Nicholas McLaen, as expected, wrote a news story, but surprisingly, he began by saying, "Why is Hugo in the negative news again?" Why Hugo again! ”

This opening seems to be accusing the media, but it seems to be accusing Hugo, but it is a bit of a "" style, but obviously, Nicholas has followed Hugo for nearly two years, and he is known as Hugo's "first priority for the royal pen reporter", this title does not come out of thin air, and he will naturally not be as vague as the "Chicago Tribune".

"Although it has only been two days since the whole incident broke out, I can't help but want to review the whole thing.

The cause of the incident was a paparazzi who broke into the shop run by Hugo's father, which caused a physical conflict, and then Hugo's father picked up a shotgun to drive away the intruders.

In fact, this qiē is very ridiculous, and every listener has the answer to the quality of Hugo's music; And whether Hugo's performance on the big screen of the movie is excellent, every audience also sees it. Opportunity is reserved for those who are prepared, and apparently Hugo did that, he seized the opportunity in front of him and carried his talent forward.

As for those who question the 'source of opportunity', it is simply ridiculous and ridiculous. Because Hollywood is a place full of opportunities, opportunities are everywhere, but not everyone can seize opportunities, and not everyone who seizes opportunities can succeed.

What's more, those voices chasing after the wind have no basis at all, and are purely just the media's own speculation, which makes people have to think again.

As Hugo's response said, 'Please show the evidence'. He is not afraid of doubts, nor is he afraid of challenges, nor is he afraid of rumors, he always straightens his waist and faces any gossip, which is the posture that a good artist should really have.

So, why did such a thing get to this point? And why is there so much multimedia solidarity to question Hugo's achievements?

Things can be explained in a complex way, but they can also be explained in a simple way: interests.

Some people may condemn Hugo's attitude towards the media as rude, cold, and rude, so almost all the media are playing up a core idea: Hugo is challenging the authority of the media! But before torturing Hugo's attitude, please don't ignore the fact that the media first violated Hugo's father - it was an ordinary person, an ordinary old man, so Hugo was angry, Hugo lost control, because he was too disappointed and angry with the media's actions to suppress the anger in his heart.

Hugo was at fault, but neither were the media that launched the provocations. When the media, which aims at public opinion supervision, evolves into profit-oriented businessmen, do they still have the authority for Hugo to challenge?

In order to dig out the breaking point, the paparazzi personally rushed to Hugo's father's house, breaking the peaceful life of an ordinary person who has nothing to do with the entertainment industry; In order to dig out the breaking point, the reporter linked Hugo's father's legitimate defense with Hugo's previous youthful frivolity, and without any evidence, carried out such absurd and unreliable inferences as 'domestic violence';

This qiē seems so incredible, when people clear their minds, they will probably feel ridiculous, but under the impetus of the media, the incident has gradually fermented, and has been pushed to a new height, raising the whole thing to the confrontation between public figures and the media, and elevating the whole thing to the contradiction between public opinion supervision and personal **, thus detonating the discussion of the whole society!

This is a sad fact for the media, because they have lost the mental strength on which the media depends.

Why is Hugo in the negative news again? Why Hugo again? The answer is very simple: because Hugo is currently the most popular, focused, and commercially valuable artist in the whole of Hollywood.

That's all. ”

Nicholas's article is as sharp and accurate as ever, and at the same time it adds fuel to the frenzy of the current storm of public opinion, pushing the whole incident to a whole new level. Just as media reporters went online and magnified this incident into a war between public figures and the media, Nicholas also went online to raise the media's behavior to the level of danger to the entire news industry.

I have to say that Nicholas is indeed the "Hugo royal pen", in the process of the confrontation between Hugo and Anthony, Hugo once directly ripped off all the fig leafs, revealing the ** and filthiness within the media, and now Nicholas has infinitely magnified this point, which has triggered a new round of discussion.

The support from the East Coast reveals the calmness and profundity of the metropolitan area, and the New York Times directly elevates the whole incident to the level of social issues.

"Step down from the throne!"

The headline of the New York Times alone is sensational enough, and so is the content of the news.

"When the media shouted, they did not compromise in order to obtain news clues, from illegal investigation methods such as voyeurism, invasion, and bribery to news writing methods such as distortion, slander, and fabrication. When the media shouted long live justice and public opinion supervision, but ignored the facts for the sake of a news breaking point, not only did not carry out public opinion supervision, but took the lead in stimulating social hatred and stimulating social contradictions, Rodney King became a stepping stone; When the media shouts about news authority, they ignore the truth for the sake of commercial interests, and wholeheartedly pursue the breaking point, and even lead it for the sake of the breaking point. Lure the law, Hugo - became a dartboard.

They must have been very happy to see this scene: watching the reporter swear and speak wildly, watching Lancaster lose his mind because of the anger of the departure, watching Lancaster cry out in a hoarse voice to protect his father, watching Lancaster boldly confront the media and stretch out his middle finger.

The reason is simple, because these are the breaking points.

Compared with a sweet date for a couple, a third party destroying a relationship is more eye-catching; Compared with the gathering of friends, the fight of close friends is more eye-catching; Compared with the thriving career, the dirt behind the scenes is more interesting...... When the truth is no longer important, when the news breaking point becomes the focus; When it no longer matters, when newspaper sales become the focus; When public opinion supervision is no longer important, when commercial interests become the headlines, market orientation has quietly changed the nature of the media.

Now, more and more media outlets have abandoned the essence of media in order to please their audiences, with more and more shocking headlines, more and more exaggerated headlines, and more and more strict negative news, and the atmosphere of the entire market has gradually changed. It is foreseeable that this sentence has deviated from the original track, and after being given commercial attributes, it has become a means for businessmen to seek huge profits, and what they care about is not the truth, but interests.

If this trend continues, there will come a time when the news media will no longer be noble, the journalist profession will no longer be desirable, and everything will only be the same interests, interests, and interests as Wall Street, then, before that day comes, "before the crown, it will also step down from the throne."

'I refuse to answer', which is the response to the already commercialized media, and a middle finger, this is Lancaster's accusation in the face of journalists who have lost their essence.

Behind the suspicion of 'domestic violence' is the depravity of the entire news media industry. As in the events of last year, no one asked for the truth, no one asked why, everyone just blindly followed the breaking point, as if all the media were united, and then used the pen in their hands as a weapon to attack Lancaster. So, the news exploded, public opinion exploded, and the focus exploded. But no one noticed: it was a farce.

Does anyone really believe the media's questioning of Hugo? The speculation that is not supported by any argument has appeared in the major newspapers and magazines, only to reduce these media to the level of supermarket tabloids.

Looking at the front page headlines of today's major media, the middle finger is so clear and neat, but it can't help but make people feel chilled and sad, because this is the ironclad proof of stepping down from the throne. ”

The support of the "New York Times" is undoubtedly very obscure, they do not really discuss Hugo's incident, but see the origin through the incident itself, and it can also be considered to be a more in-depth discussion on the basis of the "" report.

But even so, we can still feel the support of the "New York Times" for Hugo, not only the "New York Times", but also many other newspapers, they did not share the same hatred because of the "fellow journalists", on the contrary, they still calmed down and carefully scrutinized.

Although this incident was huge, and even escalated to the level of confrontation between public figures and the media, and to the level of abuse by the news media, on the whole, the entire storm of public opinion was equal. The people who cursed Hugo were on a par with those who supported Hugo, and the incident went directly from a mere entertainment incident to a social problem.

In fact, this is indeed a social problem. Ten years later, as the New York Times feared, the news media is no longer strong, the news media is no longer enviable, the pursuit of commercial interests is more important than the truth, and at that time, journalists are just journalists, an ordinary profession, and no longer uncrowned kings.

And this qiē collapse actually appeared as early as the nineties, and gradually exposed in the mid-nineties. Surprisingly, the "Hugo domestic violence" incident became the fuse for the problem to surface, and it continued to do so for the next decade.