People are gullible—and sensationalists know it.
Clickbait works because audiences keep clicking, rewarding exaggeration over accuracy. In today’s media landscape, headlines are crafted not just to inform, but to gain traction. Millions fall for sensationalized news kickers and half-baked narratives, accepting them without question or verification. As more media outlets lean into this demand, journalism is gradually reshaped not to strengthen itself as a pursuit of truth, but as a contest for engagement.
What makes this even more alarming is that those expected to resist sensationalism often perpetuate it. A simple scroll through Facebook reveals a feed saturated with dramatized headlines and unverified claims. In a digital ecosystem driven by speed, the pressure to publish first often outweighs the responsibility to be accurate. Substantiation, then, becomes an afterthought while virality takes precedence.
As a media practitioner, I find this shift deeply unsettling. Established news organizations, even those with decades of built credibility, are not immune to the pull of sensationalism. Yet, at its core, journalism demands allegiance to truth. We are meant to report with clarity and integrity, unafraid to challenge those in power, and unwilling to compromise our ethics for access, approval, or attention.
The consequences of sensationalism extend beyond professional media; they seep into the university level, eroding trust in student publications.
This environment is dangerous because when we prioritize performance over reportage, it becomes easier for critics to dismiss journalism as partisan, to brand it as propaganda, or to reduce it to political machinery. When the editorial board of a fellow student publication recently resigned amid allegations of censorship by their school administration, public reaction quickly fractured. Some condemned institutional control, while others resorted to red-tagging, carelessly labeling student journalists as affiliates of the New People’s Army.
University publications like The LaSallian are not immune to these baseless accusations. As sensationalism distorts discourse on a larger scale, it diminishes the credibility of all media practitioners, trivializing our work and the role we play in fostering public conversations.
When exaggeration becomes the norm, the line between journalism and performance blurs. Careless wording, overreactions, and deliberate misrepresentation allow anyone to claim to be a “journalist” without upholding the weight of their responsibilities. If this continues, the meaning of journalism itself risks being lost.
Yet the burden of this responsibility does not rest solely on the media. Audiences play an equally critical role in sustaining or challenging sensationalism. Even the most straightforward and carefully reported stories can be twisted through speculation, misinterpretation, and forced narratives. These distortions are then amplified, shared, and treated as fact. We experience this firsthand in The LaSallian. Despite rigorous verification and editorial processes, our work is often misconstrued, our intentions questioned, and our credibility attacked. It is one of the most difficult realities of being both a student journalist: knowing that accuracy does not guarantee understanding.
What is ultimately lost in this cycle is trust—the very currency journalism depends on. When audiences begin to assume that every headline is exaggerated and every report is agenda-driven, the distinction between truth and noise collapses. The danger is not only the spread of misinformation, but the erosion of care for truth itself. In such an environment, even responsible reporting struggles to break through. Here, restraint becomes a radical act.
Choosing clarity over virality, context over speed, and responsibility over reach may not satisfy the algorithm, but it is essential to preserving the integrity of the craft, and The LaSallian will continue to uphold it.
In the end, sensationalism thrives because it is easy—easy to produce, easy to consume, and easy to believe. But journalism was never meant to be comfortable; it demands discipline, skepticism, and accountability from both reporters and readers. When we reward exaggeration with attention, we become complicit in the very system we criticize.
People may be gullible, but gullibility is not a permanent state. It is learned—and it can be unlearned. Until then, the fight against sensationalism will not be won through louder headlines, but through quieter, more deliberate truths that refuse to be distorted.
