Li Liang, vice president of Douyin Group, wrote, “I said that Qin Shuo was either bad or stupid; it is my sincere opinion.” Li Liang pointed out, “My argument with Qin Shuo was supposed to end there, but when I saw the criticism of me from the famous Big V Hu Xijin, Weibo also posted trending searches, and WeChat also accurately promoted articles attacking me. I think it is still necessary to clarify.” Li Liang claimed that he was bad because his characterization of “byte time” was very sinister. As an industry observer for decades, of course, he knows that Japan's Nomura Report was used to characterize the Chinese Internet situation, and the conclusions he reached were definitely “not strict” or “thorough,” but why is he unwilling to change it? Eight years ago, WeChat relied on WeChat's monopoly position to ban Douyin sharing, and the lawsuit between the two parties is still inconclusive. Qin Shuo's “Byte Time” unquestionably freed Tencent from its “monopoly” of suffering for decades, and put Byte in the “possible monopoly” narrative, attacking and defending positions. I think if this position becomes a consensus, Qin Shuo will become the greatest “benefactor” in Tencent's history! Li Liang also claimed that he is stupid because his current role is more like a businessman. He has many companies under his own company and undertakes the business of standing up for the company. His manuscripts and appearances are clearly priced and very expensive. The industry knows all about this, and the evidence is not hard to find. However, a few days before that, he had no hesitation in publishing a post for Tencent. I think this is unwise and stupid. “In summary, bad words, I can't talk about it. I really think he's in this situation. Maybe he should just think it in his heart; he shouldn't say it.” Li Liang said.

Li Liang, vice president of Douyin Group, wrote, “I said that Qin Shuo was either bad or stupid; it is my sincere opinion.” Li Liang pointed out, “My argument with Qin Shuo was supposed to end there, but when I saw the criticism of me from the famous Big V Hu Xijin, Weibo also posted trending searches, and WeChat also accurately promoted articles attacking me. I think it is still necessary to clarify.” Li Liang claimed that he was bad because his characterization of “byte time” was very sinister. As an industry observer for decades, of course, he knows that Japan's Nomura Report was used to characterize the Chinese Internet situation, and the conclusions he reached were definitely “not strict” or “thorough,” but why is he unwilling to change it? Eight years ago, WeChat relied on WeChat's monopoly position to ban Douyin sharing, and the lawsuit between the two parties is still inconclusive. Qin Shuo's “Byte Time” unquestionably freed Tencent from its “monopoly” of suffering for decades, and put Byte in the “possible monopoly” narrative, attacking and defending positions. I think if this position becomes a consensus, Qin Shuo will become the greatest “benefactor” in Tencent's history! Li Liang also claimed that he is stupid because his current role is more like a businessman. He has many companies under his own company and undertakes the business of standing up for the company. His manuscripts and appearances are clearly priced and very expensive. The industry knows all about this, and the evidence is not hard to find. However, a few days before that, he had no hesitation in publishing a post for Tencent. I think this is unwise and stupid. “In summary, bad words, I can't talk about it. I really think he's in this situation. Maybe he should just think it in his heart; he shouldn't say it.” Li Liang said.