Recently, in order to rectify negative emotional issues such as malicious provocation of opposition and promotion of violent hostility, and create a more civilized and rational online environment, the Cyberspace Administration of China has launched a two month special campaign nationwide called "Clear and Clear: Rectifying Malicious Provocation of Negative Emotions". For some time now, there seem to be some "emotional plotlines" constantly being pushed on the internet: teenagers are experiencing "suffocating motherly love" and "exam oriented education shackles", middle-aged people are deeply trapped in "midlife crisis" and "class solidification" narratives, and elderly people are surrounded by "empty nest tragedy" and "retirement dilemma" and other content; Singles experience anxiety when they see 'marriage is a grave', married individuals receive hints of 'widowed parenting' and 'marriage fatigue period', and job seekers are surrounded by topics such as' 35 year old curse 'and' workplace PUA '. Unconsciously, there seems to be an "emotional director" who has insight into one's inner thoughts, always able to accurately "feed" negative emotional content such as anger and anxiety to different groups of people. Indeed, the topic of cyberspace does to some extent reflect some real-life issues. But these "emotions" magnify individual cases into universal renderings, simplify diverse phenomena into binary oppositional narratives, and even engage in extreme "labeling" and careful "design", which not only does not help to correctly understand and solve real problems, but also undermines positive social energy and pollutes the clear and rational cyberspace. How are these 'emotions' designed and disseminated? In cyberspace, information with strong emotions often has a natural "contagion" that can instantly ripple and gain more attention and interaction. Under the dual drive of click through rates and monetization, deliberately weaving opposing character designs in copywriting, exaggerating conflicting dialogue segments through one-sided editing, and mass producing provocative "hot selling" topics have been transformed into "traffic passwords". In addition, the algorithm also "empowers" a lot in this process: it continuously calibrates and strengthens push notifications based on the user's click and dwell frequency, making "emotions" repeatedly loop and amplify in the "information cocoon". To address the issue of "emotional pollution" in cyberspace, it is necessary to follow the principles of law based governance and collaborative governance. We should strengthen institutional supply, further clarify the criteria and legal responsibilities for identifying "maliciously inciting negative emotions", and provide clearer basis for regulatory enforcement. A classified disposal mechanism can be established, with warning interviews for minor violations, flow restrictions and account bans for repeated violations, and fixed evidence and legal accountability for suspected illegal activities. In addition, it is possible to explore the establishment of a "negative emotion content list" to provide guidance for platform review, and to strengthen the warning effect by publishing typical cases. Complementing the advantages of rigid constraints and flexible guidance of the rule of law can better build a multidimensional defense against online emotional pollution. As the main carrier of online content, platforms should not only meet the bottom line requirement of "not violating the law", but should actively pursue a "healthier" value orientation. In particular, algorithms should not rely solely on traffic, but should establish a multidimensional evaluation system that incorporates parameters such as content quality and social value into the algorithm model. This will strengthen the identification and cleaning of negative emotional content, increase incentives and push for high-quality content, and make algorithms a bridge for expanding horizons, consolidating consensus, and promoting harmony, rather than creating barriers and opposing forces. Ultimately, the vast majority of netizens are the participants and shapers of the online ecosystem. Content creators should be guardians of progress and goodness, rather than pursuers of emotional flow. They should actively break free from the creative trap of "conflict narrative" and "stirring up emotions", use objectivity instead of rendering, use rationality to dissolve opposition, and make more warm creations a carrier of warming people's hearts, cultivating a clear and positive online atmosphere. Content receivers need to improve their online literacy, avoid cognitive narrowness, especially be wary of the "feeding" nature of algorithms, remain alert to extreme emotional content, and be good at forming a rational and balanced cognition from different perspectives. (New Society)