Yellow Journalism vs. Muckraking

Yellow Journalism vs. Muckraking 

Yellow journalism is the American term for journalism and associated newspapers that present no legitimate news. For example, it is not researched and does not present good quality information. Instead, it uses eye-catching headlines for increased interest and sales for the people who see it. Some techniques they may use are exaggerations of news events, scandals of sensationalism. 

William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer used some of these techniques (melodrama, romance and extreme exaggerations, aka hyperboles) in the 1890s and it led to millions of purchased papers. Was this fair? It’s debatable, but it was a way to attract readers and increase circulation and it WAS successful.

On the other side of things, we were able to dig deep into muckraking and even learn about several well-known muckrakers. Some famous muckrakers include : Ida Tarbell, Will Irwin, Upton Sinclair, Jacob Riis!

Muckrakers provided detailed and accurate accounts of the social/political hardships caused by the power of big business in a rapidly industrializing United States. In a less proper way, it was a way for publicizing scandalous information about famous people/ public figures in an underhanded way. 

People might consider these both a bad thing for different reasons. Yellow journalism is a way of putting out false information to gain attraction. Especially nowadays people get information from social media and will believe anything they read - and word spreads around QUICK. 

Normal social media and internet users can get misled by titles that are off putting. Muckraking could be considered a bad thing because it is outing information that was meant to be kept quiet/ not meant for the public. People can see this as invasive. 

Yellow Journalism and muckraking both have its pros and cons. For example, I think yellow journalism is a great way to gain attention and get more viewers if you are trying to grow a following and get website traffic. Muckraking can be good if we are exposing a politician for taking part in money laundering before taking office. Journalists can be careful with their wording and include sources in order to not confuse readers and the public.

Most journalists care about the truth - the truth behind writing. It is their responsibility to make the public aware if it is a public good and not a public evil. 

Before we say muckraking is about watchdog journalism, let’s define watchdog journalism.

Watchdog journalism is a form of investigative journalism where authors or publishers of a news-publication fact-check and interview both public figures and politicians to increase their accountability. Basically they go the extra step to ensure accuracy. 

I believe all journalists have the same job. Get to the truth. Journalists can be as involved with politics as they want to be. I always assume there is always more to a story.  If they want to get to know someone running for Senator - setup that interview, ask tough questions, research them until you can’t anymore.

A whistleblower is a little bit more severe than a muckraker. This is defined as someone “who exposes information or activity within a private, public, or government organization that is deemed illegal, illicit, unsafe, or a waste, fraud, or abuse of taxpayer funds”.

Overall, people see this as a good thing from what I’ve gathered on the internet. If an individual discovers that the employee they work for is participating unethically, it is their moral duty to address it.  I found this quote below: A simple formula: whistleblowing is exactly as ethical as the practices it exposes are unethical.

 Upton Sinclair, a muckraker, exposed the terrible working conditions in the meatpacking industry and it ultimately led to change. He brought these problems to the public eye and it led to new federal food safety laws. He inspired change.

Julian Assange, an Australian editor/ publisher/ activist  founded Wikileaks in 2006 and it gained international attention in 2010 when it published a series of leaks provided by the U.S Army Intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning. 

He leaked millions and millions of classified government documents, and was later indicted with conspiracy to hack government computers.

Upton got change to happen and people admire him for that. Assange leaked millions of private documents that ended in the wrong hands. His actions were deemed outside remit of a journalist, and would have violated the Official Secrets Act if prosecuted in the UK.

Julian Assange

Assange's actions divided opinion around the world - many, on one side, argued WikiLeaks provided ground-breaking investigative journalism, while the other said it posed a risk to national security.

He leaked millions and millions of classified government documents, and was later indicted with conspiracy to hack government computers.

Upton got change to happen and people admire him for that. Assange leaked millions of private documents that ended in the wrong hands. His actions were deemed outside remit of a journalist, and would have violated the Official Secrets Act if prosecuted in the UK.

Assange's actions divided opinion around the world - many, on one side, argued WikiLeaks provided ground-breaking investigative journalism, while the other said it posed a risk to national security.