我们每年看315，图个啥？

▲ Image source: Gala screenshot

2026-03-16 08:24

Why do we watch 315 every year? What are we hoping for?

From WeChat public account: Tech4Young, by Sishao's little universe

Yesterday the hashtag #315Gala had 9.9 billion reads.

9.9 billion.

China has only 1.4 billion people — that’s seven views per person.

Chicken feet, AI poisoning, height‑scam, stock touting … case after case dropped, comments exploded, shares rocketed, everybody cursed passionately, then realised it was already past midnight, washed up and went to sleep.

And then what?

After watching the gala tonight, Sishao kept turning this question in my head:

Every year we sit in front of this show — what are we really after?

Fair first: 315 does work

Don’t rush to curse, let’s be fair first.

315 is not just decoration — it has really bitten.

Remember last year’s exposed chemically soaked shrimp? Zhanjiang Shangfangzhou Food lost its production license, banned from applying for five years, fined over ¥2.26 million, all involved products and illegal income confiscated. Other exposed companies like Zhongqing Haiyang, Liangji Frozen got the same revocation + million‑level fines, Liangji directly started cancellation procedures.

This is not a light "order to rectify" — they really paid a price.

Besides direct penalties, 315 also triggers industry‑wide rectification. This year chicken feet were exposed, and Sichuan Market Supervision Administration immediately launched a provincial special rectification. The problem is not just shutting down two companies, but putting the whole industry through a sieve.

And one more thing — the right to know.

Now you know shrimp need soaking, chicken feet need bleaching, height agencies are IQ tax. Without 315, you probably wouldn’t know. 9.9 billion reads = 9.9 billion "Oh, so that’s how it is".

So, is 315 useful?

Yes.

But —

What it can do is not the same as what you want

OK, here’s the problem.

Exposed companies get punished, industry rectification starts, you know the truth.

But what about the money you lost?

That is the biggest paradox of 315, and the thing Sishao most wants to say after this year’s gala:

The fines go to the government. The losses stay with you.

For example.

Last year’s exposed refurbished sanitary pads, Liangshan Xixi Paper Products. After being investigated, the company didn’t flee — it did something smarter: reduced its registered capital from 1 million to just 10,000 yuan.

10,000 yuan.

What does that mean?

It means even if you try to sue for compensation, legally they can only pay that much. The company still exists, the brand is still there, but the pockets have already been emptied.

Cancellation is not equal to exemption, but for consumers it almost is.

This is not an isolated case — it’s a mature logic. Small workshops exposed → cancel or reduce capital → consumers can’t recover. Tech companies exposed → ¥50,000 fine and that’s it → profits already made. Big food factories heavily fined → millions go to the treasury → your loss from buying bad shrimp, nobody cares.

And then look at rights protection itself.

In 2024, consumer associations received 1.76 million complaints, up 32% year‑on‑year.

Sounds like a lot, right?

But look at another set of data —

When asked the biggest difficulty in protecting rights: 56% said complicated procedures, 54.9% said time‑consuming and disruptive to daily life, 51.4% said businesses are passive and evasive.

And in the end? 12.8% simply gave up.

Not unwilling — just not worth it.

A pack of shrimp costs ¥20‑30, but fighting for rights might take three trips, five phone calls, two months of waiting, and finally get a "verified, will order rectification".

No matter how you calculate, it’s not worth it.

So what do most people choose? 67.5% contact official customer service — they want speed. 44.8% leave bad reviews — they want to vent.

Quick settlement, vent anger.

That is the real state of consumer rights protection in 2026.

Then what are we really after?

After going full circle, back to the original question.

9.9 billion reads — what for?

I thought of three possibilities.

First: to know.

Not everyone bought the bad shrimp, but everyone has eaten shrimp. 315 lets you know this thing exists, next time you buy you think one more second — that’s already valuable information. Knowing is itself a right.

Second: to vent.

People who have been ripped off — at the moment of exposure, don’t you feel a little satisfaction?

The one who sold shoddy stuff is finally put on public display. Even if the fine goes to the government, even if your loss is ignored, that moment of "serves them right" is real emotional value.

Don’t underestimate that vent.

In a reality of information asymmetry, high维权 costs, and weak individual power, being able to let off steam is sometimes all an ordinary person can get.

Third: a sense that someone is in charge.

This one, I think, is the most fundamental.

We watch 315 not really believing it will solve everything, but because we need to believe there is a mechanism running, someone watching, someone pursuing — it’s not completely ungoverned.

This feeling is called security.

Even if it’s incomplete, even if there’s a lot it cannot do.

But Sishao still wants to add one more thing.

This year 315 exposed the problems consumers worry about most — poor quality, false advertising, fakes flooding the market…

This is almost the same exposure list every year.

Exposed year after year, still there year after year.

It shows the problems haven’t disappeared, they’ve just changed shape. Last year it was soaked shrimp, this year it’s still soaked shrimp — just different company names. Last year it was anxiety harvesting, this year still anxiety harvesting — only the methods are more precise.

315 is a lamp, lighting up those corners.

But when the lamp is off, the darkness remains.

So, what are we after?

To keep that lamp on.

And also don’t forget, when the lamp is on, take a good look yourself.

Disclaimer: This article is based on publicly available information or interviews, but Tech4Young and the author do not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of the information mentioned. It does not represent any institution or individual. For copyright issues contact hezuo@huxiu.com.

Channel: Society & Culture

Content from the internet.
Original link, opinions are solely the author's, not representing Huxiu.
For copyright please contact hezuo@huxiu.com.

Those changing and wanting to change the world are on Huxiu App.