for absolutely no reason, especially one that involves multiple storylines being pushed down your throat at once, here’s a short post about tabloid media literacy.
as a tabloid journalist (hypothetically, fictionally), my company makes money when you click on links and read stories. that’s it. that’s the job. my paycheck and career depend on traffic.
so i see a celebrity say something in an interview with another outlet. if i think it might be click-worthy, i’m going to run with it. whether or not that’s what the person actually meant in context.
i’ll take that quote, pair it with vaguely related things that have been said in the past, and stretch it into a few paragraphs so it qualifies as an article.
then my editor steps in. sometimes they say no (for legal reasons, or because they don’t want to risk losing access to information that person’s team occasionally provides.) sometimes they say yes. access absolutely matters.
in another scenario, i notice a celebrity moving kind of weird. i start asking around. eventually someone surfaces (maybe a friend of a "partner’s" family member, maybe someone who went to primary school with the celebrity. maybe the celebrities' grocery delivery driver. maybe someone adjacent enough that it technically counts.)
as long as i can label them a “source,” i have plausible deniability. i didn’t state it as fact. i reported what a source claimed. there are legal limits, but within those limits, a lot can be printed.
in another scenario, someone from someone’s team reaches out anonymously. it genuinely doesn’t matter whose team. maybe X says something that sounds like shade at Y. then Y’s "girlfriend's" camp confirms to me that it was shade. i run with it.
i don’t actually care what their motive is. but since they gave me information, i’ll probably throw in a favorable line about them so they keep talking to me.
and then there’s aggregation.
i work at a smaller outlet. there are five of us covering hundreds of celebrities. we don’t have time to generate original reporting for everything, so we wait for a bigger tabloid to publish, rewrite their story, cite them, and hit post.
now take one out-of-context quote or one bad source, and run it through this system.
it gets repeated. and repeated. and repeated.
eventually, the original context is gone, and the distorted version becomes “what happened” in the public’s mind. that doesn't mean it was true, it just means it was loud and profitable.