Chapter 1038 1038 Top of Controversy
Nicholas McClen of the Los Angeles Times wrote a news story as expected, but surprisingly, he opened with, "Why is Hugo in bad news again? Why is Hugo again? !"
This opening seems to be blaming the media, but it also seems to be blaming Hugo, which is a bit of the "Chicago Tribune" black humor style, but obviously, Nicholas has followed and reported Hugo for nearly two years, and he is known as Hugo's "No. 1 in the Royal Notebook", this title did not come out of thin air, and he naturally wouldn't be as vague as the "Chicago Tribune".
"Although it's only been two days since the whole incident broke out, I can't help but want to review how the whole thing happened.
The cause of the incident was that a paparazzi broke into the store run by Hugo's father, causing a physical conflict, and then Hugo's father took a shotgun to drive away the intruder. After the news broke, it triggered a series of widespread reactions, and then again Some news media pointed the finger at Hugo, believing that Hugo's father had problems with emotional control, thus suspecting that Hugo also had a mental illness, which immediately triggered a series of questions about Hugo's performance.
In fact, all of this is very absurd. What is the quality of Hugo's music, every audience has the answer; and whether Hugo's performance on the big screen of the movie is excellent, every audience also sees it. Opportunities are reserved for those who are prepared, and that was clearly the case with Hugo, who seized the opportunity in front of him to develop his talent.
As for those voices questioning the "source of opportunity", it is simply ridiculous. Because Hollywood is a place full of opportunities, opportunities are everywhere, but not everyone can seize the opportunity, and not everyone who seizes the opportunity can succeed.
What's more, those chasing voices have no factual basis at all, they are purely the media's own speculation, which makes people have to think of the witch trial again.
As Hugo's response said, 'Please show evidence'. He is not afraid of doubts, challenges, and rumors. He always straightens his back. Facing any rumors and rumors, this is the true attitude of an outstanding artist.
So why did such a trivial thing get to where it is now? And why is there so much media solidarity in wanting to question Hugo's achievements?
Things can be explained very complex, but also very simple: interests.
Some people may condemn Hugo's attitude towards the media as being rude, callous and disrespectful, so almost all the media are rendering a core point: 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 the private life of Hugo's father - that was an ordinary person, an ordinary old man enjoying life, so Hugo was angry and Hugo was out of control Because he was so disappointed and angry with the media's actions that he couldn't suppress his inner anger at all.
Hugo was at fault, but neither were the provocative media. When the media that aim to supervise public opinion and press freedom have evolved into profit-oriented businessmen, will they still have the authority for Hugo to challenge them?
The paparazzi went to Hugo's father's house in person in order to dig out the breaking point, breaking the peaceful life of an ordinary person who had nothing to do with the entertainment industry. In the absence of any evidence, they made absurd and unreliable inferences like 'domestic violence'; the media, in order to dig out the breaking point, actually directly implemented the so-called emotional out-of-control, and inferred Hugo's love life and career. Traces of curves.
All of this seems so unbelievable. When people sort out their thoughts, they will probably find it ridiculous. However, with the help of the media, the incident has gradually fermented, and it has been pushed to a whole new level. It has risen to the confrontation between public figures and the media, and the whole matter has been elevated to the contradiction between public opinion supervision, press freedom and personal privacy, thus detonating the discussion of the entire society!
This is a sad fact for the media, because they have lost the spiritual power on which the media depends.
Why is Hugo making bad news again? Why Hugo again? The answer is simple: because Hugo is currently the most popular, most focused, and most commercially valuable entertainer in the entire Hollywood.
That's all. "
Nicholas's article is as sharp and accurate as ever, but it also adds fuel to the madness of the entire public opinion storm at the moment, and pushes the whole event to a whole new level. Just as the media reporters went online and magnified this incident into a war between public figures and the media, Nicholas also went online together, raising the behavior of the media to the level of harm to the entire news industry.
I have to say that Nicholas is indeed "Hugo's Royal Pen". In the process of confrontation between Hugo and Anthony, Hugo once directly tore off all the figurines, revealing the corruption and filth within the media, and now Nicholas even more This point is infinitely magnified, thus triggering a new round of discussion.
Complementing the "Los Angeles Times" is the "New York Times". The support from the east coast reveals the calm and profoundness of the capital circle. The "New York Times" directly elevates the whole incident to the level of social issues.
"The 'Uncrowned King' stepped down from the throne!"
Just the headlines of The New York Times are sensational enough, and the content is no less.
"When the media shouted for freedom of speech, but did not compromise their means in order to obtain news clues, from voyeurism, intrusion, bribery and other illegal investigation methods to distortion, slander, fabrication and other news writing methods, Michael Jackson became a victim; when the media Shouting long live justice and public opinion supervision, but ignoring the facts for a news breaking point, not only did not carry out public opinion supervision, but took the lead in driving social hatred and stimulating social contradictions, Rodney King became a stepping stone; when the media shouted With the authority of news, but ignoring the truth for the sake of commercial interests, he single-mindedly pursues the breaking point, and even can lure the breaking point. To lure illegal acts, Hugo Lancaster has become a dartboard.
Entertainment reporters must be very happy to see this scene: watching Lancaster point at the reporter's nose swearing and ranting, watching Lancaster lose his mind because of the anger of leaving, watching Lancaster for Giving everything to protect his father, hoarse, watching Lancaster defiantly confront the media and stick out his middle finger.
The reason is simple, because these are burst points.
Compared with a sweet date of a couple, the destruction of a relationship by a third party is more eye-catching; compared to a friend gathering, a close friend fight is more attractive; compared to a prosperous career, the behind-the-scenes filth is more interesting... When the truth is no longer important, when news breaking points become the focus; when freedom of speech is no longer important, when newspaper sales become the focus; when public opinion supervision is no longer important, when commercial interests become the headlines, the market orientation has been quietly changing the nature of the media .
Nowadays, more and more media have abandoned the essence of media in order to please the audience. The headlines are getting more and more scary, the headlines are getting more exaggerated, and the negative news is getting more and more serious. The atmosphere of the whole market has gradually changed. It is foreseeable that the phrase "freedom of speech" has deviated from the original track. After being given commercial attributes, it has become a means for businessmen to seek huge profits. What they care about is not the truth, but the interests.
According to this trend, there will be a day in the future when the news media will no longer be noble, and the profession of journalist will no longer be desirable. Everything is just the same interests, interests, and interests as Wall Street. Then, before that day comes, the 'Uncrowned King' 'Will be stepping down from the throne before being crowned with the crown.
'I refuse to answer' is Lancaster's response to the commercialized media; a middle finger is Lancaster's rebuke to journalists who have lost their essence.
Hidden behind the suspicion of "domestic violence" in Lancaster this time is the degeneration of the entire news media industry. Everything was like last year's Michael Jackson incident, no one asked the truth, no one asked why, everyone just followed the explosion point blindly, as if all the media were united, and then used the pen in their hand as a weapon to turn towards Lancass. special attack. So the news exploded, the public opinion exploded, and the focus exploded. But no one noticed: it was actually a farce.
Does anyone really believe the media's skepticism of Hugo? Those speculations that are not supported by any arguments appear on major newspapers and magazines, only to reduce these media to the level of supermarket tabloids.
Take a look at the 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 iron proof that the uncrowned king has stepped down from the throne. "
The support of the "New York Times" is undoubtedly very subtle. They did not really discuss this incident of Hugo, but to see the source through the incident itself, which can also be considered to be based on the "Los Angeles Times" report. , for a more in-depth discussion.
But even so, you can still feel the support of the "New York Times" for Hugo, not only the "Los Angeles Times", "The New York Times", but also many other newspapers. On the contrary, they calmed down and scrutinized carefully.
Although this incident was huge, and even rose to the level of confrontation between public figures and the media, and to the level of the news media abusing freedom of speech, on the whole, the entire public opinion storm was evenly matched. The people who cursed Hugo were as good as those who supported Hugo, and the incident went directly from a mere entertainment event to a social problem.
In fact, this is indeed a social problem. Just as the "New York Times" worried, ten years later, the uncrowned king is no longer strong, the news media is no longer enviable, and the pursuit of commercial interests is more important than the truth. At that time, reporters were just reporters, an ordinary profession. rather than the uncrowned king.
And the collapse of all this actually occurred as early as the 1990s, and it was gradually exposed in the mid-1990s. Surprisingly, the "Hugo Domestic Violence" incident was precisely the trigger for the problem to surface, and it continued for the next decade.