The printed pages in newspapers and magazines have come a long way since its modest beginnings. Nowadays, there is a good mix of publications catering to different consumer groups with different tastes and preferences. The more serious-minded, solemn and cultured crowd will champion their Economist and Wall Street Journal whereas whimsical and lurid reads such as the local Chinese newspaper Lian He Wan Bao satisfy another set of target audiences. With the ubiquitous presence of the traditional media in the form of print, it has come to play an important role amidst mundanity. Cantankerous media critics however, such as the ilk of Noam Chomsky, have accused falling editorial standards, trivialized content and alleged publishers bending to the winds of fickle consumers. This essay aims to communicate the possibility of coexistence of both entities of trivial content alongside the relatively important. Moreover, the extent of triviality and significance of content is quite subjective to one’s personal needs.
There is a somewhat false dichotomy by preposing that trivial content has no importance whatsoever. It smacks of intellectual snobbery. There are demands for inane publications which would surely offend any strait-laced academic. After all as the old saying goes, one man’s Nylon is another man’s intellectual poison. As highlighted above, the frivolity and pertinence of subject matter is idiosyncratic to an individual’s personal interests and profession. The topics of discussion in prints such as Martha Stewart Living are hardly ground-breaking or even important relative to events of war, destitution and natural disasters. Such subject matters may also be highly offensive to some in the light of the problems of the world. Newsweek’s special issue on lives of the affluent caught a lot of flack as it came smack in the middle of calamities in Myanmar and Sichuan. Yet there is a place still for publications that feature and focus on “superficial” material goodness. Such editorials should not be condemned as unimportant and trivial just because they are not wholly centred on conventionally more profound issues. We all need our little escapist joys in a world overshadowed by much toil and turmoil, be it reading about the delights of home décor or movie reviews.
This brings us to the point that while triviality and importance remain prejudiced, what has become unacceptable and deserves much concern is how particular forces in today’s publishing world are trivialising the important. Capitalism has virtually single-handedly metamorphosed the world of newspapers and magazines. It has evolved increasingly into a public-owned, profit-driven and hard-nosed enterprise. There are some rare stalwarts of reputable and accountable prints financed by foundations with municipal pride who feel above the need to squeeze the last red cent out of their trade. Notwithstanding those firms, the hapless majority are of shareholder-wary corporations in a profit-orientated age who are not in the business of public education but mass-marketing products. To improve profit margins, coverage of important events is compromised such as by doing fewer cross-references which is time-consuming as well as costly. Therefore weighty material becomes trivialised.
In addition, this spirit of economic competition means most editorial content is oriented around the public’s desire to be entertained rather than responsible reporting. Publications are primarily dominated by commercial needs so prints have to gain and maintain readership so as to survive and compete efficiently in a highly cutthroat industry, no matter its noblesse obligations. As a result of being profit-motivated, most publications now spin important content to maximise popular appeal that caters to the lowest common denominator. Important issues are still covered by publications but the spotlight rests upon the most puerile and relatively insignificant elements. The unholy trinity offerings of sex, violence and all things banal unfortunately feed the population’s increasing appetite for vicarious pleasure from the mundane and the stupid. Every facet of our media consumption seems catered to heightening people’s sensory experience with interesting snippets of amalgamation of gossip, scandal and sleaze. The mainstreaming and meshing of trivial and important contents in newspapers and magazines mean that the line between them is fading.
Furthermore, new media has pressurised traditional publications to trivialise themselves. In retrospect, reporting used to rely solely on the perspective of professionals. Journalists were trained in schools to sharpen their discernment for factual accuracy. Nowadays, with an increased number of “eyes and ears” on the ground, information dissemination has become very different. Anyone with an internet connection can initiate an online newspaper or magazine. Unrestrained by reporter’s ethics and a cautious fact-checking editorial team, bloggers are excused for penning accusatorial but entertaining opinion pieces. The author of “The Vanishing Newspaper” as well as the masses who perpetuate this dismal outlook pin the blame on the decline in sales and audience numbers of mainstream prints on the Internet. At present, many distinctly prefer the casual, caustic and off-the-cuff reportage of new media, never mind its questionable origins or that it may be less than comprehensive, objective. Locally, The Straits Times has often roped in the likes of Jamie Yeo, Maia Lee, and Colin Goh to jumpstart interest in their publications amongst the youth.
Generations have relied on and are still dependent upon the prints to inform the daily global happenings, which we otherwise would have a lack of reliable and accurate access to. Publications of newspapers and magazines have the ability to influence individuals and shape their opinions. Hence, it is disturbing to observe that the overall trend of publications including the most esteemed ones are heading towards frivolity and dumbing down cultures. The world of newspapers and magazines is being threatened by very real economic and cultural forces which call them to trivialise their material and lighten their approach for survival’s sake. As readers, we are in no position to judge the evolution of today’s publications unpretentiously because we form the exact market that is paying for what they are producing. Until a greater number of us demand a broader and deeper perspective on things, the printed pages will just continue featuring what we want.
