The Red Cross Society of China is in a fight for credibility once again after its recent donation to the typhoon-hit Hainan Province came in for scrutiny this week. According to a report by Xinhua News Agency, the Red Cross Society allocated thousands of quilts to the areas affected by Typhoon Rammasun, the strongest such storm in 41 years.

But the donation was soon called into question by many netizens, who doubted the usefulness of the quilts in areas where average summer temperatures regularly top 30 C. Some suspected a cover-up engineered to help Red Cross staff to pocket public funds.

China's largest charity has been struggling to regain public trust after a major scandal in 2011. It has once again found itself under fire due to these "bizarre" donations.

The online uproar, particularly on social media, has clearly flustered the organization, whose initial response to the accusations was clumsily prepared. But more in-depth investigations by traditional media have confirmed that humid conditions and low outdoor temperatures at night mean that victims in typhoon-hit areas need quilts as badly as they need drinkable water, food and shelters.

This time, it seems that the Red Cross Society has been wrongfully accused. But the incident has also rightfully called attention to the serious state of public trust toward the organization.

It's a pity that so many have chosen to disbelieve, rather than to believe, where the Red Cross in China is concerned.

Presumption of guilt is rapidly becoming the starting point for evaluating the charity.

This will inevitably pose a challenge to the organization's ambition to win back public trust. In an era where online opinion holds sway, the Red Cross Society must learn how to cope with Internet criticism, and even slander.

As for the public discourse on the Internet, the debate around the Red Cross's quilt donations has exposed obvious egoism and impulsiveness. These unfortunate tendencies are easily transmitted from the cyber domain to the broader public, and a blind faith in online commentary can only result in a misguided public whose attention is diverted from seeking truth to seeking controversy.

A compromise must be forged between the Red Cross Society and online opinion. The former must get used to the reality that the boundaries around public opinion have changed completely, and that the Red Cross must learn how to do publicity and crisis PR professionally and effectively.

As for the latter, we can only hope that more rational voices speak up, to help cool down overheated opinions.