China

What really brought down LinkedIn’s China play

After one compromise too many, the last U.S. social platform to operate under CCP supervision exits the stage with its tail between its legs.

A view of the Beijing skyline, tinted orange

The company's exodus was a long time coming, and not just because of its recent moves violating Western sensibilities.

Photo: Zhang Kaiyv/Unsplash

U.S.-based social networking-plus-job seeking site LinkedIn said Thursday it was exiting China — after regulators told it in March it had 30 days to clean up its content. The platform, which entered China in 2014 and was purchased by Microsoft in 2016, appeared to be trying, clumsily, to comply, with several scholars and journalists outside China complaining in recent weeks about having their Chinese-language accounts censored.

But LinkedIn has been censoring content for years, and struggling in China since its entry. The company's exodus was a long time coming, and not just because of its recent moves violating Western sensibilities.

As this author wrote in Foreign Policy magazine in February 2014, LinkedIn was surrounded by doubters in China from the day it launched. Tech blog Huxiu warned at the time of the "curse" of foreign firms that enter China with high hopes only to belatedly realize the strength of the competition within China's borders. Users in China mocked the name, "ling ying," which meant "leading elites" but sounded an awful lot like the Mandarin pronunciation of a term roughly meaning "the spirit of an unborn child." As one user said then on Weibo, LinkedIn looked like "a tragedy … about to play out."

In that context, hanging on for over seven years was a feat. But although the site grew to 50 million users in China, when judged against the size of the total China market, LinkedIn was never the smash hit its executives hoped it would be — one that might have convinced its leaders to countenance the moral compromises it continued to make.

LinkedIn gambled that it could keep everyone happy at the same time. It certainly tried to please Beijing: The company paused new user registrations after regulators gave it a talking to, and its latest spate of censorship in the West looks like part of its response. According to the Wall Street Journal, LinkedIn received 42 takedown requests from the Chinese government in 2020, of which it complied with 38.

Meanwhile, LinkedIn, or at least this author's feed, became a place that both fulfilled and defied the vision of a polyglot social network that could cross cultural boundaries, and even China's Great Firewall. It was a place for genuine, civil debate between Chinese and American colleagues and friends, and during the pandemic, a way to glimpse snippets of life in a country that became nearly impossible to visit. But alongside the cheery bonhomie there often flowed a disturbing current of Xinjiang denialism, often pushed by Western users of the platform in what smacked of pro-Beijing virtue signaling.

LinkedIn's exit underscores this unresolvable tension, one at the heart of its effort to be a platform for expression, not just job-seeking, in China. The platform's English announcement cites its commitment to "freedom of expression" and points to troubles facing a "significantly more challenging operating environment and greater compliance requirements in China." By contrast, its equivalent Chinese announcement does not mention those terms at all. LinkedIn users in China are now hurriedly exchanging WeChat information in order to keep in touch, much as Chinese users of Clubhouse did when the writing was on the wall.

China is unlikely to miss LinkedIn much, partly because its hundreds of millions of job-seekers have many other options. China's job site market is more bifurcated, with some platforms focusing on nuts and bolts searches — Tencent-backed job board Boss Zhipin had its IPO on Nasdaq in June, raising nearly $1 billion — and others, like Maimai, focused exclusively on worker gossip. Maimai has broken news about workplace scandals including a death from overwork — although it has become a victim of its own success, both beset by lawsuits from tech employers angry at being exposed and also struggling to monetize its role as quasi-watchdog. Meanwhile, bona fide social organizing is happening off-platform, with users fed up with overwork using Tencent's documents feature to share schedule details as part of a grassroots "working time" online movement. LinkedIn never really figured into any of these conversations.

Ultimately, the demands of the Chinese state, the proliferation of competition and the fast-evolving needs of Chinese web users proved too much for even a power like Microsoft. With LinkedIn gone, the list of major U.S. social networks trying to succeed in China has shrunk to zero. It will likely be years before another one really tries.

Zeyi Yang and Shen Lu contributed research to this report.

Climate

Supreme Court takes a sledgehammer to greenhouse gas regulations

The court ruled 6-3 that the EPA cannot use the Clean Air Act to regulate power plant greenhouse gas emissions. That leaves a patchwork of policies from states, utilities and, increasingly, tech companies to pick up the slack.

The Supreme Court struck a major blow to the federal government's ability to regulate greenhouse gases.

Eric Lee/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Striking down the right to abortion may be the Supreme Court's highest-profile decision this term. But on Wednesday, the court handed down an equally massive verdict on the federal government's ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. In the case of West Virginia v. EPA, the court decided that the agency has no ability to regulate greenhouse gas pollution under the Clean Air Act. Weakening the federal government's powers leaves a patchwork of states, utilities and, increasingly, tech companies to pick up the slack in reducing carbon pollution.

Keep Reading Show less
Brian Kahn

Brian ( @blkahn) is Protocol's climate editor. Previously, he was the managing editor and founding senior writer at Earther, Gizmodo's climate site, where he covered everything from the weather to Big Oil's influence on politics. He also reported for Climate Central and the Wall Street Journal. In the even more distant past, he led sleigh rides to visit a herd of 7,000 elk and boat tours on the deepest lake in the U.S.

Every day, millions of us press the “order” button on our favorite coffee store's mobile application: Our chosen brew will be on the counter when we arrive. It’s a personalized, seamless experience that we have all come to expect. What we don’t know is what’s happening behind the scenes. The mobile application is sourcing data from a database that stores information about each customer and what their favorite coffee drinks are. It is also leveraging event-streaming data in real time to ensure the ingredients for your personal coffee are in supply at your local store.

Applications like this power our daily lives, and if they can’t access massive amounts of data stored in a database as well as stream data “in motion” instantaneously, you — and millions of customers — won’t have these in-the-moment experiences.

Keep Reading Show less
Jennifer Goforth Gregory
Jennifer Goforth Gregory has worked in the B2B technology industry for over 20 years. As a freelance writer she writes for top technology brands, including IBM, HPE, Adobe, AT&T, Verizon, Epson, Oracle, Intel and Square. She specializes in a wide range of technology, such as AI, IoT, cloud, cybersecurity, and CX. Jennifer also wrote a bestselling book The Freelance Content Marketing Writer to help other writers launch a high earning freelance business.
Fintech

Can crypto regulate itself? The Lummis-Gillibrand bill hopes so.

Creating the equivalent of the stock markets’ FINRA for crypto is the ideal, but experts doubt that it will be easy.

The idea of creating a government-sanctioned private regulatory association has been drawing more attention in the debate over how to rein in a fast-growing industry whose technological quirks have baffled policymakers.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

Regulating crypto is complicated. That’s why Sens. Cynthia Lummis and Kirsten Gillibrand want to explore the creation of a private sector group to help federal regulators do their job.

The bipartisan bill introduced by Lummis and Gillibrand would require the CFTC and the SEC to work with the crypto industry to look into setting up a self-regulatory organization to “facilitate innovative, efficient and orderly markets for digital assets.”

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at bpimentel@protocol.com or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.

Enterprise

Alperovitch: Cybersecurity defenders can’t be on high alert every day

With the continued threat of Russian cyber escalation, cybersecurity and geopolitics expert Dmitri Alperovitch says it’s not ideal for the U.S. to oscillate between moments of high alert and lesser states of cyber readiness.

Dmitri Alperovitch (the co-founder and former CTO of CrowdStrike) speaks at RSA Conference 2022.

Photo: RSA Conference

When it comes to cybersecurity vigilance, Dmitri Alperovitch wants to see more focus on resiliency of IT systems — and less on doing "surges" around particular dates or events.

For instance, whatever Russia is doing at the moment.

Keep Reading Show less
Kyle Alspach

Kyle Alspach ( @KyleAlspach) is a senior reporter at Protocol, focused on cybersecurity. He has covered the tech industry since 2010 for outlets including VentureBeat, CRN and the Boston Globe. He lives in Portland, Oregon, and can be reached at kalspach@protocol.com.

Policy

How the internet got privatized and how the government could fix it

Author Ben Tarnoff discusses municipal broadband, Web3 and why closing the “digital divide” isn’t enough.

The Biden administration’s Internet for All initiative, which kicked off in May, will roll out grant programs to expand and improve broadband infrastructure, teach digital skills and improve internet access for “everyone in America by the end of the decade.”

Decisions about who is eligible for these grants will be made based on the Federal Communications Commission’s broken, outdated and incorrect broadband maps — maps the FCC plans to update only after funding has been allocated. Inaccurate broadband maps are just one of many barriers to getting everyone in the country successfully online. Internet service providers that use government funds to connect rural and low-income areas have historically provided those regions with slow speeds and poor service, forcing community residents to find reliable internet outside of their homes.

Keep Reading Show less
Aditi Mukund
Aditi Mukund is Protocol’s Data Analyst. Prior to joining Protocol, she was an analyst at The Daily Beast and NPR where she wrangled data into actionable insights for editorial, audience, commerce, subscription, and product teams. She holds a B.S in Cognitive Science, Human Computer Interaction from The University of California, San Diego.
Latest Stories
Bulletins