Fake box office and fake viewing are also infringement and need to be severely punished!

　　editorial comment/note

　　As International Consumer Rights Day, on March 15th every year, all kinds of anti-counterfeiting activities attract the most attention. As consumers, we can complain about rights protection if we eat fake food or buy fake goods; But when we enjoy "spiritual food" and watch "fake movies or TV", can we only admit that we are unlucky and have no recourse?

　　After all, in today’s film and television industry, we have become accustomed to data fraud. In 2016, ip man 3 was found by the regulatory authorities to have a fake box office of 32 million yuan and a box office purchased by the publisher of 56 million yuan; Monster hunt, which set a box office record in 2015, was even more because of the falsification of data, which led the authoritative foreign box office website Box Office Mojo to announce that it would no longer provide box office data of China film market, because it lacked "consistent and accurate" data sources.

　　The TV industry can’t be immune to it. It is reported that the current price of purchasing ratings has climbed to 300,000 to 500,000 yuan per episode, and a satellite TV channel needs to pay 4 billion yuan for ratings fraud throughout the year. In such a big environment, it is no wonder that consumers always suspect that they are watching fake movies or fake TVs that are different from others when watching movies with box office exceeding 100 million or TV dramas with top ten ratings.

　　Truth | law

　　Liu Junhai (Professor, Law School, Renmin University of China)

　　Film and television works are also regulated by the Consumer Protection Law.

　　Beijing News: As consumers, should the audience get some protection when consuming spiritual products? In an environment where fake data is rampant, are we considered to be infringed?

　　Spiritual products are also commodities. It also applies to market rules, including supply and demand rules, so it is completely adjusted by the Consumer Protection Law, which means that the goods and services adjusted by the Consumer Protection Law include film and television works.

　　Therefore, consumers of film and television works certainly enjoy the right to know, the right to choose, the right to fair trade and the right to security. If some cinemas and website platforms falsify and deliberately use water injection data, brush data and box office water injection, this actually constitutes fraud. According to the provisions of the Consumer Protection Law, consumers have the right to ask for a refund of 100 yuan if they buy a ticket with 100 yuan. Pay another 300 yuan.

　　Only in this way can we exert punitive damages, severely punish the faithless, fully compensate the victims and the audience, effectively motivate the rights-defending audience, warn the film and television industry, and at the same time, make things clear.

　　The untrustworthy in the film and television industry should pay the economic price.

　　Beijing News: Zhao Dongling, deputy to the National People’s Congress and screenwriter, suggested that criminal law should be used to punish plagiarism, box office water injection and data brushing. Is it realistic to rely on imprisonment to solve any chaos?

　　Although I am in favor of severe punishment for chaos and severe medicine for furuncle, "severe punishment" and "severe medicine" are not limited to criminal responsibility More importantly, it should activate civil liability. As long as the injured audience gets real money compensation, and the counterfeiters and faithless people really pay the economic price they are unwilling to bear, the effect should be very good.

　　We often say that the market has eyes and the law has teeth. To polish the eyes of the market, it also includes letting consumers pay more attention to their wallets when choosing demonstration works, and rationally choose their favorite film and television works; Temper the teeth of the law, including traditional civil liability, administrative liability, criminal liability, and the current credit sanctions mechanism-not only embarrassing, but also a breach of trust is limited everywhere.

　　In addition, to regulate the chaos in the film and television market, it is necessary to innovate the joint punishment mechanism for dishonesty. For example, when the producer or director of a broken promise works and other creative works reinvest and shoot other films in the future, the competent authorities will know fairly well-permission is troublesome, not to mention applying for relevant loans, participating in the government procurement market, participating in the "Five One Project" and so on, and I am afraid that they will all be missed in the future-equivalent to our court’s handling of "Lao Lai". Let the untrustworthy pay the price and let the honest get the pass. Only in this way can film and television works release positive energy and clear hidden rules.

　　With the improvement of people’s living standards, people have more and more demand for excellent film and television works. In fact, a good work is not a big hit, and it is not necessary to adopt dishonest marketing methods such as thirty-six schemes and larded studies-artists should have a conscience. Moreover, the problem of video data fraud should not be paid attention to until March 15 th Consumer Protection Day. This is a big problem related to the sustainable development of our film and television industry and market. My idea is to create an "audience-friendly" China film and television market, which can be truly shared by all creative parties and ordinary audiences.

　　False | data

　　Lv Yuxiang (teacher of Tsinghua University School of Journalism and Communication)

　　Video data should be supervised, and it is also important for the audience to improve their literacy.

　　Beijing News: During the two sessions, issues such as water injection and data brushing at the box office of film and television dramas were raised by many members. Can this problem be solved by technology?

　　For example, some data platforms can filter out some abnormal data through algorithms. This has long been technically realized. It is not difficult to find false data. The question is, who will make it public? Doing these things requires costs, and it can be done once or twice. In the long run, no one (or institution) will be able to afford it.

　　Data platform is a part of the market, so this problem is not only a matter of data platform, but also a market means. Practitioners are just driven by interests and take advantage of some loopholes that can be exploited. Moreover, no algorithm is perfect, and there will be defects. As long as there is demand in the market, there will always be some people who use it to achieve market goals. This is an industrial chain, but the problem will never be solved by criticizing them without guiding the audience-that is, improving the audience’s aesthetic and ability to distinguish between good and bad.

　　The data platform is not monopolized, and its influence is different.

　　Beijing News: Some members suggested that "monopoly should be broken, and new statistical methods such as real-time ratings should be introduced to realize a scientific system in which multiple ratings survey modes coexist." Can you explain it in detail?

　　In fact, operators, broadcasting systems and media platforms now have their own databases, which may cause other contradictions once they are made public. Official data, such as some ratings survey companies, are actually very few samples in different cities. Using such a small sample to interpret a problem in a large range can reflect a trend, but this sample cannot be used to delve into specific details.

　　If you think that the scoring and box office data of the open platform are very watery, there is actually not only one platform. Some research institutions also have their own monitoring, but their data are generally not completely open and have little influence, but some professionals may refer to them.

　　Can’t rely on the regulatory authorities for everything.

　　Beijing News: Can we rely on the government to establish a third-party data platform to control video data fraud?

　　This goes back to the first question. If the government leads, the government will invest money to be a platform or invest manpower to supervise. Who will this money be invested in? Is it necessary to create a new position? Personally, I don’t think we can let the government do everything, and let the market run and solve it when there is a market mechanism. As far as this issue is concerned, the official responsibility-whether the government or the media-should be to remind the audience not to blindly trust the data. If you know that the fraud is serious, the content itself is not good. As an audience, you should not watch it. This is a personal media literacy problem.

　　In a word, we can’t let the government solve all the problems while calling for decentralization. The establishment of a third-party data platform is not necessary to increase the workload of the management department-and it may not be done well.

　　What can you do if you find "false ratings"?

　　department responsible for the work

　　The Film Industry Promotion Law, which came into effect on March 1, 2017, stipulates that if film distribution enterprises and cinemas make false transactions, falsely report sales revenue, etc., disrupting the order of the film market, the film authorities of the people’s governments at or above the county level shall order them to make corrections, confiscate their illegal income, impose fines according to specific circumstances, and may take measures such as ordering them to suspend business for rectification and revoking their licenses according to the seriousness of the circumstances.

　　consumer

　　According to China’s Law on the Protection of Consumers’ Rights and Interests, business operators should provide consumers with information about goods or services truthfully and comprehensively, and must not make false or misleading propaganda; Consumers also have the right to report and sue acts that infringe on consumers’ rights and interests. Therefore, when we meet relevant operators and use false data in the process of film and television promotion, we can not only write film reviews truthfully, but also report them to relevant departments. □ Xiaoxiao (Master of Laws)