In today's digital age, news about "some streamer earning millions overnight" is commonplace. Live streaming sales have made shopping more convenient, but the costs behind it are hard to ignore. Some products in live streaming rooms seem to offer high cost-performance ratios, but in reality, low prices often come with quality concerns. To clear inventory, manufacturers supply influencers at low prices, cutting out middlemen, which leads to a continuous shrinkage of the share of the real economy, and many once-stable jobs are gradually disappearing.
For those who work hard, they are not eliminated due to lack of effort, but rather because the distribution of resources in society is becoming increasingly unfair. More and more manufacturers are joining this vicious competition to survive, resulting in lower prices and poorer quality, creating a vicious cycle. Ordinary people eagerly rush to buy, only to find that the quality does not meet expectations, leading to a naturally high return rate. Even more worrying is that many physical stores are closing because they cannot compete online, resulting in a livelihood crisis for countless families. They work diligently; have they done something wrong?
In stark contrast are the high commissions taken by platforms and the generous rebates for streamers. They make a fortune, while ordinary people suffer. Is this development model truly sustainable? Are we left helplessly watching our lives being shattered by the wave of live streaming sales? Some may argue that market competition is a natural law, survival of the fittest. However, does this competition inadvertently exacerbate social inequality?
When the rise of a major streamer means unemployment for thousands, what is the meaning of such competition? Those streamers who loudly proclaim to seek benefits for the common people and lower prices, often address their audience as "family," claiming to fight for the public's interests. When consumers are filled with anticipation, they believe they have finally found guardians of consumption.
However, when the "79 eyebrow pencil incident" occurred, the words "reflect on why you can't afford it, is it because you don't work hard enough" felt like a sharp blade, piercing the hearts of countless people. The once dragon-slaying youth now stands high above, blaming consumers. Looking at the recent "Hong Kong mooncake" incident, false advertising transformed mooncakes from Guangzhou into high-end Hong Kong mooncakes, exposing their profit-seeking nature. Those streamers who once spoke eloquently in front of the camera seem to have long ceased to be grassroots; behind them lies a chain of interests. Their original intentions have long been lost in the fog of profit, and forgetting righteousness for profit has become their new label.
Has the once dragon-slaying youth unknowingly become the evil dragon? In this fiercely competitive market, the crisis of bottomless competition has led to fewer businesses operating with integrity, replaced by "cutting leeks" behavior that disregards consequences for profit. This phenomenon not only disappoints consumers but also leaves those who conduct business honestly feeling helpless. Faced with such a situation, many people begin to choose to "follow the trend," trying to survive in this bottomless market. However, following the trend is by no means a long-term solution; instead, it may exacerbate market chaos and distrust.
We need to call for more integrity in business and a sense of social responsibility. Finally, let me say, please leave a glimmer of hope for ordinary people! If even this light is extinguished, the ultimate sufferers will not only be ordinary people; those at the top will also eventually face the night.