The End of the Yellow Pages
By J.p. Lawrence (Next Section/Previous Section/Convergence Menu)
From the 1890s on, newspaper culture oscillated between the poles of populism and elitism, with elitism holding the higher ground, with technological and cultural changes changing the balance here and there. The pendulum swung, but never too far, but always with much talk.
The yellow wars of the early 19th century pitted the conservative elitist papers against the sensationalist and populist new breed. The New York World, led by Joseph Pulitzer, and the New York Journal, led by William Randolph Hearst, engaged in manic circulation warfare through appeal to the lower classes, especially immigrants. Their papers pioneered the Sunday edition, variable headline layouts, bylines, comics, lifestyle sections and advertising for the workingman.
The New York Times, a paper that appealed to the upper middle and elite classes, eclipsed their legacy, however. Through a “moral campaign” of advertising, editorials, and essays, the New York Times, led by Adolph Ochs, came to define the practice of journalism.
The New York World crumbled after Pulitzer’s death in 1911. The Journal once reigned over a network of 28 newspapers, but the Wall Street Crash of 1928 smashed Hearst’s empire. The New York Times thrived and remains in the Ochs family line. Its website currently reaches more than 30 million visitors a month.
The World and Journal followed a story-based model – the facts were only as good as its story. The Journal hired writers like Stephen Crane, and their motto was “While others talk, the Journal acts.” The World hired investigative journalists like Nellie Bly, and they appealed to the immigrant classes.
The Times, on the other hand, stressed an information-based model – the story was only as good as the facts. They attacked the World and Journal for creating false narratives and using false facts, and their motto was that all of their news was “fit to print,” unlike, say, their competitors.
As Schudson points out, rightly or wrongly, the informational model is seen as more fair and more scrupulous than the story model (90). But this is not so everywhere, and it has not been so at all times. Who determines what model of journalism (knowledge production) is best?
During the yellow wars, Schudson writes, the professional classes liked spice and banners more than it would like to admit, but at the same time it felt a great need to distinguish themselves from the rest of the reading public. It is not a great feat of political correctness to note that knowledge production in American and English history has traditionally been concentrated in the hands of the white elite.
The technological changes brought upon by mass-produced newspapers allowed people of all classes to access the public sphere – their opinions now mattered. Schudson argues that the elite’s reaction to this development to develop a paternalistic attitude toward the public – regard public opinion as irrational (129).
The democratic effects of mass production could be stymied by an emphasis on quality control. The artisan model was held in higher esteem. In other words, the model of the professional arose.
Works Cited
Schudson, Michael. Discovering the News: A Social History ofAmerican Newspapers. New York: Basic, 1978. Print.