（原标题：央视起底直播带货弹幕乱象 全国首张"职业弹幕人"罚单开出！） 据央视新闻报道，在网络直播间购物，你会留意弹幕吗？在一款产品名为"燃咔果冻"的直播间里，直播 带货过程中不断有弹幕弹出，比如"轻松瘦35斤""喝酒夜宵也能瘦"，因为反馈效果好，吸引众多消费者 购买，大半年时间售出了上万单。 然而，这背后是以"职业水军"虚构减肥奇迹，用批量刷评制造的消费陷阱。北京市市场监管局对相关公 司开出10万元罚单，成功查办全国市场监管领域直播电商"职业弹幕人"首案。 直播间相同账号频繁发弹幕，反馈内容却矛盾 直播间里，带货主播正在销售一款198元两盒的"燃咔果冻"，虽然没有直接宣称其具有"减肥功效"，下 方却弹出不少弹幕，反馈吃了果冻后瘦身效果显著。 一个账号为"二XXX"的"消费者"先是发弹幕表示："轻轻松松掉了35斤"，过一会儿又发弹幕说："不饿 不动，瘦了16.6。" 不仅如此，显示为不同账号的"消费者"，发送的弹幕内容竟然一模一样。 账号为"二XXX"的用户称："不饿不动搞了16.6"，过了一会儿，显示为"鸿XXX"的账号，发来了同样的 反馈，内容一字不差。 直播间里这些异常弹幕，引起了市场监管人员的警觉。 ...

央视新闻客户端消息，在网络直播间购物，您会留意弹幕吗？前段时间，在一款产品名为"燃咔果冻"的直 播间里，直播带货过程中不断有弹幕弹出，比如"轻松瘦35斤""喝酒夜宵也能瘦"，因为反馈效果好，吸引 了众多消费者购买，大半年时间售出了上万单。买的人越来越多，一张罚单也从天而降，到底是怎么回事 儿呢？ 01 相同账号频繁发弹幕 反馈内容却自相矛盾 0:00 / 2:12 直播间里，带货主播正在销售一款"燃咔果冻"，198元两盒。记者注意到，带货主播虽然没有直接宣称这 款果冻具有"减肥功效"，下方却弹出不少弹幕，反馈吃了果冻后瘦身效果显著。 直播间里这些异常弹幕，引起了市场监管人员的警觉。 北京市市场监管综合执法总队四级主办 陆楠：我们发现异常行为主要是有以下几点：一个是同一条弹幕， 可能会有不同的用户在反复发送。第二个就是同一条用户可能会反复发一些前后矛盾的弹幕内容，比如说 有的用户发一会是"我是新疆的谁谁谁，我买了很管用"，一会是"我是上海的谁谁谁买了很管用"。通过这 个我们就发现它高度疑似是雇了职业弹幕人在直播间发送了相关的弹幕话术。 02 什么是"职业弹幕人"？ 这个显示账号为"健XXX"的所谓"消费者"称： ...

用批量弹幕构筑话术陷阱，雇佣"职业水军"伪造减肥奇迹，假借"过来人"身份吸引消费者上当受骗。近 日，北京市市场监管局对属地某生物科技有限公司开出10万元罚单，成为成功查办全国市场监管领域直 播电商"职业弹幕人"首案。 什么是"职业弹幕人"？它为何兴起、有什么特点？在"乱花渐欲迷人眼"的消费市场中，消费者如何擦亮 双眼，识别其伪装？各方如何发力打造"诚实清朗"的消费环境？记者进行了采访。 上网当"托"，扰乱市场秩序 今年6月，北京某生物科技公司直播销售一款名为"燃咔果冻"的食品。直播间里，"真给力，3颗就瘦了 3.2斤""3天成功7天破（减肥）平台期"等夸张弹幕不断刷屏，令一些消费者跃跃欲试。 然而执法人员通过IP地址分析和用户行为建模发现，该公司涉嫌购买第三方服务，批量发送虚假弹幕， 而其雇佣的这些尚未用过产品或明知产品无效却依旧操控虚假账号刷屏的团伙，就是"职业弹幕人"。他 们在直播、短视频等互动场景中批量发布事先写好的弹幕评论，虚构产品功效、用户评价，制造虚假流 量。 "职业弹幕人"为何兴起？中国社会科学院法学研究所网络与信息法研究室副主任、副研究员周辉认 为，"职业弹幕人"本质就是"网络水军"，"在直播 ...

用批量弹幕构筑话术陷阱，雇佣"职业水军"伪造减肥奇迹，假借"过来人"身份吸引消费者上当受骗。近 日，北京市市场监管局对属地某生物科技有限公司开出10万元罚单，成为成功查办全国市场监管领域直 播电商"职业弹幕人"首案。 什么是"职业弹幕人"？它为何兴起、有什么特点？在"乱花渐欲迷人眼"的消费市场中，消费者如何擦亮 双眼，识别其伪装？各方如何发力打造"诚实清朗"的消费环境？记者进行了采访。 另据《报告》，我国去年直播电商用户规模突破5.97亿，占全部网民规模的五成左右。马丽红指出，对 网络诚信体系而言，"职业弹幕人"极易透支公众对网络信息内容、平台和企业的信任。因此，"职业弹 幕人"乱象理应得到治理。 上网当"托"，扰乱市场秩序 今年6月，北京某生物科技公司直播销售一款名为"燃咔果冻"的食品。直播间里，"真给力，3颗就瘦了 3.2斤""3天成功7天破（减肥）平台期"等夸张弹幕不断刷屏，令一些消费者跃跃欲试。 然而执法人员通过IP地址分析和用户行为建模发现，该公司涉嫌购买第三方服务，批量发送虚假弹幕， 而其雇佣的这些尚未用过产品或明知产品无效却依旧操控虚假账号刷屏的团伙，就是"职业弹幕人"。他 们在直播、短视频等互 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Beijing Municipal Market Supervision Administration imposed a fine of 100,000 yuan on a biotechnology company for false advertising in the live e-commerce sector, specifically related to the use of "professional barrage commentators" to mislead consumers about a product's weight loss effects [1][4]. Group 1: Company Actions - The company was found to have employed third parties to flood its live streaming comments with fabricated user reviews claiming the product had weight loss benefits, starting from May of the previous year [4]. - The enforcement team identified that dozens of accounts were concentrated in two IP address ranges, with some accounts posting over 300 comments in a single session [3]. Group 2: Industry Implications - The actions of "professional barrage commentators" represent a technological manipulation of market feedback, disrupting fair competition within the industry [6]. - This case highlights a regulatory blind spot in the live streaming industry regarding the "industrialization of traffic fraud," prompting platforms to enhance real-time anti-cheating systems to maintain a fair competitive environment [6]. Group 3: Consumer Awareness - Consumers are advised to be cautious of absolute claims and template reviews in live streaming shopping, particularly those that promise unrealistic results [7]. - The enforcement agency encourages consumers to report any discrepancies between advertised product effects and actual results to both platform customer service and market supervision departments [7].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the case of a Beijing-based biotechnology company fined for employing "professional barrage people" to create false consumer reviews and mislead customers about a weight loss product, marking a significant enforcement action in the live-streaming e-commerce sector [1][4]. Group 1: Company Actions - The company was found to have hired "professional barrage people" to post exaggerated comments in live-streaming sessions, claiming the product could lead to significant weight loss in a short period [2][3]. - The enforcement action revealed that the company had been purchasing services to artificially inflate its product's popularity and fabricate user reviews since May 16, 2024 [3]. Group 2: Regulatory Response - The Beijing Municipal Market Supervision Administration imposed a fine of 100,000 yuan on the company for violating the Anti-Unfair Competition Law and related regulations [3]. - This case is significant as it sets a legal precedent for addressing "review manipulation" in live-streaming, providing a framework for similar future cases [4]. Group 3: Industry Implications - The case exposes a management blind spot in the live-streaming industry regarding the "industrialization of traffic fraud," prompting platforms to enhance real-time anti-cheating systems [4]. - The enforcement action serves as a warning to other online retailers to provide accurate and truthful product information, avoiding artificial methods to manipulate consumer perception [4].