Guangming Network commentator: Doctors live broadcast gynecological surgery, who gives "confidence"?

【Reading tips】Rizhao Central Hospital: Suspected live gynecological surgery was arrested Doctor is an anesthesiologist, and the police are investigating

Guangming Network Commentator: Yesterday (January 18), a briefing from the WeChat public account of the Donggang Branch of the Public Security Bureau of Rizhao City, Shandong Province, sent the topic of male doctors' live broadcast gynecological surgery to the list of hot topics on social networks.

According to the report, the bureau received a report from the public on the afternoon of the same day that a doctor suspected of broadcasting gynecological surgery footage on the Internet, so it immediately investigated the relevant personnel of the hospital involved. At present, the doctor involved has been arrested, and the case is under further investigation. Immediately after that, the network platform involved also responded that the live broadcast account involved had been permanently banned.

Judging from the screenshots of live videos circulating on the Internet and the revelations of netizens, the live broadcast content may be a male anesthesiologist secretly photographing her private parts in the case of unknown feelings to female patients. Live broadcast content without patient consent, highly pornographic content, and "rudimentary" shooting techniques are difficult to relate to legitimate live surgical broadcasts for the purpose of medical research and education.

Such a vulgar approach breaks through the basic value bottom line and the professional ethics bottom line, and is a naked violation of the privacy of patients. Although the police also reminded people not to re-disseminate relevant videos and pictures in the circular, with the fermentation of the incident, the re-dissemination of relevant content seems inevitable, and the parties will inevitably suffer secondary injuries. Even if the infringing live broadcast is deleted, it will be difficult to completely eliminate the impact of the incident on the parties for a period of time.

For a person with basic Internet survival experience, people default to having a proper judgment about basic yes and wrong, what can be done and what can not be done. Taking into account their professional status as doctors, they correspond to a higher level of education and cultural level, and let people determine their ability to distinguish. However, why did the doctors involved still commit such immoral and even legal acts?

It is difficult to say that the doctors involved made the choice of the privacy of the patients in the operating room live, without making any trade-offs between rights and responsibilities, including the possible consequences of their own actions and the deduction of whether this consequence can be afforded. Even if, as some have argued, the act was a whim of the doctor involved, this "whim" is also based on the aforementioned trade-offs and deductions, except that this trade-off and deduction did not occur at the time, and the conclusions drawn from this have become a subconscious, providing a basis for making the choice of live broadcasting.

Specifically, in a series of thinking activities such as weighing and deduction of the doctors involved, at least include the environmental atmosphere, rule tolerance, incentive-oriented perception and speculation of the selected live broadcast platform, as well as the prejudgment of risk coefficients and punishment red lines. Assuming that content that meets hormonal needs is encouraged and connived, leaking or consuming privacy brings a sudden increase in traffic and commercial benefits that can be smoothly realized, and the amount of live content is faced with an inefficient or even partially failed monitoring system, then under the "rational" calculation, what is a cost-effective choice seems obvious. Long-criticized chaos such as live broadcasting of people, secretly shooting flight attendants, and private uploading of unlocked surveillance videos can be classified as such.

If the doctor involved in the above incident violates the law, he will bear the legal consequences due. It is not intended to absolve him of responsibility here, but to show that in addition to condemning and punishing the individuals involved, the issue of governance of the new Internet format of online live broadcasting should receive more serious attention.

As some scholars have pointed out, in the Internet era, the traditional mode of transmission has been deconstructed, and the power of onlookers has been redistributed in the field of online live broadcasting. The coexistence of multiple live broadcast rooms, as well as the transmission form of most people watching a certain anchor at any time, makes the live broadcast ecology show the characteristics of cascading, concealment and wrong time, which poses a challenge to the original supervision methods and concepts.

In addition, the relationship between the online live broadcasting platform and the live broadcaster has in fact formed a community of interests, which determines the attitude of the live broadcasting platform to have reservations in supervision, which also overshadows the existing monitoring policy to a certain extent. In the online comments on related events, many netizens pointed out that the online platform party selectively grasped the scale in content moderation, tacitly agreeing that content that is conducive to drainage but actually does not comply with relevant regulations exists and spreads. It can be seen that the self-discipline of the platform has been alienated into self-obstacles.

For the endless and repeated prohibition of online live broadcast chaos, it is indeed necessary to strengthen supervision and law enforcement, strengthen the blacklist system to increase the illegal costs of live broadcasters, and the platform party should also effectively implement the main responsibility, standardize and improve the definition of the rules on privacy rights on the platform, and explore the use of new technologies such as artificial intelligence to reduce content review blind spots. More fundamentally, multiple subjects, including regulatory authorities, network platform parties, Internet users, social organizations, etc., reach a consensus on what is and how to achieve the ideal communication situation in the virtual live broadcast room, explore the formation of a collaborative governance model, and achieve dynamic balance under the guidance of clear rules.

(Please indicate the source of the reprint "Guangming Network", the author "Guangming Network Commentator")

[Previous] "Have you played X rounds" has a subtext

Source: Guangming Network