Zhang Hong (Institute of Cultural Criticism of Tongji University), as a group representing the social elite, the status of public intellectuals has gradually changed in people's minds, saying that a person's "knowledge" has been seriously derogated, and even the name "mother's knowledge" has been derived. The reputation of intellectuals is being stigmatized. What is the reason? A brief history of the stigma of "well-known" In contemporary history, the names of intellectuals have been deeply branded politically. For a long time, it was associated with the bourgeoisie (or petty bourgeoisie) and became synonymous with political unreliability. In view of its poor political reputation, it was demoted as "smelly Laojiu" and despised by the revolutionary masses. Later, it was renamed and became part of the working class. Nevertheless, under the current background, they and the working class can identify with each other, even if they are not mutually exclusive. Intellectuals in contemporary China are like the often inflamed cecum in the social structure. Although it is not destined to be completely cut off, it will always make people feel dull pain. In fact, in the 1980s, China intellectuals began to form as an independent social group. In the1990s, these knowledge groups disappeared one after another. At the same time, as a knowledge production space, the college began to expand rapidly and became the largest knowledge factory. Due to the expansion of the college and the improvement of the college system, knowledge production is no longer just a pure spiritual activity, but closely related to the interests of producers. Through a series of administrative measures, such as professional title evaluation, job evaluation and employment, scientific research project establishment and academic fund allocation, most intellectuals are strictly limited within the scope of the college system. On the other hand, the disciplines of modern colleges are highly subdivided, and the integrity of knowledge no longer exists. A series of related concepts involved in the problem of public intellectuals, such as civil society, public sphere, public nature, knowledge production and dissemination, public interest, social knowledge, etc., are themselves the products of highly detailed division of knowledge. As scholar Xu Jilin pointed out: "This academic trend has formed a double fracture inside and outside the intellectuals. Within it, the original unified knowledge field is divided into small professional fields, and intellectuals of different disciplines no longer have the same language, field and knowledge purport. Externally, because professional intellectuals changed their writing attitude, facing the college and the public, their organic connection with the public readers was also broken, and they once again became a closed narcissistic class. " In fact, the intensive talk about public intellectuals, which began in February1century, is a serious dissatisfaction with the production of academic knowledge and the transformation of knowledge groups. People call on intellectuals to re-enter the field of public affairs and pay attention to public affairs. They don't want these elite-educated groups to collectively lose their voices in the face of increasingly serious social problems. But from 20 1 1, public intellectuals began to be called "well-known" on the internet and mass media. From the moment when "public intellectuals" were called "well-known", the name was seriously degraded. Some media and commentators with special missions began to stigmatize "well-known" in a planned way and achieved great success. The attack on so-called "public knowledge" generally comes from several aspects: one is trial-style, which is generally a short article written by a concept spokesperson in the open mainstream media. They use the privilege of discourse to judge controversial phenomena with unchangeable concepts and condescending tone. This view is often unreasonable and strong outside, and once it is out of the protective layer of its discourse privilege, it will become weak. The other is the label type. This technique stigmatizes the word "well-known" without any argument or reason, and turns it into a derogatory term, just like the words "smelly Laojiu", "traitor" and "four kinds of molecules" that have been popular for many years, and then throws such a dirty word at the opponent, as if he had become pure and won a great victory. This kind of Ah Q technique generally appears in the online war of words. Intellectuals should become the great "conscience" of society. Talking about public topics in general is not the privilege of intellectuals, but the right and responsibility of any citizen. How to become an intellectual is another matter. In history, we can easily find examples of intellectuals intervening in public affairs. For example, Hugo, Zola, Sartre, Solzhenitsyn and other writers directly intervened in the process of real events with their own works. They are also regarded as the great "conscience" of society. But another kind of writers, such as Proust and Kafka, showed extreme indifference to public affairs, and they completed the exploration and critical description of an inner spiritual space in a private space. However, compared with their contemporaries, writers like Proust and Kafka have reached an unattainable limit in depth and intensity in revealing and criticizing their own life experiences. For such intellectuals, truth is the best. If the pursuit of truth is the ultimate goal of intellectuals' spiritual activities, then they should be the only group that can transcend their social class identity and interest limitations, and a group that can not only question and criticize society, but also question and criticize themselves. This power of questioning and criticizing is not the innate moral superiority of intellectuals, but the essential provision of "knowledge truth" itself. The truth of modern knowledge is based on constant questioning and criticism. Is Pan Shiyi "famous" or "putting on a show"? Pan Shiyi, a real estate developer, issued "Pan Coin" and commented on the Weibo, which became "red" at once. In addition to talking about real estate, Pan Shiyi is also keen to comment on current social and cultural phenomena, comment on current politics and publicize some of his own values. In view of the fact that Pan Shiyi is a well-known public figure, under the complicated situation of China real estate market, Pan Shiyi's performance on the Internet has aroused public concern and controversy. Some netizens believe that Pan Shiyi is more and more like a "celebrity". However, some netizens think that Pan is a businessman, and the businessman who tries to intervene in public affairs as a "public intellectual" is purely a "show", and so on. Regardless of Pan Shiyi's motives, first of all, he has the right to express freely. In Weibo, this right is beyond doubt. In my opinion, everyone has multiple identities, and it is impossible to have only one identity. Any individual may play different roles and express his identity on different occasions. Public intellectuals are not a fixed professional role, and no one is born as a "public intellectual". Public intellectuals are also the result of independent choice. Businessmen and intellectuals are not natural concepts. Especially in modern society, modern business is no longer a simple question of buying and selling goods. In the era of knowledge economy, successful businessmen are often well-educated and knowledgeable people. If some businessmen with incomplete academic qualifications want to achieve greater success, they have to further improve their knowledge and cultural literacy. In this case, whether businessmen can become intellectuals is not a problem. Or, since intellectuals can become businessmen, why can't businessmen become intellectuals? Of course, whether to become a public intellectual is a personal choice. As a professional businessman, it is not incomprehensible that Pan Shiyi became a "public intellectual" at some time. Whether it is "well-known" is not necessarily related to the number of fans. Some people think that the reason why Pan Shiyi has millions of audiences in Weibo is actually a few "elites" who have money, status and control the right to speak, deliberately guiding public opinion, and the public can easily think that the opinions of these "elites" are very important. They hope to hear all the answers from these successful people, from the trend of house prices, the change of exchange rate, the rise and fall of national strength to education. However, the publicity of intellectuals does not lie in how many audiences they have. Intellectuals are public, firstly because of the publicity of knowledge, and secondly because of the publicity of the topics they discuss. People expect to hear comments on current hot topics and some public issues from businessman Pan Shiyi. At this time, people's expectations for Pan Shiyi are not for businessmen, but for public intellectuals, or for celebrities to intervene in public life and public affairs. However, whether a person becomes a "public intellectual" fundamentally has nothing to do with the number of audiences and feedback. We can see that there are so many cultural celebrities and entertainment stars with millions of viewers on the Internet. They have not become public intellectuals, and even netizens often force them to speak on some important events, but they still choose to remain silent. On the other hand, in the era of Internet media, the monopoly position of social elites on public opinion is actually gradually losing. If a person has no power outside the law and wants to monopolize the right to speak in Weibo. In my opinion, he overreached himself, and finally he had to choose bring disgrace to oneself. The existence of the Internet, to some extent, prepares for the de-elitism of culture. It is not uncommon for social elites (especially so-called "experts") to be "beaten" by the public in Weibo. Social elites may have more information than ordinary netizens, especially some non-public information, but it is only limited to this. This does not mean that his opinion is very important and can influence public opinion. Zhang Hong