Objectivity, Sensationalism and Moral Clarity — April 24, 2026

Zebras at Hearst Ranch, Central California Coast

“Where modernism sought a singular truth, postmodernism sought the multiplicity of truths.” Miguel Syjuco

When I went to j-school in the 1990s the sensational “yellow journalism” of the late 1800s was considered a cautionary tale. It’s use of bold headlines, opinionated text, exaggerated illustrations and false accusations lit passions that inflamed citizens to anti-immigrant and racial violence. Some believe it may have precipitated the Spanish American War.

Now, in digital journalism sensationalism is again embedded into news, and opinion packaged with fact. Strong emotional content, and black and white opinions hold sway. It’s that old competition for eyeballs that’s driving it. Heated language is clickbait and everybody’s counting.

But aside from sensationalism, there’s the question of whether opinion belongs in the news. What is objectivity and what is moral clarity? If we can all agree that murder is immoral, then reporting with that assumption is not considered opinionated. But the bounds of morality are always debated. When bias is embedded in the news, it leads to competing echo chambers for opposing points of view. Everyone watches the channel that resonates, and there is little overlap where gray areas are considered. Good or bad, that seems to be where we are now, this news climate born in an atmosphere where officials routinely spew falsehoods for the purpose of manipulation.

Whatever happened to nuance? Stay tuned. Nuance is the subject of my next post.

---