Yellow Journalism

Yellow journalism, in short, is biased opinion masquerading as objective fact. Moreover, the practice of yellow journalism involved sensationalism, distorted stories, and misleading images for the sole purpose of boosting newspaper sales and exciting public opinion. It was particularly indicative of two papers founded and popularized in the late 19th century- The New York World, run by Joseph Pulitzer and The New York Journal, run by William Randolph Hearst.

It all started, some historians believe, with the onset of the rapid industrialization that was happening all around the world. The Industrial Revolution eventually affected the newspaper industry, allowing newspapers access to machines that could easily print thousands of papers in a single night. This is believed to have brought into play one of the most important characteristics of yellow journalism - the endless drive for circulation. And unfortunately, the publisher's greed was very often put before ethics.

Although the actual practice of what would later become known as yellow journalism came into being during a more extended time period (between 1880-1890), the term was first coined based on a series of occurrences in and following the year of 1895. This was the year in which Hearst purchased the New York Journal, quickly becoming a key rival of Pulitzer's. The term was derived, through a series of peculiar circumstances, from a cartoon by the famous 19th century cartoonist, Robert Outcault called "The Yellow Kid" (seesecond from top). The cartoon was first published in The World, until Hearst hired him away to produce the strip in his newspaper. Pulitzer then hired another artist to produce the same strip in his newspaper. This comic strip happened to use a new special, non-smear yellow ink, and because of the significance of the comic strip, the term "yellow journalism" was coined by critics.

Sadly though, this period of sensationalist news delivery (where the so-called yellow press routinely outsold the more honest, truthful, unbiased newspapers) does stand out as a particularly dark era in journalistic history. The demand of the United States people for absolutely free press allowed such aforementioned newspapers, which often appealed to the shorter attention spans and interests of the lower class, to print whatever they so desired. This means that they could easily steal a headline and story directly from another paper, or simply fabricate a story to fit their particular agenda.

One of the more disturbing features involved with the former practice of yellow journalism, and the period in which it was most active in is that there is no definite line between this period of yellow journalism and the period afterwards. There only exists evidence that such practices were frowned upon by the general public - by 1910, circulation had dropped off very rapidly for such papers. But regardless, does this mean that yellow journalism simply faded away, never to return? Or did it absorb itself into the very heart of our newspapers, where it will remain forever? One thing is for certain - after the late 1800s, newspapers changed drastically, and still show no sign of changing back. The modernly present newspaper appearances of catchy headlines, humorous comic strips, special interest sections, intrusive investigative reporting, et cetera serve as a constant reminder that one must always stay skeptical when examining our news sources.

What is the remedy to yellow journalism? Simply double- and triple-checking one's sources and reading between the lines. If one disregards the obvious marketing that is used to hook readers, newspapers may actually prove to be reliable sources of information.

 

TEACHER’S

The telegraph

The Sun

Andrew Mitchell: pressure continues as MPs to debate 'plebgate' 18 Oct 2012 By Christopher Hope and Rosa Prince The pressure on Andrew Mitchell to resign over claims he described police guarding No 10 as 'plebs' is set to continue into next week after Labour forced a debate on the scandal. Andrew Mitchell is under increased pressure to resignуходить в отставку over claims he described police guarding No 10 as 'plebs' after Labour forced a debate on the scandal. MPs will discuss the altercationперебранка, in which the Chief Whip is said to have sworn at officers who refused to let him cycle through the main Downing Street gates, during an Opposition Day Debate on Wednesday. The move means that despite attempts by No 10 and Mr Mitchell to draw a line under the scandal, the row is certain to continue for a fifth week. Yesterday, four weeks after Mr Mitchell allegedlyбудто бы called police officers in Downing Street “f****** plebs”, Mr Mitchell’s future as chief whip was repeatedly questioned by MPs at a meeting of the party’s backbench 1922 committee. Around 100 MPs debated Mr Mitchell’s future for half an hour at the start of the meeting, forcing the Chancellor George Osborne, who was due toдолжен был address the gathering on the Government’s economic policy, to wait outside. Around eight of the 20 MPs who spoke at the meeting raised question marks about Mr. Mitchell’s ability to continue as chief whip. Five of them – thought to be Philip Davies, Anne Main, Andrew Percy, former whip James Duddridge and Sarah Wollaston - are understood to have suggested Mr. Mitchell “should consider his position”. A further three Conservative MPs said they had initially thought he should resign but had since changed their minds. The discussion ended with MPs being called to show their support for Mr. Mitchell. However sources in the meeting in a Commons committee room said a number demonstrated their concern by failing to applaud or bang the desks. A senior party source said afterwards that the MPs had concluded it would serve no one if Mr. Mitchell resigned now. But he added that “will need to rebuild his relationships”, raising the prospect that Mr. Mitchell’s authority as chief whip has been fatally undermined by the affair. While the MPs were meeting, rumours swept Westminster that Mr. Mitchell’s deputy im the whip's office John Randall MP had resigned. Last night Downing Street was forced to deny that this was the case. The fact the row is still dominating Westminster, nearly a month after taking place, is leading some to question why Downing Street has been unable to get a grip on it. The meeting came hours after Ed Miliband launched a fierce attack during Prime Minister's Question Time over plebgate affair. As the Labour leader accused him of using “abusive language” towards police during the encounter last month, Mr. Mitchell is said to have muttered: “I didn't swear.” The denial apparently contradicted a briefing made on his behalf by friends to a Sunday newspaper shortly after the row, when he allegedly said: “You guys are supposed to f***ing help us.” Michael Fabricant, a former Tory whip, appeared to confirm that the words were used, after he accused Mr Mitchell of reignitingвновь разжигать the row. He tweeted: “Oh dear. Labour were never going to let the story go away, but now he has managed to re-ignite it himself. Self-ignition? “Several MPs have confirmed to me that AM did indeed say #pmqs ‘I didn't swear’ (at the police). This puts a whole new light on the issue.” During his Prime Minister’s Question Time clash with Mr. Miliband, David Cameron defended Mr. Mitchell, saying that he had said sorry to the police involved, and that his apology had been accepted. “That is why this Government will get on with the big issues of helping Britain compete and succeed in the world,” he added. But the Labour leader hit back: “I think it's a real issue, abusing police officers. Just because a police officer has better manners than the chief whip, it doesn't mean he should keep his job. “They say that I practise class war and they go around calling people plebs." He went on: “While it is a night in the cell for the yobs, it is a night at the Carlton Club for the Chief Whip. “Isn't that the clearest case there could be of total double standards? His position is untenableнеприемлемый. In other words, he is toast.” As Mr. Mitchell appeared to protest at the claim he swore at officers, Mr. Miliband said: "He says from a sedentaryсидячий position he didn't. Maybe he will tell us what he actually did say." In his only official comments about the altercation, Mr. Mitchell said last month: “While I do not accept that I used any of the words that have been reported, I accept I did not treat the police with the respect they deserve.”

Sweary, swearyrude, offencive words quite contrary Mitchell 'toast' as he changes story on cop rantтирада Attack... Andrew Mitchell and Ed Miliband at PMQs By KEVIN SCHOFIELD, Chief Political Correspondent Published: 16 hrs ago SHAMED Andrew Mitchell was under renewed pressure to quit as Tory Chief Whip last night after dramatically changing his story in the Gategate row. He DENIED swearing at Downing Street cops — despite previously admitting he DID. Some Tory backbenchersрядовой член парламента for Mr. Mitchell to consider his position. And Labour leader Ed Miliband said he was “toast” and in an “untenable” position. Senior Tory sources also admitted Mr. Mitchell was “weakened” after Mr Miliband tauntedязвить him at Prime Minister’s Questions in the Commons. Andrew Mitchell "pleb"плебей police row dominates PMQs PRIME Minister defends Chief Whip as Ed Miliband says "he's toast" in heated House of Commons session The Sun revealed last month that cops in Downing Street claimed Mr. Mitchell called them “f****** plebs” when they refused to open the main gates for his bike. At the time, he denied using the words attributed to him — but admitted he swore during the row. Yesterday he contradicted that at PMQs by mouthingговорить губами “I didn’t, I didn’t” as Mr. Miliband said people who swear at police should expect to be arrested. The Labour leader retorted: “He says he didn’t. Maybe he will tell us what he actually did say.” Mr Miliband said a yob who swore at police would expect a night in the cells — but Mr. Mitchell had enjoyed a night at a poshфешенебельный club. Toast... Mitchell He asked: “Isn’t that the clearest case of double standards? His position is untenable. In other words, he is toast.” As a pale and drawn Mr. Mitchell looked on, PM David Cameron again gave him his full backing. A cop who last week met Mr. Mitchell, Warwickshire Police Federation secretary Stuart Hinton, insisted: “He told us he did swear.” Four MPs at the Tory 1922 Committee last night called for him to go. Tory 'tan trip' brag NEW Trade minister Lord Marland has boasted about using a taxpayer-funded trip to Africa to “keep his sun tan up”. The multi-millionaire Tory, 56, told the House of Lords he would be “bathing in sunshine” during a two-day visit to meet business chiefs in Mozambique. He also bragged of visiting Rio, Brazil, and Qatar. Labour MP Steve McCabe said: “It’s outrageous that while Lord Marland tops up his tan, David Cameron tops up taxes for ordinary families and cuts them for millionaires.” MR Cameron defended Mr. Mitchell’s decision as International Development Secretary to give £16million aid to Rwanda — accused of arming rebels in Congo.

 

 

Главный кнут консервативной фракции парламента, Эндрю Митчел, был на заседании правительства на Даунинг-стрит. Приехал, как обычно, без синих мигалок, на своем велосипеде. На велосипеде же и уезжал. Хотел было проскользнуть в широкие ворота за легковым лимузином, но полицейский из дипломатического отряда закрыл ворота прямо перед его носом и показал волевым жестом хозяина на калитку для пешеходов.

Господин Митчел возмутился. В описанном выше скетче он позиционировал себя как Джон Клиз, а тут некий Ронни Корбет в кепке (хорошо, не в кепке, а в фуражке!) указывает ему куда ехать, ведет себя не по понятиям классовых различий.

Вспылил главный кнут, обозвал вахтенного кретином и плебеем. "Кретина" ему, быть может, и простили бы, а вот "плебея" - нет. Рабочий класс таким словом не пользуется, его знают только люди, изучавшие классическую историю Древней Греции и Рима. Оксфорд, Кембридж.

В громких звуках оркестровой меди зазвучали народные призывы ему уйти в отставку. Главный кнут, осознав свою оплошность, уже извинился перед офицером, сказал ему, что он не кретин и не плебей. Офицер принял извинения.

Судьба господина Митчела теперь неясна. А ведь он старается быть демократом, таким, как все - в лондонском транспорте, среди машин, рискуя жизнью, педалями крутит. На голове велосипедный шлем. Можно сказать, сам выглядит как плебей.

Пока рот не откроет - не поймешь, какого сословия.

А как откроет, сразу поймешь - какого.