Senior review blogger Chen Zhen once again raised the issue of placing a mobile phone holder in the car in the Xiaomi SUV test video, causing controversy. Some netizens pointed out that at present, almost all cars are equipped with mobile phone holders, questioning Chen Zhen's arguments. Subsequently, netizens dug up the black history of Chen Zhen's 7-day detention in 2005 for speeding on the Beijing Second Ring Road, and the focus of the discussion shifted.
Loading...
What happened
On April 23, Chen Zhen and mobile phone blogger Jin Scissors jointly launched a live video review of Xiaomi Su7. In the live broadcast, Chen Zhen once again questioned whether some parts of the SUV were compliant, and pointed out that it was illegal to place a mobile phone holder in the car. He said that according to traffic regulations, the mobile phone holder placed on the dashboard will affect the driver's vision and is not in accordance with the regulations.
However, this argument caused controversy as soon as it came out. Many netizens said that they did not understand the basis behind Chen Zhen's remarks, and also questioned his statement itself. Netizens pointed out that at present, almost all models in China are equipped with mobile phone holders, and if mobile phone holders are really illegal, then 99% of vehicles will be illegal.
Another netizen proposed that the mobile phone holder is placed under the instrument, far enough away from the driver to affect the driver's line of sight. In addition, Xiaomi also issued a statement in response, saying that all accessories in the SUV have passed relevant tests and all comply with the regulations. Xiaomi believes that Chen Zhen's remarks seem to be intended to "toughen" SUV products.
In addition to questioning the product itself, Chen Zhen's move will inevitably raise questions about his preconceptions or purposes. At the same time, some netizens investigated and found that Chen Zhen himself had a "black history" of illegal driving. In 2005, Chen Zhen was detained for seven days for speeding with a person on the Second Ring Road.
After this black history was exposed, the focus of public opinion also changed. Netizens have questioned that since Chen Zhen himself has also been "famous" for illegal driving, it is inevitable that it will be untenable to accuse others of whether their products are compliant.
Some netizens said that Chen Zhen may be in order to get more traffic and attention, so he keeps "singing the opposite" to find fault with Xiaomi products. But this move is no longer affordable for higher ethical standards. There are also opinions that Chen Zhen has long held prejudices about Xiaomi, and his motives may be selfish.
There is no doubt that Chen Zhen's argument has once again ignited discussions among netizens. However, with the exposure of his own "black history", the focus of public opinion has shifted from the product itself to questioning Chen's vibration machine and its purpose, intentionally or unintentionally. This is in line with the natural law of changes in online public opinion.
However, it remains to be further understood what kind of entanglement Chen Zhen has with Xiaomi, and he is the one who persistently expresses doubts about the Xiaomi brand. Generally speaking, the public opinion discussion has become more comprehensive and fair.
Netizens' opinions
In the face of Chen Zhen's voice, some netizens said: Chen Zhen is right! I remember that in the past, all the objects placed on the dashboard, including the mobile phone holder, had to be taken down during the annual inspection of the vehicle!
Some netizens said: If Xiaomi is not legal and non-compliant, then the suction cup mobile phone holder that Chen Zhen uses to shoot videos in the car every day is even more illegal, so Chen Zhen is knowing the law and breaking the law.
Some netizens said: The user pretends to be a user who violates the law. But as a car company, you can't leave the factory with or illegal accessories or provide illegal accessories.
At last
In the field of online public opinion, it is difficult for any argument to be fully recognized, and all aspects need to be further demonstrated and carefully considered. Chen Zhen's stance on questioning product compliance is itself doubtful, and he should not expect all others to agree. At the same time, as a public figure, his personal behavior must also bear a higher moral standard.
Regardless of whether there is any trouble between him and Xiaomi, it is difficult to be completely convincing for a long time to question a company for a long time. This turmoil has continued to expand from an expert's questioning of product quality to an incident in which the interests of all parties are intertwined in public opinion discussions. And netizens digging Chen Zhenhei's history also reflects the public's attention to the character of public figures.
In the Internet era, any person or enterprise needs to face an all-round and multi-angle scrutiny. It is precisely this kind of multi-party participation and judgment that makes the online public opinion environment increasingly mature and fair. It is believed that with more information disclosure, the public will be able to form a more comprehensive and neutral view.