Original title: Internet platform by "irrigation" can not wash themselves.
Source: Guangming Daily
Recently, the Hornets' nest, known for its tourism strategy, was "poked" Hornets' nest. There is an article from the media platform, "Valuation of 17.5 billion travel unicorns, is a zombie and naval ghost city? "Directed at Ma Ma travel network suspected of plagiarism and fraud.
After a brief silence, the honeycomb issued a statement acknowledging alleged false comments on its account and clearing up its position. On the other hand, the honeycomb issued a ruthless remark that would not allow any individual or institution to call its users "zombies" or "navy" to distort factual statements and organised attacks that have been verified. Act and adopt legal means of safeguarding rights.
Such a statement, at least in the ordinary consumer seems to be somewhat split. In the face of doubt, the first thing to clarify is the fact that since there are accounts suspected of false comments, then the amount of these false comments is about how many, what is the source? Is it the autonomous behavior of a few users, or the "organized" behavior of the platform? These problems concern the reputation of the enterprise and the ecology of the industry. If the objectivity of the problem is ambiguous, but focus on the questioner's motivation, will only stir up the water, wash oneself unclear, but also to the health of the industry ecology.
It's not hard to look at the general feedback on the Internet to find that the proliferation of navy on the travel website platform is not new news. However, this conclusion has been more in the fragmentation of user perception, rather than exposed by large data means. In this case, the article from the media some "title party", but it does provide a large number of data and cases, in addition to a large number of comments suspected of plagiarism, honeycomb pride in user travel notes there are still suspected robot accounts speculation, marketing numbers were re-pushed and other phenomena. If these "organized fraud" were true, it would undoubtedly do more harm and deserve more attention than accusing skeptics of "organized attacks".
After "poking" the honeycomb incident, many industry insiders came forward to say that the early development of Internet companies used crawlers or machines to gather information to enrich comments and other content, which is the underlying rules that platforms are using. Perhaps this explains the fierce reaction of the honeycomb: Why did anyone point a finger at me when everybody did that? And perhaps the subtext of "organized attack" is, is this a deliberate discredit of competitors?
Just as the proliferation of platforms and Marines has become the norm, people have been accustomed to confronting and abusing each other among competing Internet platform companies over the years. Competition in the new format of the Internet is indeed fierce, many business model similar to the enterprise is eager to win or lose in a short time, often not choose in the product, service and other aspects of intensive farming, but often evolved into one side of capital, expansion, plagiarism and mutual reporting. When someone pointed out the problem, the enterprise is more accustomed to digging "behind the scenes", counterattack accusers of impure motives. In every battle, the consumers who should have the most say are mostly the crowd.
So, from the consumer's standpoint, it is not just the honeycomb websites that hope to be poked this time, but the ecology of the industry as a whole. The so-called "irrigation" latent rules should be cleared up as soon as possible, and enterprises should provide consumers with more and more transparent choices through benign competition. In the longer term, Chinese Internet companies have been expected to highlight the new business civilization, and people hope that they will not be immersed in all kinds of internal friction.
It is hard to decide whether there is any "organization" behind the critics. Shopping malls, like battlefields, are sometimes beyond our imagination. But as I said before, the motivation and insights of the skeptics are not the most important. The focus is on whether the persistent disease of the "organized navy" exists and how to deal with it. If the honeycomb can really stand up straight and keep the bottom line, then the so-called "organized attack" will only humiliate itself and will not escape legal punishment.
(author: Jing Yishan, Department of media commentator)
Waonews is a news media from China, with hundreds of translations, rolling updates China News, hoping to get the likes of foreign netizens