This article sets out a framework for a language-oriented analysis of sensationalism in news media. Sensationalism is understood here as a discourse strategy of ‘packaging’ information in news headlines in such a way that news items are presented as more interesting, extraordinary and relevant than might be the case. Unlike previous content analyses of sensational coverage, this study demonstrates how sensationalism is instantiated through specific illocutions, semantic macrostructures, narrative formulas, evaluation parameters, and interpersonal and textual devices. Examples are drawn from a corpus of headlines of the ‘most read’ articles in the online outlet of the British mid-market tabloid Daily Mail compiled in early 2012. Sensationalized instances are identified through surveys and focus group discussions and subsequently analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. The study is located within the context of media scholarship on news values and current trends in journalism.
AllanS (2004) News Culture. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
2.
AndrewB (2007) Media-generated shortcuts: Do newspaper headlines present another roadblock for low-information rationality?The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics12(2): 24–43.
3.
BednarekM (2006) Evaluation in Media Discourse: Analysis of a Newspaper Corpus. London: Continuum.
BellA (1991) The Language of News Media. Oxford: Blackwell.
6.
BellA (1994) Telling stories. In: GraddolDBoyd-BarrettO (eds) Media Texts: Authors and Readers. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp. 119–136.
7.
BellAGarrettP (eds) (1998) Approaches to Media Discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.
8.
BrightonPFoyD (2007) News Value. London: SAGE.
9.
CappellaJJamiesonKH (1997) Spiral of Cynicism: The Press and the Public Good. New York: Oxford University Press.
10.
Charteris-BlackJ (2005) Politicians and Rhetoric: The Persuasive Power of Metaphor. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
11.
ChiltonP (1996) Security Metaphors: Cold War Discourse from Containment to Common House. New York: Peter Lang.
12.
ChovanecJ (2008) Focus on form: Foregrounding devices in football reporting. Discourse & Communication2(3): 219–242.
13.
ConboyM (2002) The Press and Popular Culture. London: SAGE.
14.
ConboyM (2006) Tabloid Britain: Constructing a Community through Language. London: Routledge.
15.
DorD (2003) On newspaper headlines as relevance optimizers. Journal of Pragmatics35: 675–721.
16.
DurantALambrouM (2009) Language and the Media. London: Routledge.
17.
EkstromM (2002) Epistemologies of TV journalism. Journalism3(3): 259–282.
18.
FowlerR (1991) Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London: Routledge.
19.
GaltungJRugeM (1965) The structure of foreign news: The presentation of the Congo, Cuba and Cyprus crises in four foreign newspapers. Journal of International Peace Research1: 64–90.
20.
GrabeMEShuhuaZBarnettB (2001) Explicating sensationalism in television news: Content and the bells and whistles of form. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media45(4): 635–655.
21.
HarcupTO’NeillD (2002) What is news? Galtung and Ruge revisited. Journalism Studies2(2): 261–280.
22.
HartC (2010) Critical Discourse Analysis and Cognitive Science: New Perspectives on Immigration Discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
23.
Hendriks VettenPNuijtenKBeentjesJWJ (2006) Research note: Sensationalism in Dutch current affairs programmes 1992–2001. European Journal of Communication21: 227–237.
24.
HoynesWCroteauD (2002) Media/Society: Industries, Images, and Audiences. London: SAGE.
25.
IedemaR (1997) The history of the accident news story. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics20(2): 95–119.
26.
KnoblochSPatzigGMendeA-MHastallM (2004) Affective news: Effects of discourse structure in narratives on suspense, curiosity, and enjoyment while reading news and novels. Communication Research31: 259–287.
27.
KressGvan LeeuwenT (1998) Front pages: (The critical) analysis of newspaper layout. In: BellAGarrettP (eds) Approaches to Media Discourse. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 186–219.
28.
LabovW (1972) Language in the Inner City: Studies in the Black English Vernacular. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
29.
LabovW (1997) Some further steps in narrative analysis. Journal of Narrative and Life History7(1–4): 395–415.
30.
LangerJ (1998) Tabloid Television: Popular Journalism and the ‘Other News’. London: Routledge.
31.
LanhamR (2006) The Economics of Attention: Style and Substance in the Age of Information. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
32.
LennonP (2004) Allusions in the Press: An Applied Linguistic Study. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
33.
LivingstoneS (1998) Relationships between media and audiences: Prospects for future audience reception studies. In: LiebesTCurranJ (eds) Media, Ritual and Identity: Essays in Honor of Elihu Katz. London: Routledge, pp. 237–255.
34.
McLachlanSGoldingP (2000) Tabloidization in the British press: A quantitative investigation into changes in British newspapers, 1952–1997. In: SparksCTullochJ (eds) Tabloid Tales: Global Debates over Media Standards. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 75–89.
SearleJ (1969) Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
49.
SlatteryKLHakanenE (1994) Sensationalism versus public affairs content of local TV news: Pennsylvania revisited. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media38(2): 205–216.
50.
ToolanM (2001) Narrative: A Critical Linguistic Introduction. London: Routledge.
51.
UngererF (2000) News stories and news events: A changing relationship. In: UngererF (ed.) English Media Texts – Past and Present: Language and Textual Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 178–195.
52.
UribeRGunterB (2007) Are ‘sensational’ news stories more likely to trigger viewers’ emotions than non-sensational news stories? A content analysis of British TV news. European Journal of Communication22: 207–228.
53.
Van DijkT (1988) News Discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
54.
Van DijkT (1993) Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society4(2): 249–283.
55.
VastermanP (2005) Media-hype: Self-reinforcing news waves, journalistic standards and the construction of social problems. European Journal of Communication20(4): 508–530.
