Recently, Ms. Zhou, who lives in Xinwan Road, Jianghan District, Wuhan City, reported through the Wuhan city message board that when she went to the barber shop near her home to cut her hair, she found that the barber was using 4 mobile phones at the same time to live broadcast her hair cutting process. She asked the barber to stop the live broadcast, but the other party did not immediately remove the camera, and called her "outdated", "Not a star, what are ordinary people afraid of?"
Later, the reporter also found the barber shop that Ms. The reporter saw that there are 6 hair cutting positions in the store, and a mobile phone holder is placed next to the mirror of the first hair cutting position when entering the door, and 4 mobile phones are fixed on it. Three of the mobile phones were streaming live, one was playing music, and a man was dancing in front of the mobile phone. After learning of the reporter's intention, the man admitted that he was Mr. Xiong, the hairdresser who had an argument with Ms. Zhou.
Mr. Xiong said that he has been live-streaming haircuts since February this year. There are many customers who have shown their faces in his live-streaming room, and most people will not raise any objections. "Now that live broadcasting is normalized, it is not a star, so what are ordinary people afraid of?" As he spoke, Mr. Xiong even greeted the reporter to stand in front of the mobile phone, and also introduced to the audience in the live broadcast room that a reporter was coming to interview.
Afterwards, the reporter visited 3 barbershops at random, and found that all of them were promoted through live broadcast or short video platforms. In a large chain barber shop, the staff told reporters that their shop also has a hairdresser who is responsible for shooting short videos, specializing in shooting customers with good haircut results, and then posting them on social media to attract new customers. But he emphasized: Whether it is shooting or posting, the customer's consent will be obtained in advance. The matter of
also aroused the attention and discussion of netizens. Most netizens said: If the live video is for profit, then Mr. Xiong's approach is obviously inappropriate. Why let "I" be broadcast live to make money for you? Will I get some money when I make money? You can sue him for this! Of course, some netizens said: Mr. Xiong's behavior is definitely inappropriate, but in fact, many people may not realize it at all, just like after Mr. Xiong was rejected by Ms. Zhou, he could still disapprove and say: "Ms. Zhou is out of date!"
seems to be a small thing, but the right and wrong inside is not to be underestimated, it may even be related to the future development prospects of an industry. So how should we look at this? In this regard, Yang Dan, an associate researcher at the Ma Research Institute of Hubei Academy of Social Sciences, expressed his opinion in "Values in Hotspots":
Now live video has already jumped out of the entertainment attribute when it was first born, and has become a cash cow for many businesses to attract money. . It stands to reason that this is understandable. Why not do new methods bring new benefits? Besides, the threshold for using live video is low, and ordinary people can afford it. It is really unreasonable if it is not popular. But the problem is that once some things are related to money, the inherent boundaries between people may be broken. From this point of view, at least two boundaries are involved, one is the moral boundary and the other is the law. boundary.
The so-called moral boundary is to advocate that people should respect each other regardless of their identities. This is the minimum principle. Violating this principle is called offense if it is light, and hurt if it is serious. And one of the most intolerable offenses is that without the consent of others, you make the decision for others. To be more popular, you do this thing. Have you asked me for my opinion? Don't say I don't want to, even if I want to, you have to ask my opinion first! This is the situation that Ms. Zhou encountered above, so it is a very normal reaction for Ms. Zhou to find out that she is in a state of being broadcast live. It is also a very normal reaction. It is not at all like Mr. Xiong said. The overreaction that occurred above.
And the so-called legal boundaries, like this kind of live shooting, may violate some legal provisions. For example: is it infringing on portrait rights and privacy rights? Ordinary people may not be so clear about the legal definition of portrait rights, but some of them are right and wrong. I think everyone still understands. Just like a netizen said earlier, you let me be broadcast live to earn traffic for you and promote it. You earned it. Will you give me the money? In other words: using my image without my consent is a concrete manifestation of infringing on my right to portrait. Besides, when I get a haircut, I don't want others to see the whole process, and do I have any privacy? So, don't say I'm in a hurry with you, I can go to court and sue you.
actually said so much, our opinion on this issueKnowing is only on the surface, what is the deeper understanding? I don't know if you have noticed. Judging from the above news facts, neither Mr. Xiong, who was filming, nor Ms. Zhou, who was broadcast live, actually did not realize that this kind of behavior has involved legal issues. What does this mean? ? It shows that at the moment when live video is popular, the publicity of legal knowledge involved in live video and the popularization of live video behavior are not compatible. The more there are, the more likely it will become more and more outrageous, and ultimately the harm to the live video industry will be very great.
(Editor: Yu Fei Editor: Liu Fang)