← the record
AIAAIC-1807

Jiuquan school forces 160 vocational students to annotate data for Baidu

Over 160 vocational students at a school in Jiuquan, China, were reportedly forced to annotate data for Baidu as part of their graduation requirements, prompting concerns about the exploitation of vocational students by the technology company. What happened In March 2023, Baidu established a data annotation center in collaboration with a vocational school in Jiuquan, Gansu province, one of China's poorest regions. Reports indicate that some 160 students were coerced into annotating data for Baidu as a condition for graduating. Students were threatened with not receiving their degrees if they did not participate. Why it happened The partnership between Baidu and the vocational school appears to be part of a broader trend in China in which technology companies recruit student interns for data labeling tasks. With student interns often paid less than minimum wage and not requir ing social security benefits , the practice allows companies to significantly reduce labour costs. The local government reportedly provided Baidu with 30 million yuan (approximately USD 4.1 million) to support the initiative, further incentivising the exploitation of student labour. Baidu said it was not aware of the situation. What it means The situation highlights serious ethical concerns regarding labour practices at Baidu and across China's AI industry. It also highlights the need for improved supply chain management at Baidu, and the greater scrutiny of labour conditions in the technology industry as a whole. System 🤖 Unknown Developer: Baidu Country: China Sector: Education Purpose: Generate text Technology: Generative AI; Machine learning Issue: E mpl oym ent

Date it happened
2022-01-01
Where this came from
Share this incident
XLinkedInFacebookWhatsAppEmail
Attribution

This incident was imported from AIAAIC and is used under CC BY-SA 4.0. Our additions to it — the structured fields, the translation, the checks against other reports — are published under the same licence.

This is a record of what was reported, not a finding that anyone broke the law. If it names your organisation and you believe it is wrong, the corrections process is free and open to everyone.