Opponents

Zhao Guoqi (www.jkbaby.cn): The righteous purpose of Tianya's employee will surely gain sympathy and understanding. But we shouldn't ignore the contemptible means he used. What's more, we shouldn't use having a justifiable reason as an excuse for moral degradation. Helping a sick child is a noble thing, but we are not sure whether the employee of Tianya has gained any personal profit from the whole deal.

People are discussing which is more important, saving life or maintaining morality. I think there's no contradiction between the two. Is it necessary to sacrifice morality to save life? The answer is no. The employee used saving life as an excuse for his vile behavior.

If we keep using good purpose as a shield and excuse for moral degradation, it will become more difficult in the future to define a boundary between moral and immoral behavior, which is quite dangerous for society. When it comes to the law, it won't excuse anyone if his or her behavior stems from good intentions but breaks the law. So, using good purpose as an excuse for moral degradation is ill-founded.

Wang Changlian (www.cnr.cn): Nowadays, as the Internet is growing more popular, it has become a stage for the people and paradise for people who make sensationalizing news a career. Sensationalized news on the Internet has a low threshold and high efficiency and can go anywhere in the world instantly. But the problem is some of them break codes of social morality and challenge the law and social order. The story of Xie was a total lie to win people's attention and sympathy. Although it had the good intention of saving life, it's a baleful example of news sensationalization. It not only caused harm to the mother's integrity but also hurt the feelings and trust of the benefactors.

First, the government should set a boundary for Internet sensationalization to make sure news is at least true. There should also be at least a rule on what can be sensationalized and what shouldn't. Second, the government should improve monitoring news sensationalization in bad taste on the Internet. As the gatekeeper, the government should set active and effective guidance and stipulate punishments for those who create abominable news sensationalization.

He He (www.anhuinews.com): We shouldn't ignore the bad influence of the incident just because it had a good intention and a good result. One thing is important: If this sort of concept is used repeatedly, will people continue to believe in these sad and real stories, and be generous in the future?

News sensationalization has harmed to the softest and most important part of charity—people's sympathy. If we are deceived time and again by liars, we won't believe in anyone or anything in the future.

Bai Yansong (Guangzhou Daily): The employee of Tianya claims he did it simply to save a life. But if we click on his blog, we can see clearly he is a professional to make sensationalized news on the Internet for the purpose of making profit. He has made very clear the procedures of his work: listening to clients' needs, making budgets, creating a plan, getting clients' approval, getting payment from clients and finally implementing the plan. So, he has a clear purpose—money. He uses saving life as a shield and excuse, since he has been condemned by the public and wants to protect himself. We shouldn't allow this kind of incident to happen again.

People should be highly alert to degrading morality consciously. It is reported the employee of Tianya has been removed from his post, but he is still a correspondent of the Guangdong TV station. He used this incident to become famous and to gain commercial opportunity. This has become a very bad example. I think there must be rules to prevent this from happening again.