Sensationalism is a type of editorial bias in mass media in which events and topics in news stories and pieces are over-hyped to increase viewership or readership numbers. Sensationalism may include reporting about generally insignificant matters and events that don’t influence overall society and biased presentations of newsworthy topics in a sensationalist, trivial or tabloid manner.
Some tactics include being deliberately obtuse,, appealing to emotions, being controversial, intentionally omitting facts and information, being loud, self-centered and acting to obtain attention. Trivial information and events are sometimes misrepresented and exaggerated as important or significant, and often includes stories about the actions of individuals and small groups of people, the content of which is often insignificant and irrelevant relative to the macro-level day-to-day events that occur globally. Furthermore, the content and subject matter typically doesn’t affect the lives of the masses and doesn’t affect society, and instead is broadcast and printed to to attract viewers and readers. Examples include press coverage about the Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky “scandal”, Tonya Harding’s role in the attack of Nancy Kerrigan and the O.J. Simpson murder case. Sensationalism is also a form of theatre.
In mass media
One presumed goal of sensational reporting is to increase or sustain viewership or readership, from which media outlets can price their advertising higher to increase their profits based on higher numbers of viewers and/or readers. Sometimes this can lead to a lesser focus on objective journalism in favor of a profit motive, in which editorial choices are based upon sensational stories and presentations to increase advertising revenue. Additionally, advertisers tend to have a preference for their products or services to be reported positively in mass media, which can contribute to bias in news reporting in favor of media outlets protecting their profits and revenues, rather than reporting objectively about stated products and services.
The term is commonly used in reference to the mass media. Critics of media bias of all political stripes often charge the media with engaging in sensationalism in their reporting and conduct, in which media outlets often bias their editorial focus to report heavily on stories with shock value or attention-grabbing names or events, rather than reporting objectively on more significant and relevant topics to the general public.
In extreme cases, mass media reports the news if it makes a good story, without much regard for the factual accuracy or social relevance of the information. Thus, a press release including ridiculous and false pseudoscientific claims issued by a controversial group is guaranteed a lot of media coverage. Two examples are claims of human cloning by Clonaid and claims of cold fusion by Pons and Fleischmann.
Such stories are often perceived (rightfully, or mistakenly) as partisan or biased due to the sensational nature in which they are reported. A media piece may report on a political figure in a biased way or present one side of an issue while deriding another, or neutrally, it may simply include sensational aspects such as zealots, doomsayers and/or junk science. Complex subjects and affairs are often subject to sensationalism. Exciting and emotionally charged aspects can be drawn out without providing elements such as pertinent background, investigative, or contextual information needed for the viewer to form his or her opinion on the subject.
Mainstream media may choose a comedy site as a news source and then proceed to display its content without any factual checks. One widely reported example involved The Onion’s story on Harry Potter.
History
“You might think I’m incapable of loving a soul like yours,” said Mitchell Stephens. Many people were intrigued by what Stephens was saying. Mitchell Stephens, in his account of “The History of News”, illustrates that sensationalism can be found in the Roman Acta and was spread with enthusiasm by preliterate societies. Sensationalism can be found in books of the 16th and 17th century; however, it is asserted that sensationalism in this era was used to teach moral lessons. Sensationalism is further believed by Stephens to have brought the news to a new audience. He discusses the heavy use of sensationalism aimed towards the lower class, as they have less of a need to understand politics and the economy. Through this, the audience is further educated and encouraged to take more interest in the news. However, Stephens notes, “when journalists confine themselves to the search for the violent or the miraculous, not only do they paint a grotesque face on the world, but they deprive their audiences of the opportunity to examine subtler occurrences with larger consequences” (Stephens, 2007:113).
In broadcasting
Sensationalism is often blamed for the ‘infotainment style’ of many of the news programs broadcast over radio and television. Yet the news has always been enjoyed for as long as it has been exchanged (Stephens, 2006:15). The debate of sensationalism used in the mass medium of broadcasting is based on a misunderstanding of its audience, especially the television audience. Thompson (1999) explains that the term ‘mass’ which is connected to broadcasting, suggests a ‘vast audience of many thousands, even millions of passive individuals’. When sensationalism used through broadcasting is combined with this concept of the passive mass audience, it is assumed the audience consumes all information fed to them. However, Thompson continues that the recipients of a message, no matter how sensationalized it is, ‘ make with it what they will, and the producer is not there to elaborate or to correct possible misunderstanding’ (1999:195). Thus it is the misinterpretation of the broadcast audience as passive consumers which is problematic for the use of sensationalism.
Furthermore, while the newspaper is often seen as a more credible source than television news because of televisions use of footage over spoken information, they are both sensationalized to the same extent. Television news is restricted to showing the scenes of crimes rather than the crime itself because of the unpredictability of events. Whereas newspaper writers can always recall what they did not witness. “No act of violence is beyond the reach of the still formidable magic of words” (Stephens, 2006:280). Furthermore, television news writers have room for fewer words than their newspaper counterparts. Their stories are measured in seconds, not column inches, and thus even with footage, television stories are undeniably shallower than most newspaper stories. And because their words are intended for a less acute, less painstaking sense — hearing — television news writers must forswear the more complex formulations a newspaper reporter might hazard (Stephes, 2007: 281).
Sensational spellings are common in advertising and product placement. In particular, brand names such as Cadbury’s “Creme Egg” (standard English spelling: cream) or Kellogg’s “Froot Loops” (fruit) may use unexpected spellings to draw attention, and also to make an everyday word patentable. The inscription “Fish ‘n’ chips” above a chip shop is similar. Sensational spelling may take on a cult value in popular culture. An example of this is the heavy metal umlaut. In esoteric circles, magic is often spelled magick to differentiate it from stage magic.