Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There have ALWAYS been higher level sources of news. That isn't the question.
The question, the topic even, is about what has happened to the mass market.
And how that impacts the less sophisticated who don't have the first clue
about qualifying alternate sources. They just get the loudest. And that is a horror.
Sure, but just as there is more mass market garbage, the*higher levels haven't always been as numerous or easily accessible.*If people are unhappy with their media diet, they'll find an*alternative.
If they aren't motivated to change, rather than decry it, I ignore it.
We all know what has happened to the mass market, lowest common denominator, and sinking.
Just like the poor, the less sophisticated will always be with us.
Unfortunately, no-one ever went bankrupt by underestimating the gullibility and stupidity of the great American public.*
The access is constant but I only skim the headlights and select what I want to read. Then go to unbiased sources and use common sense.
Most of the news are just same 'ol over and over again. Lots of propaganda, so selecting right sources is important to me.
News are part of life, but they don't make me anxious, stressed or suicidal.
Learn to better cope with your emotions or stop reading/watching them.
In the 70s & 80s we had the threat of nuclear war,...
Nuclear war and the other calamities noted in your post, are universal. They affect rich and poor, young and old, anorexic or obese. However baleful or horrible they may be, they produce a leveling effect, and thus a kinship. Nobody benefits from a nuclear war, so we all have to converge in some capacity to avoid one... and we hold our leaders accountable accordingly.
But most of the present maladies aren't universal. They subject different people to radically different levels of risk, and also demand radically different levels of sacrifice. Often, those least at risk are asked to make the most sacrifice. This breeds resentment and thereby stress.
If I am in danger, and you are in danger, and the other guy is in danger, then it's reasonable for us all, to give something up, to change our behavior, to make compromises of some sort, to quell the danger, or at least to figure out how to live without the incessantly oppressive feeling of being in danger. But if I'm in less danger than you, and the other guy is in even less danger, than we-three are going to feel respectively different levels of frustration with the response to said danger. We will have varying levels of stress, and we'll feel a tighter or looser connection to society as a whole, on account of how personally we fit with the prevailing narrative of said danger.
In other words, if we're-all-in-it-together, then we can reinforce each other positively, sharing the burdens, and thus offering each other emotional succor. But to the extent that our interests, values, desires, burdens and experiences diverge, we're going to feel the additional stress, of not only abiding the matter at hand, but in being at odds with our neighbors and compatriots.
Even if we tune-out the news, we nevertheless see all around us, in normal daily life, a radical reordering of - well, normal daily life! It doesn't take an addiction to television news or to Facebook or whatever, to feel a gnawing pressure and frustration, that one's gym remains closed, that one's friends won't accept dinner-guests, and on and on. These aren't a matter of being riled-up by shrill commentators in the media, but of what one sees daily, just living one's life.
Yes, there is a saturation of news in our lives these days, and I do believe that it's having a negative, polarizing effect on society. People are less civil and more quick to jump to conclusions, entertain conspiracy theories, be influenced by confirmation bias, etc. People are more likely to define others by the political labels they automatically place on them, and dismiss or demonize those whom they have labeled either "conservatives" or "liberals."
It's not just "modern journalism" that's responsible for this, either. There are many (too many) self-styled journalists who have created their own news platforms via social media, and they are also spreading their spin on various events that happen. People are too easily influenced by the sound bites and far too few people take the time to further investigate what they're hearing. Critical thinking seems almost non-existent.
While I believe it's good to be informed, I don't think that today's news saturation is making people more informed. I think it's making people more likely to react without thinking.
Cable news is useful for 15-30 minutes a day for me, just to identify some current events. Then it is off to the Internet for a deeper look if anything seems interesting or relevant.
This all started back in the early days of advertising on television. Advertisers figured out quickly that the more startling or unusual the message, the longer eyes stayed glued to the screen. They also realized that critical thinking needed to be suppressed in order to peddle their products.
Then they had a breakthrough; turns out that sensationalized infotainment ("breaking news") was even better at keeping eyes on the screen, and sticking around for their advertisements. Bring on CNN and Fox, and their respective consumers.
Just follow the $$$ to sort out how we got here. Regardless there is no doubt that this is affecting the mental health of everyone exposed to it.
Cable news is useful for 15-30 minutes a day for me, just to identify some current events. Then it is off to the Internet for a deeper look if anything seems interesting or relevant.
This all started back in the early days of advertising on television. Advertisers figured out quickly that the more startling or unusual the message, the longer eyes stayed glued to the screen. They also realized that critical thinking needed to be suppressed in order to peddle their products.
Then they had a breakthrough; turns out that sensationalized infotainment ("breaking news") was even better at keeping eyes on the screen, and sticking around for their advertisements. Bring on CNN and Fox, and their respective consumers.
Just follow the $$$ to sort out how we got here. Regardless there is no doubt that this is affecting the mental health of everyone exposed to it.
I think that this problem became exacerbated with the rise of televised news, but the problem itself started long before television -- it's just a more technological evolution of the yellow journalism that was first noted well over a century ago.
It seems as though each new technological gain brings with it a consequential loss. I suppose this is the price that we pay for living in an increasingly complex society -- but sometimes I think that society itself is not evolving fast enough to cope in a healthy way with the innovations brought on by each new technological advance.
Last edited by Rachel NewYork; 09-10-2020 at 04:51 AM..
I think that this problem became exacerbated with the rise of televised news...
I'd say the opposite. It became an issue with the demise of OTA televised news.
And then a few years later the demise of quality local daily newspapers.
Thirty years on... and there are rather few under 50ish with any direct adult experience
of how the news used to be delivered: high quality, same presenters, limited to a once or twice daily dose.
They just don't know, can't know, what they're missing.
Suicide is not "caused" by stress or stressful events, but suicide attempts can be initiated by such events that "push one over the edge" when they are in a fragile mental state already....Like when you're already very depressed and then your dog dies or you get news that your grandmother's parole is denied once again.
My husband passed almost 3 yrs ago. He was a writer, did political columns and watched the news a LOT. I couldn't take it so much. I think it's unhealthy. I have not intentionally turned on the news once since his passing (and I'm not on facebook). I can't help but pick up from various sources all the stuff going on (more than I want) and if somethings important, people fill me in. But I would be a stressful, hopeless individual if I watched all the crap they want to shove down our throats every day. For some, it's fine I guess...for me.. nope. I want my peace as much as possible.
And, as far as I'm concerned, they aren't 'journalists' anymore.. they are ALL commentators and all pushing an agenda.
I think that this problem became exacerbated with the rise of televised news, but the problem itself started long before television -- it's just a more technological evolution of the yellow journalism that was first noted well over a century ago.
It seems as though each new technological gain brings with it a consequential loss. I suppose this is the price that we pay for living in an increasingly complex society -- but sometimes I think that society itself is not evolving fast enough to cope in a healthy way with the innovations brought on by each new technological advance.
Agreed, it goes back a long way.
I am far from being a Luddite, as an engineer I am constantly adopting the latest technology, I get an engineering workstation and business laptop refresh every two years. Engineering technology innovations also had their unintended consequences, including the automation of design, the elimination of physical testing, office automation and so on. Net result is that it takes a fraction of the staff to design and manufacture a product today versus 40 years ago.
All of the communication technologies in the 20th century were released into the wild with no thought for the consequences, other than the companies like Google, Microsoft and Facebook who had one ambition only - to control our behavior and ultimately our pocketbooks. They have succeeded, and they are gaining more power every single day.
I am far from being a Luddite, as an engineer I am constantly adopting the latest technology, I get an engineering workstation and business laptop refresh every two years. Engineering technology innovations also had their unintended consequences, including the automation of design, the elimination of physical testing, office automation and so on. Net result is that it takes a fraction of the staff to design and manufacture a product today versus 40 years ago.
All of the communication technologies in the 20th century were released into the wild with no thought for the consequences, other than the companies like Google, Microsoft and Facebook who had one ambition only - to control our behavior and ultimately our pocketbooks. They have succeeded, and they are gaining more power every single day.
Oh, you're an engineer! I thought your nick of GearHeadDave indicated you were Steampunk. Also, your articulate and well-mannered posts reminded me of Steampunk subculture. I'm not saying that engineers aren't articulate and well-mannered, too!
Sorry to ramble... Yes, it's disturbing how these communications giants are accumulating wealth and power on an unprecedented scale. And, equally if not more disturbing, is what often appears to be a careless lack of responsibility accompanying their accumulation of wealth and power.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Also, your articulate and well-mannered posts reminded me of Steampunk subculture. I'm not saying that engineers aren't articulate and well-mannered, too!
Yes, it's disturbing how these communications giants are accumulating wealth and power on an unprecedented scale. And, equally if not more disturbing, is what often appears to be a careless lack of responsibility accompanying their accumulation of wealth and power.
