The Centre for the Study of the Great Panda Protection of China has recently issued a statement rejecting and rejecting the “culture of rice”. It was reported that the media, in part using panda heat, deliberately clipped images and produced inflammatory titles such as “The National Treasures” to attract referrals; organized a group of fans to “show their names” and fabricated rumours in live broadcasts to collect “rewards”; and, at the same time, individual fans tore each other up and vilify their breeders, seriously disrupting the normal work of the protection centres.
The main victims of the Great Panda Circle are the breeders and scientists at the protection centres. The breeder carefully planned the panda ' s diet and food, while rumours and incitement were used as targets for malicious speculation and humiliation. Some researchers are mentally depressed because of unfounded accusations and are unable to concentrate on their work, and individual staff members need even psychological treatment.
The “circle” acts as “hate” in the name of “love”, making real protection the victim of cyber-violence. The mutual attacks between the “circles” have led to the seizure of space for public discussion based on rumours of false pretences and frivolous arguments, leading to the marginalization of real scientific issues and the misunderstanding of the public about the seriousness and professionalism of animal protection. This would be tantamount to a bottom draw for a large panda protection enterprise that requires social understanding and support.
Love in the food ring, without restraint and restraint, can become a subjective cognitive disorder, a closed message of intense exclusion and a loss of sense. As the athletes say, those who do harm in the name of “love” have never only hurt the athletes themselves, even our teams, teammates, friends, family members. The same applies to the Big Panda Circle.
The “circle” is the product of a two-way reaction between the current psychosocial state and the technological change in the media. In the digital age, the “circle” provides identity and “emotional values”, while the increasingly sophisticated platform for categorizing technology enables the construction of information-closed “circles” on the Internet. In order to cure the `dinner', it would be useful to use the `drug for the disease' at these two points.
The media, which runs the “food business”, must understand that the capture of the “innocent” flow will eventually lead to its own consequences. And the netizens need to know that true love should be a show of restraint, not a word of emotion. The big panda protection business requires real work and effort. It is better to learn more about expertise than to overstretch emotions in the enthusiasts.
At the technical level, the Platform should assume responsibility, and while “user self-regulation” was important, it was equally important to optimize algorithm recommendations. Giving priority to rational and objective discussions so that diverse and constructive voices can be heard can technically reduce the space that feeds on the “circle”.