Summary of Key Points
This article focuses on the latest developments in the controversy surrounding the scriptwriter of "Fanhua": Gu Er (Cheng Junnian) made another revelation 12 days before the opening of the defamation lawsuit, escalating his accusations from initial issues regarding copyright to more serious allegations of tax violations and drug-related offenses. He also made public a WeChat conversation with Wong Kar-wai, which is considered direct evidence of his involvement in the core creation of the script. The article analyzes the dynamics of public opinion: Gu Er uses the image of a "vulnerable individual" to gain an advantage in the media landscape. It highlights that there are two different versions of Gu Er—one portraying him as a helpless outsider and the other as a professional within the industry—and discusses the dilemma faced by the production team in responding to these accusations, with clear consequences such as the withdrawal of related works from broadcast. Finally, the article offers three practical tips for both professionals and ordinary people.
I. The Escalation of the Controversy: From "Copyright" to "Tax Violations and Drug Charges"—How Serious Is This Time?
Gu Er's new revelations are even more substantial than before:
- Tax Issues: Recordings show that a producer mentioned using a newly registered company in another location to handle invoices, salaries, and tax payments (which may indicate tax evasion or non-compliance).
- Drug Charges: The executive producer claimed to have brought "dead vine water" (a substance under national control) across borders for group consumption (which is illegal).
- Direct Evidence: He made public a 2019 WeChat conversation with Wong Kar-wai, in which Wong mentioned that Gu Er's script was starting to show more style and suggested that Qin Wen should adjust the details—this is considered solid evidence of his involvement in "Fanhua's" creation.
- Celebrity Gossip: The recordings also contain private remarks by Wong Kar-wai about Tang Yan being pretentious, You Benchang being inefficient, and Qin Wen having trouble remembering her lines (though the full context has not been made public).
The facts that have been confirmed so far are: Gu Er began making allegations in 2022 and released recordings multiple times since September 2025. The production team has issued three statements but has not directly denied the authenticity of the recordings. The police have only confirmed that the claim about assaulting a police officer to secure someone's release was an exaggeration; the rest of the allegations remain unresolved. What remains to be proven are whether the recordings have been edited, the extent of Gu Er's contribution to the scriptwriting, and the sincerity of his "vulnerable" persona.
II. Public Opinion Is One-Sided: How Does the "Vulnerable Narrative" Capture People's Hearts?
Why does Gu Er receive sympathy despite stealing private conversations? He presents himself as a "triple victim":
1. Professional Vulnerability: A low-paid employee compared to a top Hong Kong director (Wong Kar-wai) and a renowned screenwriter (Qin Wen).
2. Health Vulnerability: He claims to suffer from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, making his efforts to protect his rights seem like a desperate struggle for survival.
3. Methodological Vulnerability: Stealing recordings is the only evidence he has at his disposal.
This aligns with the online tendency to sympathize with the vulnerable: People do not question whether the recording was illegal but rather wonder, "Given how miserable he is, what more can he possibly ask for?" The more the production team emphasizes rules (such as filing a lawsuit or issuing statements), the more they are seen as "the big bully targeting the small," shifting public opinion in Gu Er's favor.
III. The Crucial Variable: Which Version of Gu Er Is True?
Public opinion is overwhelmingly in Gu Er's favor, based on his self-painted image of vulnerability. However, another version of him exists online:
- He is 183 cm tall, from Shanghai, with a bachelor's degree from the Central Academy of Drama and a master’s degree in film from the United States.
- He has worked as a director at the National Theatre Company, with over 700 performances, and his musicals have been nominated for theater festivals.
These two versions are vastly different:
- If the "vulnerable" version is true, public sympathy will persist regardless of the production team's response.
- If the "professional" version is true, it would be a dispute within the industry (not just bullying of a lower-ranked individual), and public sympathy might turn into criticism for his perceived act of playing the victim.
Neither version has been verified yet, but either could change public opinion at any time. This highlights the weakness of Gu Er's narrative and the production team's only chance to counter it.
IV. The Dilemma of the Production Team's Silence: Is Remaining Silent Really the Best Option?
The production team has remained largely silent for nearly a year, not because they don't want to speak but because they are afraid of making things worse:
- They fear that admitting more could lead to further damage if Gu Er's claims are true.
- They worry about implicating other celebrities (such as Tang Yan and Chen Daoming) in the recordings, which could cause additional problems.
However, the cost of silence is significant: The show "Love Is Not a Myth" (written by Qin Wen) was withdrawn from CCTV-8, giving Gu Er complete control over the narrative. The article suggests two approaches:
1. If Gu Er is pretending to be vulnerable, the production team should verify the facts (such as his education, work experience, and whether the recordings have been edited) and present evidence rather than just issuing statements.
2. If Gu Er's claims are true, there is no other option but to admit their mistake sincerely, as公关 strategies cannot change the truth.
V. Three Tips for Everyone: Not Just Relevant to the Entertainment Industry
This controversy provides insights for both professionals and businesses:
1. Be Cautious in Semi-Private Settings: Conversations during dinners, meetings, or work groups can be recorded and leaked. If you can't control others' phones, be careful with what you say.
2. Clear Professional Protocols Are Essential: Clearly define rights to authorship, salaries, and contracts to avoid misunderstandings. Resolve disputes internally and prevent them from spreading online.
3. Silence Does Not Guarantee Innocence: In a public opinion crisis, refusing to communicate is like giving the other party control over the narrative. A sincere response is more effective than staying silent.
The controversy is not over, and the final outcome will depend on the court's judgment and the truth. Nevertheless, it serves as a reminder that in the realm of public opinion, facts are key, but the image one presents and how they communicate can also influence the outcome. Everyone should learn to protect themselves, and businesses should know how to handle crises to prevent small issues from escalating into major problems.