Will Li Li censor CCTV news?

After 2020, censorship is really getting stricter and stricter, and now many social hot news are not allowed to be released. Only send the latest news about the epidemic situation of social figures, otherwise the news of an accident somewhere will be locked and the complaint will be fruitless.

I just want to ask, is this audit really appropriate? It's all livelihood news. From beginning to end, it is analyzed by social figures and experts. Obviously, there are no politicians. It is said that there is a so-called "current political content." They also said that it is recommended to contribute through a special account, and it is not recommended for individuals to upload. However, these videos all have livelihood news released by the media, and they all have reliable sources. Why not send it? Every customer service has the same answer. Since the second half of 20 19, twenty or thirty optimized audits have been proposed, but no progress has been made. To borrow the words of "Buqishan people": What is this "suggestion"? If you don't listen to your advice, you won't be allowed to pass the trial. This is clearly an "order"!

(This section was updated in July, 20021year) Once there is a large-scale epidemic in China, the audit will become more stringent. For example, news such as "The suspected hidden transmission route in Zhangjiajie has not been discovered", "Yibin 1 confirmed case in Sichuan" and "Will the epidemic situation in Nanjing get out of control or continue to deteriorate" only hosted population broadcast, data analysis, expert interpretation and social figures (even just the report on "nucleic acid detection" of citizens in people's livelihood news programs), and there were no figures and pictures such as "holding a press conference on epidemic prevention and control".

When making a complaint, the general customer service said after verification: "At present, due to the unsuitable overall materials, due to various reasons, the manuscript has not passed the review. Please understand. " The customer service wants to get everyone's understanding, and we all refuse to understand. Then the customer service came up and asked for my number. In March 2020, due to the sudden tightening of the audit, I contacted three times by phone (the cut-off point was March 6, 2020), and every time the staff answered the same thing: "Because the epidemic is a topic of general concern, in order to ensure accuracy, the official number of the media is generally recommended to contribute." This is not a political topic at all. Why can't I post it? Shouldn't everyone be equal in commenting on this kind of social livelihood and hot spot analysis video? So I refused all customer service requests to leave my phone number. According to the usual practice, it must be transferred to the so-called advanced customer service.

After verification, the senior customer service will reply "Hello, after verification, your manuscript does contain current political content. I suggest you go to the Xuanfa and Creative Conference to learn more about it. If you really need to upload, please verify the relevant qualifications and try to deliver it, subject to the audit results. " In other words, all epidemic news, customer service will refuse to try it with "current political content", without further explanation. If you really want to "subject to the audit results", what is the use of customer service? What happened to the audit? Is it really appropriate to refuse the news related to the epidemic to be audited with the attitude of "killing one thousand by mistake and not letting one go"? When senior customer service encounters the so-called "current political content", it is basically a waste of time. Due to various reasons, the UP owner thinks that the audit result shall prevail, thus rejecting the further appeal of the UP owner.

From Shanghai to Chengdu and other places, the attitude of audit after the outbreak is basically the same. When Hebei and Jiangsu broke out, it was simply "one size fits all" and there was no audit. Sometimes even the previously approved ones are locked (even the press conference was deleted before the first upload). When complaining, everyone said that "the review is based on the objective judgment of the content of your manuscript". Is this called objective judgment? Even in 20021,Billie Billie updated the creative convention, and the customer service explained other contents to a certain extent when complaining, but for the so-called "current political content", Billie Billie still did not define "what is current political content" and asked people to check the law themselves. There are tens of thousands of comments about current political affairs under the announcement, which shows that their videos are obviously positive energy and everyone can send them. Why can't I? However, except for the censorship of other social news in June 5438 +2020 10, the censorship standards of other "current political content" have not been optimized. There is no announcement or notice about the video review rules of the epidemic. In essence, we share videos to see more people's views and analysis on social and people's livelihood hotspots. After all, this epidemic has already been searched.

As someone mentioned in the announcement, it is better to refine this rule. At least, what is the content of current politics should be clearly defined in the Convention. There should be clear standards to distinguish current political videos, videos involving current politics and videos not involving current politics. According to the current censorship attitude, people's livelihood news, which is widely concerned in the domestic media, will be judged as the so-called "current political content". Will people's livelihood news such as "someone has an accident at home" and "a major car accident somewhere" be stopped?

(This section was updated at 5438+0 on June 2022) By the end of 20021the beginning of 2022, the situation had changed again. Not only did people's livelihood news related to the epidemic fail to pass the trial, but even every other month or so, a dozen or twenty manuscripts that had been published and tried in the early days were locked under the pretext of "current political content", which were basically expired information from half a month to a year ago, out of spectrum, and still failed to appeal. As far as I know, after 65438+ 10, 14, a large number of cultural ups were released. The main reaction was that a large number of such manuscripts were removed from the shelves and similar videos could not be tried again, and the complaints were fruitless. Take me as an example. Whenever I complain about any customer service, all customer service will give the following reply to the manuscript that has not passed the review or has not been removed from the shelf: "Hello, according to the instructions of my superiors, I am currently suspending personal uploading of current political content and news information-related manuscripts, so please forgive the inconvenience caused to you. News information includes reports and comments on political, economic, military and diplomatic affairs, as well as reports and comments on social emergencies. For related announcements, please refer to/blackboard/activity-shizhengmanager.html ". If you further complain about why the manuscript overdue for more than six months is still off the shelf, the customer service will basically explain that the manuscript has been checked back, and your manuscript involves political violations, so unqualified users are not recommended to contribute. If you further question why the expired information also belongs to the current political content, the customer service will explain that it is judged according to the specific content of the manuscript, regardless of timeliness.

This kind of audit and customer service attitude itself has multiple problems. First, does the audit really understand what is "current political content and news information"? News videos overdue for more than six months have become old news, and the submission date shows that the news content displayed in this video has no timeliness; Moreover, the manuscript related to the epidemic, whether it is the early news mixed editing, or directly dealing with the news related to the social level, or even the material selected before uploading, is only interpreted by ordinary people (or experts) at the social level, that is to say, the manuscript does not involve politics, and naturally "current political content" is impossible to talk about. No matter what the timeliness is, the content of current affairs is overdue for a long time. How can this be ridiculous? Whether it is the creation of conventions, blaring announcements and notices or other regulations, this statement is unfounded. This video was reviewed in advance because of its positive energy and value, and was locked under the pretext of "current political content" a few months later. It's ridiculous! Secondly, the Bili Bili Convention clearly stipulates that "Bili Bili prohibits personal accounts from publishing current political content", rather than "Bili Bili prohibits personal accounts from publishing or reprinting current political content and social news information", and even "Buqi Mountain people" hold the same view. Moreover, some UP owners, including me, use the social and people's livelihood news videos released by the media as their own materials to create news clips related to the epidemic to record the process and feelings since the outbreak of the epidemic, which belongs to secondary creation and is not the so-called "publishing news information" in itself. Third, the concept of "current politics" in the audit is different from that defined by CCTV, whether it is timeliness or auditing. In CCTV, real current events refer to political reports, which are particularly solemn and serious. There will be no horse racing when CCTV news programs broadcast current events. However, in the mile, any event of general concern may be the so-called "current affairs politics." Fourth, issues related to epidemics may take into account certain issues, such as dissemination and accuracy. Is it "one size fits all" to prohibit personal uploading just to avoid problems? 202 1 Many major events happened, such as the rainstorm in Henan, which was also an unexpected event with great influence, wide news sources and wide spread. Many UP owners, including me, also forwarded a lot of the latest live news and news related to the rainstorm in Henan for the convenience of more people. These news sources are reliable and can be reviewed at one time in nine situations. At that time, there was no "one-size-fits-all" review of the news related to the rainstorm in southern Henan. Fifth, from the beginning of the epidemic to the present, there has never been any notice that "individual user accounts are not allowed to publish news information related to the epidemic". However, although the copyright of the video related to the Winter Olympics has been strictly examined recently, a notice was sent in the station in advance, and the customer service will give a positive reply when complaining, which is well founded. Sixth, the current social and popular science news video review will be locked if it is slightly related to the epidemic. Whether it's Harbin, where three cats were euthanized with positive nucleic acid, Shanghai issued an epidemic prevention warning for postgraduate entrance examination: COVID-19's nucleic acid test should be conducted in Shanghai within 48 hours before the exam, which is not a temperature epidemic prevention or an isolated pet. Shijiazhuang, Hebei, where the epidemic prevention medical staff bowed to a distance in tears after the death of their family members, or COVID-19's epidemic prevention and control, how to prevent "person-to-person transmission", experts: items with viruses on the surface of the mail will be contagious. If these videos can pass the trial, the broadcast volume will definitely be higher.

Now the epidemic prevention and control should be refined, and the management of people from different regions cannot be simply "one size fits all"; Then, how can the censorship of people's livelihood news videos related to the epidemic be "one size fits all"?