According to Conboy, the word “journalism” entered the English language in 1833 in an article in the Westminster Review (2004: pp.121-122). Nonetheless, realizing exactly when journalism was invented as a distinct discourse is a controversial debate: on the one hand, Chalaby claims that journalism is a recent invention dating to the era in which the “taxes on knowledge” were repealed (1998: p.32). Chalaby states that the British press from the 18th century to the first half of the 19th century was a “pre-journalistic press” and argues that the prevailing discourse before the 1850s in the British press was more “publicity” than “journalism” (1998: p.3). In this sense, the discourse in the British press is not journalism and the purveyors of this discourse are “publicists” rather than “journalists” before the second half of the 19th century. Van Tuyll holds similar opinions to Chalaby’s: “Between 1830 and the 1880s, ‘the press’ was transformed into ‘journalism’” (2010: p.479).
On the other hand, many scholars believe that journalism had emerged in the British press before the “taxes on knowledge” were repealed in the mid-19th century: Hampton uses the phrase “New Journalism” to describe the press whose structure and content differed from that used prior to the 1880s (2004, p.36). His use of the phrase
45 / 360
“New Journalism” implies that something like “old journalism” had existed before the 1880s. Conboy also uses the term “journalism” when he describes the press before the 19th century (2004: p.44). Hampton criticises Chalaby’s opinion of the “invention of journalism”: for one thing, many journalistic qualities found in the press of the late 19th century could also be found in the 17th century. For another, instead of having “publicity” be substituted by “journalism,” “publicity” and “journalism” were renegotiated terms in the 19th- and 20-century press (2004: p.283). Hampton states: “It seems unlikely, however, that press historians will accept Chalaby's assertion that the mid-nineteenth century saw the ‘invention of journalism’” (2004: p.282).
Based on the discussion above, it seems reasonable to analyze the press before the mid-19th century in order to learn how journalism was developed. Since journalism changed dramatically in the second half of that century, I will analyze the development of journalism in three parts: journalism before the 1850s, the formation of the New Journalism, and journalism in the 20th century. Since the British modern press was developed earlier than in other countries, I will discuss the history of journalism only in the British context.
2.211 Journalism before the 1850s
Early journalism focused on printing events rather than “news” in the 17th century. According to Conboy, “Printers printed reports rather than composing them themselves and therefore they were often at the mercy of unreliable and contradictory
46 / 360
evidence which did nothing for the reputation of the news medium” (2004: p.22). Two main factors influenced the formation of journalism in the 17th century: politics and commercial profit. Before this, royal authority tried to control printing through laws such as the Act of Supremacy and via agents and guilds such as the Stationers’ Company. Under the control of authorities, “the powerful assertion of informed political opinion” and “the political pamphlets” led “the development of regular printed news” (Conboy, 2004: p.14). On the other hand, the rise of capitalism in England precipitated the trade in news: “News was increasingly being traded as a commodity in lubrication of other commodities” (Conboy, 2004: p.15).
The first significant stage in the development of journalism was the period between 1640 and 1660 which introduced extreme changes in the press (Siebert, 1952: p.3). The war between Charles I and Parliament and the fall of the Star Chamber provided an opportunity for the press to extend the freedom of journalism (Sparrow, 2003: p.9). There were two main changes in this period: first, instead of overseas news, domestic news became the main content in newsbooks; second, some journalistic values such as objectivity and reliability were emphasized for the support of readers (Conboy, 2004). The main reason of the aforementioned changes was the increasingly fierce competition among different printers. As Sommerville argues, “We cannot afford to forget that journalism is a business rather than a profession. The search for profits made news publishers ingenious” (1996: p.36). It seems the power
47 / 360
of market played a more important role than other dynamics in the development of British press of this specific time.
The taxes on knowledge, which began to rise in 1712, strongly influenced the formation of journalism. Such taxes had two consequences: firstly, they obstructed the development of the legal press through raising the price of newspapers; secondly, these taxes indirectly caused the creation of “the unstampeds” which were illegally evading the imposts (Chalaby, 1998: p.12). In this sense, the legal press lost the advantage in the competition with the unstampeds because only a few readers could afford the high price. The boom of the unstampeds provided opportunities to publicists who were usually represented by and relied on specific political groups to express their opinions. The 1776 American Declaration of Independence and the 1789 French Revolution had begun to spread radicalism through the British newspapers and eventually promoted the popularity of radical journalism of the unstampeds. As Conboy argues, “A new form of journalism developed, centered upon the editorial essay and concentrating not upon a relation of the events of the time but on building radical opinion on political issues” (2004: p.91). This argument implies that journalism moved its focus from reporting events to publishing opinions. The press became an approach to present standpoints for different interest groups, as observed, “The newspaper became an accepted means in some circles for the pursuance of disputes, possibly contributing to both a more peaceful and a more public means of
48 / 360
conducting political, social, economic and religious disagreements” (Black, 1991: p.293).
2.212 The Formation of the “New Journalism”
The second half of the 19th century witnessed the emergence of the “New Journalism.”1
The structure and content of the discourse of journalism were changed dramatically in this period as journalism became a distinguished field with professional recognition (Brake, 1994; p.xii). The abolition of the taxes on knowledge was the beginning. All of the taxes on knowledge were repealed from 1833 to 1861. The consequence of the abolition of the taxes was that selling legal newspapers for a mere penny became possible (Chalaby, 1998: p.32). Thus, “the creation of a cheap press led to greatly increased consumer demand for newspapers” (Hampton, 2004: p.35). In this sense, a large market for the development of journalism had been established. The economic competition within the journalistic field in the market determined the discourse of the New Journalism. As Hampton argues, the features of the New Journalism were “a light of tone, an emphasis on the personal and ‘sensational’, and reliance on gimmicks to sell newspapers in high-stakes circulation wars” (2004: p.37). In this sense, newspapers emphasized de-contextualized news
1 It is noteworthy that the term “new journalism” here has a different meaning from the one
described by Tom Wolfe in the context of American journalism around the 1970s. Tom Wolfe’s “new journalism” is used to describe the adoption of a variety of literary techniques in the writing of objective even-handed journalism.
49 / 360
rather than the opinions of specific political groups. The press became much more commercial than ever before.
2.213 Journalism in the Twentieth Century
According to Hampton, “the press continued to develop along the lines of the New Journalism” in the 20th century (2004: p.39). On the one hand, the concentration of ownership in the press was intensified continuously. Media conglomerates and the press barons came into existence in Britain for the increasingly intense competition in the market; on the other hand, journalism was treated more as a commodity and readers were catered to as consumers. Therefore, instead of political news, entertainment was now increasingly emphasized in the journalistic field.
However, when compared to the New Journalism in the 19th century, two characteristics are worth noting as regards to the journalism of the 20th century. For one thing, “newspapers became more diverse in their content, including many ‘human interest’ items along with the now-abbreviated political news and opinion” (Hampton, 2004: p.40). In this sense, the content of newspapers tended to cover every aspect of people’s daily lives. A second characteristic was that tabloidization became a salient trend in both print and broadcast journalism. Tabloidization is a process of news media revision which ingratiates readers and advertisers’ preferences. This process reflects on the news coverage (more entertainment and soft news while less political and hard news), the presentation (more short stories and pictures while less long
50 / 360
stories) and the language (more use of widely accepted linguistic patterns from the working class rather than from the bourgeois class) ( Esser, 1999: p.293, Conboy, 2006: p.13). As Conboy explains, “the label of tabloidization is given to the trend which has seen what critics perceive to be the chief characteristics of the tabloids transfer, infecting other forms of journalism” (2004: p.181). Tabloidization can be seen as a way for media to survive in times of increased competition driven by “technological innovation and market fragmentation” (2004: p.181). Obviously, the relationship between the press and readers was changed drastically in the twentieth century. The function of informing the public via this news source was not as important as before the role of entertainment gained in prominence.
Journalism has always been changing and adapting in any particular era. As Conboy argues, “Over four centuries, journalism has moved from the printing of events, to the publishing of opinion, to the reporting of news and then to the contemporary structured ideologies of narrative and readership” (2004: p.1). Journalism has always looked for a way to coordinate itself within economic, political and cultural demands and remain distinguishable from other media products: “if it is to survive, journalism must be able to assert a specific location within this media sphere, demonstrate that it can deliver a particular form of service to the public” (2004: p.224). It is worth noting that the market is always driving the development of journalism in Britain. The problem for journalism in the twenty-first century may very well continue the dual mission of providing a public service while maintaining profits.
51 / 360