Chen Rui
On January 8, China will cancel entry restrictions.This means that the three -year epidemic prevention and control policy has been fully liberalized and synchronized with the world again.Focusing on various doubts or expectations of the Chinese epidemic prevention and control, the dust is basically settled.However, the tree is quiet and the wind is more windy. The discussion on the epidemic on the public opinion field is still complicated.
Although it is accused of being too strict in the control of public opinion, the spontaneous discussion on the epidemic on Chinese social media, breadth, depth, participants, and formalization, are far better than any other country.The developed social media and bases in China have played a key role in public opinion. For example, many well -known people have participated in the recent controversy of Zhang Wenhong, director of the China National Infectious Disease Medical Center.However, such arguments are destined not to have any results, because each public opinion voice has supporters and opponents. Although everyone discusses enthusiastically, the positions are different and cannot communicate at all.
Some discussions related to epidemics are related to science and science must be more real, but if scientific arguments are placed in a more magnificent historical and social background, it seems not so important.For example, who has invented the calculus first, whoever arrives in the Americas first, and Europeans and Europeans are important. These issues are important for science itself, but it seems that it is not so critical for society.Therefore, such controversy is best to be limited to the scientific community, without having to become the focus of the entire society discussion.Because scientific discussions have basic rules, the discussion of the public's participation is mostly self -speaking, and it is easy to fall into the opposite view of extreme emotional dominance. No one can convince anyone such discussions.
Sometimes controversy is a good thing, and it allows people's different views to fully express.But when the argument of each end and no results, it will also cause people to have more anxiety in their hearts, because opposing information means uncertainty.Especially for public opinion onlookers, the argument of no exact results is annoying, because they never know the correct answer, and some important questions seem to have a correct answer. At this time, government departments need to stop fighting.For example, the effect of Lianhua Qingjuan on the coronary virus has the effect of the coronary virus. This question will never have an answer in the Chinese public opinion field.Become enemies.
The Singapore Health Science Administration has issued a warning one year ago that if a dealer or seller claims that even the flowers can be used to prevent or treat crown diseases, they will be prosecuted and faced fines and imprisonment.With the mandatory "consensus" of this government department, even if someone still believes in the effect of the effect, at least it will not be arbitrarily claimed in social media, so there is naturally a few exotic disputes on the public opinion field.
The role of the law is to stop fighting, so the law should be the premise and bottom line of controversy, but if some remarks may not involve the legal level, and there is no official voice to end.EssenceEspecially at the moment, even if the symptoms of crown disease are reduced, they are more contagious.The question of how to define the caliber of crown disease, whether China's rural epidemic prevention forces are in place, and how the medical system responds to the impact of the epidemic.Compared to the right and wrong of experts, these issues are obviously more important.
The epidemic is not over, and people still have to work hard.When the public is wrapped in public opinion, the medical staff is trying to cure patients. What is the significance of argument with their work?Talking about mistakes, some disputes can help solve practical problems. Therefore, the public opinion field should seek common ground while depositing differences. Everyone should put their strength on finding consensus and promote action on the basis of consensus instead of disagreement and loss of disagreement.
The author is a Beijing teacher, currently living in Singapore
