When "self-defense" is traded for emotion
In recent days, singer Le Quyen has become the focus of debate on social networks after a series of comments considered harsh by her in response to some accounts on the Threads platform were widely spread.
Notably, the comment originating from the incident was the English sentence "Her flop era lowkey serving" (tentatively understood: no longer at its peak but still quite attractive) of a social network user. However, Le Quyen's strong reaction to the wording considered to be exceeding the limit has caused public controversy.
Faced with this development, the Ho Chi Minh City Department of Culture and Sports confirmed that it had received information and assigned specialized departments to coordinate in considering and resolving the case.
In the response after the scandal, Le Quyen gave many reasons to explain her behavior: she believes that she and her family often suffer from harm from fake news; that responding with a few harsh words is just "sometimes self-defense within control"...
These arguments easily create empathy, because cyberbullying is not a rare experience for celebrities. However, from an objective perspective, using harsh, contemptuous language to respond directly is an unnecessary public behavior in a celebrity because it easily makes the image they have built over the years look ugly and loses sympathy.
Artists in public spaces: personality does not replace standards
According to media expert Hoang Van - CEO of Clover media company, social networks are not an "expanded private life" but an enhanced public space. It both creates a sense of closeness and privacy, and has the ability to spread, store and amplify all statements. For celebrities, each word not only represents the personal ego but also contributes to shaping social communication standards.
Therefore, the boundary between straightforward personality and deviant behavior becomes fragile. A sharp, humorous response can be seen as bravery. But when words are market-oriented, belittling dignity, it is no longer personality but becomes an uncontrolled expression. At that time, artists unintentionally drag themselves lower with the objects they are opposing" - he said.
From a cultural perspective, Mr. Hoang Van raised what is worrying is not just a few shocking sentences, but the message spreading behind that in anger, artists can use the very violent language they are suffering to communicate and respond. For young audiences, it is a deviated signal about how to resolve conflicts. For the community in general, it erodes the standards that are already fragile in the online environment.
Reality shows that many artists who have faced anti-fans, even much more malicious comments, still choose civilized criticism or choose silence.
Silence here is not weakness, but a choice to maintain moral position and professional image.
In the case of Le Quyen, what the public is waiting for is not to prove "I am not wrong", but a change of attitude: acknowledging that the boundary has been crossed and affirming that they will choose a more appropriate way of self-defense in the future. Because for artists, the biggest loss does not lie in sanctions or temporary controversy, but in cultural ethics - which has been built over many years and can break down after just a few minutes of anger" - Mr. Hoang Van analyzed.
Le Quyen's story therefore goes beyond a "chat log" on the internet. It becomes a reminder that in cyberspace, the right to freedom of expression always goes hand in hand with social responsibility. Personality can make a mark, but only civilization can help artists stand firm for a long time in front of the public.
