Someone has no bottom line for entertainment on the short video platform, and the account is banned by the whole platform. If you don't know who is talking about here, you can ad locum Understand the outline of the event of "Cat Cup" winter vacation.
I have followed the account of Maoyibei, whose style maintains the same tone and editing, exaggerated lines and tone, as well as the deliberate pursuit of hot spots. I also ended up being interested in his works after a time.
As a "former fan" who turned from curiosity to indifference and even boredom to his works, thanks to the recommendation of the platform algorithm, he "happened to observe" the whole process of winter vacation homework event fermentation, that is, "the first episode picked up the winter vacation homework" and "the second episode connected with the parents' forced ending". A few days ago, late at night, on station B, an apology video representing "the end of the third episode" was even flashed, but the account was banned by the whole platform the day after the apology video was sent.
If the winter vacation homework event is described in written form, just start with "I have a friend", and readers can roughly distinguish between the true and false; It is possible to achieve a "news effect" similar to that of the first episode video only when it starts with "our reporter". Those who said they were watching jokes at the beginning either took the opportunity to show their "IQ" or were "peers" of the video author. After all, the actual video is already "reporting" similar to the reporter's perspective, rather than "interpretation" of the overhead camera.
Is the ban on the whole platform too severe for the fabricator? If this is not the case, some people will imitate one after another. Once everyone revels and forgeries reach a consensus, the situation will be difficult to reverse. One example is the "Headline Party" which has become the norm.
Some people believe that such a punishment will only make other creators more astute and difficult to distinguish. Do people with such a view think it is bad to increase the cost of counterfeiting? Or don't you believe the eyes of the masses?
Some people said that everyone was making up jokes. Why did they punish her severely. Because the story was fabricated but not noted, the follow-up did not clarify, but continued to fabricate the sequel, trying to "close the loop". The fabricated event was widely spread as a rumor.
Want to know the difference between lying and rumor making? ChatGPT says:
- nature:
- Lying is a deliberate misrepresentation or concealment of facts by individuals or groups, which may be for personal interests, protection of others, avoidance of punishment and other purposes.
- Rumor making refers to the deliberate dissemination of false information with the purpose of misleading, slandering, inciting emotions or disturbing public order. It is usually not only for personal interests, but also has a broader social impact.
- Object:
- Lying is usually directed at specific individuals or situations in order to achieve personal goals or interests.
- Rumors may be aimed at a wide range of people, organizations or events, with the purpose of influencing public opinion or producing certain social effects.
- influence:
- The influence of lying is usually limited, which may be limited to specific individuals or situations, and may not have a greater impact on society.
- The influence of rumor making may be more extensive, because its purpose is to influence public opinions, emotions or social dynamics by spreading false information on a large scale.
- Motivation:
- The motivation for lying may be personal interests, self-protection or good intentions towards others, but it is usually based on personal motivation.
- The motive of rumor making may involve more extensive interests such as politics, economy and society, and even may be an organized behavior. There may be more complex motives and interests behind it.
ChatGPT
Others habitually dislike the public power to enforce the law, and have no brains to express their opposition. This kind of people can be ignored.
Today, when AIGC technology does not know where it will lead mankind, this case is likely to be a milestone event. If not severely punished, I'm afraid that future fabricators will not need to indicate that the content is purely fictitious, but that the author who tells the truth needs to declare: true events, such as fake replacement.