The Trayvon Martin Case: How Yellow Journalism Has Officially Returned

by James Gabbard

Let me start off with a few disclaimers: 1) I am not taking sides in this case, I am simply going to talk facts- but 2) My opinion is going to show. I am not going to speak of guilt or innocence in any light. I am however going to show my opinion on the news 3) This case is an example, because it is highly popular at the moment and is gaining serious momentum as the case is now going to court. But realize this is not really about the case, it's about news organizations.

With that said, let's start with a quick history lesson.

Yellow Journalism: Brief History


The term came around in the late 1800s, when newspapers were trying to find a way to sell themselves and beat out one another. It all mostly took place around the time of the Spanish-American War, where newspapers would take facts and exploit them- or sometimes were even accused of completely making up stories.

This had potentially major impact on society- especially when the USS Maine sunk. Newspapers went wild claiming it was the Spanish that had done this horrible thing by sending a missile into our ship and destroying it. But there was no actual proof that it had happened, yet the newspaper reports convinced millions of Americans. Newspaper reports that were made up.

Since then, yellow journalism has been attributed mostly to tabloids that make up ridiculous stories to get people to buy them. But in the time of 24 hour news networks, I would argue that yellow journalism is also back in the mainstream.

An Interesting Case: Trayvon Martin


Let's look at the case now. What are the facts?

- 17 year old Trayvon Martin was walking outside in a gated community, reportedly going down the street to the store and back to his father's girlfriend's house.
- At some point, George Zimmerman, who was a community watch coordinator in the gated community, saw Martin. Not recognizing the teen, and believing him to be suspicious, he called 911 and began following Martin in his vehicle (it's unclear what his vehicle was, as reports have it as both a truck and an SUV)
- After hanging up on 911, Zimmerman shot and killed Martin. Reasoning of how or why is unclear, but Zimmerman has admitted he did shoot and kill Martin.
- Police arrive and at 7:30 pm declare Martin legally dead. Zimmerman is taken into custody for questioning, and later released.
- Martin was found to be unarmed, only carrying a bag of skittles and a can of iced tea.

These are the facts. Now what are the stories?

- Witnesses have come out supporting both sides. People claim they know it was Zimmerman yelling "help" in other 911 calls people nearby made while others have claimed it was Martin.
- Police have come under fire for the way the investigation was being done
- Zimmerman claims Martin came from behind and attacked him, leaving him no choice but to shoot and kill Martin.
- Martin's father claimed the police did not do a good enough job and that none of it "adds up".

Race plays a major role


When you first look at this story, you'll notice something: race plays a major role. Martin's father doesn't come out and say Zimmerman was motivated by race. In the March 12 story by CNN, they use race as a descriptor and instigator.

"According to CNN affiliate WFTV, Zimmerman, who is white, described Martin as a suspicious black man to a dispatcher."


In early reports, Zimmerman was already described as if he was a white man describing a suspicious black person. Here's another example from a March 13 story from ABC News.

"ABC News has uncovered questionable police conduct in the investigation of the fatal shooting of an unarmed black teenager by a white neighborhood watch captain in Florida, including the alleged 'correction' of at least one eyewitness' account."

Again, Zimmerman is described as white and Martin as black. In the earliest news story, from the Orlando Sentinel on March 8- they even feel the need to describe Zimmerman as white and Martin as black.

"Zimmerman, who is white, had spotted Trayvon, who is black, in his gated community about 7:15 p.m. and called Sanford police on a non-emergency number, saying he'd just seen a suspicious person, both sides agreed."

Race is always brought up by the journalist writing the piece. The only time in these pieces that it is brought up by Martin's family and lawyers is in the Orlando piece in which is said:

"Martin was an invited guest, visiting his father's fiancée and her family for a few days, they said. He had visited before, and it was a community with black and minority residents."

But Martin's family was not calling Zimmerman out for racism, they were simply backing up the fact that Martin was not suspicious. But as time went on, we begin to see bigger media presence. CNN is first, with the story on March 12 followed by ABC's on the 13th.

CNN continues to cover the story on March 15, when the case is handed over to the state for investigation. On March 16, news coverage explodes.

One could put it on the fact the New York Times had an opinion article by Charles M. Blow about the case. In the article, Blow makes a case about race- but does not call Zimmerman white. He simply states:

"One other point: Trayvon is black. Zimmerman is not." At that point, he does begin to ask questions about race and whether it was racially charged. The article is very slanted, telling the story of Martin's family finding out about his death and the heartbreak they are going through.

I should mention one more thing: Blow is also black. His piece is the only one with a picture sitting prominently by the article.

Media Bias: How race became a feud


Again, I want to disclaim that I am not saying Zimmerman is guilty or not. What I am saying is this: he was made to look guilty.

Zimmerman is a man who could describe himself as either white, Hispanic or mixed. He has half-white, half-Hispanic. But in the early days of this case, he was always described as white (except in the Blow article where his race is not identified). And Martin is always described as black.

In our culture, the majority race is considered to be white. This has been due to an influx of racism since before the Civil Rights Movement all the way into the time of African slaves coming to the United States. Blacks were simply treated as being inferior, despite science and logic saying "we are all humans." But racism is a peculiar beast- no one wants to be claimed as a racist or a bigot. We have evolved into a politically correct culture. But in such, race is now a feud.

This feud first came in the time of George W. Bush and the attacks on 9/11. People began claiming anyone who was Muslim or looked like a Muslim was a terrorist. We became paranoid to anyone we didn't find "normal". Then afterwards it was Hispanics and Mexicans with the border. But with the election of President Obama, people claimed blacks had finally arrived and beaten racism-- only to find people claiming Obama wasn't even born in the United States. And we can't forget all the racism that bounced around from basketball player Jeremy Lin, from his ancestors being Chinese.

But who isn't targeted among these racial headlines? Whites. And thus, in a war of races, when someone who appears white has done something to someone who is clearly not white- it immediately erupts into a race war in the media.

This race war isn't just by reported media- it goes to plenty of figureheads. Geraldo Rivera's comments on Martin's clothing, Obama's comments on if he had a son he would look like Martin, and so on and so forth. But as race became a hot button issue, it was looked at more closely. Bias was called, and more current reports tend to move away from playing the race feud.

Media Bias: Zimmerman still the bad guy


But even with race partially out of the bias issue, more issues came into context. News sources began questioning other news sources on their reporting- especially by using and re-using photos of Martin as a much younger man than Zimmerman. The use of Zimmerman's mug shot, with him seeming to wear an orange jumpsuit, already labeled him as a criminal. And younger photos of Martin gave the illusion that he was much younger, and in turn, much more defenseless.

Being called out on this, news sources began to run a mix of recent and past photos of both Martin and Zimmerman. But with race and youth out the window, they questioned Zimmerman's character in every which way they could. They spoke with a black friend of his, asking if he was racist. They questioned his sanity, like a March 18 article from the Miami Herald claiming he was a "habitual caller" to the police- and another from the Examiner on March 17 with the headline "Trayvon Martin shooter, George Zimmerman, made 46 calls to 911 in a year".

It's all about how you phrase things. And that's what really has made Zimmerman to the bad guy.

Phrasing makes you think differently


If I ran the headline "Zimmerman made 46 calls as concerned neighbor" would you read it? No. What's better is the Examiner headline above. Look at carefully. Do you remember from English class how sentences work? Subject-verb-object. The subject of the sentence is first, followed by the verb, and followed by the object. Look at that sentence again. Notice how Zimmerman's name is an aside so it can actually read like:

Trayvon Martin shooter made 46 calls to 911 in a year.

Zimmerman isn't the subject. "Trayvon Martin shooter" is. While it's true that Zimmerman did shoot Martin, you have to realize that the word "shooter" has connotations to it that are typically negative. We could have instead had the headline:

George Zimmerman made 46 calls to 911 in a year.

But that's not exciting. What if I don't know who George Zimmerman is? We can always make the shooting an aside.

George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin's shooter, made 46 calls to 911 in a year.

Notice how it doesn't read the same? That's because the subject has changed and takes away the punch that "Trayvon Martin shooter" has as the first few words. That punch not only makes you want to read, but quickly makes your opinion of George Zimmerman negative.

This is one example of how phrasing in the media can lead to bias. But there are many others. In journalism, it is typical to use someone's full name then follow it up by using their last name thereafter- as I have done this entire article. First names are typically used in feature stories, as a way to connect to someone. Have you been paying close attention to articles about the case? Martin is typically called by his first name, Trayvon- while Zimmerman is never called George.

This use of names also adds a personal slant, making you feel like you may know Martin better by first name and that you would never want to know Zimmerman by his first name. And this is just a part of it.

Habitual caller to 911? He made 46 calls in 365 days. Per day that's a measly 0.1 calls, per month it's 4 times, or once a week. Can we really call it a habit just because it's above the normal? He was, after all, a volunteer for a community crime watch. But the fact is the word habitual has now put the thought in your mind that he is constantly calling 911.

And of course, we can't forget this banner from Huffington Post.

Black and white photo of Martin as much younger than he was. A font that could be used for a murder-mystery novel, with a shadow behind it to make it look even more like that was the intention. And the word "tragedy" stuck there to describe this event. They could have used the word "case" or even "shooting" but they decided to go with tragedy.

Why would I have an issue with using that word? Again, connotation. A tragedy is something unexpected that is devastating. To Martin's family and friends, this is indeed a tragedy. To anyone who didn't know him, it should not be. Calling it a tragedy with everything else that has been said, turns Martin into a victim of a crime. And puts guilt right on Zimmerman's head.

In Conclusion: How is this yellow journalism?

In the same way yellow journalism in the beginning took information- either truth or lies- and made it desirable for people to want to buy, the media has done the same here. In order to get people to the websites, to the televisions and likely to the newspapers- a young man of 17 is made to be a victim of a crime that- prior to today- no one had been arrested for. The sensational headlines played up a race war and made Zimmerman look as though he was the bad guy before the police had finished an investigation.

It could be argued that without media coverage, there would be no outrage from people. There would be no second look into the case and how things were handled. I can agree with that, there may not have been. But reporting can be done with integrity, with facts and without serious speculation on someone's character. And instead, all of those were thrown out the door.

Be careful what you read, dear friends. And let's hope this case has true justice- whichever the facts come out to be in court.

Source Links
Dad: Arrest crime watch volunteer who killed my son - Rene Stutzman, Orlando Sentinel; March 8, 2012

Florida teen's shooting by watchman questioned - Vivian Kuo, CNN; March 12, 2012

Orlando Watch Shooting Probe Reveals Questionable Police Conduct -  Matt Gutman & Seni Tienabeso, ABC News; March 13, 2012

Curious Case of Trayvon Martin - Charles M. Blow, New York Times; March 16, 2012

Trayvon Martin shooter, George Zimmerman, made 46 calls to 911 in a year - Cindy Adams, Examiner.com; March 17, 2012

Shooter of Trayvon Martin a habitual caller to cops - Frances Robles, Miami Herald; March 21, 2012

Trayvon Martin news coverage - Huffington Post; various publication dates