The term “yellow” journalism was coined in the mid-19th century, and the peak of the practice is generally believed to be the end of that century in New York City.

But I would argue that we are once again awash in the deceptive practice worldwide. Social media influencers, for-profit news, and greedy pundits have flooded the internet and airwaves with what once permeated American newspapers—Yellow journalism, a cheap recreation of the genuine article.

One of the things that defines yellow press is the use of scary, bold headlines to catch people’s attention. Animal encounters and violent crime reported from places too distant to be relevant to the viewer is used again today to hold people’s attention on news programs.

Shark attacks reported in the Midwest, for example, attract with the shock of sudden, random violence. Lurid crimes from far away take valuable time from consequential local news. These stories come pre-made and can be cheaply and quickly reposted or replayed. Threats to safety, theoretical or not, are hard for people to ignore. Keeping it in front of the viewers holds their attention for your advertisers.

Yellow newspapers used comics and cartoons to depict their subjects and rivals in a negative light. It didn’t matter if what they depicted was what happened, showing an image of it led readers to imagine it was. A comic depicting an entirely fictitious situation could easily be believed to only be an exaggeration. Television documentaries today are awash in computer generated graphics and reenactments portraying the version of events producers found compelling, not necessarily the truth. While small watermarks or verbal notes may duly alert an audience to the footage’s lack of authenticity, memory is more likely to recall the video, and not the disclaimer.

Yellow newspapers also relied heavily on anonymous sources, fake experts, and pseudoscience for their stories. Today, newspapers and TV programs frequently make use of anonymous or un-vetted sources to report salacious stories. Meanwhile, many television programs today feature “doctors” or other experts who are little more than actors playing a role. The endless parade of “health gurus” on social media try to sell us things of dubious benefit.

Yellow newspapers regularly demonized “the system,” and would automatically and dramatically take the side of any underdog or “every man” against the system, regardless of evidence. In the U.S. today, this takes the form of anti-establishment populism often featured on social media, which some pundits and columnists take to an extreme. Any system that impacts a person negatively is accused of infringing on rights, regardless of history or practicality. Calls to defund or entirely demolish, rather than reform, a malfunctioning system are frequently stoked by this kind of populist extremism.

The practice of yellow journalism in the 19th century was largely reigned in after the assassination of William McKinley, the 25th President of the United States. Two columns in the popular “New York Journal”, published by William Randolph Hearst, had called for the violent death of the nation’s leader, and Hearst’s critics accused him of driving the assassin to the deed. Hearst had political ambitions that were ruined by the accusations, and the newspaper’s coverage became more moderate.

Joseph Pulitzer, who had likewise engaged in the practice of yellow journalism, also reformed the reporting in his newspaper, the “New York World.” Pulitzer and Hearst had engaged in a “race to the bottom” while competing for New York readers, and it brought shame to them both.

The peak of yellow journalism in the newspapers may have come and gone, but the information age has breathed new life into the unethical practice. May it bring shame to its practitioners before it brings ruin to its viewers.