Let the video site less routine, not just rely on users to vomit
■ Let's talk
According to a report by China News Service, some netizens recently reported that when buying members of some video sites, "the same VIP service, the price of purchases with different mobile phones is actually different." People also found that these platforms have unclear description of advertising privileges. Suspected of false publicity, automatic renewal check by default, easy to cancel and difficult to set up, additional charging items, etc.
Regarding the various chaotic phenomena of video websites, the habitual vomiting of users in recent years has spawned a lot of paragraphs, and the media has also reported it for years, but in the end, the overall chaotic phenomenon is still its own way.
User complaints, media reports, and Consumer Protection Committee interviews all seem to have "little effect". Is this problem really unsolvable?
It has to be said that online consumption is becoming more and more mainstream today, and the various "slots" in video website services are actually a matter of consumer rights that affects hundreds of millions of people. This huge user group means huge market potential for the platform, and for regulation, it should be avoided to become a blind spot for consumer rights protection.
In fact, some of the current practices of video sites are clearly suspected of touching the legal red line. As stipulated in the "E-commerce Law", operators should slash goods or services in a conspicuous way to remind consumers that tying goods or services shall not be used as an option for default consent. However, at present, the interface of many platform recharge members still only has the options of "continuous annual subscription" and "continuous monthly subscription", and the platform generally checks "automatic renewal" by default.
It should be pointed out that under normal market ecology, some chaos can be purified through market self-regulation. But in the field of network audio and video, the reality we are facing now, just like the 11 audio and video platforms interviewed a few days ago, almost covers all the mainstream platforms on the market today-chaos is with structure and industry Sexual, not a single case.
Unlike ordinary goods, online service consumption such as audio and video, once the single amount is not large, and secondly, the threshold for consumers to protect rights is high, so that most consumers can only "spit", it is difficult to effectively protect rights. In this situation, the space for users to "vote with their feet" is actually very limited. This, in turn, continues to exacerbate the website's indifference to disregard user rights. In other words, it is actually unrealistic to place such elimination of unspoken rules entirely on the voluntary regulation of the industry.
Therefore, the implementation of industry supervision and related laws as soon as possible is indispensable. In addition, consumer protection departments and organizations can also play a greater role. In short, consumers should not be allowed to "game" with big platforms alone.
For the platform, it is understandable to pursue profitability, but it makes a fortune. The current audio and video market has hundreds of millions of audiences. Whether it is user payment habits and user experience requirements, it is far from comparable in the early days of the market. Development is built on the "low user rights protection advantage", which is not necessarily a good thing for the platform and the industry's true "growth".
□ Ren Ran (media person)