My point is to ask the question whether or not it is good journalism to engage in hyperbole in a book or article title, or using clickbait on the Internet. Is this an insult to our intelligence?
This was the featured Chauncey DeVega interview with investigative reporter Greg Palast on Salon this morning:
My reaction to reading this is that Salon and Greg Palast, whose latest book titled “How Trump Stole 2020” came out yesterday, engaged in hyperbole by not writing "could steal” because frightening people would result in higher readership. My question: was this good journalism?
I won’t bother excerpting the interview since you can read it yourself. Basically, from the introduction, is its premise:
Palast explains how the Republican Party has refined its strategy of voter suppression, voter intimidation and vote theft in elections across the country. Palast also highlights how the planned chaos during the recent Georgia Democratic primaries is a preview of how the Republican Party intends to steal the 2020 presidential election for Donald Trump.
Finally, Palast issues an ominous warning: Trump and the Republicans, he believes, are plotting to use the 12th Amendment to the Constitution to declare the popular vote and Electoral College results invalid, so that the 2020 presidential election will be decided in the House of Representatives — which, believe it or not, may well vote in Trump's favor.
Chauncey DeVega’s words above aren’t hyperbole and in the interview itself Palast is objective.
My main point is to ask the question whether or not it is good journalism to engage in hyperbole in a book or article title, or using clickbait on the Internet. Secondarily, is this an insult to our intelligence?
Greg Palast his a history of this. This is his website where he depicts himself as some kind of potboiler detective. I want to give him the benefit of the doubt and say this is tongue in cheek self-mockery rather than delusional narcissism.
I have friends who are terrified about the nightmare scenarios being spun in stories and interviews which have Trump declaring martial law and ordering the military to back him if he loses the election and declaring himself president for life. In fact I was tempted to send the Salon article to a friend who expressed this fear as a near certainty to me just yesterday. She said “after all, he is the commander in chief.” I decided not to email it to her but to write this diary instead.
Palast has a history of writing worst case stories that are reasonable cautionary expositions but sometimes using hyperbole in his titles.
Consider another recent example using the word “will”.
In these articles the title includes, crucially, the advisory that the first part is “a warning!”.
Other articles have straightforward titles using phrases like “the nightmare scenario” and “long lines are a key trick in the GOP’s election fraud book”.
Periodically Daily Kos diarists are skewered in the comments for using clickbait in their titles, often rightfully so. I don’t believe we should do this. I think it is an insult to the intelligence to our readers.
Have I done this myself? Perhaps I have. I try not to do this in the actual title but admit I frequently do it in the illustration which ends up as a thumbnail on the main page.
You can be the judge.
AlterNet, which is now owned by RAWSTORY, kept the certainty that Trump is going to steal the election by using the word “will” in the title of its summary of the interview:
Here’s how Trump will steal the 2020 election: Investigative journalist
They could have used a word like “might” or “could” to modify “steal” in reference to the election.