The Greatest Showman #895 - Four Faces Embattled

Is Cornell McGregor a good reporter? Yes.

In this report, McGregor skillfully manipulates facts and comments to subtly guide public opinion, unknowingly steering readers' thoughts.

First, the word "cheating" in the title, paired with the reference to Frank Abagnale Jr., casts a shadow over Renly's actions. The subtext condemns Renly's alleged malicious hype. This choice is deliberate—sensational, thrilling, and designed to shock, instantly capturing the reader's attention and planting preconceived notions.

Second, McGregor avoids expressing direct opinions within the article. Instead, he presents a series of facts. The order in which these facts appear is intentionally crafted—like a montage in film editing—to suggest a causal connection without explicitly stating it. This technique leads readers to draw their own conclusions.

Lastly, the article's layout emphasizes the significance of the Grammys and awards season, using them as explosive points. At the conclusion, McGregor references "history," reigniting the readers' doubts and curiosity, before finalizing with the core message of shady dealings, hype, and deceit. This manipulation compels readers to consider the hidden forces at play.

A truly skilled reporter, like a masterful director, doesn't tell you "this is right" or "this is wrong." Instead, they lead you to a conclusion through the careful accumulation of psychological hints, leaving the interpretation to the reader.

Cornell succeeded in doing just that.

The entire article appears solid, well-reasoned, and full of compelling evidence, painting Renly as the villain in a series of heavy-handed blows. As McGregor noted, although Renly has stepped away from the center of the awards season battlefield, the discussion about him never ceased.

It began with the box-office success of Crazy in Love and Me Against Cancer, followed by a double Golden Globe nomination, news from the London film set, an Oscar nomination, the Berlin Film Festival, an unexpected concert appearance, and finally, his historic Grammy win.

The focus on Renly was unrelenting, reaching new heights with the Grammy win. In just one week, Renly's momentum surged, paving the way for a full-on sprint toward the Oscars in the next awards season.

This Entertainment Weekly special report broke at a time when Renly was at the peak of his fame. It sent shockwaves throughout North America—not just in the entertainment industry, but across social and political spheres, quickly evolving into a social phenomenon.

The report was published on Entertainment Weekly's official website, and within 12 hours, visitor traffic surged from an average of 30,000 per hour to 3 million per hour. The site's servers crashed, and it took 23 minutes to restart.

Despite this, the report received more than 40 million views within 12 hours, setting a record for non-portal websites. The report was shared more than 78,000 times, spreading like wildfire across the web.

Even more surprising was the response on social media. Over 50,000 comments flooded the report's comment section, causing the Entertainment Weekly servers to shut down temporarily to prevent further strain.

On Facebook, Twitter, and across the globe, the report spread at lightning speed, sparking debate with the question: Did Renly Hall deceive the world?

The Internet's fast-paced culture played a key role in amplifying this story. The report's influence spread so rapidly, it resembled an explosion. Neither McGregor nor Entertainment Weekly anticipated just how quickly this would catch fire.

In addition to the online impact, the latest print issue of Entertainment Weekly flew off the shelves. 300,000 copies sold out in record time, a feat the magazine hadn't accomplished since its 2008 Oscar special issue. This success led to an additional 100,000 copies being printed, all of which were sold by the evening.

It was clear: the controversy surrounding Renly Hall had struck a chord, both online and in the real world. The question—Is Renly Hall the man who deceived the world?—had captivated the public's attention, and everyone was talking about it.

As the story unfolded, the media raced to join the conversation, whether in agreement or in opposition to McGregor's piece. Reports quickly spread across news outlets:

"Renly Hall: The Master of Hype or the Master of Lies?""Behind the Rise: The Secrets of Renly Hall's Success""Is Renly Hall the Modern-Day Frank Abagnale Jr.?""The Price of Fame: Is Renly Hall Really Just a Genius of Public Relations?"

Journalists, eager to stay ahead of the story, responded quickly, reprinting articles, issuing opinions, and fanning the flames of controversy. The internet age had sped up the news cycle, and reporters had to act fast—whether they believed Cornell's allegations or not.

Even as they questioned Renly's motives, they were drawn into the frenzy. This story had all the hallmarks of a scandal—secrecy, power, and manipulation—and the media was hungry for more.

The coverage snowballed, and soon, nearly two-thirds of entertainment outlets were reporting on Renly, many of them without pausing to verify the accuracy of McGregor's claims. Whether it was a coincidence or a carefully orchestrated trap, the timing was impeccable. The floodgates had opened, and the public couldn't look away.