We chose to analyze the trend toward tabloidization as manifested on the front page of The New York Times over a 50-year period. While “tabloidization” often has negative connotations garnered from trashy grocery store tabloids, it may also mean a shift from a primary — or even sole — focus on traditional hard news to include softer features and topics in a prominent front page position.
Our analysis is not unique. The tabloidization of mainstream media has come under close scrutiny by industry scholars and practitioners in recent years. Linn Washington Jr. wrote an article titled “Facts, fallacies, and fears of tabloidization” which appeared in a November 1999 issue of USA Today.
“Today, the wall between the so-called fact-based standards of mainstream journalism and the 'never-let-facts-stand-in-the-way-of-a-good-story' standards associated with tabloid journalism is porous,” Washington wrote.
For our tabloidization analysis, we looked at a two-week period of The New York Times front pages: Monday, March 17 through Monday, March 31. We looked at each weekday in 1958 and in 2008. Totaling 11 days, we looked at only weekdays because we for consistency since The New York Times often has multiple Sunday editions. This process worked out well because the days coincided with each other in both years — March 17th was a Monday in each.
Visually, the difference is striking. In 1958, the paper is loaded with stories, with barely any gutter space between text. Images — either photos or graphic images — were scarce and it was difficult to tell which story went with which photo unless a fairly close look was taken. In 2008, there are obviously fewer stories on the front page. There are more photos and, of course, the pages are in color. Today there is often an easily distinguishable main story or centerpiece, a feature absent from the 1958 papers. The stories are also much longer under the Times’ current design — undoubtedly because fewer stories are featured on the front page. Dominating the bottom of each page are teasers, which offer previews into the rest of the day’s paper, this feature was absent in 1958.
After analyzing the aesthetic aspects of the front pages, we looked at story coverage. In 1958, there was a total of 142 stories on the front pages of the 11 papers, an average of 13 per day. In 2008, there was a total of 66 stories on the front pages of the 11 papers, an average of 6 per day. We then looked at story content and categorized each story into one of 10 labels: politics, economy, U.S. foreign affairs, international affairs, transportation, education, disaster, science, sports, feature. This number turned into 11 when we decided to distinguish between news features and lighter features.
This trend of lighter, or pop culture driven, features was noted in the Columbia Journalism Review article, “Off Course,” by Michael Massing.
“The Times has recognized that, as a world-class newspaper — and one in need of younger readers — it must approach [the entertainment business] with the same intensity and sense of purpose it brings to politics and economics,” Massing wrote.
The number of stories in each category of our study differed greatly in the two years. For example, the number of politics stories on the front pages of 1958 was 42, while in 2008 the number was 18. However, when broken down into percentages, numbers were similar. Politics in 1958 made up 30% of front page stories and 26% in 2008. There were, however, some noticeable differences in coverage percentages: Economy coverage showed an 11% difference because The New York Times gave a lot of coverage to a recession in 1958. Features also stood out in our analysis, as they comprised a much larger percentage of stories in 2008 than 50 years before. Features, often softer but occasional news features, were often the main story on the front page in 2008, whereas in 1958 the few features that appeared on the front pages were very short and often below the fold.
Massing notes that Times’ increasing coverage of pop culture it not necessarily a bad thing, the way the paper is going about the coverage is what needs improvement.
“With such a large culture staff and newshole, the Times would seem in an ideal position to address the impact of pop culture. And over the years it has — in book reviews, op-eds, the magazine, and the style, as well as in the culture pages. Yet actual reported pieces on the subject appear only rarely, making the paper’s culture coverage seem strangely out of balance.”
Washington, however, pointed out that no significant public out cry has been raised because of mainstream media’s adoption of tabloid style stories and writing.
“While few feel that tabloid Visigoths are on the verge of sacking the standards of mainstream journalism, the increasing prevalence of tabloid-style stories on the pages of prestigious newspapers and on network newscasts is causing alarm.”
The public may not be happy with this growing trend of tabloidization, but they are still embracing the changes, as noted by Peter Johnson in a 2007 article in USA Today. The article was run in the life section.
“A new Pew poll finds that most Americans say the media overdo celebrity news but they watch it anyway: 61% said the media have overplayed Smith's death, but 11% followed it as closely as the 2008 presidential campaign (13%) or Super Bowl (11%).”
Images also showed distinct differences in 1958 and 2008. In 1958, photos were black and white, small and always accompanied a story on the front page. If they were photos of people, they were generic headshots and almost never included surroundings. There were a total of 25 images on the front pages of the 11 papers, an average of 2.3 per day. In 2008, photos are in color, large and often the focus of the page. They do not necessarily accompany a story on the front page. For example, one 2008 main photo was of a basketball game, but the image was only accompanied by a caption and information about where the full story could be found — in the sports section. There was a total of 36 images in 2008, averaging 3.3 per day.
The presence of teasers was another major difference both visually and content-wise between the two years. Every 2008 front page had teasers focusing on arts, entertainment and culture. The one to two sentence summaries offer insight to what could be found in the other sections of the paper. There was a total of 89 teasers in the 11 days, an average of 8.1. Yet in 1958, teasers did not exist on The New York Times’ front page, decreasing the feel of tabloidization.
Massing wrote about New York Times Executive Editor Howell Raines and his “ambitious plans for building [the paper’s] circulation.”
“The goal was to corral more readers, and two of the largest potential pools were affluent readers nationwide and the young. The key to getting both, Raines believed, was improving the Times’ ‘back of the book’ sections. … To get readers between the ages of twenty and forty, ‘you have to penetrate the worlds of style and popular culture.’”
If teasers had been included in our story analysis, the percentage difference would have been drastic, pointing toward the tabloidization of the front page of The New York Times. Images accompanying teasers (or used as teasers themselves) were often as large and engaging as photos that accompanied stories on the front page. There were 23 total images in the teasers section on the lower part of the front page, an average of 2.1 per day. If added to the regular front page photos, the total number of photos for a two week period would reach 59, an average of 5.4 per day. Teasers and their photos take space away from the page, which also contributes to fewer stories reaching front page status in 2008.
Another growing phenomena is the 2006 decision to allow ads on the front page of The Wall Street Journal. Though we do not focus on this at all in our analysis, it is worth mentioning here, especially since advertisements on the front page will almost certainly mean more images on the front page. The “selling” of the front page, as it’s referred to in a commentary called “Gaffney on America” in Revolution magazine, is also arguably a “tabloid” device more so than something associated with mainstream “respectable” papers. The author of “Gaffney on America” was not surprised by the move.
“Breaking old media traditions like having ads on the front page, or even colour photos on the front page, doesn't surprise me any more. Traditional media, even if you're The Wall Street Journal, will not go anywhere by being grey and boring.”
Though our analysis was of The New York Times specifically, not of mainstream newspapers as a whole, “Gaffney” makes another interesting comment pertinent to our study.
“The most outrageous thing I read in reaction to this desperate action was from The New York Times, which claimed the Journal stood to make 'millions' in potential revenue.”
Every portion of our content analysis, and the opinions of practicing journalists today, provides evidence that there has been a significant rise in tabloidization on the front page of The New York Times. Features are now often the main focus of the front page, photos are more prominent and teasers, which were once nonexistent, are now a major contributor to the style and content of the front page. Teasers and their photos largely dominate below the fold and often cause readers to skip from the front page to inside stories in the arts, entertainment, culture or “weird news” sections found further inside the paper, potentially skipping over the rest of the hard news section.
Sources:
Gaffney on America. “Newspapers won’t go places by being grey and boring.”
Revolution. Page 11. 29 September 2006.
Johnson, Peter. “Mainstream media latch on to that a crazy drama’ hook.” USA Today.
Page 2D. 19 February 2007.
Massing, Michael. “Off Course.” Columbia Journalism Review. July/August 2005.
Washington, Linn Jr. “Facts, Fallacies, and Fears of Tabloidization.” USA Today.
November 1999.
