This article is from WeChat public account: tear nitrogen set (weiwuhui_com) , author: Wei Wu Hui II, title figure from: Oriental IC

One

As we all know, I am a teacher at Shanghai Jiaotong University.

This year, there was a doctor-patient conflict between Renji Hospital in Shanghai, and it was very violent. If you can’t remember, you can search again on the Internet to help remember.

But I don’t know if you know the fact that Renji Hospital belongs to Shanghai Jiaotong University. The full name of this hospital is Renji Hospital affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University. Therefore, the doctor at Renji Hospital and I are considered “colleagues”.

Now, I say this sentence: As a surrender, let me tell you what happened at that time.

Do you think it’s ridiculous?

Are you a media and communication college, do you know about Renji Hospital?

Similarly, in a company of 150,000 people, some people rely on their so-called “colleagues” status. What he told you may not necessarily be true.

In most cases, he knows a ghost.

Second

If I and the doctor at Renji Hospital have no contact with each other, and they are too far away, then I will tell another story.

The Oriental Morning Post on Shanghai Beach, before deciding to close the following year, there are rumors on the rivers and lakes: This newspaper is said to be closed next year.

Some media heard the wind and called to ask. The receiver was the director of the office, whoDidn’t hear it.

So, this was used by some as a rumor proof: Look, the head of the administrative department said nothing.

If I remember correctly, what kind of silly hat should there be, and I wrote a long circle of friends, saying that the director doesn’t care, do you guys know that they want to stop the rumors?

Sorry, really, such a thing, a director of an office really doesn’t know. Did not hear that does not mean no. I just do n’t know.

In most cases, that’s the same sentence, he knows a ghost.

Three

There is a kind of information, which I call “Three No Information”.

I have no author name, and no source. The so-called facts said by the author of the article, I do not know where it came from. Did he see it with his own eyes? Still listening to others? Who are others Third, there is no evidence, what happened to Zhangkou, but there is no evidence, not even a screenshot.

The spread of the three no-messages, I call it the “bathroom model”: I only hear their voices, but they ca n’t see them. In the clouds and fog, there are some dragons who do not see each other.

In the early years, no information was common in BBS. So I keep saying that the spread of BBS is a bathhouse spreading model.

Three no messages, chat in private, nothing. I never think that “rumors stop at the wise” is a word of wisdom. It is a hell if a society requires everyone to make a professional and prudent research on information when they communicate in private.

But if you take the three non-messages seriously and take them as arguments for serious discussion, this is called “media literacy deficiency.”

Yes, the article in “The Ten Questions about Li Case” is nothing.

It’s a ridiculous bunch of queens, taking the three no-messages as serious arguments to speak seriously.

By the way, the people who manipulate the communication have a routine of public opinion. Sanwu Information first threw it in the “bathroom”, and then found someone with a name to quote Sanwu Information to talk about it. After a round trip, the words of the mountain in the bathhouse had become a scrupulous upper stage. Of evidence. This routine is neither new nor unusual.

Li Case 10 asked Da V to wash the floor. Is this routine not easy to assert?

Four

Sometimes when you read a single article, you can find the flaws in it. And this flaw is enough to make you basically sure that this article is not worth it.

At that time, the very long and very professional article of Malaysia Airlines 370, even if you are a person who does not understand the terminology of the aviation industry, you can still find the flaws in it.

For example, the article said for a while that the aviation industry has a big secret that few people know. Turn around and say that this big secret is known to many pilots. This is how to slap yourself. If you can write such a text, don’t look at how many technical terms are used. IQ is limited.

There is a very strange logic: Even if Huawei responded that night with a part of apologizing to Li Hongyuan, you wouldn’t scold it?

When you read an article with such logic, the author’s logic ability to write the article is low, even if you have to show it, why not waste your time?

Yes, those who write such words are hostile to logic and have thrown out words like “law cannot be logical”.

Of course, the law speaks of evidence.

But “not allowed”?

Do you know what it means?

The media literacy, logical ability, and writing ability are all so poor that Ye Tan can’t bear to look straight.

Five

The reason why I divided yesterday’s article into two versions of Li Hongyuan 1.0 and Li Hongyuan 2.0 is that there are indeed two things, and of course I don’t deny that these two things are definitely related.

The premise of discussing matters is to cut things apart and not to talk together. Intentional agitation can be regarded as a cuckoo stick.

1.0, Li Hongyuan’s own experience, that matter is still quite fascinating. In San Wu ’s information, I ca n’t assert that it ’s a series of lies, but it can be regarded as a pretense, and it is right to let the situation develop and confirm or falsify it. (Maybe Here we will never wait that day) .

Back ten thousand steps, if all three have no information to sayIt ’s a fact, and it ’s not a secret that you have to hold down. Huawei ’s word is even more horrible: This is not a shocking secret. Do n’t you know what to explain?

This in turn shows that San Wu information is extremely suspicious, and the maximum attitude should be: to be tested.

Huawei’s follow-up on this matter. Whether it is knowing, Weibo or WeChat, all kinds of processing are visible facts. And my personal dissatisfaction lies in the fact that people seem to have treated it this way, and feel that there is no need for anger and justice.

It’s your turn to know how suffocating and desperate the so-called Complaint 404 is.

Six

Is there 1.0 Huawei vs Li Hongyuan, 2.0 Huawei vs public opinion, is there 3.0?

It turns out, yes. The previous ones are part of 3.0. To sum up, it is based on the response of “You sue me”, 3.0 has appeared. 3.0 is no longer silent, no longer suppression, but: washing the ground.

Since yesterday, a rhythm has emerged: it is about national justice. And someone published a high theory saying that the whole thing (Well, you see, churning shit sticks together) is a black publicist, with black hands behind it, Who must be who-you all should understand.

This bad text has been appreciated by Huawei Yu Chengdong and recommended to a large group.

Boss tastes nothing like this. However, it is also possible that it was not washed, and it was so poor that it had to be used reluctantly.

In response to this high theory, some people in the circle of friends say:

Media have rights and obligations, and report suspected violations based on facts.

If Huawei believes his rights have been harmed, we support his use of legal weapons to defend his rights, including suing People’s Network., Surging, Caixin and other black public relations agencies.

This also reflects the spirit of the rule of law where everyone is equal before the law.

Well said.

Seven

Yesterday, a reader left a message in my background message, saying that I rarely see such sharp articles, do I have a strong “irritation” mood?

Sorry, I ca n’t talk about it.

If there are a lot of defenses in that article, I won’t list them one by one. It is the world today and it is a last resort.

Some editors have abridged for reasons I appreciate (especially with two pictures) .

My anger, I candidly say that it started with that 2.0.

Similarly, I am also angry at my counseling. If there are too many unwritten words, I really want to write them.

So, for such a meeting, I deeply regret that I cannot physically go and interact with the speakers:

Hey, why do n’t you come to Jiaotong University to start just now?


This article is from the WeChat public account: set of pull nitrogen (weiwuhui_com) , Author: Wei Wu Hui II