China's livestream e-commerce arena has never been short of drama. From the fall of "Lipstick King" Li Jiaqi due to controversial remarks to repeated controversies surrounding "Crazy Little Yang" over false advertising claims, the battle between popularity and credibility continues to unfold. In this high-stakes game, consumer rights advocate Wang Hai has emerged as a pivotal figure, wielding his sword against industry malpractices and consequently clashing with numerous top influencers.
The "Historic Meeting" in the Livestream: A Lavish Display of Goodwill
The unexpected development occurred recently when Wang Hai was exposing a case of online celebrity extortion during his livestream. To everyone's surprise, "Crazy Little Yang" - an influencer with hundreds of millions of followers - suddenly appeared in the chat, showering the stream with expensive virtual gifts. Even more astonishing was Yang's subsequent request for a live connection, where he adopted an unusually humble tone, repeatedly addressing Wang as "Brother Hai."
During their conversation, Yang extended multiple olive branches, inviting Wang to inspect his company's product selection process and emphasizing his consumer-first philosophy. "Brother Hai, I'm absolutely serving consumers. If I were engaged in any misconduct, I would have been gone long ago," Yang asserted, attempting to mend fences through apparent sincerity.
Wang, however, responded with skepticism: "You've been involved with Putian medical scams for years - if cheating people works, you just keep doing it." Undeterred, Yang continued his conciliatory approach, explaining his relatively recent entry into the business and seeking Wang's guidance for improvement.
The influencer even offered to directly transfer money to Wang, joking about opening a special livestream to send him 100,000 yuan. These gestures inevitably sparked speculation about potential "hush money" arrangements among viewers.
A Shift in Stance: Consumer Rights Remain the Bottom Line
Under Yang's persistent charm offensive, Wang's attitude gradually softened. While agreeing to future discussions, he maintained his focus on consumer protection: "The priority is resolving consumer issues properly! Where threefold refunds are warranted, give threefold; where tenfold applies..." Yang quickly affirmed his compliance with these standards.
This seemingly cordial exchange masked underlying tensions. Just one month prior, Wang had publicly accused Yang of inflating livestream viewership through paid audiences and edited content clips, allegedly spending 16 million yuan monthly on such practices. Their sudden "reconciliation" presents a stark contrast to previous hostilities.
Behind the "Truce": A Calculated PR Strategy?
Whether this represents genuine remorse or strategic bargaining remains unclear, but Yang's approach undoubtedly constitutes sophisticated crisis management. Wang had previously exposed multiple violations in Yang's sales campaigns, including problematic blenders, toxic children's shoes, false advertising, and viewership manipulation.
Facing mounting pressure, Yang's proactive outreach serves dual purposes: demonstrating commitment to consumers through Wang's platform while potentially co-opting the watchdog as a quality control consultant. This could both rehabilitate his image and provide future insulation against product issues.
However, the maneuver carries risks. Many consumers interpret Yang's approach as admission of guilt regarding product quality. Moreover, Wang's continued vigilance - evidenced by his pinned post about the toxic shoes controversy - suggests the watchdog hasn't fully abandoned his oversight role.
For Yang, the path to lasting success lies not in public relations gambits but in genuine improvements to product quality and consumer service. As China's livestream commerce sector matures, only those prioritizing consumer rights will maintain sustainable positions in this competitive landscape.