How to evaluate the seven-year interview draft of Fan Paopao?

Before I watched Fan Paopao for seven years, I knew nothing about the hero except the origin of his name. Just like watching Panic Pang before, I know nothing except this famous heroic work. ? After reading these two articles, my feeling is: I can choose to like or dislike "Fan Paopao", but I can only choose to hate "Pang". ? Perhaps the biggest difference between these two articles lies in whether the spectator has a choice of position. ? As a media operator, when I read many articles, my identity is not the reader, but the author. -Why did the author write this? What was the author thinking when he wrote these words? What kind of emotion does TA hope to arouse readers? What kind of public opinion orientation does TA want to cause after the article is put into use? This switching of perspectives is unconscious. Especially when I realized that I couldn't "choose" and felt kidnapped. ? There is no doubt that both protagonists appear in our field of vision with negative (or non-positive) images. However, no one is perfect, and it is impossible for a person to have only advantages and disadvantages. As readers, what they want from media is the right to know. For products or enterprises or events, that is the truth behind them, and the characters will be much more complicated. Because people are alive and three-dimensional, everyone is a complex of contradictions, which is difficult to assert and judge. Maybe what you wrote is true, but what readers want is a complete "person". Journalists are the eyes of readers, and I can learn about other unknown aspects of the characters through you. Of course, as an author, you can tell me your opinion, but in the end, please let me decide for myself. ? Here I want to say that when you read an in-depth report about controversial figures (sometimes including events), if you can only see one side, an evaluation, a position and a value orientation, please be alert.