Tech Entrepreneur’s Weibo Accusation Triggers Xibei’s Transparency Pledge Over Pre‑Made Dish Controversy.

Within hours, Xibei’s official Weibo account issued an open letter that not only denied Luo’s claims but also pledged unprecedented transparency. The company announced that it would publish the operation manuals for thirteen of its signature dishes and invite the public into its kitchens for live viewing. A second statement, signed by “all Xibei partners,” reiterated that an internal review of food quality and service had already been launched in response to Luo’s post. The tone of the communication was defensive, framing Luo’s accusations as unfounded and positioning the chain as a victim of misinformation.

The backlash to Xibei’s response was swift and largely unforgiving. Users on Weibo lambasted the chain’s public‑relations approach, describing it as antiquated and reminiscent of a state‑run restaurant manager from the planned‑economy era. Phrases such as “Xi Bei’s PR is not good” and “the boss’s crisis‑management awareness is stuck in the past” dotted the comment feed, reflecting a broader sentiment that the company’s reply was tone‑deaf and overly defensive. In contrast, Luo’s followers praised his crusade for transparency, dubbing his efforts “fighting to the end with pre‑made dishes” and urging him to continue exposing the practices of other eateries that might conceal similar shortcuts.

At the heart of the dispute lies a growing consumer demand for clarity on what ends up on the plate. While pre‑prepared dishes can help restaurateurs control costs and maintain consistency across locations, diners increasingly associate the term with processed, lower‑quality food. The controversy has thrust the practice into the national spotlight, prompting calls for clear labeling and even potential regulatory scrutiny. If the public pressure persists, lawmakers could be compelled to tighten disclosure requirements, turning a single social‑media spat into a catalyst for industry‑wide reform.

episode also underscores the powerful role of key opinion leaders in today’s digital marketplace. Luo’s capacity to rally public opinion within minutes demonstrates how a single, well‑placed post can amplify consumer concerns and force a corporation to confront its practices on a public stage. For Xibei, the episode serves as a cautionary tale about the perils of underestimating the speed and intensity with which information—and misinformation—spreads online.

The incident is not entirely new territory for Xibei. In February 2020, amid the early shock of the COVID‑19 pandemic, the chain’s chairman, Jia Guolong, addressed customers and employees alike in two separate letters, acknowledging the unprecedented challenges facing the hospitality sector. Those communications were earnest attempts to maintain trust during a crisis. The September 2025 letters, however, reveal a different kind of crisis—one rooted not in external disruption but in internal transparency.

Beyond the immediate brand fallout, the dispute may reverberate throughout China’s catering industry. Restaurants that have built their appeal on an image of authenticity may feel compelled to reconsider their reliance on pre‑made components or, at the very least, to be more forthright about their use. For consumers, the episode has heightened awareness of what “fresh” truly means in a fast‑moving market, reinforcing a broader shift toward “clean” eating and an expectation that food providers will be open about their processes.

In the digital arena, the rapid escalation of the Xibei‑Luo conflict illustrates how platforms like Weibo have become modern town squares where consumer rights, corporate accountability, and brand narratives collide. The public’s demand for “opening the kitchen” reflects a desire for a more intimate, honest relationship between diners and restaurateurs—one that mirrors a romantic partnership where communication and trust are essential.

As the dust settles, Xibei’s promise to release operation manuals and invite on‑site inspections remains to be fully realized. Whether these steps will satisfy a skeptical public or simply serve as a stopgap measure is uncertain. What is clear, however, is that the episode has forced the chain—and the industry at large—to grapple with a new reality: in an age where a single tweet can ignite a national dialogue, transparency is no longer a luxury but a prerequisite for survival.