Celebrity Journalism

An area that has sparked my interest is celebrity. After writing the post, ‘Who will pay for journalism?’ I wanted to find out more. P. David Marshall is a well known academic writer of the discourses surrounding celebrity. In his text The Celebrity Culture Reader is a chapter ‘Intimately Intertwined in the most Public Way: Celebrity and Journalism.’
In this chapter Marshall asserts the changing nature of the media and how Celebrity Journalism is expected. Celebrity journalism is associated with the less dignified side of journalism or in a colloquial term known as ‘fluff pieces’.

Marshall (2006, p. 317) argues ‘instead of a discourse that highlighted the distance and aura of the celebrity, celebrity journalism worked to make the famous more real and worked to provide a greater intimacy with their everyday lives.’ Celebrity journalism was showing that famous Hollywood stars were ordinary people with extraordinary talents.
Journalistic profiles of celebrities were connecting the mass audience to discourses of individuality which Marshall (2006, p. 318) states ‘audiences in turn would have a degree of ‘affective investment’… because of the amount of personal background that was provided about celebrities in newspapers and magazines.’

Celebrity journalism has satisfied the masses by entertaining them with the stories of celebrities’ private lives ‘what sometimes emerges from celebrity journalism is a further convergence with the practices of public relations and promotion’ (Marshall 2006, p. 316).
Through the publicity that celebrities received from articles talking about their private affairs their professional work increased sales.
Marshall states that ‘national markets for entertainment were developed and buttressed by the press who also realised the value in creating celebrated individuals for the selling of their papers and magazines’ (2006, p. 318). Celebrity gossip generates a high readership, especially among females, as the private life of famous, gorgeous people provides an element of escapism.
The entertainment industry survives with the help of Public Relation practitioners who provide a press kit to journalists by setting up interviews before a film is released. Stories of this nature always have a positive angle and show the talent in a ‘good light’.

An interesting point that Marshall makes is that standard practice for mainstream or large newspaper when completing a celebrity profile is:

1. The meeting of the journalist and star in either domestic setting or café.
2. The description of the casual dress and demeanour of the star.
3. The discussion of their current work- which is essentially the anchor for why the story is newsworthy.
4. The revelation of something that is against the grain of what is generally perceived to be the star’s persona- something that is anecdotal but is revealing of the star’s true nature.

(Adapted from G. Baum, 1998 cited in Marshall 2006, p. 320).


These four points are so true, how many celebrity feature articles have you picked up and each one has the same formula to the point that you know what they’re going to say next. All of them. Magazines rely more heavily on celebrity profiles as the cover and the article generate sales.
However, while celebrity journalism has been named and shamed the latter of journalistic practice Marshall (2006) has argued that celebrity scandals can place journalists in adversarial roles. Marshall argues that ‘the National Enquirer not only led with discovered facts in the O.J. Simpson case – it has also been the first to reveal Jesse Jackson’s love child’ (2006, p. 321). Or more recently the fall of Britney Spears has made huge news stories. In contemporary times celebrities have been used in the discussion of social and cultural issues and concerns, including drug abuse, eating disorders, sexuality and more.

And we cannot over look that fact that some journalists reach celebrity status, especially television journalist who audiences familiarise with.

What do you think of celebrity journalism?



Reference

Marshall, P. D 2006 (ed), ‘Intimately Intertwined in the most Public Way: Celebrity and Journalism’, in The Celebrity Culture Reader, Routledge, New York, pp. 315-323.

Online: a 'new' journalism

The rapid technological advancements that are changing the world are having a huge impact on traditional journalism. Professional journalists are being forced to question were they exist in the world of the internet. If journalism does not move forward audiences are going to leave them behind because there needs are not being catered to. In many ways for journalism to survive the technological revolution forward thinking is needed. If they remain in the old ways they will perish. Journalism has always been a multi-skilled profession and for some reason the internet has journalists running scared rather than embracing change.

News, information and entertainment on the internet have revived media for generations who would not have had a bar of reading a newspaper from cover to cover. Our society does not live in those times anymore. For journalism to become more interactive on a medium like the internet has gotten peoples interest again. Media companies who use the technology available should be experimenting to see the different options and angles they could use to draw audiences in.
The internet has had the standard of news questioned and how the internet has seen newspapers online become more entertainment than news based.
Katz (1999 cited in Tapsall 2001, p. 236) has argued that media outlets, particularly newspapers have always been slow to change and do not welcome external challenges,

‘They’re heard it before. The newspaper industry has a deeply sado-masochistic streak. It goes to extraordinary lengths, and sometimes even great expense, to arrange for speakers to dump on newspapers and pronounce their downfall, even as they go to even greater lengths to take little or none of the advice they got.’

Television was once a threat to print media and editors believed that once broadcasts began that print would become obsolete. Now the internet has television, radio and print questioning how long will they last. Tapsall (2001, p. 237) asserts that ‘technological convergence has taken place, digital and Internet technologies do provide options to package text, sound and vision in one easy-to-access – from home or work – product.’
All new unknown technologies bring with them positives and negatives, television was seen as a negative influence when programs first began airing, now people wouldn’t know how to live without their plasmas. The internet has its positives and its negatives but really the problem is just the fear of the unknown.

Journalists are still making a living from writing articles for the online version of the publication they work for. In Australia online newspapers like The Age, The Australian and The Sydney Morning Herald are all functioning and are popular sites. Traditional media can survive alongside the internet. Just because a new medium comes along does not mean it is time to pack up the old. The internet has provided a different way of doing journalism. Only time will tell what the future of journalism will be.

Reference

Tapsall, S 2001, ‘The Media is the Message’, in S Tapsall & C Varley (eds), Journalism: Theory in Practice, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 235-253.