It can be seen as one of a series of recent absurd dramas in the American political and business circles.
The cause of the incident was first a rumor that the e-commerce giant Amazon
Amazon plans to "kindly" mark the tariff costs on its product pages so that consumers can see at a glance: "Look, the rice cooker you bought was made in China, and $30 of it is the 'patriotic tax' collected by the Trump administration!" As soon as the news came out, the White House was furious, denouncing Amazon for "engaging in political hostility" and even accusing it of "colluding with Chinese propaganda agencies." White House spokeswoman Carolyn Levitt
(Karoline Leavitt) specifically mentioned that Amazon "cooperated with Chinese propaganda organizations" in an attempt to strengthen the political motivation of its allegations, although without providing any specific evidence.
Unexpectedly, Amazon was so unethical and acted so quickly. Its response was a slap in the face at the speed of light. An Amazon spokesperson said that they were not responsible for this. The spokesperson clarified that this idea was only for the sub-brand Amazon Haul.
(Compared to Temu
The team discussed this internally, but never planned to implement it on the main site, and no relevant functions were actually implemented. In fact, when the White House opened fire, Amazon had not even written a line of code - the so-called "tariff labeling" was not launched at all, and the Trump administration took action upon hearing the news, which was purely "seeking the enemy in the void", which was a bit like seeing enemies everywhere.
The Trump administration has imposed tariffs of up to 145% on China, and has also imposed additional taxes of varying degrees on other trading partners. These policies have directly pushed up the prices of imported goods, and consumers are complaining. If Amazon really discloses the cost of tariffs, it would be like throwing the price increase bill on the government: "Well, the products are expensive, you can't blame me, it's the White House that's collecting protection money!"
White House spokeswoman Caroline Levitt
Leavitt's speech is a "logical genius". What? "Amazon is only marking tariffs now? Come on, why didn't they mark them when inflation reached its highest level in nearly 40 years under the Biden administration?" What a good trick of "surrounding Joe to save Donald Trump" - using Biden to divert conflicts and hinting at Amazon's "double standards". The White House's actions are like a student who failed an exam and pointed at his deskmate and shouted: "He didn't pass last time either!"
Of course Biden also has something to say. What kind of team am I leading? The main cause of inflation at that time was the disruption of the supply chain after the epidemic. Trump, you are purely asking for trouble by starting a tariff war. You don't have the ability to do that.
Levitt also held up Amazon CEO Bezos
However, isn’t it said that 70% of the products on Amazon come from China? Your accusation is similar to the CEO of McDonald’s holding a vegetable salad and calling on everyone to eat healthily.
The White House's fuss over an unconfirmed piece of news is intriguing. If Amazon's public lobbying on the impact of its policies on commodity prices is considered "hostile behavior," then does the weather forecast reminding people to bring an umbrella count as "opposing sunny days"? This reminds me of Trump's famous quote, "Fake
News”, but this time the guns turned to enterprises, using hearsay as a target. In essence, the White House’s accusations against Amazon are a combination of political games and public opinion control: on the one hand, the Trump administration needs to divert public grievances caused by high tariffs to avoid affecting its support rate; on the other hand,
The "politicization" label is used to suppress old rival Bezos and maintain the legitimacy of his trade protection policies.
Amazon’s response was a textbook “crisis PR”: I neither acknowledge the plan nor offend the government, and by the way, I advertised my own sub-brand “Super Low Price Zone”. After all, if Amazon insists on labeling tariffs, it may lose government support (such as AWS).
contracts), offending Trump is likely to cause trouble, and "luxury packages" such as antitrust investigations and tax audits may come to you, while to appease consumers, all you need to say is "Dear, we are always on your side."
This farce exposed the embarrassing situation of related companies: under Trump's tariff policy, if they raise prices, they will be criticized by American consumers, if they do not raise prices, they will not make any profit, and may even lose money; if they disclose the cost of goods and directly show the impact of tariffs on prices, they will be labeled as "politically hostile" by the Trump administration. Amazon's "Schrödinger's tariff labeling", Trump vs. Bezos, perfectly interprets what it means to be "two men in a dilemma".
On a deeper level, this storm is a struggle between "information transparency" and "political narrative". The government hopes that the public will attribute the price increase to "corporate greed" or "external threats" rather than its own policies; companies are trying to find a balance between the two sides.
"Visualization" is essentially educating consumers: the cost of political decisions will ultimately be borne by you. It is hard to say whether this transparency or controversy itself can force Trump to adjust his policies, but it will definitely exacerbate the division in American society. The White House characterized Amazon's business decision as
"Hostile behavior" is like Don Quixote fighting windmills - it not only exposes the unpopularity of Trump's tariff policy, but also highlights the current US politicians' lack of ideas.
#特朗普就职百日 #SEC推迟多个现货ETF审批 #币安Alpha上新
