Publishers know that outrage sells

Thursday, February 12, 1998

Publishers know that outrage sells

MEDIA: Capitalists must cater to public for living, worry about
morals later

By Amy Lum

I am writing in response to Michael Daugherty’s "A Little Moral
Outrage Goes a Long Way Toward Change" (Jan. 22). Daugherty begins
his article with threatening evidence that transpires one to think
that things such as a quarter-turn of a screw could have saved a
car accident, derailment of a train, forest fire, contamination of
a nearby stream and the killing of thousands of organisms. He
believes that small events lead to huge consequences. He believes
that boycotting Esquire magazine will demonstrate to their editors,
as well as other magazines in the same genre, that people such as
himself are tired of "lining their pockets with blood money." I
believe that this extreme and unreasonable writer has overlooked
how a capitalist economy really works and the strategies they use
to market a product, newsworthy or not.

Let’s admit it, everyone is out to make a buck, and we should
not leave out the media, including Esquire magazine. Daugherty
claims that Esquire (like any other competitive magazine) puts O.J.
Simpson on its cover to make its magazines sell. Of course, but if
you were a magazine editor competing with thousands of other
magazines, wouldn’t you put someone or something on cover to make
it sell? I am sure that if the Daily Bruin were not for free and
instead had to sell it for a quarter, the editor would be very
concerned about an eye-catching front page. The Bruin would be
competing next to the stands of the New York Times and the Los
Angeles Times. As a consumer, what would you buy? In the media
industry people know what sells and what doesn’t.

In addition, consumers (such as ourselves) are curious enough to
want to read about someone like O.J. Simpson. Esquire magazine uses
celebrities to sell. Daugherty claims that this is a money-making
business that only likes to glamorize murders. It may be true in
this instance, but before jumping to any conclusions, ask yourself:
would a magazine like Esquire would still be in business if this is
all they reported or cared about? And even if it did report
eye-catching stories on their front cover, people are just as
interested in it. Esquire magazine is giving the public what they
want to read and see, not necessarily something that is newsworthy,
but something that sells in our capitalist economy.

Similar in situation is the talk show, "Jerry Springer."
Everyone knows that this includes uncontrollable fighting, with
outrageous stories, complemented by seconds of beeping to cover up
the foul mouths of Springer’s guests. Yet Springer knows what
sells. His shows are eye-catching, sinful and scandalous. His
ratings are above Leno’s and even second to Oprah’s. People are
interested in watching. This may or may not be newsworthy, but
others may argue that Springer’s show may be seen as one of the few
who give our social deviants the opportunity to be publicized.