Abstract:When pointing out that the content of highly stylized videos of food counterfeiting exposing by self-publishers such as “Xin Ji Fei” for rumor refuting, “Chinese Food New Media” (CFNM), has considerable authority, and it has achieved the mainstream view of academia that macroscopic attention should be paid to “Subject”“Time” Channel and Content, and the Scientific, Easy-to-Read and Emotional Repudiation of the content on the micro level are still met with strong resistance from public opinion, and the public even used the rumor refuting method of CFNM to attack return. This paper argues that in a context where multiple subjects are involved in communication, disinformation is no longer a one-way “transmission-reception” relationship, but rather a constant dialogue process between the public and the subject about rumours and disinformation. Therefore, this paper uses the Nvivo qualitative research tool to compare the argumentative frameworks of the video texts of “China Food News” “Xin Ji Fei” and the texts of the relevant comment sections. In the course of the rumor refuting process, the public partially appropriates and reverses the authoritative argumentative framework by means of “frame poaching”, rendering the original strong argumentative framework almost invalid. In the process of correcting scientific disinformation，it inevitably involves the refutation of pseudo-rational understandings that are apparently coherent, and this argumentative framework is inevitably at risk of being poached, it constitutes the action dilemma for refuting food safety information rumours.
