A few days ago, Hungry posted a message on its official Weibo, saying that several cartoons published by a WeChat official account comic blogger replaced all the warm-hearted events of the hungry takeaway brother in real life with the takeaway brother of Meituan. Hungry, with the help of the official Weibo platform,? Positive energy? Should be relayed, should not be? Leverage? . Every good deed should be promoted, and should not be? Handling? .

originally a comic book author? Live a billion dollars a day? Recently, a number of cartoons with the theme of selling little brothers were published in its WeChat official account. The whole length of these cartoons used the image of kangaroo ears, which caused public doubts about being hungry. By August 6, the comic book author? Live a billion dollars a day? In Weibo, I sent a response saying,? This incident made us hungry and wronged, and we sincerely apologize; In addition, this cartoon uses the small ears and logo with the characteristics of Meituan without the authorization of Meituan, which also makes Meituan lie down, and we sincerely apologize. ? In addition, this letter of apology also mentioned that? Originally, I thought everyone was a respectable takeaway brother, and the color was not important. It seems that the shopping mall is like a battlefield, and all the plants are soldiers? .

As soon as this apology came out, many netizens began to question the author's insincere attitude. In his cartoon, a group of takeaway brothers with kangaroo ears joined forces to lift a car for 11 seconds to rescue a overturned woman, and there were stories of takeaway brothers who took the high-speed train to deliver milk tea, and stories of takeaway brothers who were physically disabled and determined, etc. Without exception, the story of little brothers was painted by the author as a takeaway brother of the US Mission. The color is not important. Every takeaway brother who worked hard deserves respect, but he was hungry and had been with the US Mission. Deadly enemy? In this way, it is hard to say that the outstanding deeds of employees who are hungry will not have an impact on being hungry.

He said that he didn't think too much from the creator's point of view, but it was first of all a disrespect for the hungry little buddy who really did good deeds. I hope the author really realized his mistake.