Recently, an incident occurred in Qingdao where an elderly man wearing an armband confronted a mobile vendor, who is suspected to be a university student. The incident began when the elderly man, a security guard on duty at May Fourth Square, discovered a moving vendor and became very angry, driving him away. During the process, a verbal conflict ensued between the two parties. It was clear that this elderly man had done this before; he believed his words could intimidate the other person, saying things like "who do you think you are," and his expression particularly caused extreme discomfort among netizens.
The incident quickly escalated online, triggering a series of reactions. The negative impact on Qingdao's tourism due to the spread of this incident is incalculable, prompting the relevant parties to contact the videographer, requesting him not to post it online and demanding the video be destroyed. However, this action was exposed, leading to even greater public outcry. In this situation, the tourism authority decided to change the original punishment to dismissal.
As we all know, Qingdao is a famous tourist city in China, but this city often experiences some disharmonious phenomena, such as the previous incident where a large shrimp cost 30 yuan, and now a mere security guard can bully a mobile vendor at will. This indicates that the quality of the staff related to this tourist city is questionable.
It is understandable for a security guard to perform his duties, but abusing power during this process and displaying a petty demeanor is something that the vast majority of netizens cannot tolerate.
After this incident occurred, the relevant management did not provide an appropriate response. They chose to communicate in a way that would avoid conflict, hoping the videographer would delete the video and stating that they had punished the elderly man according to their regulations. Clearly, they wanted to downplay the situation with a passive approach. This handling not only failed to quickly mitigate the impact on the city's tourism but also exacerbated the negative effects. As the management, their first reaction should have been to respond officially and make a decision immediately, rather than attempting to suppress the incident. Therefore, the crisis management behavior of the relevant tourism authority is evidently quite inadequate.
Of course, the emergence of such phenomena also indicates that the training of relevant personnel is merely superficial. From the iceberg theory perspective, this only exposes a small corner, suggesting that there are more serious issues behind it.
Similar incidents occur almost every year in Qingdao, which requires reflection from society, the government, and relevant institutions. Why is it that as a tourist city, they cannot even provide the most basic services? Why do similar incidents happen year after year? Why are the handling methods inappropriate when such incidents occur? Why can’t these negative occurrences be nipped in the bud?
This incident is fermenting, but it will not last forever, as public opinion will eventually decline after a period of fermentation. However, we cannot ignore the existence of the problem just because public opinion will decline. Otherwise, if there is an arrogant elderly man this year, will there be another arrogant elderly man next year? If such issues are not eradicated, what will be the potential impact on Qingdao's tourism?
From the official announcement they released, it can be seen that the handling of this incident is escalating, changing from private negotiations and punishment to public dismissal, and nothing more. They did not express gratitude for the supervision from netizens, nor did they show any deep reflection on their future standardized management. This indicates that as an established tourist city, it is fundamentally filled with an air of arrogance.
Of course, this incident merely reflects a situation where lower-level individuals bully other lower-level individuals. However, in the atmosphere of a city's development, why does such a phenomenon occur? Why does a lower-level person display such an ugly demeanor when given a small amount of power? Is the underlying logic a failure of management or a misalignment of values?
Before this incident, there was also a fight between an elderly man and a young man on the Qingdao subway. Of course, the video did not capture the entirety of the incident; the publicly released video only shows an elderly man beating a young man, while the young man did not dare to fight back. Without considering other factors, the video reflects a negative trend where elderly people bully young people.
Later, this incident also attracted the attention of the public security authorities, and the final conclusion or restoration of the truth was that the young man provoked those around him with words after entering the subway, and the elderly man could not help but teach him a lesson. The final resolution was that the young man was administratively detained, while the elderly man faced criminal responsibility. Is the truth of the incident really like this? We cannot know for sure; we can only believe that unless a person is mentally ill or abnormal, they would intentionally bully those around them in public.
However, it is clear that the elderly man with the armband at May Fourth Square and the mobile vendor both have their wits about them. Therefore, the words they expressed basically reflect their true inner feelings.
If management indeed does not allow mobile vendors to sell in such places, then it could have been handled in a friendly and equal manner, rather than with anger. Just because one is a security guard does not mean they are exceptional and have the so-called law enforcement power to trample on others' dignity. To brazenly say, "Why should I explain to you? Who do you think you are?" Why can’t there be an explanation? If it is truly not allowed, why can’t there be an explanation? Saying the other party is "who do you think you are" is also rather arrogant, isn’t it? Of course, the suspected university student did not give him a good response either; since the other party asked him who he was, he gave a strong reply, saying he was his father.
Upon hearing this young man's response, the elderly man immediately became furious and grabbed him, not allowing him to leave. It seemed he was going to take further severe action against him. At this moment, people around began to mediate, saying he was still a child and should not take this matter to heart.
What the people around said seems normal, but upon reflection, it is not normal. Why do they say this? They do not dare to address the issue directly but instead choose to muddy the waters, or say that he is just a child and should not argue with him. This clearly ignited the elderly man's competitive spirit; he felt that this mobile vendor challenged his authority and he must restore his face. Thus, he disdainfully said, "So you’re a university student, huh? Come here, come here," putting on a gangster-like demeanor. Who is he trying to impress?
In summary, this elderly man with the armband in Qingdao has truly brought shame to Qingdao. The response from the relevant tourism department is likely a final response, as although this incident has caused a certain degree of negative impact, it did not result in a fatality or substantial physical conflict, thus it does not fall within the scope of sentencing. However, this incident has sounded an alarm for Qingdao's tourism; if similar incidents continue to occur, will this tourist city need to be put in quotation marks?