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
VAGABABOND: 2XXX 