Okay, let's break down the situation involving Lisa (Lalisa Manobal) appearing on a Chinese magazine cover after her controversial remarks, using a rational analysis to identify who might be responsible.
The situation involves several key actors and factors:
1. "Lisa (Lalisa Manobal):" The former brand ambassador for a Chinese cosmetic brand (Perfect Diary), who made controversial and offensive remarks about China and the Chinese people in a personal vlog shortly after joining the brand. 2. "The Chinese Magazine:" The publisher of the magazine featuring Lisa on its cover. 3. "Perfect Diary:" The Chinese cosmetic brand that employed Lisa as an ambassador. 4. "The Public (Chinese netizens):" Who reacted strongly and negatively to Lisa's remarks. 5. "Perfect Diary:" Who initially hired Lisa and later terminated her contract. 6. "(Indirectly) SM Entertainment:" Lisa's agency, which also faced criticism.
"Rational Analysis of Responsibility:"
Responsibility isn't always singular; it's often shared among multiple parties based on their actions, motivations, and roles in the events.
1. "Lisa:" "Responsibility:" She holds primary responsibility for the words and actions she herself committed. Her vlog was a direct act of making offensive remarks, which damaged the image of the Chinese people and the country. This initial action set off the entire chain of events. Her decision to potentially engage in

相關(guān)內(nèi)容：

?

理智分析辱華品牌代言人能否上中國(guó)雜志封面，甚至上中國(guó)綜藝？

分析以上這個(gè)問題前，先分析第一個(gè)問題！

?

?

第一：在阿迪達(dá)斯14位中國(guó)代言人全部解約后，國(guó)外藝人是否需要跟隨中國(guó)藝人的腳步解約？

這個(gè)答案顯然是不需要的，非本國(guó)藝人與品牌的合作本來就與本國(guó)無(wú)關(guān)，我們國(guó)家也不會(huì)去干涉別國(guó)藝人的行為！

?

?

第二：是否要限制這些辱華品牌的代言人來中國(guó)演出？同限韓令一樣！

這個(gè)問題就值得商榷了，限韓令是因?yàn)轫n國(guó)聽從美國(guó)在本土布置薩德，危害到中國(guó)安全問題，事件嚴(yán)重性很大，所以這類限制令上升到了對(duì)一個(gè)國(guó)家的封鎖！

而這次看得出來美國(guó)還在“試探”階段，通過“新疆棉花”來看看我們的反應(yīng)，相信之后會(huì)有更大的動(dòng)作，其實(shí)這招之前，美國(guó)也用過，就是對(duì)付華為，tiktok（抖音國(guó)際版），不過當(dāng)時(shí)因?yàn)槟承┨貏e原因，中國(guó)的娛樂圈并沒有這么大反應(yīng)。

可能某一種原因是因?yàn)?，那些企業(yè)是私企，美國(guó)利用商業(yè)、經(jīng)濟(jì)斗爭(zhēng)的原因來制裁，但這次不一樣，對(duì)中國(guó)進(jìn)行了人權(quán)的抹黑，以此為由，聯(lián)合歐盟、加拿大等國(guó)家聯(lián)合國(guó)際品牌一起制裁具有強(qiáng)烈地域標(biāo)識(shí)的企業(yè)，中國(guó)“忍無(wú)可忍”！或許他們也沒想到，這次我們的反應(yīng)會(huì)這么強(qiáng)烈！

?

?

但不扯出來談別的，回到lisa事件本身上！

第一：明星的確是品牌的代言人，可抵制明星之前不應(yīng)該先抵制品牌嗎？中國(guó)能否做到先將這些辱華品牌全部“請(qǐng)出去”呢？之前看到成都拆下了“HM”的公告牌，那是否其他地區(qū)，其他品牌，也應(yīng)該如此“對(duì)待”呢？

第二：這件事責(zé)任一部分要?dú)w于這本中國(guó)雜志，因?yàn)槿耸请s志定的，當(dāng)出現(xiàn)“危機(jī)”時(shí)，應(yīng)該更換拍攝藝人，或者和“青你”一樣，好好處理，延期發(fā)行。

第三：如果前面兩件事無(wú)法做到，請(qǐng)不要為難打工人！更不要被一些利益競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，結(jié)果輿論被帶了風(fēng)?向?！保持理智對(duì)待！

?

?