched in 2015, is billed as a child-safe version of the massive Google-owned site. Last month, Google said it's testing new parental controls for kids 9 and up to use the full scale version of YouTube. Facebook four years ago unveiled a version of its Messenger chat app for kids to talk to their parents and friends. Now, the social network is working on a version of Instagram for kids under 13.
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said he doesn't let his young daughters use the company's products, except Messenger for Kids.
Screenshot by Sarah Tew/CNET
Technical issues like content moderation or the opaque advertising model of social networks are hard concepts to grasp, so lawmakers have glommed on to an issue that's more visceral and universal in nature: the safety of our children. It isn't a topic that the tech executives can easily swat away.
Even tech luminaries have sounded the alarm. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates talked about raising their kids with limited tech. Apple CEO Tim Cook, who has recently feuded with Facebook, has said he doesn't want his nephew on a social network.
"These hearings reflect an emboldened Congress and a tech industry that's on the defensive because the companies know that serious regulation and legislation is coming," said Jim Steyer, CEO of Common Sense Media, a child advocacy nonprofit. "No one is going to take Mark Zuckerberg seriously as a voice for parents, but the truth is our kids lives are being dramatically shaped by social media and internet platforms."
Silicon Valley companies have received blowback in the past when they've waded into kids products. YouTube Kids faced controversy in 2017 when the service's filters failed to recognize some videos that feature disturbing imagery but are aimed at children -- like Mickey Mouse lying in a pool of blood, or PAW Patrol characters bursting into flames after a car crash. Facebook's Messenger for Kids, meanwhile, suffered a bug in 2019 that let children join group chats with strangers.
Critics accuse Google and Facebook of skirting the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, or COPPA, a federal law that regulates user data collection from sites with users who are under 13 years old. In 2019, the US Federal Trade Commission slapped the company with a record $170 million fine, as well as new requirements, for YouTube's violation of COPPA. In response, the video site made major changes to how it treats kids videos, including limiting the data it collects from those views.
The pushback from Congress on Thursday comes as lawmakers have drafted other legislation that deals with Silicon Valley's treatment of kids.
In September, Castor introduced the Kids Internet Design and Safety (KIDS) Act, in the House. This bill banned "auto-play" sessions on websites and apps geared for children and young teens. The legislation also banned push alerts targeting children and prohibited platforms from recommending or amplifying certain content involving sexual, violent, or other adult material, including gambling or "other dangerous, abusive, exploitative, or wholly commercial content."
Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, who asked Zuckerberg if his kids use Facebook products, has introduced the Big Tech Accountability Platform, which is a road map for how Republicans are approaching regulating the tech industry. While Republicans are still concerned about the censoring of conservative voices online, they also are concerned with how the big platforms use their algorithms "to drive addiction," as well as the role the companies play "in child grooming and trafficking."
"Remember, our kids -- the users -- are the product," McMorris said Thursday. "You -- Big Tech -- are not advocates for children. You exploit and profit off them."
When Local Newspapers Fold, Polarization Rises. Here's What You Can Do
When Local Newspapers Fold, Polarization Rises. Here's What You Can Do
Russia's invasion of Ukraine, rising energy costs and our ongoing struggles with the coronavirus pandemic take up a lot of our attention these days. But there's more going on a lot closer to home -- you just might not know it, because your local newspaper is gone.
More than a quarter of hometown newspapers have disappeared in the last century, leaving about 70 million Americans with little or no way to stay informed about their city and county governments, schools or businesses. As the country heads toward the 2022 midterm elections, Americans are increasingly turning to friends and social media to stay informed -- which isn't always trustworthy, as we learned during the 2016 election when around 44% of Americans were exposed to disinformation and misinformation through untrustworthy websites.
"The state of local news in America is dire," said Tim Franklin, senior associate dean of Northwestern's Medill School of Journalism and head of the Medill Local News Initiative.
Local journalism isn't just a nice idea. Community newspapers report some of the most important stories in our country. That includes the Boston Globe's 2002 series exposing the Catholic Archdiocese of Boston's sex abuse of minors, Sara Ganim and The Patriot-News' coverage revealing Penn State sex abuse scandal involving Jerry Sandusky and the Charleston Gazette-Mail's 2017 expose on opioids flooding into West Virginia.
This is part of Citizen Now, a package that aims to empower readers with information about our changing world.
CNET
But for every Pulitzer Prize-winning local journalism story, there are countless more that have served as chroniclers of their communities and watchdogs of the people in power. And when they aren't there, research from the Brookings Institute found there's generally more government waste and fraud.
"When you have less local news, there's various effects, some of which you'd find predictable: lower voting turnout, more corruption, more waste," said Steven Walden, president and co-founder of Report For America, a nonprofit that funds young reporters to work in understaffed newsrooms throughout the US. "There's also evidence that you have more polarization and misinformation."
The journalism industry has been struggling to adapt. Advertising, once a vital part of the newspaper world, has shifted to online. Meanwhile, profit-hungry newspaper owners have chosen to lay off staff and reduce the quality of their products.
Nonprofit organizations have stepped up to support newsrooms in several ways, but ultimately, they live or die by their communities. Many local papers and radio stations depend on individual donations to fund reporting that would never be done by larger publications, covering civic meetings and investigating local issues that lead to exposés which fix injustices. Even simply signing up for and reading local news draws people closer to issues that affect them -- and reinforces what publications do.
"Most of these stories weren't big but they mattered immensely to the residents in a community larger outlets didn't regularly cover," said Greg Yee, now a reporter at the Los Angeles Times, speaking about his year writing for the Farmington Daily Times in Farmington, New Mexico. (Full disclosure: Yee is a former colleague of this article's author.) Stories that stick out from that time include a mobile home park cut off from natural gas in winter and a new gas station opening in a Navajo Nation community, the only fuel access in 30 miles, that significantly improved locals' quality of life.
"A good local news organization is a problem solver: it identifies problems and helps a community come together to solve it," said Penelope Abernathy, visiting professor at Northwestern's Medill School of Journalism, who heads a site dedicated to mapping news deserts, areas with one or zero local papers. "And a good news organization shows you how you are related to people you may not know you're related to in another part of the county, region or state."
The Washington Post / Getty Images
Long, withering decline
Journalism jobs have been shrinking for decades, driven by declining newspaper circulation and the rise in digital advertising. The news industry's advertising and subscription businesses have roughly halved over the past decade. Much of that money's shifted to Google, Facebook and Amazon, which together now hold 64% of the US online advertising market.
For newspapers, that shift in spending is catastrophic. In the decade after the great recession in 2009, the Pew Research Center found newspaper newsroom employment in the US had dropped by more than half, to about 35,000 workers.
Ironically, the news industry has more readers than ever before – upwards of 10 times as many, according to Danielle Coffey, vice president and general council of the News Media Alliance.
"We don't have a broken product. It's being consumed at exponential rates," she said. "The source of the problem is the revenue problem."
It wasn't always this way.
The founding fathers believed so strongly in newspapers as a public good that they set up government subsidies for postal rates, reducing the cost of distributing the news – which at the time, was delivered on horseback.
In the 1960s and '70s, though, publicly traded paper owners began fixating on profits. To impress shareholders, news organizations conglomerated into big chains that gobbled up local papers into regional networks, said Amanda Lotz, professor of the Digital Media Research Centre at Queensland University.
"The financialization pressure really moves [newspapers] away from the balance between a commercial and public service enterprise of providing news to a community," Lotz said.
Rounds of acquisitions resulted in the gutting of editorial budgets and staff. With fewer reporters, newspapers started relying on national stories published by wire services, a trend that created "ghost papers" that had little or no local content. Meanwhile, the internet became an easy substitution for things online that had until then been exclusive to the paper, like weather, sports scores, classifieds and even news.
Venture capitalists and other financial firms began buying up newspapers in the 1980s but rapidly accelerated in the last two decades, growing to own over 23% of US newsrooms today while wringing out profits with more layoffs.
"Those losses put more strain on already stretched newsrooms and the publications ended up churning through staff," said Yee, who worked for four years at a pair of newspapers owned by hedge fund Alden Global Capital. "All of that translates into worse, inconsistent coverage of the communities they're trying to serve."
As a result, from 2004 until the start of the pandemic in 2020, the US lost a quarter (around 2100) of its newspapers, according to a report from the University of North Carolina's Hussman School of Journalism and Media. By the end of last year, another hundred were gone, Poynter reported, expanding news deserts that are mostly located in financially-impacted rural areas in the country's interior.
Some papers have tried to rely more heavily on subscriptions, while transitioning to mainly digital publishing. Some success stories include the Chattanooga Times Free Press, which has been operating since 1869. Last September, it switched to a daily digital edition and a single print edition on Sunday from a daily print edition. The publication spent $6.1 million to give all its monthly subscribers iPads and train them one-on-one how to use them to access their daily paper, and it's retained subscribers through the transition.
"There are some real success stories in this transition. If you can lower your paper costs and your distribution costs and if you can attract enough digital subscribers, you can support a local newsroom on that. But many local news organizations are still getting a significant chunk of their revenue from print advertising," Medill's Franklin said.
Bloomberg / Getty News
Legislative fix, maybe
One way the news industry could regain revenue and profit is to seek compensation from big tech platforms. After all, advocates say, Facebook, Google, Twitter make money selling ads next to links, videos and photos published and shared freely to their networks.
Legislators in Australia were the first to pass a law in February 2021 requiring Google and Facebook to negotiate with publishers for compensation to use their work, while France followed with its own legislation shortly thereafter. The latter locked horns with Google before finally securing legal assurance that the search giant would pay local media outlets when they appear in search results. Critics like the Electronic Frontier Foundation lament that the Australian and French laws ensured deals for big media publishers at the expense of smaller ones, but that hasn't stopped Canada and the UK from gearing up to pass their own versions.
A version of that idea in the US, called the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act, was proposed in March, 2021 by Senators Amy Klobuchar, Rand Paul, Cory Booker, and Lindsey Graham -- a rare bipartisan effort. The bill would allow news organizations to collectively bargain with tech companies for compensation, but hasn't moved out of committee yet.
Another idea to fund journalism Is the Local Journalism Sustainability Act introduced a year ago in the House by Representatives Ann Kirkpatrick and Dan Newhouse. That bill, if it were to become law, would give newsrooms around $50,000 annually in tax breaks to hire reporters. Small businesses, meanwhile, would receive $5,000 for the first year to advertise in local papers, and Americans would get a $250 stipend to pay for news subscriptions. It's unlikely to pass, though, in part because of partisan bickering over other spending plans on Capitol Hill.
"We need to make sure these publications can sustain themselves through this crisis and beyond, and I believe the credits in this bill make significant progress in providing a pathway to that sustainability," Rep. Kirkpatrick said when announcing the bill.
Nonprofit newsrooms
Some news organizations are finding funding beyond ads and subscriptions. Nonprofit foundations and philanthropic organizations are funneling grants and other aid money to newsrooms, including a new wave of nonprofit publications, like ProPublica, which run mostly on foundation and individual donations.
The American Journalism Project is a self-described venture philanthropy firm that to date has raised $90 million to back 32 local nonprofit newsrooms. Founded in 2019, it's also helped launch four more, taking the startup incubation model and applying it to digital newsrooms.
The organization focuses on both funding newsrooms and guiding them toward self-sustainability by diversifying their revenue streams, said Sarabeth Berman, CEO of the American Journalism Project. Newsrooms they've helped grow by around 67% in their first year and are projected to double their revenue in three years.
"Will local news only be nonprofit? No. Is nonprofit news vital for the future of an informed citizenry? We think so," Berman said.
Report For America, founded in 2017, describes itself as a service organization, which helps pair young reporters fresh out of college with legacy newsrooms. The organization financially supports the reporter by paying half their salary (up to $25,000) the first year, then a third (up to $20,000) the following year. After that, it's up to the publication to decide whether to hire them permanently.
"If you're not in New York or Boston or Washington, some of these news organizations have trouble getting people to go out to smaller towns," said Report For America's Waldman. "We have a very significant recruiting operation and are able to create a sort of self-selected group of people who are really passionate about local."
Report For America has grown its graduating class to 130 reporters this year, up from its first class of 13 in 2018 -- to date, over 560 reporters have gone through the program and partnered with local newsrooms. They include Laura Roche of the Charlotte News & Observer writing about the fraught debate over museums returning the unethically sourced remains of Black people, Sierra Clark of the Traverse City Record-Eagle writing about Melissa Isaac and many others in her Anishinaabek Neighbors series, and Brandon Drenon of the Indianapolis Star writing about the NAACP and others criticizing Indiana schools for failing Black students.
Report for America also connects newsrooms with donors in their area in an effort to get the community more involved in funding its local news again.
"Our goal is to actually help change the local business models in a way that they can sustain that," Waldman said.
The nonprofit Knight Foundation pledged to give $300 million to news organizations in 2019, some of which will go to both the American Journalism Project and Report For America, among other nonprofits that in turn support local newsrooms -- efforts that can be seen city by city on this interactive map. The flow of financial support is important for local newsrooms that operate on nonprofit and for-profit models, which are both valuable to their communities, said Jim Brady, vice president of the Knight Foundation's journalism program.
"Nonprofits tend to be more investigative or enterprise in nature, and the for-profits tend to provide more information on how consumers can live their daily lives. So we think both must be part of the answer to how local news can thrive," Brady said.
An infographic from the UNC Hussman School of Journalism and Media's project website, The Expanding News Desert, headed by Penelope Abernathy.
UNC Hussman
What to do if you don't have local journalism
News experts have advice for what to do if you live in a news desert, with little or no coverage. First on the list: Stop thinking that social media posts are an informative replacement for reporting. Social media can help people know what's going on, but it's rife with bias and misinformation.
"There's a proliferation of misinformation and disinformation that goes unchecked because there's no local journalist checking on the facts. [Social media is] a place where unvetted gossip can get spread," Franklin said.
People need to learn to spot misinformation that's spread on social media by publications that look like they're trustworthy but aren't. Both the World Health Organization and the Poynter Institute have their own free online courses to learn how to fact-check posts yourself -- not just to spot fake news, but also to understand the agenda behind why they're spreading in the first place.
In the voids left by local papers, citizen journalists and bloggers have stepped up to provide their communities with informative coverage, but they lack the oversight and vetting a newsroom provides. For lack of better options, a citizen reporter could start a site on Substack and write about local events, Franklin suggested.
The best thing to do is to reach out to regional papers the next town over and request coverage. You can find your nearest local or regional paper on Newspapers.com or NewspaperMap.com. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting has a station finder site too, and if you're a fan of National Public Radio, you can sign up to become a member of your local station in order to help support it. It isn't a perfect solution for an existing newsroom to stretch to cover another area, but is far better than starting a new local publication from scratch.
But if your community decides to launch a new publication, organizing it as a nonprofit newsroom is a successful way to go. They rely on donations -- foundation support and individual giving account for a combined 83% of nonprofit revenue, according to the Institute of Nonprofit Newsrooms' 2021 Index. And that model is working: 83 of the over 400 nonprofit newsrooms affiliated with INN are less than five years old.
Then there's nonprofit newsroom Berkeleyside, which hosted the so-called first 'direct public offering' where it solicited a combined $1 million in funding from 355 of its readers (an average of $2,816 per person) in 2018 to get started. These are technically securities, but sold directly to its readers, and the publication continues to publish today. It's one of many ways newsrooms are innovating new ownership structures to stay solvent.
"We need to get more support from communities, from local community foundations, from national media foundations and from high net-worth individuals to help make local news sustainable in all areas of the country," Brady said.
Correction, June 28: The original version of this story incorrectly stated how many reporters were in Report For America's first graduating class. Its first graduating class of reporters was in 2018 and had 13 members.
Huawei oneplus and beyond china s biggest smartphone ever made huawei oneplus and beyond china s biggest smartphone makers huawei oneplus and beyond china s biggest port huawei oneplus and beyond china sea huawei and us government huawei oneplus and oppo huawei oneplus india
Huawei, OnePlus and beyond: China's biggest smartphone brands you should know about
Huawei, OnePlus and beyond: China's biggest smartphone brands you should know about
This story is part of Generation China, CNET's series exploring the nation's technological ambition.
Apple, Samsung and Huawei have long been mainstays on the global smartphone leaderboard, but in recent years there's been a string of new players. Xiaomi, Oppo and Vivo might sound unfamiliar to most Americans, outside a tech-savvy bubble, but they're right up there with the world's top brands.
While Samsung wears the crown as the world's largest smartphone company and Apple still pulls in the most profit, Chinese phone-makers have ascended rapidly worldwide and are displaying resilience amid the coronavirus pandemic. Huawei surpassed Apple to become the world's second largest seller of smartphones last year, achieving this coveted milestone without selling any phones in the US, and briefly eclipsed Samsung in April. A Shenzhen-based phone company, Transsion, meanwhile, has overtaken Samsung as the No. 1 phone supplier in Africa since its launch there in 2018.
"Chinese smartphone-makers have captured around 40% of the global market share, showing that Chinese firms are increasingly capable of building consumer products with global appeal," said Dan Wang, technology analyst at Gavekal Dragonomics, a research firm.
In addition to enticing shoppers around the world to buy their handsets, Chinese vendors have worked hard to shed the reputation that they're merely cheap copycats -- they're starting to drive innovations such as foldable designs or pop-up cameras, which offer a window into the future of smartphone technology. Royole, a Shenzhen-based company, unveiled the world's first flexible smartphone, beating Samsung to the punch, although the South Korean electronics giant is often mistakenly credited for it. Nevermind that it was a spectacular failure. Xiaomi, meanwhile, unveiled the first trifold foldable phone that much of the world had ever laid eyes on. Vivo and Meizu both made waves when they released phones without a single physical button and almost no ports.
Generation China is a CNET series that looks at the areas of technology where the country is looking to take a leadership position.
Along with these innovative designs, Chinese phone brands are increasingly churning out high-end phones and pushing price boundaries, aiming to transcend their budget phone image and compete with the likes of Samsung and Apple after focusing on the budget or entry level market for years. Critics say they still have a long way to go.
"These competitive pressures drive changes in pricing, innovation and marketing, but I'm not convinced that Chinese vendors, aside from Huawei previously, pose a significant threat to Apple's brand," said Tuong Huy Nguyen, senior principal analyst at Gartner. "Apple is a high-end brand and an ecosystem-driven experience."
To be fair, China's smartphone industry has witnessed its fair share of failures along with the meteoric rise of companies like Huawei and Xiaomi as the smartphone market consolidates. Gionee, a Shenzhen-based manufacturer that was among the first Chinese firms to break into the lucrative Indian market, went bust last year. There was also Vsun, a Chinese contract manufacturer that laid off all its employees on the same day it filed for bankruptcy in May last year. Small players have been squeezed even tighter amid the coronavirus pandemic, which has resulted in Chinese phone-makers refocusing their efforts back to their home market, according to industry analysts.
But the rapid emergence of China's phone-makers on the global stage underscores the country's rising technological prowess. It comes as Beijing seeks to catch up and eventually overtake the US as the global technological leader across 10 high-tech sectors including robotics, semiconductors and even electric vehicles, as part of Chinese President Xi Jin Ping's ambitious master plan known as Made in China 2025. It's this very plan that fueled the costly trade war between Washington and Beijing. In May, Beijing unveiled a follow-up plan that details China's involvement in setting the standards for key tech like 5G.
Still, some Chinese phone-makers are poised to gain market share from Apple and Samsung in the second quarter despite the coronavirus pandemic, which has ravaged the global economy and disrupted supply chains, according to a TrendForce report published in April.
But who are the key players? The following is a breakdown of all of the Chinese phone-makers you should know, according to how recognizable they are in the US.
Huawei
US chipmakers continue to sell product to Huawei, despite a Trump administration ban on the sale of US technology to the Chinese telecom giant.
SOPA Images
Of all the Chinese phone manufacturers on this list, Huawei is probably the name that needs no introduction. It's the world's second largest smartphone company, and it's at the center of an international battle for technological dominance between Beijing and Washington.
Once virtually unknown to most Americans, the telecommunications giant was splashed across newspapers when top executive (and daughter of the company's founder) Meng Wangzhou was arrested in Canada for an alleged violation of US sanctions with Iran. Since then, the Chinese telecom has regularly made international headlines, especially since the US Commerce Department banned American companies from doing business with Huawei without first obtaining a license.
For Huawei, that meant it could lose access to crucial technological parts including semiconductors, which are key components used in its base stations and phones. It also meant Huawei's handsets were cut off from the full power of Google's Android operating system, along with several popular apps including the Google Play store, Gmail, Google Maps and apps that rely on Google like Uber and eBay.
At its launch in September, the Mate 30 was Huawei's first major phone to launch without Google's proprietary apps. Despite US efforts to constrain Huawei, the company reported first-half earnings this month showing revenue grew more than 13% from a year ago to around $65 billion.
But in May, Washington tightened its entity list measures in a move that blocked Huawei's global chip supply from key supplier's like Taiwan's TSMC, which could put Huawei's future in genuine jeopardy. "It might cripple Huawei, which I consider China's most important technology company," Wang said.
ZTE
ZTE launched the Axon 10 series in the US last year, which marked its comeback into the United States after being swept up in a trade fight with the Trump administration.
Angela Lang/CNET
You may remember ZTE from when it got embroiled in a trade fight with the US government. Once the fourth largest phone vendor by market share in the US, ZTE saw its operations come to a grinding halt after the Commerce Department in 2018 barred the state-owned Chinese telecom from buying components from American companies over sanctions violations.
Although the ban was lifted several months later as the result of Trump's surprise intervention, ZTE paid the US $1.4 billion in penalties, the Chinese telecom took a reputational hit and suffered a $1 billion loss in 2018.
The 35-year-old company had spent years building its brand in the US, where it sold low-cost smartphones through wireless carriers including AT&T and Verizon, selling 19 million phones in 2017, according to Canalys. It had achieved what none of its homegrown competitors had been able to in the US. Much of that evaporated with the controversy.
Last year, ZTE quietly reentered the US market with its "comeback phone," the Axon 10 Pro, its first major phone launch since it was banned. Still, industry analysts say they have doubts over whether ZTE can shake off the impact of the US ban even after installing company veteran Ni Fei at the helm of its consumer electronics business.
"ZTE is expected to face challenges from both its Chinese competitors and the US-China tensions," said Will Wong, research manager at IDC Asia Pacific. "Since ZTE has been banned by the US in the past, the current tensions between the US and China are expected to make its channel players more cautious while working with them."
Lenovo
Angela Lang/CNET
Lenovo is a giant in the PC industry. It can even lay claim to the world's first 5G laptop. But it's also the owner of one of the most iconic American phone companies: Motorola, which it bought from Google for a cool $2.9 in 2015. Still, it's been a long road back to the black for Lenovo's phone business. After years of bruising losses and layoffs, Lenovo's mobile unit turned a small profit last year, its first since it acquired Motorola, thanks to a "clear focus on selected markets, a competitive product portfolio and expense control." This year, the company released a string of phones across the price spectrum under its Motorola label like the revamped Razr, and it's gearing up to release its Legion-branded gaming phone as the company seeks to grow those gains in its phone business.
OnePlus
Launched this month, the Nord is OnePlus' inaugural midrange phone from a brand-new line by the same name.
Andrew Hoyle/CNET
Unlike most of its Chinese competitors, OnePlus has emerged as an unlikely success story in the US, breaking into the brutally competitive American smartphone market within the seven years of starting out. The young company, which has roots in tech metropolis Shenzhen, started off there as an online-only supplier of high-end yet affordable phones.
But it truly broke into mainstream America in 2018 when it launched the 6T flagship series with the support of a key US ally: T-Mobile. It was the first time OnePlus had the backing of a major US carrier, which marked an important milestone for OnePlus since most Americans still buy their phones from carriers. It also meant that the phones would be available in T-Mobile's vast network of retail stores around the country.
Jump ahead to 2020, and OnePlus is one of the fastest-growing smartphone brands in the US after its phone sales more than tripled in 2019, according to Counterpoint Research. Although its market share remains minuscule compared to those of Apple and Samsung, it has managed to snatch a small slice of the pie from both juggernauts, as well as curry favor with some of the most discerning gadget enthusiasts out there.
In April, it launched its OnePlus 8 flagship series amid the coronavirus pandemic with the backing of Verizon, and is set to launch the more wallet-friendly Nord this month via an augmented reality launch.
Xiaomi
Xiaomi's flagship for this year is known as the Mi 10 series.
Xiaomi
Xiaomi is one of China's earlier homegrown success stories. Founded in 2010, Xiaomi, which was once widely ridiculed for blatantly copying Apple, has matured into one of China's domestic champions, shipping more than 124 million phones in 2019 in more than 90 countries worldwide.
For many years, Xiaomi's not-so-secret weapon has been selling quality phones at near cost. It has even released a $100 phone. This low-margin strategy has helped Xiaomi cultivate a loyal fan base, especially in price-sensitive countries in Asia like India, where its slick Android phones often sell out within hours of release.
Xiaomi generates most of its revenue from selling phones, but recurring revenue from the sale of software and services that ride on its phone allow the Beijing-based company to sell its handsets for cheap. It also sells a portfolio of its own smart products to help boost its brand.
In addition to phones, Xiaomi relies on a portfolio of smart products including bedside lamps and air purifiers to help build its Mi brand internationally. An upgraded electric scooter (pictured above) was launched in July.
Screenshot by Sareena Dayaram/CNET
In recent years, however, Xiaomi -- like many of its rivals -- has prioritized selling more high-priced phones as the global smartphone industry and its margins shrink. This strategy seems to have paid off, with the company reporting nearly 14% revenue growth in the first quarter despite the business challenges of the coronavirus pandemic. It stands in contrast to Samsung and Apple, which have both warned of a challenging year ahead.
Oppo and Vivo
Vivo has broken ground for a 32-story highrise, which will house its headquarters, in the southern Chinese tech metropolis of Shenzhen. It's scheduled to be completed by 2025.
NBBJ
If you're not familiar with the name Vivo, there's still a good chance you have seen some of its phones, which appeared in Marvel's blockbuster Captain America: Civil War. As with its older and larger sibling Oppo, the Chinese phone-maker's trademark marketing style involves using high-profile product placement and sponsorships to win over European shoppers. Although Oppo and Vivo aren't household names in the West, both have vaulted up the global rankings to place within the top six smartphone manufacturers in a comparatively short period of time, due partially to the popularity of their affordable phones among young consumers.
Oppo and Vivo (along with Xiaomi) are expected to have gained even more market share in the April-to-June quarter despite the pandemic, according to IDC. That's mainly because both companies enjoy a strong foothold in Asia, including the world's two largest smartphone markets, China and India, where most of their regional sales are generated, according to Wong. Even though Oppo and Vivo stress that they're competitors, both companies were spun out of the same parent company. BBK Electronics is a privately held, media-shy Chinese conglomerate believed to be the world's third largest manufacturer of smartphones. Along with Vivo and Oppo, it counts OnePlus and RealMe as part of its stable of brands.
RealMe
Ian Knighton/CNET
RealMe is the baby of the bunch, a 2-year-old company founded by a former Oppo executive. RealMe phones found success quickly because they were cheap but juiced up with cutting-edge technology.
Last year, the company, which is also owned by BBK Electronics, said it shipped 25 millions phones -- a figure it hopes to double by the end of 2020.
"Their connection with Oppo allowed them to form a partnership with channel players in a more efficient way, which might be difficult for new smartphone-makers as channel players may not be familiar with a new brand," said IDC's Wong.
The brand originally piggybacked on Oppo's success, and was known back in 2010 as Oppo Real before it spun off into an independent division. It also rapidly entered new international markets, finding success in India and parts of Europe in recent years. Earlier this year, the company unveiled its first 5G phones as part of a push toward the premium end of the market.
TCL
TCL is the new kid on the smartphone block -- after a fashion. The Shenzhen-listed company has had a long history of designing, manufacturing and marketing phones under brands that are not its own: TCL has produced handsets carrying the Alcatel name, the once-popular Blackberry brand and even has the tiny Palm handset.
In April, the company, better known for making televisions, launched the moderately spec'd TCL 10 series, the debut line using its own brand that included a 5G phone, internationally.
But the Chinese company is also vying to become the next big name in foldable phones, teasing radical designs including a trifold phone and a rollable phone.
Founded in 1981, the Chinese consumer electronics company built its reputation selling value-for-money TVs that mostly kept up with competitors in terms of specs.TCL will continue selling these TVs along with the bevy of consumer electronics under its portfolio, but it's aiming to boost its brand through the more personal smartphone, echoing a strategy employed by industry giants Samsung and LG.
Meizu
The Meizu Pro 6 (center) looks a lot like an iPhone.
Dave Cheng/CNET
Formerly a maker of MP3 players, Meizu was one of the earlier Chinese firms to make a foray into the hypercompetitive world of smartphones. The Zhuhai-based company rolled out its first phones in 2009, quickly becoming a force to be reckoned with domestically, and eventually entering overseas markets like India and parts of Europe.
At its height, it was China's sixth largest domestic manufacturer, shipping approximately 20 million smartphones in 2015, which was a 350% jump from the year before. Huawei sold about 100 million in 2015. In a sign of confidence in its business that same year, Meizu garnered a near $600 million investment from Alibaba, as part of the e-commerce behemoth's push of its own mobile operating system into Meizu's popular handsets.
But Meizu has failed so far to break into the upper strata to join the ranks of China's smartphone elite. Today, the once high-flying company is struggling to stay afloat amid the consequences of misguided business decisions that included the over-release of smartphones and intensifying competition from its homegrown rivals. As players with more financial firepower refocus on the Chinese market, "there is little room left for smaller vendors," said Canalys research analyst Hattie He in a 2018 report.
