From November 7 to 9, Xinhuanet published three commentaries titled "Unstoppable Tricks, Out-of-Reach Regulation," "Arbitrarily Adjusting Merchant Prices Is an Act of 'Bullying'," and "Abusing AI Models May Cross Legal Boundaries."
Below are the full texts:
**Xinhuanet Commentary 1: "Unstoppable Tricks, Out-of-Reach Regulation"** When browsing online ticket platforms, consumers often opt for the "lowest price" flights listed at the top. However, many discover only after payment that the so-called "discount" quietly includes additional fees like "refund protection," turning what seemed like a bargain into an overpriced purchase. Such carefully designed "tricks" by platforms leave consumers defenseless.
From pre-checked add-on services to fine-print fees and post-payment pop-up "service explanations," even the most cautious shoppers struggle to avoid pitfalls.
Compounding the frustration is the difficulty in seeking redress—platforms update their deceptive tactics faster than regulators can respond. Local regulators admit that while many ticketing platforms are headquartered in major cities, their operations span nationwide. When disputes arise, jurisdictional authorities often find themselves "able to regulate but unable to enforce," as cross-regional coordination is costly and inefficient. Many cases end in mere "mediation," failing to deter platforms effectively.
To curb these "hidden tricks," regulators must break down geographical barriers, ensuring swift accountability regardless of a platform’s headquarters location. Clear rules and penalties targeting "low-price baiting" and "hidden bundling" should be enforced to eliminate loopholes. Additionally, simplifying cross-region complaint procedures would prevent consumers from being left helpless.
Relying on tricks for quick profits is ultimately self-defeating. When consumers lose trust and vote with their feet, even the most elaborate schemes and flashy marketing will fail to retain users.
**Xinhuanet Commentary 2: "Arbitrarily Adjusting Merchant Prices Is an Act of 'Bullying'"** Recent topics like "platforms adjusting prices five times a day" and "small hotels jointly reporting OTA platforms for price interference" have sparked heated discussions.
On one side, merchants complain about losing pricing autonomy, with costs and profits spiraling out of control. On the other, consumers face erratic prices for identical products or rooms, undermining their shopping experience. Platforms’ unilateral price adjustments, disguised as "supply-demand optimization," are in fact overreach that harms multiple stakeholders.
Whether for small shops, independent hotels, or online vendors, pricing reflects cost calculations and service commitments. Yet some platforms exploit their traffic monopoly, using "algorithm optimization" as an excuse to arbitrarily hike prices for profit or force merchants into loss-making promotions. Worse, some adjust prices without notifying merchants, leaving them unaware of selling at a loss or overpricing and losing customers.
Such overreach ultimately shifts costs onto consumers. While shoppers might occasionally snag a "bargain," merchants compensating for platform-induced losses may cut product quality or services, hurting long-term consumer interests.
Many merchants, reliant on platforms for traffic, endure these "bully clauses" silently. But such practices violate e-commerce laws prohibiting "unreasonable restrictions on transaction prices" and disrupt fair competition.
Pricing power is no trivial matter. Platforms should facilitate supply-demand connections, not manipulate prices. A healthy ecosystem requires platforms to respect merchants’ autonomy and consumers’ right to transparency. Only integrity can build lasting market trust and mutual success.
**Xinhuanet Commentary 3: "Abusing AI Models May Cross Legal Boundaries"** As the "Double 11" shopping festival winds down, merchants are making a final push for traffic. Yet some consumers find delivered clothing items starkly mismatched with AI-model displays—colors and materials so off they’re nearly "misrepresented." Behind this lies blatant misuse of AI technology.
AI models, initially an innovative tool for e-commerce, can reduce photoshoot costs and diversify styling references. However, some merchants have weaponized the tech, using flawlessly rendered AI models to conceal product flaws.
While AI models move naturally on-screen—adjusting sleeves, turning gracefully—this hyper-polished "perfection" is a carefully crafted deception. The gap between expectation and reality not only violates consumers’ right to accurate information but also erodes commercial trust.
Merchants prioritizing "perfect illusions" over actual quality will face backlash: soaring return rates, ballooning售后 costs, and eroded trust.
The "AI-Generated Content Labeling Measures," effective September 1, mandate clear labeling of AI content to curb misuse. Existing laws like the Consumer Rights Protection Law and E-Commerce Law also prohibit false advertising. Abusing AI models risks legal consequences.
Online shopping is about products, not pictures. What truly retains customers is genuine quality and service—not artificial perfection.
Comments