Group 1 - The article highlights the tragic case of a doctor who committed suicide due to online harassment, raising concerns about the impact of cyberbullying on individuals' lives [1] - It discusses the evolution of online violence, noting that it now includes not only direct insults but also moral coercion and the invasion of privacy [2][3] - The article emphasizes the broad reach of online violence, where victims can be ordinary individuals rather than just public figures, and the reasons for harassment have shifted from factual errors to personal disagreements [2] Group 2 - The phenomenon of group attacks in online violence is noted, where initial harassment by a few can escalate into a collective frenzy, fueled by shared sentiments among users [2] - The article points out that perpetrators often exploit the anonymity of the internet, making it difficult to hold them accountable for their actions [4][7] - It mentions the increasing prevalence of organized online harassment, where individuals or groups may manipulate public sentiment for personal gain, creating a "customized online violence" industry [4][9] Group 3 - The article discusses the challenges in addressing online violence, including the difficulty in gaining attention for clarifications after the initial outrage and the anonymity of perpetrators [7][8] - It highlights the psychological impact of online violence, which can be as severe as physical violence, yet often results in inadequate legal consequences for offenders [8] - The need for improved regulations and accountability from online platforms is emphasized, suggesting that they should take more proactive measures to prevent and address online violence [9]

Core Viewpoint - Platforms must recognize that online violence governance should not merely be a superficial response to regulatory demands, but should be an internalized and proactive governance awareness, as it is crucial for the future ecosystem of the platform [1][6]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions - The Central Cyberspace Administration of China has issued a notice urging local internet departments and platforms to strengthen the rectification of the "opening box" issue, emphasizing a "zero tolerance" approach [2]. - The rise of "opening box" incidents, which involve severe online harassment and privacy violations, has prompted regulatory bodies to take serious action against these new forms of online violence [2][3]. Group 2: Platform Responsibilities - Platforms have failed in three main areas: promoting controversial content through their information push mechanisms, having loopholes in user identity verification, and delayed responses to complaints, which allows harmful information to spread [3]. - The need for platforms to prioritize the prevention of online violence, such as "opening box" incidents, is becoming increasingly urgent as public tolerance for such behavior has reached its limit [3]. Group 3: Proactive Measures - Platforms should not limit their responsibilities to merely notifying and deleting harmful content but should focus on prevention and intervention, establishing a proactive governance model [4][5]. - The implementation of technologies like natural language processing and behavior monitoring is essential for platforms to intercept harmful content before it spreads [5]. Group 4: Victim Support - Many victims face high barriers to asserting their rights on platforms, making it crucial for platforms to create quick reporting channels for "opening box" incidents and prioritize responses to victim requests [5]. - The introduction of features like "anti-violence mode" by platforms indicates a step towards better governance, but further actions are needed to effectively combat online violence [5].