Bad artists have been hit hard again.
Recently, the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television issued the "Notice on Strengthening the Management of Online Live Broadcasting and E-commerce Live Broadcasting", which specifically proposed that "effective measures should be taken not to provide public opportunities for artists who have violated the law and lost morality to appear in public and speak out, and to prevent and curb the spread of bad trends such as showing off wealth and worshiping gold and vulgar kitsch in the field of live broadcasting".
Why send documents? Because after the "Bad Artist Ban Order" in 2014, some bad artists arranged a "live streaming gold road" for themselves - now, this road is blocked.
Relevant Notice of the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television (Source: The official website of the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television)
< h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" ></h1>
In recent years, there have been many anti-heaven melons in the entertainment industry, and some chaos has even broken through the social bottom line.
In 2014, the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television issued an injunction, naming and banning unscrupulous artists who have committed illegal and criminal acts such as drug abuse and prostitution, and requiring all types of radio and television broadcasting institutions at all levels to stop broadcasting movies, television programs, network dramas, and micro-movies in which relevant personnel participate. For some time after the ban was issued, these people did disappear.
However, with the rise of new technologies and means, some bad artists have also targeted the "good opportunities" of live broadcasting, charity and other face-revealing faces, creating momentum for the comeback -
Ke Zhendong, who was once involved in drug scandals, was once hidden in the snow, and now plays live broadcasts on social platforms and "interacts intimately" with fans; Chen Yufan, who was also detained by the police for drug abuse, was recently exposed by the media to appear in a public welfare activity in China and "get along very well" with children;
Fan Bingbing, who was levied more than 800 million yuan in retroactive taxes and fines according to law two years ago, is currently active on major social platforms, appearing with an Internet celebrity in a live broadcast with goods, and winning more than 10 million sales in a few minutes;
Zhai Tianlin, who was sat on the academic fraud, Huang Haibo, who had a bad record of prostitution, or "half-kneeled to guide the showbiz juniors" in the blockbuster video, or because he "wore slippers and was not afraid of the heat" to help people to be on the news again.
As if a gust of wind blows, the old things are traceless, change the platform, and reproduce the rivers and lakes.
Regarding the new regulations on online live broadcasting issued by the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television, many netizens believe that artists with illegal and bad deeds such as drug abuse, prostitution, tax evasion, and counterfeiting must be forced to "go offline", and artists suspected of cheating, domestic violence, excessive speech and other private moral losses should also be included in the list of suspensions.
At present, the live streaming market is mixed, and Uncle Dao has written an article analyzing the routines and hidden corners. During this year's "Double 11", a well-known host was exposed to a live broadcast with goods refund rate of more than 70%, a popular talk show actor was exposed to the number of live broadcasts was seriously mixed, and some Internet celebrity anchor products were counterfeited.
According to the "Double 11" Consumer Rights Protection Public Opinion Analysis Report of the China Consumer Association, the slot points of live streaming with goods are mainly concentrated in two aspects: "celebrities with goods are suspected of brushing single fraud" and "low after-sales service satisfaction in celebrity live broadcast rooms". So, what kind of legal responsibility should these artists who fake goods with live broadcasts bear? Is it also counted as a bad deed?
And the live broadcast show, which is in urgent need of regulation, can no longer be mixed with illegal and immoral gold diggers, so that they can fish in muddy waters.
Live streaming has become a common practice. Image source: Network
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" > two </h1>
Some people say, is this too harsh?
Those who break the law and lose morality will have to pay a price. Star artists who appear in the public eye should bear the social responsibility matching their influence.
On the surface, the violation of law and morality in the literary and art circles is a private matter of individuals, but in fact it has a considerable impact on the social atmosphere. These star artists often have a large fan base, and their social influence may sometimes not be less than that of the media and some social organizations. In recent years, the rice circle culture has been criticized by public opinion many times, and behind these paranoid and even almost crazy behaviors, it also reflects that star artists have a non-negligible appeal to fans, especially young people.
Therefore, society has higher moral requirements for star artists, which is not excessive. In Chinese culture, the so-called private morality of public figures has never been a matter of individuals. Since you have to rely on fans and traffic to obtain revenue, you must also bear the social responsibility and moral responsibility corresponding to your own influence.
If we imagine that the tainted "idol" is illegal on the front foot and the back foot is turned around and is still famous and profitable, what is the orientation to people? The concept of right and wrong in this society will be distorted.
In this sense, the "ban order" is to set rules and benchmark the bottom line for the showbiz industry, and once it crosses the line, it must be prepared to bear serious consequences.
Of course, people expect provisions such as "do not provide public appearances and voice opportunities for artists who have violated the law and morality" in the document to further clarify the implementation rules. For example, how to accurately define "illegal and immoral" in order to be neither leaky nor expanded? Which channels count as "public appearances and voices"? What responsibilities should the respective platform assume? How do bad artists get a chance to reform themselves? I believe that after clarifying these, the policy will be better implemented.
Text/Point Cangju
Editing/Taboo