urban management bursts the balloon of store opening? it’s time to burst the prejudice of the group too
2024-09-11
한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina
□chen qi (jinggangshan university)
recently, a video went viral online in which a woman claimed that the urban management bureau, when dealing with business operations occupying the road, punctured the balloons in front of a newly opened store one by one, questioning the inhumane law enforcement of the urban management bureau, which sparked heated discussions. on september 11, the comprehensive administrative law enforcement bureau of jiashan county, jiaxing city, zhejiang province refuted the rumor, saying that the actual situation was that the store in question was worried that the balloons would explode during the removal, so it commissioned law enforcement personnel to help remove the store anniversary items that had been placed on the road for an extended period of time.
the story of helping the store to remove the anniversary items was distorted into forcibly puncturing the store's anniversary balloons. this is a distortion of the facts and a discredit to the urban management. during the spread of the video, many netizens were indignant and accused the urban management, believing that the urban management was too broad. what is even more thought-provoking is that after the official statement was issued to refute the rumor, some netizens still commented: "the store owner must have been coerced to say this," and they still intend to continue questioning.
there is nothing wrong with questioning, but pseudo-questions that ignore facts are worth being vigilant about. how to distinguish between questioning and pseudo-questions? the most critical point is that questioning can be eliminated with facts, while pseudo-questions may never be eliminated because they will continue to question the facts you use to eliminate them. in this incident, the official not only gave a detailed rumor-refuting statement, but also took out the surveillance video in the store. the video clearly showed that the owner said to the urban management: "i'm afraid of doing this, just help me get a pair of scissors to poke it out." this directly hit the facts that were previously questioned, but it still suffered doubts from some netizens. it is not an exaggeration to classify this kind of questioning that is not based on factual analysis, but on personal subjective opinions, as pseudo-questions.
by observing the performance of the public opinion field, we can find that pseudo-questioning has always had a strong discourse market. it was born from the dissolution of a certain kind of trust, and at the same time it is constantly dissolving the corresponding trust, and this vicious cycle continues. specifically, some people may have encountered incompetent urban management in reality, while others may have seen incompetent urban management in the news, so there is a split in the trust in the urban management group, which in turn leads to certain prejudices. when encountering an incident related to urban management again, the existing prejudice will play a role invisibly, coupled with the instigation of inflammatory pseudo-questioning theories, further deepening the prejudice against the urban management group. just like in this balloon puncture incident, the existing group prejudice turned "enthusiastic help" into "brutal law enforcement."
of course, it should also be pointed out that to break through group prejudice, it is not necessary to regard a certain group as good, but to separate the stereotype of the group from the individuals in it, and to treat and evaluate the matter objectively. it is a simple truth that there are good people and bad people in all walks of life, and of course they need to be treated differently. however, group prejudice always kills everyone with one stick, which can easily hurt the good part of the group. in addition, studies have pointed out that people tend to pay more attention to negative information about others and society, and the media also has such reporting preferences. this "biased exposure effect" makes the urban management group, which is closely related to the complicated affairs at the grassroots level, often the most likely to be accidentally "infected", resulting in the situation where good news does not go out, but bad news spreads thousands of miles.
when people criticize the urban management in hot public opinion events, what are they criticizing? are they really the parties involved? perhaps they are more criticizing an "imaginary enemy" that brings together many negative elements, a group that deviates from the normal evaluation range. in the end, the whip of group prejudice is whipped on specific innocent individuals. in addition, the author also found that many platforms now display ip addresses when commenting, so this phenomenon often occurs in the comment area. some netizens will say when responding to others: "men in xx are like this, or women in xx are like this." this similar critical logic raises dissatisfaction with individuals to prejudice against the group, and then returns to dissatisfaction with individuals from prejudice against the group. all these things often increase hostility and need to be vigilant and changed.
many times, it is not difficult to judge only the event itself. but the reality is that it is often difficult for people to focus only on the event itself without any divergence in the process, because people often have group biases that they themselves are not easy to detect. therefore, consciously avoiding one's existing wrong tendencies and clarifying the difference between groups and individuals can better prevent judgments from going astray and reduce accidental injuries to others.
