America 1929: John F. Kennedy, the Great Writer

The Philadelphia Inquirer's editorial read: "If this guy likes to make up stories, he should go to Broadway. But compared to a proper screenwriter, he probably won't make a living."

Perhaps due to prior communication, Hearst quickly seized this opportunity.

They quickly adjusted their strategy, targeting Arthur's previous response to the New York Daily News article, "When News Becomes a Weapon."

First, the New York Daily News jumped in, publishing an editorial in a prominent position.

The title is quite provocative: "Examining the real manipulators of 'news weapons'."

The article cleverly avoided the newspaper's own accusations of defamation against Arthur.

Instead, they focused on the concepts in Arthur's article and refuted them.

Mr. Kennedy once wrote an article condemning the news as a tool of attack, accusing the media of turning their pens into clubs of vigilante justice. These words sounded very righteous.

But if we examine Mr. Kennedy's own practice, we cannot help but ask: Is what he criticizes precisely his own behavior?

Isn't his "Yes, Mayor" series a prime example of weaponizing news?

He abandoned the basic duty of journalists to verify facts. He chose to create fictional characters, fabricate dialogues, and construct scenes. His core purpose was to systematically satirize and vilify municipal institutions and their employees.

This is not news. This is an attack on the public sector disguised as news. It is more sophisticated and more inflammatory.

Another noteworthy contradiction is that when other media outlets criticize him, he raises the banners of "freedom of the press" and "suppression of dissent," portraying himself as the victim.

But when he freely depicts civil servants in his works, does he ever give them any space to defend themselves?

We ask our readers to consider a question.

Who exactly is turning news into a weapon? Is it the media outlets that insist on reporting facts and emphasize evidence, or this columnist who hides behind the guise of "satire" and relies on fabricating stories to damage others' reputations?

The answer may lie in the vast discrepancy between Mr. Kennedy's moral manifesto and his actual writings.

After The New York Daily News set the tone, other newspapers in the Hearst group quickly followed suit.

The San Francisco Examiner published an article titled "From 'Seeking Truth' to 'Making Stories': A Journalist's Wrong Path."

The Los Angeles Examiner was even more blunt.

"If criticism can be done without basis, then what is the difference between newspapers and street gossip? This 'honest man's' work might be more suitable for publication in the fiction section."

This wave of criticism also reached the editorial office of The New York Herald.

Isabella tidied up several newspapers that had published critical articles and gently placed them on Arthur's desk.

She didn't speak, but her amber eyes were filled with worry.

Arthur had just finished organizing the manuscript for the new issue of "Yes, Mayor".

He looked up, his gaze sweeping over the aggressive headlines, his face showing no surprise, but rather as if he had expected it.

Arthur calmly commented:

"They dared not debate with me about the veracity of the dock incident, as that is their weakness. So they shifted their focus, attacking the 'form' of the article, questioning my 'qualifications,' and even attempting to refute me with my own arguments."

"This is a public relations strategy, Isabella."

"So, do we need to respond? Issue a statement explaining that your article is satirical commentary, rather than traditional news reporting?"

"No need," Arthur shook his head.

"Responding to this kind of argument will only embolden them. They want us to vehemently refute them so that the show can continue."

"Moreover, a large-scale criticism may not be without its benefits."

Isabella paused for a moment, then seemed to understand.

She turned and walked to another desk, picked up the latest sales report, glanced at it, and her voice betrayed a hint of excitement:

"Yesterday's sales... were almost 30% higher than the day before. Several partner newsstands reported that many customers were curious and wanted to see what the 'honest man' who was being criticized had actually written."

"Controversy attracts attention," Arthur said with certainty.

"It's unusual that they're using such a massive media machine to target a column in a small newspaper like ours. The bigger the fuss, the more it exposes their own anxieties, and the more it piques the interest of ordinary people."

"Readers will judge for themselves. When they actually read 'Yes, Mayor' and discover that those seemingly exaggerated dialogues actually reflect the buck-passing and empty talk they encounter when dealing with municipal departments, they will naturally understand the value of the article. Hearst's criticism, to some extent, is expanding our visibility."

Isabella breathed a sigh of relief, but then remembered something else, and her expression became serious again:

"Your speech at Columbia University on Wednesday... given the current media climate, the atmosphere will likely be quite tense. There will certainly be pointed questions, and there's even a possibility of someone deliberately disrupting the proceedings."

"I know. But this is precisely an opportunity, an opportunity I've been waiting for."

"Chance?"

"An opportunity for me to go beyond the biased quotations and deliberate misinterpretations in newspapers and directly explain my thoughts and practices to journalism students, colleagues, and the public."

"They accused me of 'weaponizing journalism.' So, in my speech, I clearly explained my understanding of 'weaponizing journalism.'"

He turned to face Isabella.

"News can certainly be a weapon. But the key lies in what it fights for and how it is forged."

"Is it used as a tool for specific powers or interests to attack dissidents and cover up the truth? Or is it used as a guardian of the public to expose lies and safeguard the public interest?"

"Does it derive its power from fabricating facts and slander, or is it rooted in a profound observation of reality, using satire as a scalpel to expose deep-seated problems and stimulate reflection?"

"When I wrote 'Yes, Mayor,' I wasn't targeting any specific official, but rather trying to depict a pervasive systemic inertia and logical paradox. This depiction may have employed literary exaggeration, but its core stems from my observation and distillation of numerous real events and common phenomena."

"This is fundamentally different from the kind of 'news weapon' that ignores facts and maliciously hurts people that I condemn."

Isabella listened quietly, the worry in her eyes gradually replaced by clear recognition.

Arthur walked back to the table, neatly arranged the newspapers criticizing him, and calmly said:

"Let this storm rage on. It's time for more people to see what a real weapon of journalism should sound for and how it should be forged."