Is Cornell McGregor a good reporter? Yes.

Throughout the report, Cornell cleverly used the dislocation of facts and comments, and unconsciously achieved the effect of guiding public opinion and guiding readers.

First of all, he used the word "deception" in the title and used Frank Abanel Jr. as a reference. The subtext is to condemn Lanly's malicious hype. In this way, it is sensational enough, thrilling enough, and shocking enough to firmly grasp the sight of every reader, attract a lot of attention, and create preconceived psychological hints.

Second, he avoided the practice of expressing personal opinions in the content, instead listing a lot of facts. But the order of the facts is very intriguing, similar to the way of editing in montage, implying that there is a "causal relationship" between the two things, but it is just not clearly stated, and then the readers think: this is their own judgment .

Finally, in the layout of the article, he carefully emphasized the impact of the Grammys and the awards season, creating a hot spot; at the end of the article, he chose a "historical" topic to once again awaken people's inner doubts and curiosity. Furthermore, the whole article is based on the core ideas of shady, hype and deception, which makes people involuntarily guess that this is the result of overwhelming power.

A truly good reporter is actually the same as a truly good director. They will not tell you directly, "This is right" and "This is wrong", but through a large number of psychological hints to guide a directional trend, and the rest of thinking and reflection will be left to readers and audiences. Let them play by themselves.

Cornell did it; so, this report was fried.

The whole article seems to be well-documented, clear-cut, and full of dry goods, leaving little room for reversal. It not only responded to the previous report of the New York Times, but also further analyzed it. He truly achieved "everything", hitting Lan Li's shoulder with heavy hammers one after another.

As Cornell said, in the past month, although Blue Li has been far away from the gunpowder of the main battlefield of the awards season, the discussion about him has never cooled down——

First, the excellent box office performances of "Crazy Love" and "I’m Anti-Cancer", then double nominations for the Golden Globes, then news from the London filming scene, then Oscar nominations, and then the Berlin Film Festival. Out of the concert, and finally Grammy.

The best Grammy in history since the millennium.

So, focus, focus, or focus.

The focus on Lan Li has never cooled down. What's more, the concert and the Grammy's one after another, Shuangshuang created history, Shuangshuang wrote brilliance, and in just one week, Lanli was even more enthusiastic. Climbing to a brand new peak, in the next awards season, he will undoubtedly launch a full sprint towards Oscar.

This special report of "Entertainment Weekly" came out under such a background. It was shocking to cause a sensation in the entire North American market. Not only the entertainment circle, but even social news and political/government news were involved, and it gradually evolved into a social event.

First of all, the special report was published in the official "Entertainment Weekly". Within the next twelve hours, the influx of visiting tourists increased from an average of 30,000 per hour to an average of 3 million per hour. The official server of "Entertainment Weekly" went down directly, and it took a full 23 minutes to restart.

Despite this, the click-through rate of this special report exceeded 40 million within twelve hours, which also created the highest traffic of non-portal websites; at the same time, the number of forwarding of special reports was as high as 78 thousand More than a thousand times, it spread to the entire network in half a day, at least in North America.

The most surprising thing is the message. The message board of the special report flooded into more than 50,000 messages-before that, the entire website had not reached 30,000 messages. Now, after reaching its peak in one effort, "Entertainment Weekly" has to close the message board to avoid server problems again.

On Facebook, on Twitter, all the special reports of "Entertainment Weekly" are all over the world. Just the amount of forwarding by the peer media, it has exceeded 7,000 times within six hours-this is Including all social media data, all media forwarded this heavy report as soon as possible, and then raised questions one after another:

Lanly-Hall, did he really deceive the world?

The characteristics of the Internet age and fast food culture have been brought into full play at this moment. Even Cornell and "Entertainment Weekly" themselves did not expect that things will ferment and spread so fast, almost like the Big Bang. "Boom" the ground exploded at once.

Secondly, the special report was published in the latest issue of "Entertainment Weekly", and an incredible thing happened: 300,000 magazines were all sold out; moreover, the supply was in short supply.

At the moment when the Internet is popular, all paper media are facing the dilemma of declining sales. "Entertainment Weekly" has been two years in a row, and the average monthly sales will remain between 230,000 and 250,000; and in the past four months, even if there is a bonus for the awards season, "Entertainment Weekly" The best-selling November issue was only 210,000 copies, and the worst-selling Christmas special issue was only 170,000 copies.

But this time, 300,000 copies were sold out in one go! Moreover, the mailboxes were crowded with e-mails for purchase, and more than a thousand of them have been one after another.

As a result, "Entertainment Weekly" made a decisive decision to print one hundred thousand copies. This was an adventure and a gamble, but they succeeded.

Before night fell, 90% of the 100,000 reprints were sold. I believe that the remaining small part of the magazines will be sold in the next few days. This is the first time "Entertainment Weekly" has sold more than 300,000 magazines since its Oscar special issue in 2008. The outstanding sales have made the entire magazine happy.

From the Internet to reality, from virtual to real, from the entertainment industry to other industries, "Len Li-Hall: The man who deceived the world!" This article is spreading at the speed of light, and there is no need for two. In fourteen hours, more than a quarter of Americans had heard of the news and joined the discussion.

And then, things are like snowballs, rolling bigger and bigger, and can't stop at all.

The reporters did not even have time to interview Lan Li, nor did they have time to call Andy, because they must report and respond to Cornell’s topic as soon as possible: agree or disagree, definitely still contempt, discuss or watch...

In the Internet age, if there is no such hot news forwarded in the first time, loyal subscribers will immediately feel that they are out of date and disappointed. The rate of decline in subscription rate and attention is far beyond imagination. Therefore, they must forward and respond first, even if it is a neutral position of "wait and see", they must also write and publish the manuscript. After completing this series of actions, they can further follow the news.

Therefore, in the next twelve hours, the Internet showed such a scene:

"Len Li-Hall, is he really a liar?"

"Master of hype? Master of lie? Or true innocence?"

"Is there a lot of popularity? Or is it not groundless? Behind the rapid rise, Lan Li-Hall is facing doubts."

"The tree attracts the wind, behind the strong rise, what secret does Lan Li-Hall hide?"

"Renley Hall = Frank Abanel Jr.? The most handsome scammer in history, the gentlest liar in history."

"Only 22 years old. The secret of Lanly-Hall's success: malicious hype? Or is it due to strength?"

...

These related news are all derived from the special reports of "Entertainment Weekly". In order to remain objective, reporters either give up their comments when reprinting the news, or just reprint them; or they put forward different opinions and leave a comment. A string of question marks.

But today, more or less, reporters’ reprinted headlines have a certain tendency: it seems that most people have preconceived assumptions. Cornell’s report is correct and objective, but they still need to verify it. .

Not only because of Cornell’s skill in writing the topic, but also because in the past two years, reporters have not suffered less in front of Lanly, aside from last year’s "Seattle Expedition", on other occasions. , The reporter and Lan Li are always incapable of fighting.

What's more, deep down, the reporters have always been suffocating with Lan Li: So far, no one has unearthed Lan Li's wealth background! In the 21st century, this is simply a shame!

Naturally, reporters saw such a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to guide public opinion unconsciously, so why not do it?

"The number one hot seed in the awards season, the public relations scandal of Renly Hall College broke the news!"

"The impact of the actor was blocked, and Lanly Hall was accused of'for the Oscar, no compromise'!"

"The biggest scandal of the awards season came out: Lanly-Hall deceived everyone!"

"Hidden behind the dazzling beauty-the public relations strategy of the important seed players of the Oscar actor has been exposed.

"Cunning? Wisdom? Treacherous? Smart? Tear off the gentleman's mask of Lanly-Hall and spy on the true soul under the skin!"

...

The above news is much sharper and sharper~lightnovelpub.net~ They completely skipped the link of proof and verification, and confirmed the authenticity and correctness of Cornell's report in advance-or that they didn't care about the facts at all. The truth is that it only cares about hot spots and gimmicks, just like "Entertainment Weekly", the first time it can't wait to start concocting the focus.

These news media not only stood on the moral commanding heights and criticized and judged Lan Li; they also linked Lan Li with the filth of the college’s public relations and sharply analyzed the malpractices behind the industry. As a model, it is thoroughly nailed to the pillar of shame.

There was an uproar. Nearly two-thirds of the entertainment magazines and newspapers reported in the first time and joined the discussion. The momentum was beyond imagination. What is even more "coincident" is that not long ago, Hollywood successively released negative news about Renly Hall. Now, it seems that all the "negative rumors" have been confirmed.

Is this a coincidence or a trap?

b