![]() |
| Wu Lei Weibo Controversy Explained as Studio Moves to Protect Actor’s Rights (Photo: Weibo) |
The account in question, using the name Bai Shanshan, first posted a cryptic message on January 17 suggesting possession of private images and attaching a price tag. The post resurfaced the following night with sharper wording, this time directly naming Wu Lei and claiming limited “sales” had already taken place. Although no official account was tagged, the vague but provocative wording immediately triggered widespread speculation.
Confusion spread quickly, as China’s entertainment industry has two public figures named Wu Lei. Comment sections filled with users asking which individual was being referenced, while others urged caution and restraint.
![]() |
Despite the uncertainty, the discussion gained traction at lightning speed.
As the account continued posting, netizens began examining its past activity. Older posts hinted at emotional outbursts directed at a former partner, while other resurfaced content referenced dates and locations that encouraged online sleuthing.
Around the same period, unrelated posts from different users began circulating, attempting to link a person named Wu Lei to questionable rumours involving overseas travel. None of these claims were supported by verified evidence.
![]() |
Further scrutiny revealed that the Bai Shanshan account had previously made sweeping comments about male celebrities and had hinted at plans to release lists tied to alleged scandals.
Some deleted posts even claimed a personal financial connection to Wu Lei, though these statements are no longer visible.
As speculation intensified, images believed to show the person behind the account began circulating online, adding fuel to the already heated debate.
The topic briefly climbed to number one on Weibo’s trending list before dropping later in the night. Meanwhile, Wu Lei Studio’s official statement also entered the trending chart, signalling a clear shift in the narrative.
![]() |
In its response, Wu Lei Studio firmly rejected all false claims and confirmed that legal professionals had been engaged to secure and preserve evidence across platforms.
The studio stated that all necessary legal measures would be taken and urged platforms, media outlets, and users to immediately stop spreading unverified information. The message was clear: defamation and false accusations would not be tolerated.
![]() |
Fan and netizen reactions have been sharply divided. Supporters rallied around Wu Lei, calling for rational discussion and condemning what they see as attention-seeking behaviour.
Others adopted a wait-and-see approach, urging the public to respect legal processes rather than amplify rumours. A smaller group questioned platform moderation, asking how such posts gained traction so quickly.
What do you think about how this situation unfolded, and how should platforms handle similar cases in the future?




.webp)