Then there’s the part with the title “Yellow Journalist” comes into play, a Journalist as from the word journalism which is defined by Merriam-Webster as “the collection and editing of news for presentation through the media.” These “Yellow Journalist" are pulling the information out of thin air so they are “collecting and editing news,” so they don’t deserve the title of "Journalist."
Also, the fact that these Yellow Journalist are making money off this mean that there will be more people trying to make a quick buck off this new epidemic. Most of these writers know they’re writing fake news but they make money off it and that’s all they care about. These writers aren’t worried that they’re making a more ignorant population just the money.
I think you make a pretty good argument and I completely agree with you. If these writers know that they are writing fake news and making money out of it then I don't think they deserve the title Yellow Journalist. Maybe more and more people should start questioning any information they come across.
ReplyDeleteThey say in the article Professor Quinn handed out that they're looking for that shock factor when reporting. They will do whatever they need to do to get that factor whether that means to report fabricated news or cold hard facts.
ReplyDeleteBut I like your point of view in summarizing the article.
I agree with you Micheal. I guess there has to a means by which these yellow journalists should be made accountable for any false information they post out there.
ReplyDeleteHi Michael,
ReplyDeleteI think yellow journalism historically has been around since the late 19th century (so say 120+ years), but it's getting new attention due to the popularity of social media. Yes, our population is certainly becoming complacent. I wonder--have we always been this way? Is there a way to remove the monetization aspect of web reporting?