CommentsMY TURN-It’s the question many of us are asking these days: what exactly is fake news? Is it news you disagree with? Or is it advertising that looks like news but isn’t -- as is the case with an “advertorial” in which an advertiser who wants to hype a new product pays for it to be written about as if it were a news story. (These types of articles should be identified as such and the Internet tries to make that distinction by calling them "sponsored.")
For me, fake news is fiction. It can be cleverly disguised. It can contain a germ of truth. It can be filled with outright lies delivered authoritatively. And with the proliferation of stories on the Internet and cable news, it can be difficult to figure out just what is true and how much is BS.
I don't pretend to be an expert. But it is incumbent upon all of us to develop a healthy skepticism: if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. It is also ill-advised to put all media in the same basket. Hopefully, as we explore this vitally important topic, we can discover sources to check with and how to look for red flags.
I was going to treat our Fake News series like a good conversation between friends, but given the amount of information available and the ongoing daily drama from our President, that neat idea goes by the wayside!
To start, I’d like to break the topic down and analyze professional print media before we go onto consider the role of social media in later articles.
I found it fascinating to look back at the long history of print journalism in Los Angeles.
The first newspaper in our great City was called the Los Angeles Star and for those of you who thought “bilingual” journalism was a relatively new phenomenon, this Los Angeles Star (1851-1864;1868-1879) was originally a weekly with the name, La Estrella de Los Angeles. In the beginning (until 1855), it was printed half in Spanish and half in English.
When the Civil War broke out, its editor’s outspoken criticism of the federal government led to the Star being banned from the mails, and to the arrest of that editor for treason. The paper ceased publication in 1864, apparently due to financial problems, but resumed in 1868. In 1870, it became a daily, but ceased publication again in 1879 because of lack of funds.
Angela Serratore, a writer historian, wrote that the Los Angeles Herald, the first daily newspaper in Los Angeles, was purchased by William Randolph Hearst (founder of yellow journalism -- see "Fake News is not New”) and became his flagship newspaper, the Herald-Examiner. It was born out of the newspaper magnate’s desire to run for President since he surmised it would be impossible to get elected without a Southern California counterpart to his already successful San Francisco Examiner.
In 1903, the Los Angeles Examiner came into being, a paper that many years later, in 1962, merged with the Los Angeles Herald-Express, Hearst's afternoon paper. (This was merely a formality, as the two papers had shared workspace for decades.)
Serratore says, "Initially a pro-union counterpart to the Otis Chandler family’s Los Angeles Times, the Examiner quickly moved to the right -- it came out in favor of the deportation and detainment of Mexican-Americans in the 1930s and of Japanese-Americans during WWII. Like many other Hearst publications, it also traded heavily in gossip and scandal. It gave voice to legendary gossip columnist Louella Parsons, who struck fear into the hearts of badly-behaving celebrities and saw her column expand to 600 newspapers within a decade, owing largely to her championing of Hearst’s mistress Marion Davies."
The Examiner closed in 1989 due to what critics deemed bad management and it left the beautiful LA Landmark building which has been empty since its demise.
Newspapers took on the political views of their owners but for the most part, editorial opinions and actual news were kept separate. The Los Angeles Times was started in 1881 and Harrison Gray Otis took control in 1882, making it a major conservative force in the city.
The Otis Family controlled the LA Times until the end of the 20th century. As different generations took over management, the paper became more moderate. The Otis-Chandler family helped build many of LA’s cultural centers and even if you disagreed with their politics, we all have enjoyed their philanthropy and love for this City.
Today, the LA Times is accused of being both too liberal and too conservative, which places it right in the middle, where most Angelenos live. Its investigative journalism has proven to be a tremendous asset to our city. Even though it is half the size of yesteryear, it is still a morning pleasure with my cup of coffee. There is something about the feel of a real newspaper that the digital screen can't duplicate.
Those of you around my age probably remember the tabloid "Confidential" which was mostly fake entertainment news. It was always sensational and people would grab secretive looks as they checked out at the market. They had a huge circulation but I personally never saw anyone buy it. It was a little like the early days of Playboy Magazine which was supposedly read for its excellent editorial content and not its explicit photographs. Right.
The New York Evening Graphic (1924–1932) was an ancestor of the supermarket tabloids that would emerge in the 1960s. Called the "Pornographic" by detractors for its emphasis on sex, crime and violence, it provided many of the themes that founder Robert Harrison used as publisher of Confidential. When Harrison started as a copyboy at the Graphic, he met theater critic Walter Winchell, who would later promote his future magazine.
Confidential was launched at the end of 1952 and at its height had a circulation of five million. Its final year was 1978 when it was hit by numerous libel suits. Meanwhile, a whole cottage industry grew up, feeding on salacious – sometimes true, sometimes false -- "facts."
The Daily Enquirer is probably the most successful of these “tabloids” today, especially with the blessing of our 45th President. There should be no confusion, though, between reading it for fun and reading it as a valid news source!
During their histories, newspapers developed political identities. The morning Los Angeles Times was once very conservative while the Daily Mirror was chattier. The LA Examiner was reflective of Hearst's philosophy. However, you knew that what you read was the truth. There were always exceptions to this, of course, but the perception was if someone told you something you might question its validity but if you read it in "black and white" it was not questioned. Remember the riddle: “What’s black and white and read all over?" The newspaper, of course.
Today, most newspapers are part of large media companies. They have teams of lawyers who vet stories, trying to avoid legal problems. You do have to remember, if there is a byline, that person's opinion is included in the article, even if it’s not specific.
CityWatch does not profess to be a newspaper. Publisher Ken Draper says it is opinion on the news and that is why each article has a byline. And you will notice it runs the gamut, including all political persuasions.
I really appreciate your sending me items you consider "fake news.” Even the "research" is sometimes suspect. In my next piece, I want to examine the quagmire that the Internet and cable news has inserted into our daily lives…and the lives of our children.
Thank you for so enthusiastically joining me in this process. As always comments welcome.
(Denyse Selesnick is a CityWatch columnist. She is a former publisher/journalist/international event organizer. Denyse can be reached at: [email protected]) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.
