Characteristic fault in Ma name fiasco

It's clear that Jack Ma Yun still enjoys much of the influence he has built up over the years despite keeping a low profile in recent months.

No single incident alluding to anyone else could have instantly wiped out so much wealth as CCTV and People's Daily managed to achieve with their reports that a man surnamed "Ma" in Hangzhou had been placed under criminal compulsory measures for colluding with external forces in an attempt to subvert the state and split the nation.

Although the billionaire has been working for some time to distance himself from Alibaba, that distance is evidently not far enough to insulate the tech giant from the fallout of the reports that someone surnamed Ma was being investigated by the national security authority.

Given the sensitive key words of "Ma", "Hangzhou" and "national security," anyone could have anticipated a stampede in the market.

After Alibaba had more than 9 percent of its market value erased in just such a stampede within minutes, state media clarified it was not Jack Ma but someone whose name had three Chinese characters, not two Chinese characters.

It was an expensive incident. Could it have been deliberate, meant to stir up a market stampede?

Strictly speaking, the reports were correct, based on facts presumably supplied by the national security authority - only that the suspect had a surname the same as Jack Ma and was detained by the authority in Hangzhou, where Jack Ma is also based.

It was a coincidence - if Jack Ma not been so famous internationally, who would have alluded to the Alibaba co-founder?

If it's assumed that a plot or conspiracy was involved for some ulterior motive, it was more likely that CCTV and People's Daily simply ran the release as it was fed by the national security authority, with their editors not even knowing who that "Ma" could be.

They may be blamed for not exercising due diligence before rushing to push the information on their apps.

But they are unlikely the only parties to blame for the extremely expensive blunder.

It was most unlikely a story unearthed by their own reporters but more likely a repetition of the release given to them by the government.

A problem arose here. In view of the sensitivity surrounding Jack Ma, the press release should have been more elaborate in the first place, rather than sticking to the standard practice of making public only the surname and hiding the given names. Then, the misunderstanding would have been avoided.

While the authority giving the information could easily have done better, those at CCTV and other state media should also have exercised greater caution and raised questions after seeing the sensitive key words.

Did they not find the information suspicious?

The multi-billion-dollar fiasco could have been prevented, but it happened probably due to a bureaucratic culture of "making fewer mistakes by doing less."

Although it did not look like a conspiracy in most aspects, the incident showed that anything in relation to "Ma" could be sensitive due to a commonly understood Chinese characteristic.