Hu is irreparable, standing completely on the opposite side of the party and the people.

[hot news] 时间:2024-03-02 04:43:09 来源:Breaking news website 作者:{typename type="name"/} 点击:150次


Recently,hot news social media has set off a fierce discussion on the movie "I am a Alpine", and the argument is Hu Xijin, the head of the wall.He actually criticized the netizen who criticized the film into "extreme left", which attracted widespread attention.

This storm is not only about the question of a movie, but also involves deep -seated issues such as freedom of speech, diversification and public opinion environment.With a consistent tough attitude, Hu Xijin labeled the critics on the "extreme left". However, he himself avoided the party spirit issues involved in the film in the article, which caused many people to question.

As a senior media person who has served in the official media for many years, whether Hu Xijin's practice is in line with the ethics of a professional media person, which has caused more controversy.In the article, he emphasized that "criticism is normal", but the critics are "extreme left" below. This contradictory logic makes people can't help thinking about his real motivation.


What is even more unexpected is that Hu Xijin seemed to avoid talking about the party's content in the film in the article, but only mentioned "the light of human nature."Whether this choice is reasonable, especially when considering the content of the film, it has caused more discussions.It is a retired party member who should pay more attention to the cautious speech, but Hu Xijin has made the critics "extremely left". This abnormal speech is confusing.

Some voices on social media pointed out that Hu Xijin's remarks showed a illusion of diversification and tolerance, but in fact, he was engaged in monopoly and monopoly.This behavior has triggered a deep reflection on the freedom of speech and the environment of public opinion, especially in a society that emphasizes multiple voices, this behavior seems incompatible.

Some of Hu Xijin's comments are considered a threat to freedom of speech and diversification. He has all the critics as "extreme left". This is not only a rejection of diversification, but also a violation of freedom of speech.The quality of the film should be judged by the audience, not blindly labeled.

In the discussion of the movie "I'm Gao Mountain", some questioning sounds were tagged on "extreme left", and even accused of hostile forces.This behavior caused concerns about freedom of speech. Some people think that this is suppressing different voices, making people in the system dare not criticize the movie.


What is even more incredible is that there may be other purposes behind some malicious comments.Some accounts may be pursuing traffic and obtaining attention by making disputes; others may use movies to achieve some political purpose.This phenomenon makes people question the authenticity of online remarks, and also puts forward higher requirements for the fairness of online reviews.

In general, this controversy about the movie "I am a High Mountain" is not only a debate about artistic quality, but also a thinking about freedom of speech, diversification and public opinion environment.This controversy has triggered the review of social values, so that people can't help thinking, whether freedom of speech has really been fully guaranteed in our society, and whether multiple sounds can be fully respected.Perhaps this dispute is not only an evaluation of a movie, but also a profound reflection on the entire society.

In the controversy of the movie "I'm Gao Mountain", the emergence of some malicious comments made people question the authenticity of online speech.Some people point out that some accounts may be pursuing traffic and get attention through manufacturing disputes.This commercial speech not only caused the discussion to lose its objectivity, but also seriously affected the judgment of the real quality of the film.

For such a phenomenon, some voices in social media believe that this is a destruction of film comments.Some accounts are either from distant overseas, or they are marketing numbers that chase traffic to women's topics. They use "fraud" to make film reviews, provoking the "people who eat melon" who have not watched the film at all.This behavior not only misleads the audience, but also destroys the healthy ecology of online remarks.


The movie "I'm Takayama" itself is a moving work, vividly tells the story of President Zhang Guimei through the language of film art.However, the malicious context is dedicated and comprehensive, so that this film is flooded, deconstructed, and even defiled.The positive energy conveyed by the film was distorted by some people, which led the public to some misunderstandings about it.

Regarding such an online speech, the filmmakers have called on the audience to publish real comments and accept Critical criticism after watching the film.Sincere communication is good for every Chinese film and every Chinese filmmaker.However, if the noise of losing conscience, the hard -working Chinese filmmakers can't afford it, and Chinese films who are recovering are also unbearable.The negative impact of this online speech is not limited to a movie, but also a kind of harm to the entire industry.

At the same time, some observer pointed out that the quality of the film should be objective, rather than being influenced by a momentary network hotspot and emotion.The film is an art, and it should be reviewed by the audience under a rational and objective attitude.Otherwise, too emotional remarks will only make real excellent works lose fair evaluation, and even affect the normal creative enthusiasm of filmmakers.

In the article, Hu Xijin will all be "extreme left". This is not only a rejection of diversification, but also a violation of freedom of speech.The quality of the film should be judged by the audience, not blindly labeled.This suppression of different sounds has caused deep torture of freedom of speech.


In film reviews and social media, some people's questions about the film have also triggered reflection on the entire social values.Freedom, diversification, and tolerance, these are the concepts that the civilized society should pursue.However, when these ideas are used and distorted by some people to satisfy their own interests, social progress and civilization are threatened.

In general, this controversy about the movie "I am a High Mountain" is not only a debate about artistic quality, but also a thinking about freedom of speech, diversification and public opinion environment.This controversy has become a microcosm of a social phenomenon, allowing people to think about how should the balance between freedom of speech and diverse voices be achieved in the information age.Perhaps this dispute is not only an evaluation of a movie, but also a profound reflection on social progress.

(责任编辑:{typename type="name"/})

相关内容
精彩推荐
热门点击
友情链接