Fluentide

A Chinese podcast · Same story, 4 levels

"Mother From Prison" Crashes: A Debate About Whitewashing Crime — episode cover art
8:49

""

"Mother From Prison" Crashes: A Debate About Whitewashing Crime

About this story

"Mother From Prison" Crashes: A Debate About Whitewashing Crime. HSK 3 Chinese listening practice.

This is an HSK 3-4 Chinese listening episode that runs about 9 minutes. The full Mandarin script is shown with tap-for-pinyin and a line-by-line English translation, so you can listen and read at once — comprehensible input in the sense of Stephen Krashen's i+1 theory. It teaches 12 key vocabulary words such as 注意、决定、影响 and walks through 4 grammar patterns, each explained in English with examples. The same news story is retold at 4 difficulty levels — use the level selector above to find the version that is challenging but still understandable for you.

Read at your level

原文

Read the complete story in Chinese. Reveal pinyin and English only when you need them.

2026 5 20 深夜
一篇道歉
如果中国电视
一定
天天向上快乐大本营我是歌手
湖南过去 20 重要几个综艺
离不开
很多叫做"国民主持人"
但是一天
是在道歉
道歉
监狱妈妈
一部电影
导演
本来 5 30 上映
电影改编一个真实故事
主演这个真实故事本人
其实是一个杀人
我们从头
2009 4 16 晚上
陕西
她的丈夫
因为家里一件小事吵起来
什么程度
判决书写
""
就是怎么
吵架过程
去了客厅
一把水果
回到房间
丈夫胸部一刀
一刀
动脉
当场死亡
陕西高级人民法院后来认定
故意伤害死亡
判处有期徒刑 15
剥夺政治权利 5
15 这个最高刑期
我们"判刑"
注意
法院认定
没有""
也没有"长期"
没有"反抗自卫"
法院认定
一次因为琐事失控故意伤害
服刑 15
2024 前后出狱
故事如果这里结束
就是一个普通刑事案件
但是一个导演
找到
独立电影导演
之前纪录
决定
红的故事拍成电影
而且
本人出演自己
电影 2019 开始
注意
那个时候监狱
导演自己后来采访
监狱
本身就有法律问题
中国法律规定
剥夺政治权利
剥夺
不能参与"出版演讲集会"活动
影视演出宣传
通常这个范围
但是放下程序问题
更大问题
这个电影讲的故事
法院判决
完全故事
电影宣传
"她是一个长期妻子
"一晚无可
"反抗失手
"坐了 15
"出狱
"回到儿子婆婆身边
"原谅
听起来
一个很想流泪故事
但是判决
没有任何提到
没有任何提到长期
没有任何提到自卫
判决只有
一件家里小事
一把水果
一刀
一个死去丈夫
一个判刑妻子
也就是说
电影"根据真实故事改编"
但是那个真实故事没有东西
凭空写进去了
精确
电影抹掉确实做的
然后编造一个她不应该理由
中国网友这个叫做""
5 月初
电影开始大规模宣传
推荐电影
后来
5 中旬
律师判决翻了出来
电影宣传在一起对比
网友
抵制声音豆瓣
一路到了 B
人们
"美化犯罪
"颠倒黑白
"利用受害者死亡卖票
"利用''这个话题同情
注意一点
中国社会
真的共识
很多女性确实在家
真正反抗入狱案例
因为这个共识
所以""虚假外衣
特别愤怒
5 19
中央电视下场审批
一个明确官方信号
这个电影问题
5 20
片方宣布
也就是上了
红的社交
平台关了
也是 5 20 深夜
道歉
道歉了三
"未能认真审核项目背景内容深表歉意
意思
没有好好出品人的功课
"没有参与电影投资
意思
我不是真的花钱这个项目
只是挂了
"制作团队中断所有联系
"片方撤掉我的署名
意思
我的名字这里抹掉
听起来说清楚
但是网友还是
为什么
第一
之前合作过多
他们不是
认真
不太说得过去
第二
作为出品
你的名字本身就是电影信用背书
你的"国民主持人"光环
多少愿意信任电影
现在出了
我没仔细
责任这么干净
第三
中国公众几年名人代言""案件
已经看了太多
代言减肥
代言医院
代言理财骗局
每一
名人"不知道"
"也是"
公众已经听腻
这次
最大危险不是电影本身
这种"挂名 道歉 "循环
大家觉得
"国民主持人"这个身份
变得那么干净
但是
我们也要一点公道话
不是导演
没有剧本
没有判决
确实参与投资
而且
他在同一
清晰道歉
并且片方撤掉他的署名
公关角度
这个反应已经
干净
那么
还有什么意义
我想这样
电影一种特殊产品
告诉观众
"一个真实故事
"就是发生过的
观众相信
他们就把自己感情交给银幕
可是如果"真实"假的
这种感情
骗了
可以活下去
可以出狱以后慢慢回归社会
甚至可以自传
但是不能一段真实存在过的杀人
重新包装
一个温情反抗故事
然后观众流泪
死者那里
判决那里
真相那里
最后
我想一个问题
如果有一天
有人想把一个喜欢故事
拍成一部很美电影
告诉所有"真的"
你会怎么
你想一下
今天这里
明天
English transcript reference

Late at night on May 20, 2026.

On Weibo, Wang Han

posted an apology.

Who is Wang Han?

If you've watched Chinese TV,

you've definitely heard of him.

Day Day Up, Happy Camp, I Am a Singer —

several of Hunan TV's most important variety shows of the past 20 years

can't be separated from him.

Many people call him "the host of the nation."

But on this day,

he was apologizing.

The thing he was apologizing for

is called "Mother From Prison."

It's a movie.

The director is named Qin Xiaoyu.

It was originally going to release on May 30.

The movie is adapted from a true story.

The lead actress is the real person of that true story —

Zhao Xiaohong.

Zhao Xiaohong

is, in fact, a killer.

Let's start from the beginning.

The night of April 16, 2009,

Shaanxi.

Zhao Xiaohong and her husband Zhang Bo

got into an argument over a small household matter.

How small?

The court verdict wrote it down:

"propping up the bed."

A matter of how to set the bed up properly.

In the middle of the argument,

Zhao Xiaohong went to the living room,

got a fruit knife,

returned to the bedroom,

and stabbed her husband once in the chest.

That single stab

pierced his aorta.

Zhang Bo died on the spot.

The Shaanxi High People's Court later determined:

Zhao Xiaohong committed intentional injury (causing death).

Sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment.

Deprivation of political rights for 5 years.

15 years is the maximum sentence this crime can carry.

We call it "the maximum sentence."

Note this:

in the court's findings,

there are no words "domestic violence."

Nor "long-term abuse."

No "resistance" or "self-defense."

What the court found

was a single act of intentional injury — losing control over a trivial matter.

Zhao Xiaohong served 15 years.

She was released around 2024.

If the story ended here,

it would be an ordinary criminal case.

But a director

found her.

Qin Xiaoyu.

An independent film director.

He'd made a few documentaries before.

Qin Xiaoyu decided

to turn Zhao Xiaohong's story into a movie.

And to have Zhao Xiaohong

play herself.

The movie started filming in 2019.

Note —

at that time Zhao Xiaohong was still in prison.

The director himself later said so in an interview.

The film crew went into the prison to shoot.

This in itself is a legal problem.

Chinese law provides

that a person deprived of political rights,

during the deprivation period,

cannot take part in "publishing, public speaking, assembly" and similar activities.

Film performance and promotion

are generally counted within this scope.

But let's set the procedural issue aside.

The bigger problem

is that the story this movie tells

and the court's verdict

are two completely different stories.

The movie's promotion says:

"She is a wife who was abused for years.

"That night she could bear it no longer,

"and in resisting, lost control.

"She served 15 years in prison.

"After release,

"she wants to return to her son and mother-in-law.

"She wants to be forgiven.

It sounds

like a story that makes you want to cry.

But in the verdict,

there is not a single mention of domestic violence.

Not a single mention of long-term abuse.

Not a single mention of self-defense.

In the verdict there is only:

one small household matter,

one fruit knife,

one stab,

one dead husband.

And a wife given the maximum sentence.

That is to say,

the movie is "adapted from a true story" —

but it wrote in, out of nothing,

things that weren't in that true story.

More precisely:

the movie erased what she actually did,

then invented a reason for her that means she shouldn't have done it.

Chinese netizens call this "whitewashing."

In early May,

the movie began large-scale promotion.

Yao Chen recommended this movie on Weibo.

Later she deleted that post,

and apologized.

In mid-May,

a lawyer dug out the verdict,

and put it side by side with the movie's promotion.

Netizens exploded.

The boycott spread from Weibo and Douban,

all the way to Bilibili, Xiaohongshu, and Douyin.

People said:

"Beautifying crime.

"Turning black into white.

"Using a victim's death to sell tickets.

"Using the topic of 'domestic violence' to scam sympathy.

Note one thing:

Chinese society

genuinely has a consensus about domestic violence.

Many women truly have suffered in domestic violence.

There are real cases of women jailed for resisting abuse.

Precisely because that consensus is real,

using "domestic violence" as a false cloak

makes people especially angry.

On May 19,

China Central Television stepped in to review it.

This is a clear official signal:

this movie has a problem.

On May 20,

the production side announced the film was pulled.

That means it won't be shown.

Zhao Xiaohong's social media account

was shut down by the platform.

Also late at night on May 20,

Wang Han posted his apology.

In his apology Wang Han said three things:

One,

"I deeply apologize for failing to seriously review the project's background and content.

Meaning:

I didn't do my homework as a producer.

Two,

"I did not take part in investing in this film.

Meaning:

I wasn't actually putting money into this project,

I just lent my name.

Three,

"I have cut off all contact with the production team,

"and the production has removed my credit.

Meaning:

please erase my name from this.

It sounds like all three things are made clear.

But netizens still aren't buying it.

Why?

First,

Wang Han and Qin Xiaoyu have collaborated several times before.

They aren't strangers.

Saying you never looked carefully

doesn't quite hold up.

Second,

as a producer,

your name itself is a credibility endorsement for this movie.

Your "host of the nation" halo —

how many people did it make willing to trust this movie?

Now that something's gone wrong,

saying "I didn't look closely"

can responsibility really be brushed off that cleanly?

Third,

in recent years the Chinese public has seen too many

celebrity-endorsement "crash" cases.

Endorsing fake diet pills,

endorsing unscrupulous hospitals,

endorsing investment scams.

Every time something goes wrong,

the celebrity says "I didn't know,"

"I was deceived too."

The public is tired of hearing it.

For Wang Han this time,

the biggest danger isn't the movie itself.

It's that this cycle of "lend your name → it blows up → apologize → move on"

makes everyone feel

that the identity of "host of the nation"

has become not so clean either.

But,

we should also say something fair for Wang Han.

He isn't the director.

He didn't write the script.

He didn't alter the verdict.

He really didn't take part in the investment.

And,

on the very same day he was attacked,

he posted a clear apology,

and had the production remove his credit.

From a PR standpoint,

this response counts as fast,

and clean.

So,

what's the meaning of all this?

I think it's this:

a movie is a special kind of product.

It tells the audience:

"This is a true story.

"This is what happened.

When the audience believes that sentence,

they hand their emotions to the people on the screen.

But if the words "true story" are fake,

then those emotions

have been deceived.

Zhao Xiaohong can live on.

Zhao Xiaohong can slowly rejoin society after prison.

Zhao Xiaohong can even write an autobiography.

But you cannot take a real murder case that actually happened,

repackage it,

tell it as a warm story of resisting domestic violence,

and then have the audience cry for her.

The dead man is still there.

The verdict is still there.

The truth is still there.

Finally,

I want to ask you a question:

If one day,

someone wants to take a story you don't like,

make it into a beautiful movie,

and tell everyone "this is real" —

what would you do?

Think about it.

Okay.

That's all for today.

Talk tomorrow.

Listen again

Try it without the transcript and notice what sounds clearer.

What vocabulary does this episode teach?

词汇
zhùyìto note / pay attention

To note, pay attention. The episode repeatedly says 注意 to flag the key fact: the verdict contains no mention of domestic violence.

juédìngto decide / decision

To decide. Director Qin Xiaoyu 决定 to film Zhao Xiaohong's story and cast her as herself — the decision that started everything.

yǐngxiǎnginfluence / impact

Influence, impact. A celebrity producer's name has 影响 — it lends a film credibility, which is why endorsement carries responsibility.

jiēshòuto accept

To accept. The episode's question: even if a producer apologizes, will the public 接受 it? Many no longer do.

pǔtōngordinary

Ordinary. The dead husband was a 普通 real person — a concrete human being, not a plot device.

wēixiǎndanger / dangerous

Danger, dangerous. The episode's framing: Wang Han's biggest 危险 isn't this one film — it's the cycle of 'lend name → blow up → apologize' that erodes public trust.

pànjuéshūcourt verdict document

The written court judgment. The episode contrasts the film's marketing with the 判决书 line by line — and they don't match.

jiābàodomestic violence

Domestic violence (short for 家庭暴力). The film built its emotional appeal on 家暴 — a label the verdict never uses.

xǐbáito whitewash

To whitewash — repackage a guilty person through narrative so the public sees them as innocent or sympathetic. The single word that powered the backlash.

měihuàto beautify / glorify

To beautify, to glorify (something that shouldn't be). 美化犯罪 — 'beautifying crime' — was the central accusation against the film.

chèdàngto pull (a film) from release

To withdraw a film from its scheduled release. Industry term: 撤 (withdraw) + 档 (release slot). The film 撤档 on May 20.

chūpǐnréncredited producer

A film's credited 'producer' — can be a real investor or just a prestigious named figure. Wang Han's (named-only) role here.

* beyond level超纲词

What grammar patterns appear in this episode?

语法

根据真实故事改编

根据 (based on) + 真实故事 (true story) + 改编 (adapted). A fixed phrase that appears on film posters. The episode's whole argument is that this phrase, on this film, was false — the adaptation invented what the 'true story' never contained.

电影'根据真实故事改编'。

根据真实事件改编。

把 A 重新包装成 B

把 construction with 重新包装 (repackage). 把一段真实存在过的杀人案,重新包装,讲成一个温情的故事 — to take a real murder case, repackage it, and tell it as a warm story. The grammar of narrative manipulation.

不能把一段真实存在过的杀人案,重新包装。

不是 A,是 B (sharp correction)

Used to replace a wrong framing with the right one. The episode uses it to separate fault: his fault is 不是'主导而欺骗',是'挂名而疏忽' — not 'leading and deceiving,' but 'lending his name and being negligent.'

他的过错是'挂名而疏忽',而不是'主导而欺骗'。

X 能 Verb 得这么干净吗?

A rhetorical question expressing doubt. 责任能撇得这么干净吗?— 'can responsibility really be brushed off this cleanly?' The 得 + adjective + 吗 structure questions whether something can be done as completely as claimed.

责任能撇得这么干净吗?

Proper Nouns

专有名词
汪涵Wāng HánWang Han赵小红Zhào XiǎohóngZhao Xiaohong张勃Zhāng BóZhang Bo秦晓宇Qín XiǎoyǔQin Xiaoyu姚晨Yáo ChénYao Chen中央电视台Zhōngyāng DiànshìtáiChina Central Television (CCTV)圣塞巴斯蒂安Shèng Sàibāsīdì'ānSan Sebastián (Film Festival)

Free account

Keep learning from this story

Create a free account to keep saved words and your preferred level together.

  • Keep words with their story context
  • Remember your preferred level
  • Build your vocabulary over time

Continue with Fluentide