Core Viewpoint - The article investigates the chaotic practices of MCN (Multi-Channel Network) institutions in the context of the booming traffic economy, highlighting their unethical methods to manipulate online content for profit [2][3]. Group 1: MCN Institutions and Lowbrow Content - Some MCN institutions are actively planning and promoting lowbrow content to drive profits, utilizing scripted designs and character packaging to standardize "borderline" performances [3][10]. - The phenomenon of group live streaming, or "tuanbo," often features suggestive dance performances and provocative clothing, which are designed to entice viewers to give tips [4][5][8]. - Investigations reveal that many group live streaming accounts are linked to specific MCN institutions, indicating a systematic approach to producing lowbrow content [8][9]. Group 2: Audience Manipulation and Engagement - Group live streaming incorporates interactive elements that encourage viewer engagement and tipping, such as provocative performances and suggestive interactions [5][6][10]. - The use of suggestive dance routines and audience-triggered actions, like throwing oversized inflatable balls at female hosts, is common to enhance viewer excitement and increase tips [5][6]. Group 3: Regulatory and Ethical Concerns - Experts express concern that the prevalence of lowbrow content in live streaming could harm the industry's reputation and negatively influence younger audiences [10][11]. - Regulatory bodies have begun to address these issues, with proposed guidelines that prohibit MCN institutions from engaging in or promoting lowbrow content [11].

Group 1 - Price transmission and circulation are crucial for the efficiency of the national unified market, with 97.5% of commodity and service prices determined by the market [2][3] - Recent years have seen a rare phenomenon of continuously low prices in China, with the CPI index hovering around 1% since March 2023, negatively impacting economic growth and consumer vitality [2][3] - The central government has emphasized the need for a "reasonable recovery of prices" to counteract low price expectations [2] Group 2 - The traditional price formation mechanism struggles to explain the current low price phenomenon, as factors like monetary supply and commodity prices have limited explanatory power [3] - The digital economy and service sector have increasingly influenced price formation, complicating the price transmission mechanism [3][4] - The complexity of price transmission is exacerbated by the interdependence of enterprises within supply chains and the rise of digital sales channels [3][4] Group 3 - Current price transmission and circulation face three major bottlenecks: the inability to reflect innovation costs in the price system, incomplete marketization of social services and public utilities, and price competition leading to price internalization [5][6][9] - The digital economy has significantly reduced costs across various sectors, but the costs of innovative factors are not effectively reflected in the existing price system [6][8] - The social services sector, including education and healthcare, has not fully transitioned to a market-based pricing mechanism, impacting overall price levels [9][10] Group 4 - The rise of online sales has led to a competitive environment characterized by absolute low prices, resulting in price internalization and instances of selling below cost [11][12] - The pricing system for online sales is chaotic, complicating traditional price supervision and management [12][21] - The government aims to regulate online sales and prevent excessive price internalization through various measures [19][20] Group 5 - To address low price expectations, targeted reforms are needed to streamline price transmission mechanisms and enhance price supervision [13][14] - The development of the digital economy should prioritize quality improvement and efficiency, guiding industries towards high-quality supply and demand [14][15] - Accelerating the marketization of pricing mechanisms for social services and public utilities is essential for enhancing market vitality [17][18]

Group 1: Core Views - The central viewpoint emphasizes the need for strengthening credit construction in the platform economy, integrating legal regulation and intelligent supervision to ensure regular oversight [1][7] Group 2: Issues in the Live Streaming Industry - The rapid development of the live streaming industry has led to issues such as false advertising, product quality concerns, and tax evasion, which undermine consumer trust and fair competition [2][3] - The "Opinions" document highlights the importance of enhancing credit regulation for network anchors, self-media, and multi-channel network (MCN) institutions [2][3] Group 3: Credit Management Mechanisms - Establishing a unified credit management system is crucial, allowing for the assessment and public disclosure of credit statuses for anchors and merchants, thereby promoting integrity and reducing dishonest behavior [3][4] - Platforms can utilize big data and algorithmic analysis to create a dynamic credit scoring system, categorizing merchants into different risk levels (A, B, C) based on their historical performance [3][4] Group 4: Incentives and Penalties - The implementation of differentiated management and services based on credit status is proposed, offering incentives for compliant businesses while imposing restrictions on those with poor credit [3][4] - For high-credit (A-level) merchants, platforms can provide benefits such as increased visibility and reduced advertising costs, while low-credit (C-level) merchants may face penalties like reduced search rankings and advertising limitations [4][8] Group 5: Information Sharing and Data Barriers - The "Opinions" call for breaking down data barriers between platforms to facilitate the sharing of public credit information and operational data, addressing the challenges posed by inconsistent data standards and administrative divisions [5][6] - A unified credit data standard is necessary to ensure efficient data exchange among platforms, which can be coordinated by national regulatory bodies [5][6] Group 6: Joint Accountability Mechanisms - The establishment of a joint accountability mechanism is essential to prevent businesses from evading penalties by switching platforms, requiring a unified credit database accessible across platforms [7][8] - Platforms must ensure that businesses fulfill all legal obligations before exiting, promoting effective exit processes while allowing for credit restoration opportunities [8] Group 7: Regulatory Approaches - A balanced approach between government regulation and industry self-discipline is necessary, incorporating entry mechanisms, daily oversight, and self-regulation to enhance regulatory efficiency [9][10] - Platforms should implement real-time monitoring using big data and AI to detect and address fraudulent activities promptly, ensuring that dishonest entities cannot re-enter the market easily [9][10] Group 8: Industry Self-Regulation - Industry self-regulation is vital for the long-term operation of the credit system, with platforms and industry associations encouraged to sign credit agreements and establish industry credit scoring standards [10]

Core Viewpoint - Liu Genghong's live fitness session faced a sudden shutdown due to alleged inappropriate attire, sparking significant discussion online. He defended his content and questioned the standards of the platform's moderation [1][11]. Group 1: Incident Overview - Liu Genghong's live stream had over 100,000 viewers when it was abruptly terminated, with the reason cited as "damaged stockings" and "provocative clothing" [1]. - Liu expressed confusion over the moderation standards, emphasizing that his content has consistently promoted health and positivity for nearly four years [1]. - The incident led to a backlash from viewers, with some criticizing the focus on attire rather than fitness [6][7]. Group 2: Background and Career Transition - Liu Genghong, born in 1972, is a singer, host, and actor who gained popularity through a family variety show but saw a decline in attention in recent years [9]. - After signing with Wuyou Media in late 2021, he initially attempted to engage in e-commerce live streaming, which did not yield significant results [9]. - His pivot to fitness live streaming resulted in a notable increase in viewer engagement and popularity [9][11]. Group 3: Viewer Engagement and Performance Metrics - Liu Genghong's recent live streams have seen a drastic drop in viewership, with current numbers ranging from 1 million to 2 million, compared to a peak of 44.76 million [15]. - His secondary account, "Liu Genghong Health," reported average viewership of only 88,000 and sales figures between 75,000 to 100,000 [15]. - Over the past month, Liu's main account lost over 407,000 followers, totaling a loss of 854,500 from its peak of 70.035 million [24]. Group 4: Public Response and Future Outlook - Liu Genghong acknowledged the loss of 1.1 million followers and indicated that he expects this trend to continue, suggesting that follower loss reflects high traffic [27]. - As of the latest report, Liu's follower count stands at approximately 6.1 million, and he plans to celebrate when it reaches 6 million [27].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the controversy surrounding influencer Gu Qianqian, who faced a ban on her Douyin account due to alleged violations of laws and policies, despite her significant income from live streaming and e-commerce activities [1][2][4]. Group 1: Income and Business Activities - Gu Qianqian reported a transaction amount of 116,000 yuan on Douyin, with an estimated commission of 30,320 yuan, claiming a daily income exceeding 30,000 yuan [3][4]. - She has established four companies in 2024, each with a registered capital of 100,000 yuan, focusing on cultural, sports, and entertainment industries [7][8]. - Gu Qianqian is the legal representative of eight companies, with seven currently in operation, and holds various executive roles across multiple firms [6][8]. Group 2: Industry Context - The article highlights that Gu Qianqian's income is not unique, as other influencers, such as Fan Xiaohui, have reported monthly earnings as high as 34 million yuan [11]. - The majority of live streamers earn significantly less, with nearly 70% of them making less than 3,000 yuan per month, indicating a stark contrast between top earners and the average influencer [10][12]. - The commission structure for Douyin influencers varies, with individual streamers typically receiving 30% of sales, while those in higher-tier unions can earn between 30% and 55% [12].