Art – VAGABABOND: 2XXX

Yellow Press

‘Yellow Press’ or ‘Yellow Journalism’ was an American journalistic style that came to prominence in the latter half of the 1800s; This said style, as Gullason (1959, pp. 202) explains, had, “a dependence on ‘the familiar aspects of sensationalism-crime news, scandal and gossip, divorces and sex, and stress upon the reporting of disasters and sports’.” Adding to that, he would also note the Yellow Press for its lenient attitude towards truth and accuracy, relying more so on its eye-catching nature for sales. With pioneers such as W. T. Stead bringing this American style to Britain, British papers would be flush with Yellow Press heading into the 20th century. It’s influence on the eras of journalism that would succeed it is evident, especially in the New Journalism that swept Britain around the same time — with Hampton (2004) depicting the two styles more so as vehicles to entertain and give readers what they want, rather than to accurately inform.

Yellow Journalism is most easily defined by four key characteristics: eye-popping headlines in large print, use of multimedia such as pictures and comics, often misleading or untrue statements from sources due to chequebook journalism, and the implementation of an ‘underdog’ narrative (Mott, 1941). These fundamental elements would first arise in the heated feud between William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer in the late 1890s, in which the term ‘Yellow Press’ is coined (Department of State, n.d.). Pulitzer and Hearst — along with James Gordon Bennet Jr. — would organise their reporters to look for “scoops” and “beats” in an effort to be the first to break news; This scramble for fast reporting and trying to outsell the competition led to lapses in accuracy as statements by sources weren’t always checked up on (Wiener 1994). Competition, especially in the New York newspapers — as well as the reportage of conditions in Cuba leading up to the Spanish-American War — would lead to the profound mass production of Yellow Press in the States by the end of the 19th century.

Lee (1976, pp. 232), in explaining why Britain had to adopt the capitalist business model American newspapers had adopted, said: “In the simplest of terms, the press had become (by 1914) … a business entirely, and a political, civil, and social institution hardly at all.” British newspapers would first embrace the use of sensationalism — and introduce the use of telling the story through headlines and subheadings or crossheads — in covering the murders committed by Jack the Ripper in 1888 (Knelman, 1993). The introduction of crossheads and hooking titles would be introduced by William Thomas Stead, a key figure in bridging the American Yellow Press style into Britain. At his time working for the Pall Mall Gazette Stead would also incorporate illustrations and line drawings into stories; he was also pivotal in introducing more interviews and ‘character sketches’ that blended interviews, word pictures and personality analysis (Honigsbaum, 2019). Onward, through to 1900, British newspapers would adopt the American’s Yellow Press style of fast reporting, increased informality, putting a spotlight on crime reporting as well as gossip, and sensationalising stories (Wiener, 1994).

Another large factor as to how the American style of press reached Britain was with the laying of the transatlantic telegraph cable in 1966 between the two countries. All of a sudden, British and American reporters and writers were able to openly communicate with each other and influence each other in the development of stories. Not only that, but the going ons of Europe — specifically conflicts — could now reach the US faster than ever and vice versa; McLaughlin (2016, pp. 66), on explaining why the speed of the transatlantic telegraph cable was important, said: “An account of the battle of Metz on 19 August appeared only two days later in the New-York Tribune. Such a commitment cost the Tribune some $5,000, but it was a sound investment: it boosted circulation and thus profits in an era of intense competition to be first with the news.” With conflicts such as the Spanish-American War and the Franco-Prussian War leading to more communication between British and American war reporters, war reportage in general became a key reason as to how the American style influenced British journalists.

McKerns (1976, pp. 27) would state the one key difference between the Yellow Press and Britain’s New Journalism: “The “Yellow Journalism” of the 1890’s was the New Journalism without its social consciousness.” Critics of the Yellow Press and Britain’s New Journalism, such as Arnold (1887), look to the use of false or exaggerated information as their main gripe. Yet, despite this, British new journalists would introduce and provoke the popularisation of investigative journalism in Britain, especially on social issues. William Thomas Stead, after arriving at the Pall Mall Gazette would commission stories on London gangs and housing conditions in the East End (Honigsbaum, 2019). One of his most pivotal works, Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon, was a an expose on prostitution in England — specifically child prostitution. With its publication, came the repealing of the Contagious Diseases Acts and the age of consent being raised from 13 to 16. The investigative journalism that looked into social issues came with Britain’s New Journalism, but wasn’t present in America’s Yellow Journalism.

The impact American Yellow Press had on British New Journalism hasn’t been overstated in the slightest. The parallels — sensationalism, fast news, illustration, gossip columns, falsifying and exaggerating facts — are evident between the two and can even be seen today in tabloid journalism. The pioneers of the two genres: Pulitzer and Hearst in the US, and Stead in Britain, were able to popularise the monitisation of the newspaper industry, devolving it from a public service to a business. And, though there lied one key difference between the two genres in terms of subject matter, it’s minimal in the face of the similarities.

References

Arnold, M. (1887) ‘Up to Easter’, The Nineteenth Century, May, pp. 629-643

Department of State (n.d.) U.S. Diplomacy and Yellow Journalism, 1895–1898. Available at: https://history.state.gov/milestones/1866-1898/yellow-journalism (Accessed at: 21 February 2020)

Gullason, T.A. (1959) ‘Stephen Crane’s Private War on Yellow Journalism’, Huntington Library Quarterly, 22(3), pp. 202

Hampton, M. (2004) ‘Liberalism, the Press, and the Construction of the Public Sphere: Theories of the Press in Britain, 1830-1914’, Victorian Periodical Review, 37(1), pp. 73

Honigsbaum, M. (2019) ‘The ‘yellow press’ and the New Journalism’ [PowerPoint presentation]. JO1205, History of Journalism. Available at: https://moodle.city.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=32283 (Accessed: 23 February 2020)

Knelman, J. (1993) ‘Transatlantic Influences On the Reporting of Crime: England vs. America vs. Canada’, American Periodicals, 3, pp. 3

Lee, A.J. (1976) ‘The Origins of the Popular Press in England, 1855-1914’. London: Rowman & Littlefield Pub Inc, pp. 232

McKerns, J.P. (1976) ‘The History of American Journalism: A Bibliographical Essay’, American Studies International, 15(1), pp. 27

Mclaughlin, G. (2016) The War Correspondent. London: Pluto Press, pp. 66

Wiener, J.H. (1994) ‘The Americanisation of the British Press, 1830-1914’, Media History, 2(1-2), pp. 63

Union Chapel

With the gale winds and gentle drizzles of Storm Dennis encroaching on what could’ve been a pleasant Saturday morning, litters of men and women slowly slither their way up to Compton Avenue in Islington. A hoarse female voice buzzes you through the aged wooden doors and, welcomed by aromas of free tea and coffee, the over 200 year old concrete maze soon feels rigid and intrusive. Those feelings soon subside once met with a hearty handshake and a thankful smile.

It doesn’t take long for commotion to arise: musicians flock in and out the green room, ‘volunteer’ lanyards are passed around, pews are dusted. And then at noon — with arms outstretched to the community — Union Chapel gradually teems with souls and voices.

Sat between the trendy cafes of Upper Street and deluxe apartments of Canonbury Square, the Gothic 19th century structure not only stands as a looming presence amongst the more diminutive buildings but also as a bastion — the centrepiece of a community.

Being purely a place of worship has become a rarity in modern London churches. With a 2018 report released by The National Centre for Social Research revealing that less than 40% of Britons believed themselves to be Christian and less than a third of the country attends church services regularly, churches have had to adapt with the times.

Union Chapel, every Saturday, hosts ‘Daylight Music’: a pay-what-you-can midday concert with up to 30 acts — an eclectic mix of young aspiring musicians, poets, and theatre acts. “It was the idea of giving a stage to people who wouldn’t get a chance to play,” said Ben Eshmade, the founder and producer of Daylight Music. “The building itself is a sort of meditative space, and it’s just so different seeing the venue in the daytime rather than the night. It became very clear that there was a whole community out there of people who could use or benefit from the chapel being open on Saturday mornings. It’s just a great way of starting the weekend.” Ben has run Daylight Music on 330 Saturdays since launching the project 11 years ago. The money raised, first a foremost, goes to paying the artists performing; Left over proceeds go directly to the church and their efforts in restoration and aiding the homeless.

Playing its part in bringing together Highbury & Islington’s artists, the chapel carries importance for its role in aiding the homeless and disenfranchised. Since 1992, the red and white tower has provided those of need with a hot shower, a warm bed, food, and clean clothing with their ‘Margins Project’. Andrew Mitchell, who’s lived in the area for more than 30 years, has been a regular volunteer for the program. “London, as with most big cities, has a problem with homelessness. Even if we can only take in as many as we can at a time, hopefully other places can follow from our example and help carry the weight.” As well as housing and tending to those in need, the Margins Program helps those struggling by offering English tuition and employing them at the chapel’s cafe to improve their employability. “We’ve recently had someone come in whose just not been able to make ends meet since his parents passed. Right now he’s helping out at the Margins Cafe — being taught skills in catering and keeping him somewhere safe — and hopefully he can take that forward into something more fortunate.”

If anything, the multi-faceted Union Chapel serves as a microcosm of what the modern British church is becoming — no longer just a place of worship but these community hubs that bind together the people and groups around them. And, though a prime example of this, Union Chapel isn’t the only secular organisation turning toward community building. Just down the road in Angel, St Silas holds Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, hosts for the local orchestra, and has theatre classes. St James Church in Islington hosts a variety of events — such as music lessons and ballet classes — aimed at young children whilst also holding yoga classes and meditation sessions for adults.

Union Chapel had to adapt and it adapted; it was saved from demolition in 1982 and 29 years later is now listed as a Grade I building. Through the compassion it’s shown its community, the community has shown it back in its donations to the Union Chapel Project and those volunteering for the Friends of Union Chapel helping restore and preserve the building.

Margaret Grangier, a local mother of two, has over the years seen Union Chapel integrate itself people’s lives: “I never came regularly at the beginning, purely because I wouldn’t say I’m the most religious person, but I started coming round to the concerts on Saturday mornings and to the cafe on Wednesdays. Eventually, it just becomes a part of your life. You start to see that in everyone who comes here as well; you’ll often come round asking people if they’d like to join the mailing list — the room would be packed but a majority of people would still say they’re already on it.”

“New Journalism” to traditional journalism

Though the phrase’s origin is disputed, the term ‘New Journalism’ refers to a style of journalistic writing birthed from experimentation throughout the 1960s and 1970s. More conventional journalism at the time, and prior to this, was confined as merely objective retellings of actions and statements (Dickstein, 1976) whilst those who were part of the New Journalism movement sought to inject themselves into the story — writing from a more subjective perspective and with literary techniques more commonplace in fiction writing. The style was far more common in America, though not in their newspapers; New Journalism found its roots in magazines: with print magazines, television news magazines, or any form distinct from primary daily news sources long housing more commentary and opinions in their writing (Nadler, 2016). And, though the movement has long since ended, the effects it had on modern journalism is prevalent — especially in online publications such as Buzzfeed or Vice — as its deviation from conventional journalism paved the way for more creativity in reporting.

One of these differences between New Journalism and regular reportage lies in the material they reported on. As Sims (1984) writes: conventional news would see a bulk of their stories centred around reporting on the people, places, and institutions of power. Conventional journalism and reporters had skepticism about men in power more than anything else Dickstein (1976). America in the mid-20th century was in the midst of the Cold War, the Vietnam War, the Cuban Missile Crisis — news revolved around politics and conflict. In contrast, as Sims (1984) wrote, new journalists primarily wrote more about society and cultures, especially domestically instead of looking outwards like conventional news did. In fact, parallels can be drawn between the two journalistic styles and American society in 1950s-1970s: the government was focusing its efforts on international affairs and its own politics — much like conventional news did, all the while a counterculture was emerging that centred around an anti-war, anti-conservative, anti-conformist sentiment and civil rights — just as New Journalism did. An introspective into the society around them and not internationality was a big difference between New Journalism and conventional journalism. As the conventional journalists covered international affairs, new journalists such as Hunter S. Thompson wrote of the lewdness at the Kentucky Derby in The Kentucky Derby is Decadent and Depraved and Norman Mailer wrote of the march on the Pentagon in The Armies of the Night.

The domestic nature of the content would also aid in the gaining popularity of new journalistic writings as it garnered more relatability; they were stories that their audience — the American public — might themselves experience or at least have had thoughts about. Hellman (1977, p. 414), in his critique of traditional journalism, illustrates how relatability affects the audience: “It is difficult to deal in the middle-range of plausible experience when this realm of likelihood is constantly being assaulted by extremities delivered through the media. In this situation both the mundane and the extraordinary fail to satisfy a sense of the realistic.” This would define a key distinction between the two journalistic forms: New Journalism — in its tendency to sway away from writing about international affairs, top one percenters, or those in power — wrote about everything else in between which led to heightened relatability within a traditional news reading audience

Another key distinction between traditional journalism and New Journalism is the role that the writer plays. In traditional journalism, the reporter isn’t present in the story, their role is defined to just retelling events and sources; on the other hand, in nNew Journalism, the story is uniquely that of the writer as it showcases that writer’s voice, perspectives, and opinions (Polsgrove, 2009). As conventional journalists in mediums such as newspapers had to contend with intense editing and objectivity, writers of New Journalism — that was more abundant in magazines — had more freedom with what they wrote and didn’t have to adhere to objectivity. However, the writer’s subjectivity in New Journalism came under criticism: as Marzolf (1991) describes, it was opinion in the guise of fact.

In fact, the certain liberties New Journalists took with the truth would be at the centre of many criticisms. Objectivity, as well as conventional journalism’s role of conveying information clearly, came the need to paint the full picture of a story; Editors and writers made it a point for the stories to be factual and real. On the other hand, in New Journalism, several writers have been exposed as having made up aspects of their stories to better aid the storytelling aspect. However, as Talese (Big Think, 2012, 02:41) explains in a video he did about New Journalism, the invention of story elements was attributed to the nature of research in New Journalism more than anything else. Whilst traditional journalism was fact-oriented, New Journalism was detail-oriented, which has meant that new journalists have had to immerse themselves in the story, researching for prolonged periods of time; as Talese explains in the video, all that time spent researching is time not spent writing and publishing, so shortcuts in fabrication is made to shorten the time spent researching. For Honor Thy Father, Gay Talese spent close to seven years interviewing and being around the Bonanno family and the mafia — the subjects of his book. And yet, Talese would be accused of fabricating some parts of the story. A reviewer (The Princedom and the Power, 1971) in the New York Times cites that Talese’s way of describing his subjects’ thoughts was little more than fiction-imposed-on-fact, which hurt the entire story’s realism and made it seem like Talese had made it all up. Despite the fabrication however, the work and effort put into gathering the truth in the story can not be discredited, as Talese would travel to Sicily to uncover the history of the mafia. So, though the truth and factuality in traditional journalism was seen as a rule, it wasn’t a must in New Journalism.

Lastly, the most decisive difference between traditional journalism and New Journalism is the use of literary techniques. Traditional journalism was a form restrained by conformity: most importantly to the writing methods that have been proven to work amongst the newspapers’ mass audience. Objectivity, the inverted pyramid and simplicity in writing defined conventional journalism. There was a lot more freedom in New Journalism, which took after literary prose writing in many respects, As Wolfe (2007, pp. 150-151) said, the New Journalism style of writing was defined by four key elements: scene-by-scene construction, copious dialogue, the notation of details, and point of view. The way in which the two journalistic forms would use these elements is the key difference.

The way in which conventional and New Journalism differs is in the formatting of how they convey their information. In traditional journalism this would follow the inverted pyramid, where the most important information starts the story, and then the most important after that follows, and so on. In New Journalism, much like it literature, the story is written with scenes and on occasion chapters. Writers would set-up the scene with exposition and an inciting incident, which would escalate until it hit a climax or a point in which the people in the story change (Franklin, 2009). Franklin (2009) would also talk about the use of chronology and use of time in new journalism, saying how rearranging parts of the story helps in providing a better understanding of the story. In that respect it is similar to conventional journalism.

Another key difference is the use of point of view. In traditional journalism, as Wolfe (1975, pp. 31) says, the writer is detached, written in 3rd person, and often written in the same “calm, cultivated and, in fact, genteel voice”. In New Journalism, point of view is used in a multitude of ways: 1st person from a character in the story, 2nd person, from the point of view of the writer themselves, or the point of view will change throughout the story. This, as Wolfe (1975) states, allows readers to feel like they’re part of the story and — more importantly — be suggested how to feel , as with point of view comes personal views and opinions. The way in which conventional journalists use point of view makes it so they remain impartial, as opposed to new journalists who make it intimate and personal.

Quotes are something both conventional and new journalism share. In conventional journalism, the use of quotes allows the writer to provide context or showcase the views being presented on their story — the quotes serve the writer. But, in New Journalism, the use of quotes is unique, primarily by the use of dialogue. Quotes and dialogue are used to give the subject’s voice the best platform possible (Benham, 2009); the quotes served the subjects and the people in the story, as well as helping the writer in conveying emotion to the reader.

The way in which the two forms convey detail is also distinct. Conventional journalism, though it makes objectivity and its role to inform chiefly, is still subject to a large mass audience, so they must consider the retention of the reader as the story progresses. This is done by simplifying all the details. In contrast, New Journalism is superlative in their use of details. From the setting to facial expressions to what the writer assumes is being thought by the subject. And to add to that, New Journalism implored the use of literary devices. Wolfe (1975) talked about how devices such as italics, onomatopoeia and pleonasms helped in making New Journalism look distinct from ordinary journalism. Additionally, the abundance of details paints a fuller picture for the audience as well as makes them feel a part of the story. Furthermore, details would infer an idea instead of outright saying it; for example Wolfe (2009, pp. 151) spoke of the details new journalists would look to include to best characterise their subjects: “The details that reveal one’s social rank or aspirations, everything from dress and furniture to the infinite status clues of speech, how one talks to superiors or inferiors, to the strong, to the weak, to the sophisticated, to the naive — and with what sort of accent and vocabulary.” This is the most notable difference between the conventional form of journalism and new journalism

Though the movement has ended, the aforementioned elements that seperated New Journalism from conventional journalism are still seen in forms of journalism today. The introspective look into our culture as its subject matter can be seen today in investigative journalism and documentaries. Subjectivity and individual voice can be seen in new media journalism. And, the literary components of New Journalism can still be seen in feature writing and magazines today. All these factors helped in making the New Journalism become distinct and grow into a movement in the 1960s and 1970s

References:

Benham, K. (2009) ‘Hearing Our Subjects’ Voices: Quotes and Dialogue’, in Call, W. and Kramer M. (ed.) Telling True Stories: A Nonfiction Writers’ Guide from the Nieman Foundation at Harvard University. New York: Plume

Big Think (2012) Gay Talese and New Journalism. 23 April. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Auu4IE_l4to (Accessed: 8th December 2019).

Dickstein, M. (1976) The Working Press, The Literary Culture, and the New Journalism. The Georgia Review. 30(4). pp. 856

Franklin J. (2009) ‘A Story Structure’, in Call, W. and Kramer M. (ed.) Telling True Stories: A Nonfiction Writers’ Guide from the Nieman Foundation at Harvard University. New York: Plume

Hellman, J. (1977) Fables of Fact: New Journalism Reconsidered, The Centennial Review, 21(4), pp. 414

Johnson, E.W. (editor) and Wolfe, T. (editor and contributor) (1975) The New Journalism. London: Piccador

Marzolf, M.T. (1991) Civilizing Voices: American Press Criticism 1880-1950. New York: Longman Publishing Group

Nadler, A.M. (2016) Making the News Popular: Mobilizing U.S. News Audiences. Illinois: University of Illinois Press

Polsgrove, C. (2009) ‘Magazines and the Making of Authors’, In: Nord D.P., Rubin J.S. and Schudson M. (eds.) A History of the Book in America, Vol. 5: The Enduring Book: Print Culture in Postwar America. North Carolina: University of North Carolina Press, pp. 259-261.

Sims, N. (editor and contributor) (1984) The Literary Journalists. New York: Bellantine Books

The Princedom and the Power (1971) ‘The Princedom and the Power’. Review of Honor Thy Father, by Gay Talese. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/1971/10/05/archives/the-princedom-and-the-power.html

Wolfe, T. (2009) ‘The Emotional Core of the Story’, in Call, W. and Kramer M. (ed.) Telling True Stories: A Nonfiction Writers’ Guide from the Nieman Foundation at Harvard University. New York: Plume