Editor's note: The original text of this article has been deleted.
Source: Xinhua Daily Telegraph (ID: xhmrdxwx)
Author: Yi Yangang, Xinhua Daily Telegraph commentator
Several leaders stood in front of the camera, and the medical staff who returned from aiding Hubei stood in the back row... Recently, a picture of "leaders taking a photo with the first batch of medical staff aiding Hubei in Tangshan stealing the limelight" went viral on the internet, and it was criticized for "not seeing you on the frontlines of the epidemic, but you're the first to grab credit and attention." Yesterday, Tangshan Kailuan General Hospital in Hebei responded that the photo was taken at an isolation point, and the steps were the dividing line. According to regulations, leaders cannot go up the steps, and medical staff cannot go down the steps.
At first glance, this seems to be another case of "quickly responding to doubts and salvaging one's image." However, other photos provided by netizens quickly "exposed" the relevant personnel—these medical staff had all walked down the steps and taken close-up photos with others in different positions. Responding to public opinion doubts with a poorly executed "lying response" is even more inappropriate than "leaders stealing the limelight" and further damages one's image.
The special background of the epidemic has created a public opinion field that is easier to focus on. In the past two months, most people have been staying at home, keeping their phones close by, and have become accustomed to obtaining information from social media platforms. When they see news, especially related to the epidemic, they will easily make comments, making it easy for an incident to become a hot topic of public opinion. If the response is slow or if the usual "ostrich policy" is adopted, it is highly likely that a "small matter" will escalate.
On the other hand, by responding to public opinion supervision promptly and honestly, and taking it seriously to make improvements, not only can the problem itself be solved, but also the understanding and support of the public can be gained, and public opinion can be calmed. Taking the series of comments from Xinhua Daily Telegraph as an example, there are many such cases: we pointed out that it was unreasonable for the epidemic prevention personnel to slap a family of three playing mahjong in Xiaochang County, Hubei Province, and local officials apologized twice in person; we questioned that "10 health certificates cannot compare to an outdated health code," and the authorities in Hainan Province coordinated to resolve the issue overnight; we criticized the "charging for quarantine of the builders of Huoshenshan Hospital," and the local government quickly refunded the fees and held officials accountable; we discovered that in a certain area of Tianjin, "a fee of 2000 yuan must be paid to a third party for a work resumption certificate," and the district leaders visited the company overnight to apologize and hold officials accountable...
The epidemic is an extremely special test, with many unpredictable situations and problems. The more so, the more it tests the capabilities of local governments, departments, and units. There is a case that is worthy of being written into textbooks: on the afternoon of March 11th, it was pointed out that the Qingshan District of Wuhan was using sanitation vehicles to sell meat to residents. Three hours later, the Steel City Garden Management Committee responded and admitted their mistake through the government's official Weibo account, and established six working groups to apologize to each household in person. Subsequently, the Qingshan District Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision announced the dismissal of the relevant responsible persons and initiated an investigation. Early the next morning, the Wuhan Municipal Commission for Discipline Inspection announced the initiation of a disciplinary investigation into the deputy district mayor of Qingshan District.
Comparing the response to this case with the "leaders stealing the limelight" incident in Tangshan, the difference is clear. In fact, the vast majority of the public are reasonable. When negative news arises, if the relevant departments and parties respond in a timely manner, clarify misunderstandings, publicly apologize for their responsibilities, and quickly resolve problems, most crises can be resolved smoothly. What is to be feared is that some people, out of habit, lack a sense of responsibility, dare not face problems directly, refuse to admit mistakes, and instead shift blame or even blatantly lie to deceive the public, making what was originally not complicated become difficult to handle.
In the era of mobile internet, the ways in which the public obtains information and reaches the truth are becoming increasingly diverse, and people's opinions on public affairs are becoming more diverse. This is a new situation that social governance must face. Looking at it from a different perspective, this new situation also provides new ideas and tools for social governance. With a sense of awe, timely grasp the public's demands and social concerns, make good use of commonly used social media, short videos, and other new platforms, change one's mindset, and when dealing with doubts and other governance challenges, one will be more adept.