What’s written in the stars?
Why newspapers still publish horoscopes, even in face of science
In dismissing astrology — among other beliefs — in her controversial remarks last week to a conference of Canadian scientists, Gov. Gen. Julie Payette simply underscored the scientific community’s studied view that astrology has no basis in evidence-based fact.
While many astrologers will no doubt take issue with this statement, any review of credible scientific literature makes clear there is no verified evidence to support believing that the movements of the sun, moon and stars can predict our daily destinies and future paths.
Why then, knowing that astrology has little more credibility than that slip of paper in a fortune cookie, do I most always check out my daily horoscope in the Star?
I am certainly not alone in this habit. The Star’s daily horoscope column is among our best-read regular features. In the few instances I have been around when the Star messed up and missed publishing its syndicated horoscope column — now written by longtime American astrologist Jacqueline Bigar — outcry from aggrieved readers was substantial.
But Payette’s comments did make me think: Given the current spotlight on media trust and the battle against misinformation and “fake news,” the horoscope columns published by the Star and many other credible news organizations — including the Globe and Mail, the CBC and the Washington Post — would seem to be a curious anomaly. Why do news organizations committed to evidence-based, accurate information publish something scientists dismiss as a bunch of bunk?
Indeed, as a 2016 article in Smithsonian.com, the online magazine for the Smithsonian Institution, asks: “How are horoscopes still a thing?
“Why are people willing to reorder their love lives, buy a lottery ticket, or take a new job based on the advice of someone who knows nothing more about them than their birthdate?” author Linda Rodriguez McRobbie asks in her excellent examination of newspaper and magazine horoscopes. “One reason we can rule out is scientific validity.”
I expect most horoscope readers well understand the facts about the horoscope column and do not base serious life decisions on what they read in those columns.
According to a Wellcome Trust Monitor Survey cited in a 2014 article by University of Essex sociology professor Nick Allum, published by the academic website, The Conversation, less than 10 per cent of those surveyed think horoscopes are “very” or “quite” scientific. Still, that same survey found that 21 per cent of British adults reader their horoscopes “often” or “fairly often.”
A 2005 article in Britain’s Independent newspaper posits that it is newspapers that made astrology part of popular culture, citing horoscope columns dating back to the 1930s.
“Of all the pseudo-sciences, astrology is by far the most popular: 90 per cent of the country’s population can tell you their star sign,” the article states. “Its success is a comparatively recent phenomenon and entirely owing to the creation of the daily newspaper horoscope.”
So why do the Star and many other global news organizations continue to publish horoscope columns, knowing as we do that astrology is not a science? The answer is found partly in the label the Star applies to its column — “Diversions.” Like the comics and the crosswords — two other traditional newspaper features to which readers have long been loyally attached — the horoscope is offered largely for its harmless entertainment value, some lightness and levity amid the dark and heavy seriousness of the news.
Moreover, while astrology is not science and no serious news organization today should suggest it is, we know astrology does have appeal to some on a deeper level.
Studies indicate that however unscientific it has been found to be, some people do indeed choose to believe in some connection between the stars and their lives. Others report finding some measure of psychological appeal and means of regular selfreflection in the horoscope column.
“I think it is a happy diversion for those who want it,” Irene Gentle, the Star’s managing editor, told me. “There was an interesting story in the New York Times a while back that said China was seeing a big boost in astrology because of a rapidly falling belief in anything else. They had to believe in something.
“All this says to me, as long as enough readers like it, I am happy for them to be able to read it,” she said. “I don’t think it impacts our credibility or seriousness.”
That seems a fair assessment to me. As for the future the horoscope column? Who can predict? publiced@thestar.ca