The right to sell the network is a network of violent discourse

 Nine Yang, v. If true, then the site has indeed abused its oversight of the enterprise is to sell consumers the right to speak, and then formed a network of violence. Kau Yang to use

communication between consumers and businesses as a third-party media platform, the complainant could have been exposed site However, once the commercial interests of the public opinion melted into its mixed into the right, then not only unable to protect consumer interests, it will infringe the rights of the enterprise. In this regard, the site organizers and related departments should strengthen management, and monitoring site to do legitimate business. For businesses, if subjected to the network of violence, should be the same as the September sun, stand out, and can not compromise, so as not to play a role in fueling such violence. Any product can not be 100% perfect, and Only in this way, the public's legitimate right to speak in order to be protected in order to cool down the network of violence and not be unlimited zooming. (Wang Wei)

CCTV came to light, Because the site is called the one hand, consumer rights, on the other hand to carry out advertising business, then how harmony of the two businesses together? If its advertising clients have been consumer complaints, the site can be fair and impartial manner its exposure? I think the answer is no.

Recently, CCTV to threaten their contributions, and the site is denied this, saying the video is the result of exposure CCTV clip, does not reflect the entire event process. Who is in need further investigation. This incident once again we had to focus violence from the network.