Rumors that harm farmers must be investigated to the very end and must not become unsolved cases

A single irresponsible rumor can very likely cause farmers' hard work of more than half a year to be wasted, and can even cause an agricultural industry that a place has painstakingly cultivated for many years to collapse in an instant. How to respond to and eliminate rumors that harm farmers is a topic that needs to attract public attention and discussion.

Recently, some media outlets reviewed incidents in recent years in which rumors harmed farmers, and found that many food safety rumors were spread through related media reports, causing enormous harm to farmers and related agricultural industries. Although relevant government departments and testing agencies carried out verification and refuted the rumors, the media's intensity in reporting clarifications was clearly weaker than when exposing the issues, making it difficult to completely eliminate the adverse effects on farmers and related agricultural industries.

The awkward reality that rumors harming farmers become "unsolved cases" after being "reported" by the media does indeed exist, but for some rumors, some authoritative media outlets also quickly clarified them afterward. For example, after the rumor that "strawberry pesticide residue causes cancer" appeared at the end of April this year, our newspaper responded quickly and published on May 1 the article "Is 'Strawberry Pesticide Residue Exceeding Standards Causes Cancer' True?" to refute the rumor; the People's Daily "Verification" column then published on May 2 the investigative report "The Claim That 'Eating Strawberries Causes Cancer' Is Unreliable," which also refuted the rumor. Unfortunately, none of these media clarifications achieved a "major reversal" in public opinion, and farmers and the national strawberry industry still suffered heavy losses.

Why do rumors that harm farmers occur repeatedly? The real crux is not that the media failed to investigate and clarify rumors that harm farmers, but that even when clarified, it is difficult to attract widespread public attention. To a certain extent, this also reflects the problem that rumors harming farmers are "difficult to refute." First, in many cases the media refuting the rumor are not the media that first "exposed the problem"; when the media that first "exposed" it do not clarify, some consumers at least see the issue as "controversial" and remain doubtful of the refutation. Second, from the perspective of the "primacy effect," people are more willing to believe the information they encounter first, so the communicative power of "rumor refutation" is greatly reduced. Third, some irresponsible online and social media platforms are more willing to spread eye-catching rumors rather than fair and rational refutation information, objectively causing information asymmetry for many consumers.

But this cannot become a reason for us not to tackle rumors that harm farmers, because a single irresponsible rumor can very likely cause farmers' hard work of more than half a year to be wasted, and can even cause an agricultural industry that a place has painstakingly cultivated for many years to collapse in an instant. How to respond to and eliminate rumors that harm farmers is a topic that needs to attract public attention and discussion.

We might first sort out three common types of rumors that harm farmers that have appeared in recent years. The first is the completely baseless and irresponsible "online rumor," most of which are motivated by using food safety, a public topic, for online hype and attracting audience attention. The second is the plausible-sounding "distorted and exaggerated rumor," which, through intentional or unintentional conceptual shifts or substitutions, distorts plant diseases that are harmless to humans into diseases harmful to humans, causing people to reject eating them. The third is the more complex "authoritative rumor," which, although it has undergone some procedures and testing, leads to misinformation and false reporting because the testing methods are unscientific, not rigorous, and not broadly representative. For example, the claim that "strawberry pesticide residue causes cancer" that appeared in April this year was this type.

To more effectively reduce rumors that harm farmers, while rationally and fairly refuting rumors, we should also focus on the two links of "beforehand" and "afterward." "Beforehand" means taking preventive measures to eliminate the environmental soil in which rumors that harm farmers breed. For the first type, baseless online hype rumors, under the condition of real-name registration online, holding them accountable is no longer a technical problem; we must increase the crackdown and make hype-makers hold awe for speaking online. For that kind of distorted and exaggerated rumor, local governments need to disclose information promptly and accurately, and through various forms of communication, especially by making good use of mobile terminals and social media, spread professional and authoritative voices to consumers and promptly eliminate outside suspicion. For rumors caused by the lack of rigor of mass media, the media must pay attention to strengthening professionalism and self-discipline, and on agricultural product safety issues must scientifically seek verification and speak rigorously.

The "afterward" link means severely pursuing responsibility against rumor-mongers so as to play a deterrent role. Recently, the lawsuits by Wanda Group and Alibaba Group against related online hype rumors have been greatly enlightening to us. Their lawsuits and claims for compensation can, to a large extent, create a huge warning and deterrent against rumor-mongering hype-makers. But for rumor-mongers who bring losses of tens of millions or hundreds of millions of yuan to farmers and agriculture, we rarely see anyone file lawsuits against them, and rarely see anyone punished for it. This is largely because farmers are in a weak position, lacking strength and support and unable to defend their rights. This requires someone to speak for them, and requires government, regulatory departments, judicial departments, and others to strike hard against rumor-mongers, pursue responsibility according to law, and claim compensation for losses, so that those rumor-mongers dare not spread rumors and cannot afford to spread them.

In recent years, through the joint efforts of relevant departments and producers, China's food safety level has greatly improved. To completely make rumors that harm farmers disappear, it is inseparable from rebuilding consumers' confidence in agricultural product safety. In this sense, we should maintain a positive and open attitude toward food safety supervision by the public and media opinion, but in this process, we must also resolutely prevent any intentional or unintentional rumors from harming farmers and agriculture. Cultivating rationality and cracking down on rumors is itself an indispensable and important part of building the food safety system.