CCTV's comment: a word not be cut? Our "negative rights" be safeguarded-bad review, hungry-IT information
On July 18, recently for an article with a insult bad review, Jinan, Shandong, a mobile ordering software users are "hungry" platform on the store armed with a knife stabbed , left eyebrow bone and right collarbone, right thumb, index finger injuries stitched 19 stitches. "Hungry Mody boss cut man" event is raised for a hot meal ordering software security issues.
In response to these reports, CCTV commentator Wang Jian said today issued a consumers enjoy the right to give bad reviews and consumer "negative rights" should also establish institutional safeguards, so that consumers and businesses no longer face the risk of malicious revenge.
"Negative rights" require institutional protection, not only to establish "privacy protection" mechanisms and evaluation mechanism to reform, eliminate business rivalry. "Negative rights", online shopping platform to continue upgrading and innovation, enhance consumer evaluation of the effectiveness of the mechanisms. For both repeated online shopping "online not offline choke" problem, regulators also need to attach great importance to, and maintaining market fairness.
Following is the full text of the article:
Bad review risk rate caution! "Murder caused by a bad review" although extreme, but exactly the same and repeated incidents of harassment of consumers of businesses in recent years, many consumers shudder. I can still "happily" give businesses bad reviews? Consumer evaluation mechanism for how best to effect this?
"Bad review-phobia" take the right medicine
Once upon a time, consumer e-commerce platform evaluation mechanism is a major change. "The customer is God" was originally aimed at physical stores, when you e-commerce booming, many consumers of online shopping but still doubt: if buying a fake on the Internet or products exist quality problems, how do I protect their interests?
This concern with consumer evaluation mechanisms appear, gradually disappeared. The hands of "negative rights" consumers are not trampled upon in the online shopping process. A difference in assessment, tend to be small shops have great destructive power. Because of this, network personage hate bad reviews, away from the plague.
However, with the development of e-commerce to flourish, the years consumer evaluation mechanism lacks innovation, problems mechanism itself is becoming increasingly prominent. On one hand, "calling you", "send ghost money" businesses such as vulgar retaliation was not satisfied with the shopping experience by many consumers, but they dare not give businesses on business impact assessment. The other hand, many businesses face a number of malicious harassment of consumers, for example, with "bad review" bargain to coerce, or even want to eat the "free lunch".
Even more worried is that the "professional bad review Division" host team gradually, and relies on the consumer evaluation of defects in the mechanism, and erode business and consumer customers. It serves, "bad review-phobia", online shopping platform, and regulators are supposed to prescribe the consumer evaluation mechanisms must be secondary innovation .
? Chengdu man network order to bad reviews by the wrath of the businesses hit the door
"Negative rights" require institutional protection
How can online merchants face shortage also allow consumers to "negative rights" be effectively protected? Key measures to establish a system of protection, so that consumers and businesses no longer face the risk of malicious revenge.
First, the "privacy protection" mechanisms should be established . Currently consumers travel-rating at the same time, often faces the telephone, address and other personal information, "streaking" situation. Despite the need to provide appropriate information to the business of online shopping, but gives "bad review" whether through technical means, ensure that anonymous speech?
Secondly, whether reform evaluation mechanisms, eliminating the business rivalry . A bad review, whether objective or not, can often be ruined small shops a few months of hard work. Because of this, the network business is so mind "bad review". In many cases, consumers in the evaluation of a word not even curse each other, however businesses dare not respond online. Can reform evaluation mechanisms to allow consumers to evaluate back objectively and rationally true? For example, using large data means "professional bad review teacher" expulsion "God" of the team. Adjusting the weights, not let a bad review does not become a nightmare for businesses, consumers, "repeated bad review" spurred business tool. Meanwhile, determines the evaluation cycle, let a bad review does not impact too long, businesses also have chances of rehabilitation.
Risk bad reviews online shopping platform not to do without
"A word not just comment on" consumer powers, is also urging businesses effective means of improving service. "Negative rights", online shopping platform cannot stand aloof, and to continuously upgrade and innovation, enhance consumer evaluation of the effectiveness of the mechanisms. For both repeated online shopping "online not offline choke" problem, regulators also need to attach great importance to, and maintaining market fairness.
Only by joint efforts of all parties, consumer evaluation mechanisms can play an effective role, also would let "bad review" as a weapon for businesses to continuously improve service quality!
央视评论：一言不合就被砍？我们的“差评权”谁来保障 - 差评,饿了么 - IT资讯
7月18日消息，近日，因一条带有辱骂的差评，山东济南一位手机订餐软件用户被“饿了么”平台上的店家持刀砍伤，导致左眉骨、右锁骨、右手拇指、食指多处受伤缝合19针。“饿了么店家持刀伤人”事件引发对于订餐软件安全问题的热议。
针对上述报道，央视新闻评论员王健今日发文表示，消费者享有给差评的权利，而维护消费者“差评权”也要建立制度性保护措施，让消费者和商家不再面对恶意报复的风险。
“差评权”需要制度性保护，不仅要建立“隐私保护”机制，还要改革评价机制，消弭商家心中的芥蒂。对于“差评权”，网购平台也要不断升级创新，提升消费者评价机制的有效性。而对于屡屡出现的网购双方“线上不合线下掐”的问题，监管部门也需高度重视，维护市场公平。
以下为文章全文：
差评有风险，打分需谨慎！“一条差评引发的血案”虽然极端，却和近年来屡屡出现的商家骚扰消费者事件如出一辙，让不少消费者不寒而栗。我还能“愉快地”给商家差评吗？消费者评价机制如何才能最好地发挥效应呢？
“差评恐惧症”需对症下药
曾几何时，电子商务平台引入消费者评价机制，是一次重大变革。“顾客是上帝”原本针对实体店铺而言，当电子商务蓬勃兴起时，不少消费者对网络购物却依然心存疑虑：假若在网上买了假货或商品存在质量问题，我该如何保护自身的权益呢？
这一担忧伴随着消费者评价机制的出现，渐渐烟消云散。手中握有“差评权”的消费者，在网络购物的过程中并非任人宰割。一个中差评，往往对中小店铺有极大的杀伤力。正因如此，网络电商才对差评恨之入骨，避之唯恐不及。
然而伴随着电子商务蓬勃发展，这些年间消费者评价机制却欠缺创新，机制本身存在的问题却日益凸显。一方面，“呼死你”、“寄冥币”等商家的恶俗报复手段让许多消费者虽然对购物体验不满，却不敢轻易给商家打出差评。另一方面，不少商家也面临一些消费者的恶意骚扰，例如，以“差评”为要挟砍价，甚至希望吃到“免费的午餐”。
更让人担忧不已的是，“职业差评师”等寄生团队渐渐萌生，依托于消费者评价机制中的缺陷，蚕食商家和消费者的荷包。足见，对于“差评恐惧症”，网购平台和监管方理应对症下药，消费者评价机制必须进行二次创新。
▲成都男子网络点餐给差评遭商家怒砸家门
“差评权”需要制度性保护
怎样才能让网络商家坦然面对不足，同时也让消费者的“差评权”得到有效保护呢？关键要建立制度性保护措施，让消费者和商家不再面对恶意报复的风险。
首先，“隐私保护”机制应当建立。当前消费者给出差评的同时，往往也面临着电话、住址等私密信息“裸奔”的局面。尽管网络购物需要给商家提供相应信息，但给出“差评”时能否采取技术手段，确保匿名发言？
其次，能否改革评价机制，消弭商家心中的芥蒂。一个差评，无论客观与否，往往可以毁掉中小店家几个月的努力。正因与此，网络商家才会如此介意“差评”。许多时候，消费者在评价中甚至一言不合就诅咒对方，然而商家却不敢在网上回应。能否改革评价机制，让消费者评价回归客观理性的本真？例如，运用大数据手段将“职业差评师”驱逐出“上帝”的队伍。合理调整权重，让一次差评不不致成为商家的梦魇，而不同消费者的“重复性差评”成为鞭策商家的利器。同时，合理确定评价周期，让一次差评不致影响太久，也让商家有改过自新的机会。
面对差评风险 网购平台不能置身事外
“一言不合就差评”是消费者的权力，也是鞭策商家提升服务的有效手段。对于“差评权”，网购平台不能置身事外，要不断升级创新，提升消费者评价机制的有效性。而对于屡屡出现的网购双方“线上不合线下掐”的问题，监管部门也需高度重视，维护市场公平。
只有各方共同努力，消费者评价机制才能起到有效作用，也才会让“差评”成为促进商家不断提升服务质量的利器！