The term yellow `“ not so much the colour it signifies but the meaning it carries `“ is very familiar in the world of journalism. In an official function to commemorate the National Press Freedom Day some years ago, the issue came up and the men on the dais, including the editor of this newspaper, were called upon to define what it exactly signified. Off hand, the history of the word as in `yellow journalism` was not available, but many of us attempted giving our understanding of what it was all about, and expectedly all the answers were not far off the dictionary meaning which says it is `journalism that exploits, distorts, or exaggerates the news to create sensations and attract readers`. Surprisingly the 9th edition of the Concise Oxford English Dictionary does not have an entry on this, perhaps indicating the term is a dying lexicon in the modern world. But thanks to the internet, arguably the most accessible and inclusive encyclopaedia, most of which is available free to everyone, we have a gist of the history of this broad category of journalistic practice, and we are sharing this with our readers, especially the matter always surfaces in times of chaos and mayhem, as indeed Manipur is once again immersed in today.
The advent of the electronic media, and earlier on, colour printing technology, has altered the significance of the word considerably. But in 1898, the arrival of the technology to use a single colour other than the familiar base of black and white must have appeared startlingly eye catching. And yellow ink it was that first made its impression on newsprints. The colour was used by certain publishers to headline news in the battle for newspaper circulation in America of the time in the midst of the Spanish war. Surprisingly again, the name associated with this term in the new context belonged to someone who is arguably one of the most well-known and respected person in journalism `“ Joseph Pulitzer. Yes, the man who instituted America`™s most prestigious awards for various categories of journalism and photojournalism. Pulitzer purchased New York World in 1883, and set about grabbing the readers`™ attention by introducing a sensationalist style of journalism with screaming headlines and cartoons in bold yellow ink. But competition soon emerged, and in 1895 William Randolph Hearst gave him a run for his money matching him in every move in his Morning Journal. The period saw these American newspapers scale previously unachieved heights in terms of circulation, and editors who objected to the practice coined the term `Yellow Journalism`. And even though the yellow colour has today been replaced by multicolour offset printing, capable of reproducing images with high fidelity to natural colours, a broad understanding of the term `yellow journalism` which has nothing to do with actual colour the name implies, has remained. The colour printing capability of newspapers has altered radically, but the term still signifies the brand of journalism which is in the end is just `a story told by an idiot; full of sound and fury; signifying nothing`. Again, the arrival of the television media has redefined what sensationalism in journalism can be with their `sting operations` stories, graphic accounts of gruesome accidents, close-ups scrutiny of shifting moods and emotions of people in trauma and tragedy etc, making the traditional understanding of `yellow journalism` bland. The internet, social media, and the so called citizen journalism, as we are witnessing, has yet pushed the frontiers of yellow journalism still further.
What exactly should be defined as yellow journalism then? The dictionary meaning is still ethereal for everybody will differ on what should constitute sensationalism, what should be its limits etc. A working definition or rather a working scale, however is available, informally and in the course of a discussion, passed on to IFP by an American journalist colleague. Asking the question: `How much does one `need` to know of any news event?`™ should give a rough idea where journalism has crossed the limits of decency and propriety. In our context, it could very well be, how much do I `need` to know of anybody`™s private affairs? How much should I be concerned of how much somebody else is earning, unless it is stolen money? When such questions do not have a satisfactory answer, but readers`™ interests as well as journalistic passions persist, we may very well have crossed into the territory of `yellow journalism`. And we would also reiterate that is a voyeuristic syndrome that can afflict not just journalists and newspapers, but also their readers in equal measures.