文 | 张冉燃 杨朝鸿 公共信息不能被算法"静音"，权威声音也不应在平台"若隐若现"。主流媒体发布的政策解读、民生资讯 等承载公共价值的内容，既关系公共知情权的有效实现，也关系社会共识的充分凝聚。作为信息传播的 枢纽之一，平台应主动校准内容管理的价值导向，为这类权威信息开辟畅通传播通道，确保关乎公共利 益的内容顺畅、高效地触达公众，更好履行其职责。■ 随着技术演进和社会期待提升，平台需要建立更精细、更具区分度的内容治理体系，既牢牢守住规范秩 序的底线，更努力攀达主流价值传播的高线。 具体而言，平台应为主流媒体等权威信源建立专属识别和保障机制，明确政策解读、民生资讯等公共信 息的内容审核标准，避免模糊规则、算法误判对这类内容的传播造成阻碍。同时，完善信息传播的反馈 与申诉机制，对主流媒体报道内容的限流、屏蔽等操作，应及时出具明确的合规依据并保障申诉通道畅 通，让公共信息的传播路径清晰可溯、顺畅无阻。 近日，深圳新闻网在某社交平台发布的电动车新规视频一度被标记为"仅账号可见"，平台方未说明违规 原因，后续又恢复其正常传播。平台屏蔽主流媒体报道的事件不止一次，凸显了公共信息可能被算法、 社区规则等不当拦截的现实风险 ...

企业、名人容忍相关的模仿和玩梗是出于"情分"，但认为有侵权风险，不愿容忍而选择最低成本的投诉 来维权，则是一种"本分"。在这一过程中，平台内容治理不能总因为怕麻烦先下架视频，最后落得企 业"里外不是人"。用透明公正的标准充分核查与说理，积极受理被投诉者的申诉等等，平台能做的事有 很多，关键是，必须克制住"先下架内容"的冲动，慎用"先下架内容"的权限。 （文章来源：南方都市报） 近年来，类似的名人模仿现象在网络上常见，是否涉嫌名誉权侵权的关键焦点就是，有没有侮辱和丑化 行为并造成一定后果。可以说，村支书在视频被投诉下架后，借助农话题模糊焦点、偷换概念，确实不 地道，但他当初对雷军的模仿视频是否"侵犯名誉权"，也同样存在争议。被投诉视频中，村支书多是在 模仿其语气、话术表达和风格等，该行为是否存在侮辱和丑化，又是否对小米公司造成了实质的侵害后 果，只有走法律途径才能下定论。 不过，类似纠纷大多没有走到对簿公堂那一步，而是通过平台解决。但显然，面对内容是否侵犯名誉权 的争议，平台恐怕只能调解，而调解的方式如果仅是告知用户"被投诉"并下架视频，必然不能解答疑 惑。还有媒体发现，近来一名以模仿雷军风格来卖红薯的博主，也 ...

Group 1 - Douyin officially announced the trial implementation of the "Douyin Community Legal Industry Convention" to enhance the quality of legal content and regulate the dissemination of legal-related content [1][2] - The convention includes two main aspects: account qualification standards and content management standards, aimed at improving platform governance rules and measures for handling violations [1][2] Group 2 - The convention encourages legal content creators to complete the platform's legal professional qualification certification before publishing professional legal service content [2] - It prohibits accounts without platform qualification certification from publishing legal service-related content and from implying they have legal practice backgrounds [2] - The convention also bans impersonation of legal experts, practicing lawyers, and judicial personnel, as well as the use of forged or altered legal credentials to register or upgrade accounts [2]

Core Viewpoint - Douyin announced the trial implementation of the "Douyin Community Legal Industry Convention" to enhance the quality of legal content on the platform and regulate the dissemination of legal information [1][2]. Group 1: Account Qualification Standards - The platform encourages legal creators to complete legal professional qualification certification before publishing legal service content [4]. - It prohibits accounts without certification from publishing legal service content or implying they have legal qualifications [4][2]. - The platform bans impersonation of legal professionals and the use of forged legal documents to register or upgrade accounts [4][2]. Group 2: Content Management Standards - The platform promotes the publication of objective and neutral legal knowledge to provide users with high-quality legal content [5]. - It prohibits the dissemination of false or misleading legal information, including distorted laws and fabricated policies [6][8]. - The platform forbids providing illegal guidance or services, such as evading legal obligations or promoting illegal collection practices [8][9]. Group 3: Prohibited Legal Services - The platform bans misleading users through free consultations that lead to paid legal services [9]. - It prohibits the use of fabricated cases or exaggerated claims to induce contracts [9]. - The platform restricts the promotion of unqualified legal products and the manipulation of accounts for misleading public judgment [10]. Group 4: Penalties for Violations - Violations of the governance norms may result in warnings, content restrictions, account suspensions, or permanent bans depending on the severity and frequency of the violations [10].

Core Viewpoint - The resolution of content governance lies not only in responsibility allocation and technical optimization but also in shaping a healthy public opinion ecosystem. Platforms should actively guide the production and dissemination of quality content rather than merely acting as "post-deletion machines" [3][26]. Group 1: Current Governance Challenges - The central internet authority has been conducting "Clear and Bright" actions targeting misinformation from self-media, malicious marketing in short videos, and the misuse of AI technology [4]. - The responsibility boundaries of platforms have become increasingly prominent, with issues such as low violation costs for individual users and the disparity between societal expectations and governance capabilities complicating content review efforts [5][7]. - The responsibility for content review is difficult to ascertain, as platforms face significant challenges in managing vast amounts of user-generated content, which lacks the clear contractual obligations seen in e-commerce [8][9][10]. Group 2: Real-World Dilemmas - The sheer volume of content generated daily makes it nearly impossible for platforms to pre-screen all potentially harmful information, leading to a management gap [13]. - The low cost of individual violations encourages risky behavior among users, as the consequences for them are minimal compared to the significant penalties faced by merchants in e-commerce [14][15]. - There is a mismatch between the high expectations placed on platforms by society and their actual capabilities, leading to a "high responsibility, weak means" paradox [16][18]. Group 3: Path to Resolution - A shift from "single-point accountability" to "layered responsibility" is necessary, distributing accountability among individuals, platforms, and society [22]. - Increasing the cost of individual violations and enhancing traceability through improved user identification and behavior monitoring can help mitigate risks [23]. - Platforms should adopt a proactive approach to governance, focusing on "prevention" rather than "post-incident response" to reduce the spread of harmful content [25]. - The ultimate goal of governance should be to cultivate a healthy public opinion ecosystem, where quality content is promoted and becomes mainstream, rather than merely eliminating violations [26].

Core Insights - Douyin's life service has launched a special action to combat illegal promotion of medical and beauty services in live streaming, resulting in significant enforcement outcomes [1] Group 1: Regulatory Actions - Over 23,000 violators have had their live streaming group buying permissions suspended for more than 30 days, with 605 individuals banned for 180 days due to severe violations [1] - More than 106,000 live streaming rooms have been interrupted due to illegal promotions [1] Group 2: Violations and Tactics - Some influencers have used disguised terms, misleading speech, comment section guidance, and background boards to bypass platform regulations, promoting banned or restricted products and services such as "UK enhancement," "water light needle," "photonic skin rejuvenation," "eyebrow washing," and "laser pigment removal" [1] - These actions not only violate relevant laws and regulations but also severely breach platform rules, negatively impacting consumer experience [1] Group 3: Risk Management - In the first half of the year, the platform established a risk identification system and conducted special rectification actions, addressing violations from 1,517 medical beauty businesses [1]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the ongoing "Clear and Bright" campaign by the Central Cyberspace Administration of China, which targets misinformation, malicious marketing in short videos, and the misuse of AI technology, highlighting the challenges of content regulation on digital platforms [2][3]. Group 1: Responsibility and Governance - The article emphasizes the need to clarify responsibility attribution in digital spaces, particularly in content review, where different platforms have varying responsibilities [4][5]. - Major internet platforms have faced legal scrutiny for allowing false information and inflammatory content to proliferate, indicating a need for stricter content governance [4][6]. - The distinction between e-commerce platforms and content platforms is highlighted, with e-commerce platforms having clearer responsibility structures compared to content platforms, which face challenges due to the decentralized nature of user-generated content [6][7]. Group 2: Challenges in Content Regulation - Content platforms struggle with the sheer volume and diversity of information, making it nearly impossible to pre-screen all content effectively [9][10]. - The low cost of individual user violations leads to a lack of accountability, as users can easily create new accounts to continue posting harmful content after being banned [10][11]. - There is a significant asymmetry between the responsibilities placed on platforms and the powers they possess to enforce compliance, leading to platforms often being blamed for user misconduct [11][12]. Group 3: The Dilemma of Content Review - Platforms face a dilemma in content review, where overly strict measures may alienate users, while lenient policies can lead to the spread of harmful information [13][14]. - Public expectations for platforms to swiftly identify and remove harmful content often exceed the technical capabilities of these platforms, creating a gap between societal demands and operational realities [14][15]. Group 4: Pathways to Resolution - The article suggests a shift from a model of "single-point accountability" to a "layered responsibility" approach, distributing accountability among individuals, platforms, and society [17][18]. - Increasing the cost of individual violations and enhancing traceability of user actions are proposed as methods to improve accountability [18][19]. - The need for algorithmic transparency and the development of multi-objective algorithms that balance user engagement with social responsibility is emphasized [20]. - A proactive approach to content regulation, focusing on prevention rather than reaction, is recommended to mitigate the spread of harmful content [21][22]. - Finally, fostering a healthy discourse ecosystem where platforms actively promote quality content rather than merely reacting to violations is deemed essential for long-term governance success [22].

Core Insights - Douyin E-commerce has identified misleading content related to "video shooting techniques" and "store management strategies" that could misguide creators and merchants, potentially affecting their operational direction and wasting time [1][3] - The platform has taken action by removing over 50,000 pieces of content related to improper operational techniques in the past six months and plans to enhance monitoring and governance of such content [3] Group 1 - Douyin E-commerce discovered that some creators and merchants are sharing content that is difficult to verify and may not be effective [1] - Misleading content often exaggerates claims and fabricates cases, which can lead to misguided operational strategies for creators and merchants [1] - The platform aims to maintain a healthy creative environment and protect the legitimate rights of creators and merchants [3] Group 2 - Over the last six months, Douyin E-commerce has disposed of more than 50,000 pieces of content related to improper operational techniques [3] - The platform will continue to strengthen monitoring and governance against improper operational techniques and tools [3] - The focus is on ensuring that the rights of creators and merchants are not infringed upon [3]

Core Points - Douban announced on August 7, 2025, that it has addressed issues related to fake accounts and AI-generated spam content on its platform [1] - The platform identified a significant number of accounts engaging in "account farming" behavior, which resulted in the posting of a large volume of spam content across various film and book entries [1] - A total of 2,272 accounts were processed for violations, leading to the removal of 348,674 short reviews and 5,701 long reviews deemed as spam [1] Company Actions - Douban emphasized its commitment to maintaining the authenticity of ratings and reviews by combining technology and manual oversight [1] - The company encouraged users to report any misuse of platform features or spam content to enhance community integrity [1] - Douban reiterated that the credibility of user accounts in film ratings is based on real user data, and spam content will be identified and removed by algorithms, with violators facing penalties [1]

Core Viewpoint - Douyin is actively addressing the issue of malicious marketing accounts that distort information and disrupt the platform's content ecosystem and algorithm recommendations [1] Group 1: Regulatory Measures - Douyin has established new regulations targeting ten types of violations by marketing accounts [1] - A health score mechanism for accounts has been introduced, which will influence content recommendation and monetization rights based on the account's health score [1] - The platform is implementing a tiered penalty system that includes reduced content recommendations and restrictions on monetization rights [1] Group 2: Community Engagement - Douyin encourages user feedback and suggestions during the trial phase of these governance regulations [1]