On the eve of the National People’s Congress in 2021, Li Dongsheng, a representative of the National People’s Congress, said in an interview: “Internet defamation is more common in recent years, which has caused great confusion and impact on the parties and the institutions involved.” Therefore, Li Dongsheng’s representative suggested: First, to improve relevant judicial interpretations, new regulations must be set in accordance with the information release model of social platforms such as WeChat and Weibo. Second, issue uniform judicial norms through case studies. Third, clarify the responsibilities of other social entities through legislation. For example, increase the management of real-name systems on online platforms; increase the cost of defamation of “marketing accounts”.
Legislation alone is not enough for many things. The key is the cost of law enforcement. Many people have heard the phrase “the law does not blame the public” as a way of criticizing law enforcement agencies and not doing personnel affairs. But if you really are in it, you will notice that many “small cases” and “small things” are difficult to provide enough manpower and material resources to solve one by one. In reality, petty theft is still the case, not to mention the massive amount of network information. Take Zhihu as an example. When I waited for the keyboard man to like mouth-heavy, I got dizzy when I started a government. When I saw someone replying to me with yin and yang, I couldn’t help but greet each other’s ancestors, or what “pink dog food” was. Take it well”. Playing Zhihu over the years has often been put on a completely different hat. I don’t know if I thought there was a group of people using my account. From a legal perspective, does this kind of baseless accusation or even abuse of me count as defamation? Of course it counts. But can everyone be punished? impossible. Even if you know that there will be some review mechanisms to actively delete unfriendly information, intelligent netizens can always maximize the yin and yang strangeness, and cannot fundamentally solve the problem of netizens spitting each other. As for the “marketing account” slander, I am curious: what is a marketing account? Register a Zhihu account to boast that Apple is awesome, is this a marketing account? Register an account to play China Invincible on Douyin. Is this a marketing account? Mainstream media register a platform account and use Wang Bingbing to drain traffic all day long. Is this a marketing account? There is no way to accurately define this gadget, and everything can be marketed. Therefore, how do you legislate to clarify responsibilities? There is no way to define the “subject” of the marketing account. Of course, it does not mean that some slander and rumors on the Internet can only be ignored. What really should be managed well is when a rumor spreads at an incredible speed, does it belong to the self-published behavior of netizens, or is it the “manipulation” behind it. You should remember that there was a so-called “Chinese boy beating a foreign child” a while ago. At that time, some of the “big size” obviously played a role in spreading the spread. It turned out that the reverse was reversed. Those “large” either pretended to be deaf or dumb, or when nothing happened, and the original rumors were not punished! The above link is that some netizens are more honest, investigating how this matter fermented, and who played the role of “giving the flames”. Can we be more truthful about these numbers? Breaking the chain of interests behind this and digging out some interested parties with obvious impure motives is the basis for preventing the expansion of certain slander behaviors and even affecting the three views of netizens.