Sensationalism in Yellow Journalism: The good and the bad.
Can the coexistence of traditional “hard” news and sensationalist “soft” news continue?
What exactly is Yellow Journalism? Google will tell you that the term encompasses newspapers and magazines that make little effort to present legitimate, well vetted research within their pages, whilst using eye-catching headlines for increased network traffic and, of course, sales. Daniel M Robrish explores the etymology of the term more fully on his Quora account. The centred topics in yellow journalistic articles tend also to lean towards the softer side of news, mostly “human interest” stories.
In a previous article of mine linked here, I touched on the fact that The Sun is the UK’s most popular newspaper by circulation as of April 2019. I am sure I need not regurgitate widely known news, but The Sun is a tabloid paper, synonymous with yellow journalism, and the hallmarks it bears. Another widely popular tabloid newspaper is The Express. Assumed by many to be a right leaning establishment, the paper reaches close to 25,000 adult viewers per month. I’d like you to consider the sample article I have linked here and discussed below with regards to sensationalism in yellow journalism.
“[sensationalism is] the act by newspapers, television, etc. of presenting information in a way that is shocking or exciting” — Cambridge Dictionary
Forgive the somewhat crude tone to the article presented, but I had to touch upon the sensationalist aspect of this article. Whilst the article as an entity is perhaps more rounded and more partial to the ex Prime Minister, given it’s reported right wing lean, the initial section of the article — which presents the argument — focusses almost entirely on conjecture, filled with “reports”, “claims” and credible yet anonymous sources who denied any advance from the authors of the bibliography the story originates from, an oxymoronic notion if ever I have seen one. This is mimetic of almost all the reports I could find on the topic.
The reporter fails to deliver any concrete facts pertaining to the actual topic that the title accuses David Cameron of, and although the reporter doesn’t himself claim to have verified the story — especially not a reporter of The Express — it is dangerously close to crossing the line of fake news, and is firmly in the category of yellow journalism, given the lack of objective facts. The only objective part of the article that is not conjecture is the fact that the Prime Minister’s spokeswoman has concretely denied the allegation. I have chosen to link the above article as I feel it is one of the most rounded — or one of the least poorly rounded — I should say.
For those of you who wish to further read up on the topic, The Guardian, a left leaning newspaper, posted several articles (one focussing on Twitter reaction to #piggate, and one interviewing Charlie Brooker (Black Mirror) about his “clairvoyant” abilities since the show depicted the event years earlier) concerning the topic.
It is interesting to theorise about the impact this type of reporting has on the public demographic. There does appear to be somewhat of a state of seeming incredulity amongst the public regarding The Express. For example, take the top 10 suggested searches when typing in “is the daily express…”
30% of the results directly relate to the suspected lack of objectivity and truthfulness of the newspaper, whilst 70% hint at the fact that a common conception of the newspaper is it’s political bias — implying bias and therefore, untruthfulness. These are damning statistics concerning the reliability and reputation of the newspaper. There is a case to be made that the pedalling of sensationalist misinformation is partly the cause of this seeming distrust. This line of argument must stem from the purposes of news, the actual aims of a news story.
“News is that part of communication that keeps us informed of the changing events, issues, and characters in the world outside. Though it may be interesting or even entertaining, the foremost value of news is as a utility to empower the informed.
The purpose of journalism is thus to provide citizens with the information they need to make the best possible decisions about their lives, their communities, their societies, and their governments” — American Express Institute
Breaking down this criteria for a “newsworthy” story to its constituent parts, we are left with:
A) Keeps us informed
B) Empowers the informed
C) Provides information to make the best decisions concerning lives, communities, societies and governments.
Applying these criteria to the story as an entity, not merely the article written by The Express, A) is met, though the value of the story with regards to “worthiness of being informed” is tenuous. B), again, is met, though this is entirely subjective, as there is a line of argument that suggests stories such as rumours surrounding the lives of celebrities do not deserve circulation since they constitute unverified muckraking. The main problem arises with C). The article does not enable the reader to make a more informed decision about their life, nor their community, nor their society, nor their government.
Though The Express’s motivation for the story was unlikely to pertain to smear tactics of the Prime Minister, given their seeming right wing bias, it is plausible that newspapers can use these kinds of stories to harm the reputations of politicians either side of the aisle. If true, this misinformation actually does the opposite of the aforementioned news value, is skews the ability of the public to make informed decisions regarding their governments. Though the example story smears a right ring politician, I am wholly against the practice, not merely the example. For example, there have been many accusations against Jeremy Corbyn personally regarding anti semitism that have since been denied.
The practice of sensationalism as a journalistic tactic does appear to have a negative effect on the avid readers of journalism across social media. Take, again, the example of The Express. A tweet from Dominic Ponsford on Twitter regarding the 2019 British Journalism Awards was met with this response from @bibbleco:
The account has disregarded the newspaper entirely from the category of journalism. Whilst this dismissal from the field of journalism is exaggerated, it is plausible, if not likely that the presence of sensationalistic practice, whatever form it may adopt, is cause for this reaction.
Opposing Angle
“We love them [sensational articles]. Sensational stories are the junk food of our news diet, the ice cream sundae that you eagerly gobble up. You know it’s bad for you but it’s delicious, and you can always have a salad tomorrow.” — Tony Rogers
The negative point of view regarding sensationalist yellow journalism is all well and good, but it fails for account for the wide spread reach that such newspapers have. One would assume that if they were as utterly misleading as some would tell us they were, nobody would read them! There is, then, an alternative point to be made, and indeed it has been made, that positive reception to sensationalist stories is woven into the very fabric of our bones, as if it is as important to our brain as blood is to our heart.
Rogers comments on some of the positives of such stories, noting that they help to promote the spread of information to less literate audiences as well as questioning or establishing social norms and boundaries — and more power to them for that. Everyone should be able to have access to news, and if sensational stories by nature encompass a wider demographical range of literacy, then that is a good thing.
Moreover, whilst the aforementioned example is too extreme to comment on social norms — one would hope there would be no questioning that is goes against social norms — there are stories that do help to question narratives within our society. Again, that is a good thing.
“The golden age of political coverage that journalism critics pine over — the era when reporters concentrated on the ‘real’ issues — turns out to have been as mythical as the golden age of politics.” — Mitchell Stephens
Like Stephens, Rogers concludes that contrary to the scarcity argument that there is a finite amount of news available and that it should be filled solely with “real news”, the sensationalist stories “which critics savaged as empty-headed chatter”, are in fact worthwhile lens through which we view the world. It stands to bear, then, that although the story regarding #piggate and David Cameron may start to encroach on muckraking, the sensationalist segment of journalism, as a whole is important.
Further Thoughts
I decided to do a little research as to why this kind of news garners so much attention. After all, as I mentioned, the very fact that newspapers such as The Sun and The Express have such a vast reach is indicative of either the problem of sensationalism or the influential benefits it brings — depending on your point of view, of course. I read works regarding Hyperrealism, one branch of the study of Epistemology from the late Jean Baudrillard.
“In this postmodern world, individuals flee from the “desert of the real” for the ecstasies of hyperreality and the new realm of computer, media…people are caught up in the play of images, spectacles, and simulacra, that have less and less relationship to an outside, to an external “reality,” to such an extent that the very concepts of the social, political, or even “reality” no longer seem to have any meaning” — Jean Baudrillard.
Note: though this is not an essay, I will list the works that I have read at the bottom of the page for those who are keen to read more on the topic.
Baudrillard maintained that perhaps the mundane aspects of normal life was such that the average person sought to move away from the “real” towards sensationalist pieces that focussed more on the scandalous nonpolitical aspects of politics as a way of inducing “new modes of theory and politics”. With regard to this, #piggate would indeed qualify as a relevant example, and is perhaps a truer explanation for the positive reception to this largely “non-story” style article than anything previously mentioned. Baudrillard’s works on epistemology and ideology are well worth reading for anyone who seeks to learn more on the topic.
A Clickbait Consideration.
The final topic I would like to consider with regards to yellow journalism, which indeed is a much more modern phenomena, is clickbait.
“something (such as a headline) designed to make readers want to click on a hyperlink especially when the link leads to content of dubious value or interest” — Merriam-Webster
This concept plagues a lot of online journalism. If we take the salient characteristics of sensationalism as the dyadic notions of: shocking and exciting, then clickbait titles can perhaps be defined as an extrapolation of the sensationalist articles they often represent. The most poignant example that I could find was the suggestion feed on Snapchat, underneath the stories section. An example is illustrated below using GIPHY.
Expanding on Baudrillard’s works, we can assume that the criteria for a successfully enticing link to a yellow journalistic article would include a sufficient detour from the “real” as to entice the viewer, and provide enough information to deem the article “worthy” of sensationalistic tendency without spoiling the entirety of the article contents.
As can be seen through the following examples, the majority of these article links provide sufficient evidence for clickbait:
— “You won’t believe the prices for these”
— “Pattinson is running into big trouble filming”
— “Rumours of Rockstar’s next game”
The fact that the third article actually includes the word “rumour”, defined as a circulating story of uncertain truth is indicative of the types of clickbait a sensationalist story will utilise to garner views. This is not a criticism of the tactic, I think that is functions parallel to the articles themselves, it is merely an observation.
Final thoughts, then. Firstly, I think that there is a time and a place for yellow journalism, and their sensationalistic tactics. The mass consumption of such media has been fuelled in recent years by a seemingly increasing notion of journalistic escapism — fuelled by reality TV and “larger than life” shows.
This permutation of content consumption seems to be valid and natural in the right setting, when the reader is aware that what they are consuming is yellow journalism. The problem, for me at least, with yellow journalism arises from the various contexts of “[they] make little effort to present legitimate, well vetted research within their pages” (Daniel M Robrish). Naturally, if applied to a less serious topic, this is fine, as long as the reader is aware of it. The potential issue for me is when this brand of journalism is applied to more serious stories that affect many millions of people. In that context, the lack of facts is troubling. My only concern is that the line may blur as time goes on between hard journalism and yellow journalism such that readers misconstrued sensationalist stories as “real”, vetted research stories — whether this is intentional on the part of the newspaper or not.
As long as we maintain the division between traditional informational journalism and this altered brand of entertainment journalism, I believe the two can and will continue to coexist side by side, and that there is little to no harm in that.
Despite the corny nature of the simile, consuming sensationalist media is much like junk food, whilst we may know that it is bad for us, we enjoy it every once in a while, peacefully knowing that we can always eat healthier the next day.
Be sure to follow me on Twitter for the latest political and journalism related content.
— Baudrillard, J., 1981. For a Critique of the Political Economy of the Sign. St. Louis: Telos Press.
— Baudrillard, J., 1994. Simulacra and Simulation. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
— Baudrillard, J., 1996. The System of Objects. London: Verso.
