[onepointsixC]

Articles whose content contradict their headlines are rather quite frustrating. The title is "Huawei Manages to Make Smartphones Without American Chips"

But the article itself states: "While Huawei hasn’t stopped using American chips entirely, it has reduced its reliance on U.S. suppliers or eliminated U.S. chips in phones launched since May"

And it's graph shows significant usage of US chips.

I'm sure Huawei is trying it's best to reduce its dependence on US chips, and thanks to access to chips from the EU, Taiwan, JP, it likely will succeed. But I can't help but be annoyed at the thought that Taiwan and Japan are relying on the US to protect them from the same CCP they're short sightedly profiting from.

[idoubtit]

There is no contradiction. The title, "Huawei Manages to Make Smartphones Without American Chips", is confirmed by the content of the article, including a quote by an analyst: “When Huawei came out with this high-end phone—and this is its flagship—with no U.S. content, that made a pretty big statement.”

The title didn't claim that Huawei, for all of its phones, had not used any American chip. It claimed that some of its new phones don't use any.

Your claim that "it's (sic) graph shows significant usage of US chips" is wrong. The table shows that for every component that was built by an American firm, they have a non-American alternative. Sometimes American providers are still listed, but the table is not quantitative, so the American chips part still used may be lower than 5%, for all we know after reading this.

[freddie_mercury]

The headline doesn't say they've made every single one of their smartphones without US parts.

You are reading something into the headline that it doesn't claim.

It doesn't contradict that story.....

Headline: Huawei Manages to Make Smartphones Without American Chips

The second sentence from the story: Huawei’s latest phone, which it unveiled in September—the Mate 30 with a curved display and wide-angle cameras that competes with Apple Inc.’s iPhone 11—contained no U.S. parts, according to an analysis by UBS and Fomalhaut Techno Solutions, a Japanese technology lab that took the device apart to inspect its insides.

[k_sze]

I think that if you frame it in the context of “class war”, it all makes sense. E.g. there is the Taiwan as corporate interests and Taiwan the people.

The corporate interests don’t give a rat’s ass about who has ultimate sovereignty, or democracy, or human rights. They can’t. It’s systematic and by-design. Corporations only care about profit. As long as there is profit to be made, they wouldn’t care if Taiwan gets annexed by Mainland China.

The people, however, may have different ideas.

So we’re not really talking about “short-sightedness” here. We’re talking about different entities of vastly different wealth and power, within the same country, having different perspectives on the same “problem”. The rich and powerful have liberty; they probably have wealth hidden away and companies set up in multiple countries. They can have plan Bs, lots of them. The rest of the population, however, is stuck.

[martinpw]

That doesn't seem like a contradiction. The newer phones do not have American chips, which matches the headline that says they have managed to make phones without these chips.

[throw754325]

Not everyone in Japan or Taiwan are anti-China. From what I’ve seen, most big businesses that make money from China are often pro-China.

[siavosh]

I’m sure a lot of this will be up for friendly discussions in the next bilateral trade call.

[tomhoward]

Your comment has some validity, but the title doesn't seem false; the key point is that Huawei's new flagship product, the Mate 30...

> contained no U.S. parts, according to an analysis by UBS and Fomalhaut Techno Solution

[onepointsixC]

I missed the statement on the Mate 30. I guess the chart combined with other parts of the article threw me off.