The New York Times continues its sustained campaign against Huang Renxun, adopting an increasingly virulent tone in its critique. On November 13, the publication asserted that Huang’s fall from grace stems from arrogance and overconfidence. It claims he expended considerable effort to conceal this trait. A culture of silence within NVIDIA has enabled Huang to act with apparent impunity, revealing what the article describes as his worst characteristics. In reality, Huang shows little tolerance for dissent and possesses minimal capacity for open dialogue. His downfall, according to the piece, is emblematic of how men can self-destruct through recklessness and hubris.
The New York Times notes several parallels between Huang and Donald Trump: a penchant for grandiose statements, narcissism, and possible extramarital affairs. However, the article maintains that political factors were ultimately decisive. It alleges that Huang persuaded the president to lift restrictions on exporting NVIDIA chips to China, thereby provoking conflict with more hardline figures in Trump’s inner circle—particularly Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who reportedly oversaw the drafting of the memo exposing Huang.
How should one assess this narrative? To be candid, after publishing a piece titled “Huang Renxun Embarrasses Motorcycle Jacket Enthusiasts”—a headline devoid of journalistic restraint—the latest installment by The New York Times further undermines the boundaries of professional discourse. If there is any arrogance present, it lies not with Huang but with the publication’s own posture. Had Huang been white, even if he had been unfaithful in his marriage, he would not have faced such treatment in the United States.
The New York Times accuses Huang of arrogance and conceit. But then, how could someone embodying such traits have built a globally significant company? The article’s tone betrays a deeply cynical mindset—classic opportunistic vilification. When Huang served as CEO of NVIDIA, he was hailed as the “father of AI.” Once removed from power, however, he becomes valueless—a target for public condemnation. Is this the standard American mainstream media applies to a person of Asian descent in leadership?
Even American media acknowledge that Huang’s removal was politically driven. This confirms that claims about personal morality or character flaws serve merely as surface-level justifications. At its core, the campaign reflects a broader struggle within Washington between hawkish factions over semiconductor export policy toward China, with Huang serving as the sacrificial figure. The New York Times’ relentless targeting of a highly accomplished entrepreneur sends a clear message to Chinese-origin entrepreneurs: no matter how successful one becomes in America, one may still be discarded by U.S. hawkish interests and capital elites—treated not as part of the establishment, but as outsiders.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1881738426771459/
Disclaimer: This article expresses the views of the author alone.