CCTV's 'News 1+1', on October 21st, Bai Yaosong analyzed the Harbin Lin Songling incident.

Introduction:

On October 21, 2008, CCTV's "News 1+1" aired a program titled "Harbin Under the Nightfall." Bai Yaosong and the host conducted an exhaustive analysis of the entire case, focusing on the surveillance footage released by the police. The father of the deceased, Lin Songling, appeared for the first time in a media interview. At the press conference, the family of the deceased demanded that the police release the complete surveillance footage. They also believed that the two previous press conferences held by the special investigation team clearly favored the police, with some wording being very irresponsible.

Excerpt from part of Lin Jilisi's interview dialogue:

Lin Jilisi:

He is not standing at a fair, just, and transparent angle.

Reporter:

Why?

Lin Jilisi:

Because what he said is not true.

Reporter:

Which part is not true?

Lin Jilisi:

Because he only played the video of my son, who is the deceased. How did he pick up a stone and hit someone? This is our policeman, this is one of us, but they are already criminal suspects, which has been determined by the Public Security Bureau. Why do they still talk like this in the press conference?

Part of Bai Yaosong's commentary:

If in the past openness and transparency were attitude issues - whether you do it or not, whether to be open and transparent or not, now openness and transparency are reflected in the details. If your details cannot give people a sense of trust in openness and transparency, even if you move forward towards openness and transparency, there will still be many flaws and places that make people worry.

Host:

Where does the flaw show up this time?

Bai Yaosong:

For example, the first one is that the video you broadcast was not a complete recording. Of course, as a broadcasting organization, due to various factors such as the length of the program, there may be some editing, not necessarily intentional editing as everyone might imagine. But we need to make another inference: since it could be suspected, then it is not good. From a broader perspective, if the complete video had been broadcasted, it would actually make people's understanding of this event clearer. You have already moved towards openness and transparency, but the part that wasn't broadcasted instead caused new complications, right?

Host:

This seven or eight-minute video, we actually saw too, all it showed was the deceased chasing and beating the police, without showing the final moment when the police hit the deceased.

Bai Yaosong:

But we must pay attention to the issue that when people raise such questions, don't you eventually need to let them see it? First of all, the family should be allowed to see it. This is one point. You must say whether the details can achieve openness and transparency.

There is another detail to consider, such as the attitude in language. Otherwise, the father of the deceased wouldn't raise doubts. They are already criminal suspects, how can you still say they are 'one of us'? And saying 'died after running to the guardrail.' See, in the future, achieving openness and transparency is not just about doing it or not, but more importantly, considering whether every detail well implements the principle of openness and transparency.

Video Premiere: www.girl521.com----