Yes, absolutely! Unsubstantiated sensationalism can be a quick and dirty way for any media form to gain followers. One famous example would be the yellow journalism of the 1890's, which arose in part due to the rivalry between the big newspaper empires of Hearst and Pulitzer. Their newspapers frequently resorted to over-exaggeration and splashy headlines in a spiraling race to attract more readers. This culminated in their coverage of the run up to the Spanish-American War, which some claim misled public opinion towards hawkishness (particularly coverage of the sinking of the USS Maine, though the actual political impact of this coverage has been disputed).

You might call what was being said in some of the papers in the 1790s US as sensational. For this period, I would characterize much of the press as being more or less partisan.

THE DISPATCHES, From our envoys at Paris, which are published at length in this day’s paper, present us nothing new. They only place all of the propositions of X, Y, and Z to the account of the minister of Foreign Affairs. Infamous BACHE can therefore no longer impute the insolent demands to ‘unauthorized agents.’ Talleyrand, the old hopping Bishop, is no unauthorized agent; he is the authorized agent of the Directory, just as lord Grenville was the authorized agent of his Britanic Majesty, so that, there is no longer any room for excuse; there is no hole to creep out at. A tribute has been demanded by the tyrants of France, and all that the people have to do, is to determine whether they will be their vassals or not.

-Quote found in Humphrey's The Revolutionary Era

This quote is from the Porcupine's Gazette, that published in favor of the Federalists. This quote deals with the XYZ affair and is responding to a Republican-leaning paper, the Philadephia Aurora edited by Benjamin Bache.

Another such example is not in a paper, but in a pamphlet.

The reign of Mr. Adams has been one continued tempest of malignant passions. As President, he has never opened his lips, or lifted his pen, without threatening or scolding; the grand object of his administration has been to exasperate the rage of contending parties and destroy every man who differs from his opinions...

This was written by James Callender, who had written for both the Philadelphia Aurora and the Richmond Examiner. This, however, was found in a political pamphlet he authored called The Prospect Before Us.

Found in Smith, Sedition in the Old Dominion, Journal of Southern History.

More partisan than sensational, I would say. But the two can go hand in hand.

It certainly was. One example is that of the Spanish-American War which a few people here have already mentioned, another is that of 'The Curse of the Mummy', which was blamed for the premature death of much of Howard Carter's team during the excavation of Tutankhamun's tomb.

If you're still not convinced, I suggest you watch Citizen Kane.