Meng: Li Hui is not good at the beginning, how could it be?

The author's blog has always focused on the industry, namely, marketing, public relations and corporate affairs, some of the forefront of issues and trends, belong to business people, rather than the literati. But since the feeling and made a story and cultural events related to the http://www.aliyun.com/zixun/aggregation/39815.html "> Blog article and was reprinted by Sohu Culture channel, it attracted a lot of anonymous abuse." For such Shang, five Maoists, I just laughed it off. Li Hui is a a of the elite class, only to a man without a political background ruthless hand, this can be sure. Turn a comment written by Mr. Meng.

Meng: Li Hui should take the responsibility

Li Hui is disappointing. Now, he decided to escape from his questioning Wen Huai sand of the monstrous waves, walked away. The evidence is that Li Hui published another article on February 24: "Why should I question Wen Huai sha"? He in the text to shirk responsibility, in addition to the "query" part of the responsibility of the sand to some cultural celebrities, but also pushed to other reporters: "The newspaper colleagues encouraged me, must be their own pursuit and questioning as soon as possible public." "It can be said that although the question of the article is my personal writing, but from a different point of view, it is a group of media people's feelings and reflection of the central embodiment." Li Hui declared: "Anyway, my task has been completed." I will no longer write a new opinion on this matter unless it is necessary. I will go back to the existing writing program. The search for more truth can be done by interested other journalists based on relevant clues. "I think that Li Hui's rhetoric is a reflection."

First, Li Hui from the beginning to now, for the text Huai Sha's denunciation has been limited to the "query", that is, has not been confirmed by the argument or truth, and then come to a clear and accurate conclusions, how can this stop?

Second, only "query", many people have been involved in the text of the sand Monstrous lambaste wave, has been the text Huai Sha sentenced to "public opinion of the death penalty." Li Hui announced that "my task has been completed", is not responsible for the Wen Huai Sha, but also for Li Hui's own irresponsible.

Third, because the incident has been in the "questioning" state, from the public opinion of netizens, many people look forward to the truth. To declare "My task is done" without obtaining a specific truth is not true in sentiment and reason. This is also irresponsible for the audience.

In short, the audience welcomes the question because the audience demands a definite statement, i.e. truth or conclusion. From February 12 in the Beijing Evening News published "Wen Huai Sha, the true age of the ancient Chinese master of the Absurd Life", by February 18, the real age of three cross-examination and other: Li waved questioning Wen Huai sha, and then to February 24 published "Why I want to question Wen Huai sha", Hui for Wen Huai Sha's denunciation, has been clearly unmistakable in the "questioning" 's state. It is now clear that Li Hui has violated journalists ' professional ethics or minimum conduct. In other words, he made a big taboo in journalism.

Truth is the life of journalism, and also the life of journalist profession. Li Hui, a journalist of the Chinese Communist Party's central mouthpiece People's Daily, should be aware that the principle of "proletarian journalist" is "seeking truth from facts". Any person or thing that is disputed, divided, or has a different opinion or ambiguity must be heard and not listened to. The opinion of any person must be carefully interviewed, carefully verified, in order to be accurate. Therefore, the publication of the idea of Huai Sha, should be in advance to interview the text Huai Sha, listen to the text Huai Sha for the relevant facts of the statement, but Li Hui did not. As a journalist, this should not be unfair. But Li Hui is unwilling to stop. Wen Huai-sha to Li Hui's "query" to respond, Li Hui openly and very definitely said: "I hereby solemnly declare: I have never seen the Wen Huai sha, but also did not interview him, whether it is the years of the dog or rooster." ”

Wen Huai Sha said, if Li Hui to find his communication, "I will communicate with him, I think I have this generosity." Li Hui's response is: "Anyway, my task has been completed." I will no longer write a new opinion on this matter unless it is necessary. I will go back to the existing writing program. As a journalist, Li Hui communicates with Wen Huai Sha is a matter of course. Of course, if the work is busy, there is no time to discuss the relevant issues with the Huai Sha, but the hands have second-hand information, such as the text Huai Sha on the relevant issues of the formal rhetoric is not. Now it seems that Li Hui did not. The view "Why I want to question Wen Huai sha", Li Hui all the basis is hearsay word, he can only "question".

Li Hui should be the finish, not disappointing.

                                                                                                                                                                                             (written in 2009-02-25)