搜尋歷史
熱門搜尋
經銷商登入 / 註冊
From the green belt to the bamboo cicada, the 'hidden war' between Chinese automakers has gone public.
Regarding the 'Bamboo Cicada' incident that has caused a storm in the industry, on August 5, official media 'Zhejiang Propaganda' published an article like this: 'Four Thoughts on the Bamboo Cicada Incident.'
The article states: The stronger the enterprise, the greater its tolerance for discussion. In the 'Bamboo Cicada' incident, many netizens participated in the discussion by releasing videos, etc. This was not to deny Huawei's technical strength, nor was it to question China's technological innovation, but rather grassroots expression centered around certain communication symbols of enterprises. This expression is more about exploring the boundary between commercial rights protection and internet meme culture, reflecting higher scrutiny standards for behavior of top enterprises, and is a soft form of public opinion feedback.
But what netizens worry about is: If various jokes and teasing are considered attacks, and if brand dignity is equated to 'cannot be discussed', then the margin for error for online expression will continue to be compressed, derivative creation and memes will be easily over-interpreted, and making statements will become increasingly restrained.
Zhejiang Propaganda also specifically mentioned: High-profile expression must withstand scrutiny. Zhejiang Propaganda pointed out: For example, Huawei Executive Director and Terminal BG Chairman Richard Yu stated at a press conference that whether within 5 million or 10 million, AITO M9 is the most powerful SUV among currently launched models on Earth, hands down.
'Most Powerful' 'Hands down' such unreserved statements, indeed tend to be amplified in communication. When an enterprise emphasizes its own advantages with absolute language, consumers will naturally ask: Why is it the 'most powerful'? What is the standard? Once a disconnect appears between communication expression and user actual feelings, the rhetoric originally used to build trust may become a target for netizen jokes or even sarcasm.
After Zhejiang Propaganda published this article, it immediately triggered an uproar. Surprisingly, 'Half-Month Talk', a magazine under Xinhua News Agency, reprinted the article verbatim. Does this mean official media collectively stepped in to criticize Harmony Intelligent Mobility's 'dominance'?
Regarding the so-called 'Bamboo Cicada' incident, the AI software Doubao gave such an explanation:
In the December 2023 AITO M9 press conference, Richard Yu said the hit line 'Best SUV within 10 million', and the audience on site let out continuous 'Wow' sounds of surprise, becoming a network meme circulated for years in the auto circle.
In July 2026, some netizens accidentally found that the wawa sound emitted by the Bamboo Cicada rotating is highly similar to the collective surprise sound of the audience at the press conference. Many bloggers started making derivative short videos: the screen shows hand-cranking the Bamboo Cicada, the soundtrack is the original press conference audio, and the caption plays on the meme: Best toy within 10 million, leading by shaking.
At that time, it was widely rumored online that Harmony Intelligent Mobility legal department complained and took down videos as soon as they saw Bamboo Cicada videos, even videos that only posted Bamboo Cicada without any follow-up interpretation were also complained and taken down. Public opinion was immediately in an uproar.
How real is the situation? On August 4, a Harmony Intelligent Mobility spokesperson issued a statement:
For a long time, malicious editing, impersonation of relevant executive voices, using AI to defame portraits, false attribution, slander, etc., content infringing on personal legal rights has been continuously existing on the network. We have always conducted daily evidence collection and complaints in accordance with the law. This complaint is part of daily rights protection work, targeting specific infringing content, not targeting the 'Bamboo Cicada' toy. As of the evening of August 4, a total of 56,000+ relevant online information was monitored. We actually initiated complaints against 171 specific infringing content items, and the platform feedback indicated 144 were taken down.
The Harmony Intelligent Mobility spokesperson clearly pointed out in the statement that complaints were initiated against only 171 items, and the platform feedback indicated 144 were taken down. In other words, among these 171 videos, at least 84% of videos were judged as non-compliant by the platform. Then, where did the information spread on the internet that Harmony Intelligent Mobility complains whenever seeing Bamboo Cicada come from?
Even more shocking is, regarding the same event, official media showed divergence, with high tension between them. On the evening of August 5, 'Jiangsu News', also an official media, published an article like this: Those advising Huawei to be generous, are you suitable?
Jiangsu News stated: It is quite rare that when Huawei is maliciously attacked and takes rights protection action voluntarily, someone still jumps out to advise it — large enterprises should be generous, only listening seriously to advice is true confidence, etc., with an air of teaching large enterprises how to do things,
Essentially, it is a posture of justifying black traffic, guiding public opinion with words that seem rational, neutral, and objective on the surface, but actually blur legal boundaries, affect market judgment, and damage the business environment, which is a bit inappropriate.
Since 'Jiangsu News' mentioned in the article 'Someone jumps out to advise it — large enterprises should be generous', which is highly related to what was mentioned in 'Zhejiang Propaganda' article 'The stronger the enterprise, the greater its tolerance for discussion', outsiders widely speculate that Jiangsu News is directly 'retorting' against relevant figures represented by the 'Zhejiang Propaganda' article.
Official media directly stepping in to 'fight', this is a rare thing in the past car circle.
Coincidentally, on July 30, Xiaomi Auto held the Xiaomi Pengcheng Technology Launch Event, when Xiaomi Company founder Lei Jun announced the price of Xiaomi's new car N90 Max, he specially said such a sentence: 'I can assertively say that N90 Max is one of the best models among Range Extender SUVs within 500,000 yuan.' What is interesting is, when Lei Jun mentioned 'models' here, he intentionally made a longer pause, and then added words like 'one of'.
After the Xiaomi Pengcheng Technology Launch Event, on August 3, Xiaomi PR Head Xu Jieyun posted a Weibo like this: 'Encourage real awesome, strike down exaggerating awesome', presumably alluding to the industry 'exaggerated marketing' phenomenon. The two events happened one after the other, since it coincided with the escalation of the Harmony Intelligent Mobility 'Bamboo Cicada' incident, triggering extensive discussion in the industry.
Is this Xiaomi intentionally targeting Huawei?
It is not an isolated incident. As early as September 16, 2025 at the Harmony Intelligent Mobility Stelato S9T New Product Launch Event, Huawei's Richard Yu publicly said such a paragraph: 'You say our cars are racing for two-second acceleration performance, or three-second acceleration performance, this is meaningless, you know? What is truly important is safety. Drifting directly on the road, drifting to other lanes, drifting to the green belt. Everyone thinks drifting is a very impressive performance, on highways, in city roads, you simply cannot drift easily, drifting will only bring traffic accidents. You think drifting in the city is how cool, I say that is the most stupid behavior, safety is the most important.'
Since Xiaomi SU7 Max version and SU7 ULTRA version both have extremely strong acceleration capabilities, and frequently there are incidents of Xiaomi SU7 running onto green belts in folklore, some netizens called Xiaomi SU7 'Green Belt God of War', and Xiaomi also specifically debunked rumors for this. In such a background, Richard Yu's paragraph is generally interpreted by the industry as alluding to Xiaomi.
Added to that in the early years Lei Jun had publicly called out to 'Defeat Huawei'. No matter what background this sentence was based on, at first glance, this information undoubtedly conveyed the signal to people that Xiaomi and Huawei are 'arch enemies'.
This time Bamboo Cicada incident, Zhejiang Propaganda, Jiangsu News stepped in turn, standing at completely opposite positions to comment on the same thing, which is truly rare.
What felt unexpected was, on August 6, a netizen posted a Lianhe Zaobao article, Lianhe Zaobao stated in the article: 'Facing the huge Chinese public opinion market, using power to pressure netizens is actually the lower strategy, ignoring it is the middle strategy, being able to like Lei Jun turn positive communication through self-mockery or other techniques is the upper strategy'. From Lianhe Zaobao's viewpoint, its stance of praising Xiaomi and mocking Huawei is obvious. This again triggered an uproar in domestic public opinion.
From multiple angles, the hidden struggle between Huawei and Xiaomi seems to be upgrading. Our view is: Two top enterprises hidden struggle, and duration is prolonged, is both a manifestation of the industry competition becoming fierce, and also caused by the objective factors of industry high-speed development. In such a scenario, whether it is Huawei or Xiaomi, remaining restrained in public opinion, maintaining high standards in products, ensuring legal compliance in marketing communication, or perhaps is the way to solve mutual respect.
