In this incident, both of them chose to speak out at the first time and questioned the official, which was praised and praised by many netizens and even attracted the attention of many fans.
However, after the incident reversed, many bloggers questioned them on the Internet, questioning that they, as the hosts of official media, failed to do their independent investigation and objective and accurate professionalism. But blindly please netizens and choose what everyone likes to hear. In order to get rid of the flow, standing in line with conscience, inciting the masses' emotions has a bad influence on the situation.
Because this incident involves a criminal case, it is not convenient for officials to disclose specific information, but these media people are as ignorant as the media when they understand the handling process of this special case and criminal case. Because I know that there will be traffic when questioning the official, I will guide the rhythm to places that everyone likes.
In particular, they shouted for the local release of law enforcement videos, knowing that they did not meet the relevant regulations, but repeatedly questioned them. Previously, the other party's statement on the Internet was completely ignored. Insufficient evidence, listening to one person's words, without on-the-spot interviews and investigations, took it for granted and lost the reputation of the official media.
For this question, Cheng Hao once refuted in the video, saying that his report was based on Ye Ting's report letter with her handprint, and said that he would bear legal responsibility. Moreover, my own voice is audited, and it is my duty to follow hot spots. I have the certificate to do this.
It seems that this is not his fault, but in hot events, these official media do have the suspicion of rhythm. After being beaten in the face, they deleted the video, but did not report the media objectively, putting investigation and evidence collection first.
Kaifeng Ye Ting case, because of the seriousness and complexity of the case, it can be seen from the time of investigation that such cases have already exceeded the local jurisdiction. However, it is not difficult to imagine that there are inevitably some flaws in the process of grassroots law enforcement. It is enough to exercise the right of supervision and demand standardized handling of cases. However, many media and self-media have infinitely magnified these flaws and even questioned the official fairness.