A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
Articles like this make it difficult to understand when the don’t explain the context. How far does one US dollar actually go in India? I mean, I can look up the conversion rate, but I don’t know how much it’s actually worth to a person there.
Like, what’s the average weekly or monthly living cost for someone in India?
It's in the story:
"The potential annual earnings from working eight hours a day can be as high as $5,000 - a figure that far surpasses India's per capita income of around $3,000."
yes, there's some context, but I think it would be helpful if there was a bit finer context than just an annual income statement-- if they were more granular.
These kind of articles feel sort of... dehumanizing? I mean, the whole thing is supposed to be about how these gig jobs are possibly changing these peoples' lives, but it talks mostly about the companies themselves and how they work, and the people who use the services, hardly mentioning the actual workers, referring to them mostly as statistics.
I dunno, maybe it's just me.
You are right. This story does feel like a fluff piece to highlight the corporation.
well... not exactly?
ok, so, the headline directly addresses the pay rate, the workers, and a direct affect, but the article focuses almost entirely on the corporations and consumerist element of the story, only mentioning the workers as a statistic until the end, where a worker experience is only passingly mentioned for those who may have actually bothered to stick around to the end of the article, with no commentary or context offered afterward.
it's from Reuters, which is a well-reputed news source from Germany. I don't dispute the facts in the article. But it feels very... sterile and clinical? Maybe that's a cultural thing. I'm American and I expect a bit more humanism in my reporting. But for a story that's supposed to be about how people are being affected by some new service, the article surprisingly avoids much of any reporting on those very pekoe and how they're being affected by this new service that they are, themselves, now running. Instead, it focuses on (generally) the companies that run the services and the users of those services.
But, beyond simply the coldness of the reporting (which, again, maybe that just a cultural thing), I find it kind of disturbing how much it seems to ignore the workers involved, an entire class of people, and the people who should really be the focus of the whole story.