The Year that Defined American Journalism explores the succession of remarkable and decisive moments in American journalism during 1897 - a year of significant transition that helped redefine the profession and shape its modern contours. This defining year featured a momentous clash of paradigms pitting the activism of William Randolph Hearst's participatory 'journalism of action' against the detached, fact-based antithesis of activist journalism, as represented by Adolph Ochs of the New York Times, and an eccentric experiment in literary journalism pursued by Lincoln Steffens at the New York Commercial-Advertiser. Resolution of the three-sided clash of paradigms would take years and result ultimately in the ascendancy of the Times' counter-activist model, which remains the defining standard for mainstream American journalism. The Year That Defined American Journalism introduces the year-study methodology to mass communications research and enriches our understanding of a pivotal moment in media history.

The Year that Defined American Journalism explores the succession of remarkable and decisive moments in American journalism during 1897 - a year of significant transition that helped redefine the profession and shape its modern contours. This defining year featured a momentous clash of paradigms pitting the activism of William Randolph Hearst's participatory 'journalism of action' against the detached, fact-based antithesis of activist journalism, as represented by Adolph Ochs of the New York Times, and an eccentric experiment in literary journalism pursued by Lincoln Steffens at the New York Commercial-Advertiser. Resolution of the three-sided clash of paradigms would take years and result ultimately in the ascendancy of the Times' counter-activist model, which remains the defining standard for mainstream American journalism. The Year That Defined American Journalism introduces the year-study methodology to mass communications research and enriches our understanding of a pivotal moment in media history.

A sweeping look at the messy and contentious past of US presidential pre-election polls and why they aren’t as reliable as we think. Polls in U.S. presidential elections can and do get it wrong—as surprising outcomes in 2020, in 2016, in 2012, in 2004, in 2000 all remind us. Lost in a Gallup captures in lively and unprecedented fashion the stories of polling flops, epic upsets, unforeseen landslides, and exit poll fiascoes in presidential elections since 1936. Polling’s checkered record in elections has rarely been considered in detail and, until now, has never been addressed collectively.   Polling embarrassments are not all alike. Pollsters have anticipated tight elections when landslides occurred; they have indicated the wrong winner in closer elections; state polls have confounded expected national outcomes. Exit polling has thrown Election Day into confusion. The work of venerable pollsters has been singularly and memorably in error. It is a rare presidential election not to be marred by polling controversies. Lost in a Gallup casts a critical eye on major figures in election polling such as George Gallup, a prickly founding father of public opinion research. The book also considers the polling innovations of Warren Mitofsky, whose admonition rings true across generations: “There’s a lot of room for humility in polling. Every time you get cocky, you lose.�   Lost in a Gallup examines how polling failure often equates to journalistic failure. Historically, poll-bashing was quite pronounced among prominent journalists, including well-known newspaper columnists such as Mike Royko in Chicago and Jimmy Breslin in New York. They and other journalists challenged the presumption that polls could accurately measure or interpret what the public was thinking. Even so, polls drive news media narratives about presidential elections, shaping conventional wisdom about how competitive those races are. As Lost in a Gallup makes clear, polls are not always in error. But when they fail, they can fail in surprising ways.  

Nineteen ninety-five was an exceptional year, a hinge moment in recent American history. Drawing on interviews, oral histories, memoirs, archival collections, and contemporaneous news reports, W. Joseph Campbell presents a vivid, detail-rich portrait of those memorable twelve months. The book offers fresh interpretations of the decisive moments of 1995, including the entry of the Internet and the World Wide Web into the mainstream of American life; the bombing at Oklahoma City, the deadliest attack of domestic terrorism in U.S. history; the sensational "Trial of the Century," at which O.J. Simpson faced charges of double murder; the U.S.-brokered negotiations at Dayton, Ohio, which ended the Bosnian War, Europe's most vicious conflict since the time of the Nazis; and the first encounters at the White House between Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, a liaison that culminated in a stunning scandal and the spectacle of the president's impeachment and trial. As Campbell demonstrates in this absorbing chronicle, 1995 was a year of surpassing exceptionality, a watershed at the cusp of the millennium. The effects of that pivotal year reverberate still, marking the close of one century and the dawning of another.

Many of American journalism's best-known and most cherished stories are exaggerated, dubious, or apocryphal. They are media-driven myths, and they attribute to the news media and their practitioners far more power and influence than they truly exert. In Getting It Wrong, writer and scholar W. Joseph Campbell confronts and dismantles prominent media-driven myths, describing how they can feed stereotypes, distort understanding about the news media, and deflect blame from policymakers. Campbell debunks the notions that the Washington Post's Watergate reporting brought down Richard M. Nixon's corrupt presidency, that Walter Cronkite's characterization of the Vietnam War in 1968 shifted public opinion against the conflict, and that William Randolph Hearst vowed to "furnish the war" against Spain in 1898. This expanded second edition includes a new preface and new chapters about the first Kennedy-Nixon debate in 1960, the haunting Napalm Girl photograph of the Vietnam War, and bogus quotations driven by the Internet and social media.

Many of American journalism's best-known and most cherished stories are exaggerated, dubious, or apocryphal. They are media-driven myths, and they attribute to the news media and their practitioners far more power and influence than they truly exert. In Getting It Wrong, writer and scholar W. Joseph Campbell confronts and dismantles prominent media-driven myths, describing how they can feed stereotypes, distort understanding about the news media, and deflect blame from policymakers. Campbell debunks the notions that the Washington Post's Watergate reporting brought down Richard M. Nixon's corrupt presidency, that Walter Cronkite's characterization of the Vietnam War in 1968 shifted public opinion against the conflict, and that William Randolph Hearst vowed to "furnish the war" against Spain in 1898. This expanded second edition includes a new preface and new chapters about the first Kennedy-Nixon debate in 1960, the haunting Napalm Girl photograph of the Vietnam War, and bogus quotations driven by the Internet and social media.

This offers a detailed and long-awaited reassessment of one of the most maligned periods in American journalism—the era of the yellow press. The study challenges and dismantles several prominent myths about the genre, finding that the yellow press did not foment—could not have fomented—the Spanish-American War in 1898, contrary to the arguments of many media historians. The study presents extensive evidence showing that the famous exchange of telegrams between the artist Frederic Remington and newspaper publisher William Randolph Hearst—in which Hearst is said to have vowed to furnish the war with Spain—almost certainly never took place. The study also presents the results of a systematic content analysis of seven leading U. S. newspapers at 10 year intervals throughout the 20th century and finds that some distinguishing features of the yellow press live on in American journalism. The yellow press period in American journalism history has produced many powerful and enduring myths-almost none of them true. This study explores these legends, presenting extensive evidence that: • The yellow press did not foment-could not have fomented-the Spanish-American War in 1898, contrary of the arguments of many media historians • The famous exchange of telegrams between the artist Frederic Remington and newspaper publisher William Randolph Hearst-in which Hearst is said to have vowed to furnish the war with Spain-almost certainly never took place • The readership of the yellow press was not confined to immigrants and people having an uncertain command of English, as many media historians maintain The study also presents the results of a detailed content analysis of seven leading U.S. newspapers at 10-year intervals, from 1899 to 1999. The content analysis—which included the Denver Post, Los Angeles Times, New York Times, Raleigh News and Observer, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, San Francisco Examine and Washington Post—reveal that some elements characteristic of yellow journalism have been generally adopted by leading U. S. newspapers. This critical assessment encourages a more precise understanding of the history of yellow journalism, appealing to scholars of American journalism, journalism history, and practicing journalists.

The yellow press period in American journalism history has produced many powerful and enduring myths-almost none of them true. This study explores these legends, presenting extensive evidence that:

The yellow press did not foment-could not have fomented-the Spanish-American War in 1898, contrary of the arguments of many media historians.

The famous exchange of telegrams between the artist Frederic Remington and newspaper publisher William Randolph Hearst-in which Hearst is said to have vowed to furnish the war with Spain-almost certainly never took place.

The readership of the yellow press was not confined to immigrants and people having an uncertain command of English, as many media historians maintain. rather yellow journals were most likely read across the social strata of urban America.

The term yellow journalism emerged and took hold during a period of raging competition and intolerance among newspaper editors in New York City-and did not directly result from the rivalry between Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer, as most media historians claim.

The study also presents the results of a detailed content analysis of seven leading U. S. newspapers at 10 year intervals, from 1899 to 1999. The content analysis-which included the "Denver Post, Los Angeles Times, New York Times, Raleigh News and Observer, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, San Francisco Examiner" and "Washington Post"-reveal that some elements characteristic of yellow journalism have been generally adopted by leading U. S. newspapers. This critical assessment encourages a more precise understanding of the history of yellow journalism, appealing to scholars of American journalism, journalism history, and practicing journalists.

W. Joseph Campbell, longtime newspaper and wire service journalist, examines the origins and development of the ethos of independent journalism in two former single-party states in francophone West Africa—Benin and Côte d'Ivoire. In both countries since the late 1980s and early 1990s, a diverse and outspoken press, free of direct state control, has emerged and taken hold. Campbell shows how the ethos of independent journalism can emerge from disparate sources and dissimilar historical legacies, despite prolonged periods of repression and autocratic rule. In Benin, the ethos of independent journalism has been shaped by traditions of expressing dissent through the press—traditions established during the long period of French rule. The etiologies of independent journalism in Côte d'Ivoire include policies of the post-colonial regime that sought to channel and constrain dissent and dissident opinion within state structures. Demonstration effects of freely circulated French-language titles also helped shape and give rise to independent journalism in Côte d'Ivoire. The dominant trend in the press in both countries has been toward daily periodicity—a trend that suggests a resilience and little-recognized hardiness of journalism in Africa. Campbell draws on extensive interviews with Beninese and Ivorian journalists to challenge the pessimism that defines most studies of Africa's press. This is an important study for scholars and researchers of journalism in the developing world, particularly West Africa, and for students of African political life.