Welcome to the Unoriginal History of "Fake News"

There was a time in my life where I wanted to be a journalist. Well, more specifically I wanted to be an investigative journalist. I loved the movie "His Girl Friday" and read as many books in the "Cat Who" series as I could find. Both prominently featured journalists who sought to discover the truth and inform their readers. I thought that reporters often worked with the police, not only to get the latest scoop, but also to help catch the villain in these stories.

Even Disney had a made-for-TV movie that falls in this genre

I used to watch the news all the time as a kid. It was hard not to when so much of the national news took place right in my backyard (that being Washington D.C.). I tried to stay as informed as possible.

As I got older, I began to understand there were types of journalism that were less "Get a Clue" and more "Harriet the Spy". Though journalists can't print anything they want, libel laws don't stop hidden agendas, gossip, and bias from seeping into the stories journalists report on. There have been some graphics of how informative and biased certain news organizations are floating around the internet as of late. I didn't post any graphics here as I wasn't sure about the original source for them.

An interesting take on the pitfalls of spying on your friends and classmates

Needless to say, after doing several research papers on the subject and even studying journalism for a bit in high school, I lost interest. When I went back re-watch "His Girl Friday" and it's predecessor "The Front Page", I also noticed more of the nasty and sometimes unethical things the journalists portrayed would do to get their story. One journalist (and head of his news paper) sort of kidnapped someone so his chance at the big scoop wouldn't be ruined.

(I wrote another blog post on seeing the play "The Front Page" about a year and a half ago. You can click here to read it.)

In high school we learned about yellow journalism (journalism that is based upon sensationalism and crude exaggeration). It was a term coined in the 1890s and was tossed around into early 1900s to describe news papers with misleading headlines, scare tactic stories, and sensational pictures or illustrations of events. Basically what we call click-bait and "fake news" stories today. These tactics could be used to sway the public on different topics and mobilize them into action.

To say that "fake news" and click-bait are new problems for the world of journalists is to disregard that the history of the journalism industry is littered with first person narratives that were meant to incite extreme reactions from readers. The purpose of all stories is to cause an emotional reaction with the reader, even in non-fiction pieces found in new reports.

I've heard some people lament that idea that journalist standards have sunk to a new low in recent years, but I disagree.

Journalism, like most writing platforms, is currently going through the biggest revolution seen since the introduction of the television. People are no longer limited to getting their news from a few local news papers, television stations, or radio programs. We can share information from anywhere in the world in milliseconds. We are more aware of what is going on in the world than ever before.

That's awesome.

But it also leads to new problems. Fact checking still needs to be done and misinformation continues to be spread faster and faster. There's also the emerging problem of bias confirmation and echo chambers that litter social media and forum websites such as Reddit, Tumblr, and 4chan. We can't only read and share stories that align with their view points and call people names when they post stories with the opposite view. We might miss out on other view points and facts that could help us better understand the situation.

Journalism and the free press are a right of the American people. It's in the very first amendment to the Constitution and Bill of Rights. It was important to Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine. It's a right that should continue to be important now.

And anyone can be a journalist. We all have phones in our pockets. We can take pictures, record events, and share them hundreds upon thousands of times on any social media site. Though, that doesn't mean we can take everything at face value. Under every narrative is a grain of truth.

Even my writing isn't without it's narrative bias.

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope you guys like hearing from me.

Until next week.

Welcome to the Front Page

This past weekend, I went into New York City. I (unfortunately) wasn't there for the Women's March, but I did get to see and speak with many of the protesters on their way in. I was actually in town to see the Broadway play, "The Front Page", starring Nathan Lane, John Slattery, and John Goodman.

The play is about a journalist who is trying to get married and escape his crazy boss, but he somehow gets pulled into investigating one last story when a man scheduled to be hanged the next morning escapes from jail. It's been adapted into a few movies. My personal favorite version is the movie "His Girl Friday" (where Hildy is played by a woman instead of a man and Cary Grant is the crazy boss). The 1930 version and "His Girl Friday" are both on Amazon Prime and I highly recommend checking them out if you can.

It's interesting to see how a play written nearly 100 years ago still holds up for modern audiences.

The journalists openly admit to writing inflammatory headlines, exaggerating facts, and twisting people's statements just so they can get in edge to sell more newspapers. They compete with each other to get the best scoop for their stories. Politicians in particular are a popular target for the journalists to poke fun at.

That's not to say that the sheriff and mayor in the play don't deserve the nasty things that are being written about them, they do. See they happen to be up for reelection very soon and they want to guarantee as many votes as possible.For example, they scheduled the man to be hung a couple of days right before a major election in the hopes that it would get them more votes. They also do everything in their power to make sure nothing prevents the hanging from happening, including bribing a man, who brings a reprieve for the condemned man, with a position of power in the city.

The journalists are all aware of the mayor and sheriff's motivations, which is a key reason why they enjoy tormenting the sheriff and mayor with their exaggerated stories. They especially love reporting on the incompetence of the sheriff's men, who are mostly made up of the sheriff's family (and were appointed by the sheriff).

The more scandalizing the story on the front page is, the more likely people are going to buy the newspaper. Doesn't this sound familiar?

With social media eclipsing traditionally printed newspapers, the front page stories are the ones we see while scrolling through our Facebook and Twitter feeds. The more the headlines pulls at our emotions, the more likely we are to click on and share them. Journalists know this, so they will purposefully write their headlines in a way that is both eye catching and inciting a power emotional response.

Journalists aren't the only people who can report on current events. Now, anyone can take photos and videos of events and include a brief caption, then share them with millions of people. We have more access to information than ever before and can easily research current events.

And yet, fact checking still remains a huge problem and media bias certainly helped shape this past election. We probably wouldn't have known that Bernie Sanders was running for the DNC if people on social media hadn't rallied behind him. Then there's the media circus surrounding Donald Trump's latest tweet. (Seriously why hasn't someone confiscated his phone yet? It seems like it's going to turn into a huge security risk sooner rather than later.)

There are some who are claiming we now live in a post-fact world, where opinions matter more than factual evidence presented. I'd make a "Whose Line" joke, but personally I find this idea to be unsettling.

The media has always walked a fine line between reporting the facts and sensationalizing a story so they can sell as many papers as possible (or clicks). They are in the business of making money after all. Bias will also always be a problem. That doesn't mean we should disregard the importance of freedom of the press, having evidence based arguments, and challenging those in power.

The biggest thing I took away from seeing "The Front Page", is that even though we the audience know the journalists are purposefully using questionable tactics to sell their papers, we're on their side. We want them to expose the crooked politicians because if the journalists don't, who else will? We want the journalists to get their stories.

And please remember this is my just my opinion. I'm sure somewhere in the dark recesses of the Internet, there's an analysis of this play that says we should really be siding with the crooked politicians.

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope you guys like hearing from me. Until next week.