Don't Watch The News!

Welcome to an eye-opening journey into the intricate workings of mainstream media and how it shapes our perception of the world. Buckle up as we dive deep into the mechanisms through which news outlets wield their influence over our minds. Before you raise an eyebrow, let me assure you: this isn't a dive into conspiracy theories. Instead, we'll be delving into well-supported research, drawing from peer-reviewed papers to back up every claim. But first, let's take a moment to explore the crucial difference between actively sought information and the information that bombards us without invitation. Understanding this contrast will set the stage for our exploration into the subtle ways the media can sway our views. So, without further ado, let's unravel the mysteries together.

Differences In Delivery

When we actively seek out information we engage in several cognitive processes. I will be focusing on two key cognitive mechanisms, namely, focused attention and deliberate evaluation. Here’s how they work: when we want to know something about a specific topic, for example, how to grow tomatoes, we make a conscious decision to seek out that information. Actively sought information on the topic of tomatoes might become available to us by initiating a Google search, taking a trip to the library, or speaking with someone at the local plant nursery. In this case, where we get the information is less important than how we come into contact with it.

Having decided to seek information we focus our attention on that task, and, in turn, unearth various sources for the information we seek. Once we have uncovered a few sources to draw from we must then use deliberate evaluation to determine which sources of information are most useful to us. Continuing with the example of how to grow tomatoes some potential factors influencing our discernment might include the climate we live in or the space available to us. For example, a website describing how to grow tomatoes in a cold climate will be of lesser use to us if we happen to live in a temperate climate.

This should be a pretty unproblematic explanation so far since the above-outlined mental process has transpired in an organic way that is harmonious with our inborn capacities. Problems begin to arise, however, when the information we receive has not been sought out in the first place. Sticking with the tomato example I will quickly detail an alternate scenario below.

You spontaneously find yourself with a few spare moments in your otherwise busy day, so you pick up your phone and navigate to your favourite social media app. There is no clear intention present when you open the app, you're just looking to pass a few minutes before tackling your next task. On your home feed, a short video clip about growing tomatoes pops up, and the photogenic thumbnail of beautifully ripe, red, juicy tomatoes hanging from the vine grabs your attention. You tap on the video and watch as a computer-generated voice delivers 5 bullet points of information detailing why this particular cultivar of tomatoes is the best for home growers, all synced to a montage of perfect video clips displaying a tomato plant in all its glory. The video ends, you swipe up, and the next video on an unrelated topic automatically starts playing.

Sound familiar?

The Problem With Modern Information Sources

This method of information delivery presents our minds with several challenges, but most notable is its ability to bypass our powers of focused attention and deliberate evaluation detailed above. You may not see the problem, especially in such a low-stakes example like learning about tomato plants, but let me assure you, the implications are substantive.

Focused attention and deliberate evaluation work together as a form of quality control for information being stored in our brains. When we are actively engaging with the information presented to us we are less likely to accept low-quality information and/or information from questionable sources. When information is presented to us in a passive state our mental faculties are not activated in the same manner allowing subpar information to slip past quality control ending up filed away in our minds as though it were credible.

I would like to point out a few potential caveats to the information derived from the social media example to further clarify this point. The tomato cultivar presented in the video clip has been presented as the best of the best, but who exactly is making this claim and what evidence do they have to support it? You might be thinking, “Well, I saw the monstrous plant in the video so laden with fruit it could barely support itself!” and indeed you might have, but how can you be certain the plant in the video is the cultivar being described? Are you familiar with the cultivar being described and can you identify it? How do you know the plant in the video hasn’t produced such high yields as a result of heavy fertilization and environmental manipulation that may have taken place in a grow room? What reason does the person who posted the video have for sharing this information with you? Is it possible they stand to make a profit from your belief that the tomato cultivar presented in the video is the best variety for home growers?

I could go on and on but the point is there are a lot of unknowns surrounding the credibility of information presented in this format. To be clear, many of the questions I presented above could be answered with relative ease by lightly researching the claims made in the video, and it might turn out that everything stated is grounded in fact. But you couldn’t know that to be true unless you did your due diligence and examined the background information, and that would mean halting your scrolling, checking the poster's profile and maybe googling a thing or two. In other words, you would have to engage your focused attention and deliberate evaluation to validate the information presented to you in the video clip, but that is a big, and I mean, a BIG problem when it comes to social media.

If we exited our social media apps after every post we viewed to fact-check it and do background research, the fraction of time spent viewing posts would be quite low thus putting the bottom line of a social media company's bank account at a disadvantage. Social media platforms and their delivery methods have been fine-tuned to keep you scrolling because more screen time equals more profits, and the software engineers have done this fine-tuning by exploiting our biological tendencies, i.e. short-circuiting our attention span, bypassing our quality control faculties, and capitalizing on our inherent attraction to images.

My point is not to say that all information garnered from social media is bad, nor am I attempting to tell you that you cannot fact-check the information found on these platforms. I am merely attempting to demonstrate how exposing yourself to the information stream of a social media platform positions you poorly when attempting to separate fact from fiction.

You might be wondering what all this has to do with the news since this post is titled “Don't Watch The News”, and the answer is quite simple. Social media has become the number one news outlet in contemporary society, and most people in our modern era get a significant portion of their news information from short video clips described above, with all the associated drawbacks. Furthermore, if you consider the structure of a typical 30-minute news broadcast, the delivery method is very much the same as if someone spent 30 minutes scrolling on social media. Consider the below example.

The Problem With TV News

You arrive home after a busy day, and, not long in the door, you reach for the TV remote. You turn the TV on and switch to the news channel. The broadcast starts rolling and in the 30 minutes that follow you’ve been exposed to a dozen or more rapid-fire news stories all in quick succession. Aside from the choice to turn the TV on, no part of the process entailed focused attention, and the speed at which successive stories are presented leaves little to no time for deliberate evaluation.

Now, you may take issue with my claim that watching the news does not necessitate the presence of active focus given that one must focus on the broadcast to receive the message, but there is a difference between active focus and passive concentration (ref). We tend to switch over from active to passive concentration when engaged in automated tasks. Think of driving a car. For most of us, the first time we drove a car was a nerve-wracking experience and required intense active concentration. After driving a few times the whole process becomes routine and engages different circuits in the brain, those responsible for passive concentration. If you’ve ever jumped in your car and driven to your destination without really remembering how you got there, that passive concentration at work, and it's the same type of concentration employed when we scroll on social media or veg out in front of the TV.

As we can see the pitfalls of a social media feed are very much at play in a typical news broadcast, but this is only the tip of the iceberg. In the remainder of the post, I will examine additional factors that compound the effects of the complications already outlined.

For starters, news outlets typically display a negative bias prioritizing negative and sensationalistic stories leading to a skewed perception of the world, making it seem more dangerous or dire than it is. This effect is often compounded by constant exposure to tragedy. Watching the news frequently exposes viewers to traumatic events, such as accidents, violence, and natural disasters, which can contribute to feelings of anxiety, fear, and hopelessness.

Additionally watching mainstream news presentations may result in a confirmation bias. People often seek out news sources that align with their pre-existing beliefs, leading to the reinforcement of biases and polarization, which can contribute to societal divisions and conflict. This confirmation bias when coupled with disproportionate coverage of some stories which may not reflect their actual significance, and selective reporting that prioritizes certain stories over others creates a highly polarized and biased perspective of the world in the broadcast's viewer base.

Furthermore, the constant barrage of negative stories present in the news can create a sense of powerlessness and a feeling that one has little control over the events happening in the world, leading to feelings of frustration and despair. Overemphasis on conflict perpetuates a sense of division and mistrust within society, exacerbating feelings of anxiety and disillusionment, and continuous exposure to negative news without balanced coverage of positive developments can erode optimism and hope for the future, leading to feelings of despair or resignation.

How To Stay Informed

One can still remain up to date on current affairs whilst remaining insulated from the most damaging effects of mainstream news coverage. One of the simplest ways to do so, if the title hasn't already given it away, is to read the news rather than watch it. If you are reading newspaper articles, be it physically or digitally, the non-stop barrage of images and information is interrupted. One can only be exposed to information as fast as they can read and the act of reading necessitates the presence of active rather than passive concentration. Complementary to the reduced input speed of reading is the opportunity for deliberate evaluation that printed media supports. Put simply, take your time to read the news and chew it over. The sense of urgency that video news broadcasts present is largely fabricated. Despite the severity and intensity of the stories covered, and assuming one isn’t directly impacted by them, there is ample time to consider them carefully.

Reading the news may not be enough, however, especially if the text you are reading is delivered via platforms like X (formerly Twitter). Without delving too deeply into the workings of tech algorithms, you should strive to be the one choosing the stories you read and avoid allowing algorithms and AI to curate your reading list. The reasoning for this could constitute a post in and of itself but the short and narrow of it is, that social media algorithms show you posts designed to keep you on the platform and glued to your screen, not the posts most useful to you. Notice I said useful rather than relevant. These terms are not synonyms despite what your Instagram explore page may have you believe.

And finally, try to seek news from outlets that seem misaligned with your personal views in addition to those in alignment with them. Read articles from both sides of the spectrum, compare the differing interpretations, and try to remember that the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle. Do not let the media radicalize you. Remember the humanity of those holding views opposed to yours. Seek understanding and common ground. Keep faith in the future.

I hope this article has shed some light on the psychology of the mainstream media and how it subtly alters our views and our perception of the world and the people around us. I encourage you to break free from the endless cycle of doom and gloom perpetuated on the news and to seek information from impartial sources. Form your own opinions rather than adopting those provided by the institutions that surround us, and remember to be tolerant and compassionate towards others despite your differences of opinion.