"Don't let people know that I said it." "Don't write it in, we are brothers, I told you this." "The leader may not say it, but he will give me small shoes."

　　Today, "not mentioning names" has become a prerequisite for many cadres to open their hearts and tell the truth. Interviews by Banyuetan reporters found that when faced with various interviews or inquiries, cadres, regardless of whether the subject is positive or negative, hope to hide their names in subsequent news reports or research reports. At the grassroots level, the tendency of cadres to "anonymize" is increasing.

1　

"Regardless of whether the content is positive or negative,

Don't even mention the name"

　　The Banyuetan reporter interviewed in a certain eastern province and randomly found a township cadre to learn about the construction of rural cultural facilities. Write down the name and position of this cadre. When half a month talking about reporters writing the manuscript, the local government came to discuss: Don't mention the name of the township cadre, and highlight the local mayor in the manuscript.

　　The reporter of Banyue Tan couldn't help being surprised, because this is a typical positive manuscript. It stands to reason that the name of the cadre to be interviewed is written. However, the fact is that even if it involves positive and typical interview reports, some grassroots cadres’ names have been "replaced" and "anonymous".

　　When reporting on the economic development of a certain place in the east, the reporter of Banyuetan interviewed many directors of the local Bureau of Natural Resources, Culture and Tourism Bureau, etc. After the interview, the head of the local propaganda department "reminded" the reporter of Banyuetan: "Try not to appear as director. ’S name, all replaced by the relevant person in charge."

　　It turned out that the propaganda department was worried that individual leaders would "have an opinion" because of the extra or missing names, so to be on the safe side, no one's name would appear.

　　When grassroots cadres accept media surveys and interviews, especially when difficulties and problems are involved, they dare not express their opinions publicly. Not long ago, the reporter of Banyue Tan reposted a report on the "watering" of statistical data in a few places in the circle of friends. A county magistrate quickly left a message, "The situation at the grassroots level is overweight at the top." In less than a minute, this One comment was quickly deleted.

　　Out of the need to protect the interviewee, Banyuetan reporters often respect the interviewee's request for "anonymity." After the report was published, many grassroots cadres praised it, thinking that it was on everyone's heart, but few dared to repost it in the circle of friends. Some cadres made comments on a whim, and they would quickly delete them to prevent someone from checking in.

　　However, when the half-month reporter saw the anonymous interviewee again after a period of time and asked about the original pain points and how the problem was solved, they would often get a frustrated answer of "not the same as in the past".

　　In this way, a new governance paradox has gradually formed-the more the problem needs to be solved, the more it needs to be reported anonymously; the more anonymous the report, the more difficult it is to solve the problem in a timely and effective manner. If things go on like this, the expectations of grassroots cadres will fail, and they will become "powerless to complain" or even "long live the Buddha system."

2

The "anonymization" of cadres reflects the two dilemmas of grassroots governance

　　When cadres, especially grassroots cadres, are interviewed, they often hope to hide their names and call themselves "relevant cadres" or "relevant staff." There are also some grassroots cadres whose names have been replaced. Active or passive "anonymity" reflects the two dilemmas of current grassroots governance.

　　The first is the generalization of accountability and the fear of being held accountable. "Proposing opinions is like spitting in the wind and spitting on one's face." A grass-roots cadre said helplessly. When faced with a problem, the person who gave the opinion is likely to become a "pottery man". Whoever reports the problem will solve the problem. Once the issues raised by the named report raise concerns, the parties and related responsible persons will inevitably be held accountable and face the risk of generalization and aggravation of accountability.

　　An organization cadre in a certain city in central China revealed that when dealing with a hot incident that attracted strong public opinion, a leader who had only been in office for only three days and had nothing to do with the incident was held responsible for the leadership. He believed that such treatment was unfair. Helped to explain from it, the result was criticized by superiors for not talking about politics, and was almost punished.

　　Some grassroots cadres said that the same problem can be rectified after the unit's internal verification; the problem is pierced to the higher level and the investigation team is attracted. The cadres who report the problem are easily "aired up" due to self-reporting of family ugliness; once it is reported to the media , Arousing social concern, the primary task is to deal with public opinion, rectification has become a secondary task, the cadres involved in the incident will be punished, and the dismissal will be dismissed. Reflecting problems truthfully has become the most reluctant way for grassroots cadres to choose.

　　The second is that the evaluation mechanism is not sound and is willing to be replaced. When making achievements, most localities emphasized that "it is the result of the attention of the leaders, the care of all levels, and the strong leadership ability", etc., giving credit to the leaders; when asked what they have done, ordinary cadres waved their hands one after another, "We Just a job, not worth mentioning, don't write my name."

　　Some grassroots cadres said that due to the lack of daily assessment and evaluation standards, good or bad work depends on the evaluation of the main leaders. In the work, neither can we seize the "showcase" of the leadership, and we must do everything possible to count all the "credit" to the leader and "win glory" for the leader.

　　Wang Zhongwu, a professor of sociology at Shandong University, said that the "anonymity" of grassroots cadres can easily discourage their enthusiasm for entrepreneurship. "Obviously, I have completed the work myself, but it is easy to chill the cadres in the work summary or external publicity."

　　In addition, some grass-roots cadres also said that everything being done in a proper order means "waiting, relying, and demanding." Behind some glorious political achievements, it is not ruled out that they are stepping on the policy red line. The grass-roots cadres are well aware of the ins and outs of the incident, and even personally participated in the possible violations. Once the positive model fails the test of time and problems are exposed afterwards, the participating cadres can hardly be blamed.

3

Should not turn a blind eye to the phenomenon of "anonymization"

　　Xing Yuan, a professor of sociology at Shanxi University, and other interviewed experts said that whether it is not daring to be named when reporting problems or being replaced by a prominent leadership role, attention should be paid to the phenomenon of "anonymization". It is necessary to analyze the crux of the problem. On the basis of this, targeted measures were taken to strengthen the building of grassroots governance capacity.

　　On the one hand, the grass-roots level should establish the correct concept that "the goal of reflecting the problem is to solve the problem". For universal problems, all localities should take the initiative to identify themselves, strengthen investigations, and find out the current situation of the region and department, and cannot wait until specific problems are exposed. Deal with it urgently.

　　Not long ago, a municipal public institution in the central region changed the past method of listening to opinions and suggestions face-to-face. It adopted an anonymous method and initiated a questionnaire survey internally to collect opinions and suggestions from cadres and employees on inspections and rectification. This method was widely praised by employees.

　　On the other hand, when the superiors are arranging work tasks, they either already have specific requirements, and some documents are even directly managed by cooperatives and villagers’ groups. Apart from the implementation documents, there is not much space left to the grassroots; or there are policy blind spots that require grassroots breakthroughs. Existing regulations are explored, but this has also planted hidden dangers for stepping on the red line. While giving credit to the leadership, it also passes on the responsibility.

　　Experts suggest that grassroots cadres are participants and practitioners of grassroots governance. While implementing various policies and measures, grassroots cadres should be encouraged to carry out their work creatively according to actual conditions. While emphasizing result orientation, they should improve on-the-job evaluation so that grassroots cadres can Have more sense of gain.

　　Half a month to talk about reporters: Liang Xiaofei Yang Wen Shao Kun