Telling both sides of online story.doc

Telling both sides of online story Updated: 2013-08-30 10:36By Jason Chu (China Daily) Editors note: Chu, a Fudan University lecturer, writes a micro-blog under the name Wenyuangedaxueshi, or Great Scholar. He has more than 50,000 followers on Sina Weibo. Weibo is certainly a good channel for disseminating information, but the cases of Qinhuohuo and Lierchaisi should sound warning bells for netizens, because they emphasize that we should be responsible for what we say, especially micro-bloggers with many followers, even though the Internet is a virtual space. However, many legal professionals have raised the question: Should the government be directly involved in cases of this sort? If rumors damage peoples reputations, it seems more reasonable for the victims themselves to come forward and request moral and legal help. I think it is a legal topic open to discussion because its also related to the definition of freedom of speech. I believe these cases will prove beneficial by helping to clarify the definition of freedom of speech. Its important to combat rumors, but there must be a strict distinction between rumor and truth. We need truth, but not a Department of Truth. Qinhuohuos case reminds me to exercise caution when I want to forward some exciting micro-blogs. All micro-bloggers want to become popular online and attract a lot of comments and forwards, but rumors should not be encouraged. I heard a story during a dinner in the summer of 2012. I took it down and posted it on a micro-blog. More than 20,000 people forwarded the post. However, some people said it was a just rumor and reported the case to Sina Weibo. I usually dont bother to defend myself, even if people question me online and, as a result, it was decided that I had fabricated the rumor and then spread it. My user account was suspended for two weeks. Later, I dined with the subject of the story and he gave me his version of events, which was generally the same as what Id posted, altho