Yes, you read that right. What I want to compare here is how I, as a father, raise my children.
When the child was young, he was a little naughty and wild.
The walls at home are painted with various lines, which is very annoying.
So, I gave the little guy an order in a very serious tone: No painting on the wall!
However, my prohibition fell completely on deaf ears and had no effect. The walls at home were still "smoky".
After I scrubbed all kinds of things and couldn't bear it anymore, I called my children again and further clarified the prohibition I had given before:
If you paint on the wall again, the brush will be confiscated and destroyed, and you must scrub the wall clean yourself!
The little guy looked at the brush with vigilant and distressed eyes, then looked at the huge wall nervously, and finally felt a little moved.
Then, I am very satisfied with the subsequent results. Although the repeatedly painted walls could not be restored to their original appearance, since then, the children finally understood and implemented the idea that drawings can only be done on paper and cannot be painted on the wall.
You see, a child who has just become sensible understands that if you only say "forbidden" and only explain what you are not allowed to do, this prohibited behavior has no meaning. Anyway, the big deal is just the old pattern of "I did it and you got angry" which doesn't hurt or hurt.
only has clear consequences. It is clearly pointed out that children must bear responsibility for inappropriate behavior. If the walls are soiled, they must scrub themselves and be punished. The paintbrush used to smear the walls must be confiscated and destroyed. Children are really afraid.
Even children understand this.
Looking back, let's look at the news reported by CCTV News client. The principles marked in bold are just principles. Then, the news stopped abruptly.
Now, if you are the "kid" and see this kind of ban that just says "no", do you accept it? How can the practical significance of something like
that talks about principles be highlighted? Is there anyone who doesn't know such a simple thing before telling this principle?
Is the meaning of three orders and five orders just simple repetition? ——You are really used as a repeater!
In fact, we have a complete compensation and accountability system for this kind of behavior of modifying other people's health code for non-epidemic prevention purposes.
talked about the "red code incident" that led to the repeated emphasis on the ban. The compensatory act of “wiping the wall” is to restore the health code of the person whose code has been changed. The accountability system of "confiscating the brushes" is to stop the relevant personnel.
Objective facts exist. However, in the most official news we have seen so far, there is no mention of this situation. What does this mean?
We must be clearly aware of the authoritative position of CCTV News Client in the media. The news released by CCTV can be said to have the actual effect of "giving orders to the commander" to a large extent. Under such an effect,
is equivalent to a father giving requirements to his children. He should describe the specific situation in detail. If you only tell half of the story, just mention the forbidden part, and say nothing about responsibility or punishment, then, at least in the minds of some people who originally had other ideas, this kind of report will be "missing a weight" and there may be opportunities. Can be multiplied. After all, you only said it was prohibited, but did you say what would happen if this situation happens again? The
ban is just a matter of principle. After prohibited behaviors occur, making amends and punishing them are powerful and effective ways to uphold principles. If there are principles but no methods, then the principles are empty and hypocritical. After the
principle is determined, only the methods need to be further clarified and effectively communicated, so that people who are bound by the principle can have effective operational constraints, and only then can the binding meaning of the principle be truly reflected.
#Official: It is never allowed to assign health codes for non-epidemic prevention reasons#
