Whether it is deleted posts or mechanized replies, it cannot meet the requirements of social governance under the condition of media integration.
A netizen suggested on the mass message board of Ningbo Minsheng e-point, that legislation prohibit teachers from giving their children make-up lessons, on the grounds that it was "unfair" to do so. The staff of the Ningbo Municipal Education Bureau said that the post was indeed true and that it was also their reply. However, he also said that the netizens' posts also explained their attitude, and the Education Bureau did not have legislative power.
That's the end of the matter, it's over. But new questions have emerged, and the online post has been deleted at some point. According to reports, China Ningbo Network Minsheng e-Diantong Mass Message Board is the Ningbo Network People's Livelihood Service Platform, since its launch in September 2013, with the purpose of serving the people's livelihood and solving problems as the orientation, an effective closed-loop solution mechanism for netizens' demands has been established, and the acceptance and response rate of various departments has been more than 98%.
In other words, this is an official platform for ordinary people to speak out. Regardless of whether the identity of this netizen is a parent, whether his words are reasonable or not, whether his suggestions are in line with reality, whether they are feasible, as long as they do not violate the law, do not violate public order and good customs, and do not violate the restrictive provisions of laws and regulations related to network management, he has the right to publish his opinions here. Because it is the right of citizens to make suggestions, Ningbo officials set up this platform to provide a good communication channel for citizens to speak out.
It's unclear who deleted the post, but the deletion didn't help solve the problem. On the one hand, it will affect the performance of the legitimate rights and interests of the people, on the other hand, it will make people question that the official only wants to hear the voices they want to hear, which will reduce the credibility of the platform and cause communication obstacles. In fact, the original intention of setting up this platform should be to more conveniently connect with cyberspace and more effectively receive the most direct and grounded voice from the side of the people. From the perspective of service, between and their own service objects, if there is a situation of poor information, it will greatly increase the cost of communication and reduce administrative efficiency.
Of course, the netizen's suggestion is sharp, illogical, and ridiculous. Although many media outlets call it "parent" when they retweet it, I think it is more like a kind of funny. However, even if it is a funny word, it is still worth taking seriously when it is posted on the publicly established people's livelihood platform. From the screenshot, the Education Bureau answered according to the usual standard language. Of course, there is nothing wrong with saying this, but there should be a clearer and more accurate attitude towards the questions of netizens. The Education Bureau just replied to a reply like "I know", and did not solve the problem of netizens, and this problem will always exist.
On the other hand, the Education Bureau did not say, but netizens helped to answer. Although the netizens' answers are reasonable, they are not authoritative. This is like the handling of network public opinion, the voice should not be spoken, leaving a gap in public opinion, which is equivalent to giving up the initiative of public opinion. Fortunately, some netizens made up for the official statement. Unfortunately, this filler was also deleted along with it.
In the internet age, people can easily establish direct connections between people, and the same is true between people and institutions. The network is a virtual dimension that blurs space and time, and once a problem arises, it will persist if it is not solved. The Internet also has technical means such as screenshots and storage, even if it is deleted, it will be re-turned out, so avoidance is inevitable.
This puts forward higher requirements for the governance capabilities of relevant departments. Perhaps according to the previous standards, the reply of the Education Bureau has been very polite. Today, when it comes to the Internet, such replies are too standardized and procedural, and there is no information content. In his book Understanding the Medium, McLuhan mentioned that media with low information content will inevitably cause wide participation from the audience, and they will supplement the information themselves to promote communication. Therefore, whether it is deleted posts or mechanized replies, it cannot meet the requirements of social governance under the condition of media integration.
Red Star News special commentator Li Xiaopeng
Edited by Yin Shuguang
Red Star Review Submission Email: [email protected]
(Download Red Star News, there are prizes for the newspaper!) ）
