Why are we following the news and is it worth doing

2024 Author: Malcolm Clapton | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 03:44

Attention, breaking news! Urgent release, read all! Or don't read it. Writer Brett McKay takes it upon himself to figure out what the real nature of news is and why we generally follow it. Here is a translation of his thoughts in the first person.

When I do my usual morning chores, especially on weekends, I have a habit of listening to my favorite shows on the radio: Radiolab, TED Radio Hour, To the Best of Our Knowledge. However, before all these radio broadcasts begin, the presenter be sure to say:

But first, the news.

It doesn't matter what I'm doing at this moment - brushing my teeth or doing something else - after this phrase, I always reflexively begin to listen to find out what will be said next.

What follows is usually referred to as a news bulletin. These are the main events that have happened to date, a summary of the most important incidents: 25 people died as a result of a landslide; an explosion occurred in the center of the capital; the stock market falls and rises again; the sports team has won some kind of award; the beloved celebrity passed away.

The news very rarely talks about what really interests me. And yet, every time the phrase “But first - the news!” Sounds on the radio, I involuntarily begin to listen more attentively.

The inexplicable dissonance between my strange craving for news and the fact that I do not extract anything useful from them for myself, for several years in a row, has given me a logical question: is there really any point in following them?

News is a new religion and a distraction

Consuming news is a daily habit of billions of people around the world. It doesn't matter where they get them from: they see it on the Internet or on TV, hear it on the radio or read it in the newspapers.

This habit is nothing new. Even in the days of primitive people, there were scouts who regularly supplied their fellow tribesmen with information about nature, food and neighboring tribes. By the way, there is an assumption that it was these messages that became the root cause of our strongest craving for news, as they helped to escape from sudden invasions of enemy tribes and survive. A hundred years ago, people had no social networks, no blogs, no news sites - instead, they bought daily newspapers in batches.

Consuming news is not a new practice at all. She was rapidly gaining momentum and gradually became one of the integral parts of our life.

In the modern world, news has, in a sense, replaced religion for some people. Checking the news feed immediately after waking up and before going to bed replaced our morning and evening prayers.

Previously, believers sought solace in the scriptures, but now, according to British writer Alain de Botton, we turn to the news for that.

Alain de Botton British writer and philosopher We hope to receive a revelation. Find out who is good and who is bad. Feel compassion and understand the logic of the events taking place in the world. And if we refuse to participate in these rituals, we may be accused of apostasy.

If news is considered a new religion, it will be the least studied. The media rarely share information about themselves. It is unlikely that we will find anywhere reports on how everything actually works in the world of mass media.

In the most cultured countries, news consumption is undoubtedly an effective diversion of public attention.

Not following the current news or not knowing what is happening in the world is the surest way to be known as an uncouth redneck.

However, at the risk of sounding like a heretic, I will try to prove that while news in general is not entirely useless, we could well get by with much less information than what we have today.

We are proud to follow the news. Why?

I dare to suggest that when it comes to the question of why we follow the news, there is a big difference between how we respond to it and our real motives. When analyzing the reasons given by people in most cases, it often turns out that they do not sound as convincing as we would like.

Reason # 1: the news is truthful about what is happening in the world

The mission of any journalist (who is serious about his profession, of course) is to inform people as accurately as possible about what is happening around, and to tell the truth, only the truth and nothing but the truth. Should we think that if there were no news, we would be deprived of the opportunity to know about what is “really” going on in the world?

The truth, which the media shares with us, is impossibly one-sided and reflects only one side of our life. Moreover, as a rule, that part of it that is new, unknown and full of negativity.

Research has shown that the ratio of bad news to good news is about 17: 1. We constantly see reports of dozens of maddened murderers and pedophiles, but we don't hear a word about those millions of people who just went to work, had dinner and went to bed without killing or injuring anyone.

There are a huge number of truthful headlines that have absolutely no chance of ever making the front pages of newspapers.

• A fifteen-year-old teenager helped an unfamiliar old woman to climb three flights of stairs.
• Having carefully weighed everything, the man decided not to kill his wife.
• Sensation! Every day 65 million people go to bed without being raped.

In the world of news, danger lurks around every corner, and famous people struggle to create as much hype around them as possible. The perspective in which the mass media views the world is so narrow that it invariably covers only a small part of the whole picture of what is happening, mercilessly distorting everything else.

The media not only talk about what is happening in reality, but also help shape it. What we see and read in the news influences our perception of life and ideas about the current state of the country and the people around us.

As a result, we get a terribly gloomy and rather cynical perspective. Although for the most part things in our small world of family and close people are going pretty well, in general it seems that the rest of the planet will soon fall into tartar.

Reason # 2: the news is free from racial barriers and other prejudices

When we keep our finger on the pulse of all the events taking place in the world (be it natural disasters, diseases or wars between countries), then presumably this should help us feel part of the global community, as well as generate collective unity and empathy.

However, psychological research has led to completely opposite results.

When we see that a particular person is suffering, we are imbued with sympathy for him. But when we learn about the suffering of tens, hundreds and thousands of people, we tend to be indifferent. In the face of massive suffering, our empathy hastily escapes for fear of being overwhelmed by other emotions.

News, instead of making us more humane, has the exact opposite effect.

We are supposed to learn to be more open to the suffering of others, but the endless reporting of hundreds of people killed in an explosion or from some kind of illness does not make us feel emotionally. Yes, we certainly feel sorry for them all, but deep down we mostly don't give a damn.

Reason # 3: News makes it feel like we are on the road to solving important problems

Keeping track of the news is one of the most important responsibilities of an active citizen. But it is often presented as a given, in an oversimplified form and without any important explanations.

First, in order to be truly informed, to be able to truly understand the situation and know what to do, you need to do much more than just read the news endlessly. News bulletins rarely give context. More often than not, there is an endless stream of facts and expert points of view.

To understand what really happened and what weight this event had, you need to connect all your resources: basic knowledge of history, philosophy, psychology and other sciences, carefully collected from books or other more comprehensive sources of information. Then and only then can you really understand the meaning of what happened and draw certain conclusions.

Secondly, not all news requires an instant response and urgent action from you. They are not directly related to you at all.

Most of the news deals with just such problems that you still could not do anything, even if you really wanted to. And if there is news that requires a response, how often are you willing to actually do something? How many stories from the myriad news stories you've ingested over the past five years have directly prompted you to take action? One percent? One hundredth of a percent?

Someone, of course, can argue that the widespread and uncontrolled consumption of news makes us less inclined to take any active action in principle. Buried in an avalanche of stories about how badly destroyed and how terrible this crazy world is, we feel overwhelmed, paralyzed, apathetic. What can we do to change the situation, and where will it all lead?

Alain de Botton British writer and philosopher Any modern dictator who wants to consolidate his power does not have to take such dire measures as a widespread ban on news. He just needs to make sure that news organizations broadcast a chaotic stream of information messages (in huge numbers, without clarifying the context), without attaching special importance to really important events.

All of these messages need to be mixed with the constantly emerging news of bloody murders and ridiculous celebrity antics. This will be enough to undermine most people's understanding of political reality, as well as their determination to do something to change the situation.

If you want people to accept the status quo, don't give them news at all, or give them so much that they drown in it. Then nothing will ever change.

As de Botton explains, consuming news can ultimately lead us to "disconnect" from the real world altogether.

The real reasons for consuming news

While we come up with a host of logical, noble explanations for why we follow the news, in most cases, the reasons for their consumption sound less convoluted.

For fun

The main reason for the consumption of news is the reason for the existence of mass media in general - this is interesting. There is action, drama, twists and turns of events, and tension. Each genre of fiction has parallels to the real life of the news.

Mysticism, horror, suspense. Why would someone take the plane to the mountain on purpose? What did the doomed passengers feel just before the crash? Who started the gunfight? Is he guilty or not?

Novel. Is there something between these two celebrities? It seems that everyone is already discussing their secret connection! Why did they break up? Who dumped whom first?

Comedy. Have you seen what a mistake this politician made? This is awful fun!

Parable. Will the CEO get fired because of his machinations? Will anyone punish this youngster spoiled with attention and money? Stay tuned and find out everything!

News, full of intrigue, some schadenfreude and almost detective stories, can undoubtedly be a sight to be followed by quite a lot of fun.

To follow the lives of others

People are such creatures that are highly sensitive to their own position in society. We monitor social media feeds to see and find out how our friends are doing compared to us. At the same time, the media taught us to keep track of what is happening in the lives of various famous people, although we personally do not know them.

We maneuver between the news about those we know personally and those who are simply interesting to follow in order to keep abreast of all the ups and downs. Seeing someone make mistakes, fail, or get criticized somehow gives us incomparable pleasure. Even if we actually like this person. Observing the failures of others makes us, albeit for a short time, feel a little better and above others.

To give yourself status

Being aware of what is happening is like having a bachelor's degree in some science. This does not automatically mean that you are smarter or richer than others, but it still gives you a certain weight in the eyes of society.

People have a habit of using this as a kind of assessment criterion, as a selection mechanism, which largely helps to save time and effort when meeting a person. Someone who does not follow the news at all is considered insufficiently educated.

A person with an intelligent air ranting about the current state of affairs is seen by the majority as a member of society worthy of respect.

It is unlikely that anyone wants to be classified as a "lower class" people. This is why we all volunteer to join the daily race of regularly studying news headlines. Alas, now this is a mandatory requirement for those who want to be able to maintain a conversation and thereby maintain their status.

For a thrill

The overwhelming part of our life is boring and predictable routine. And although most of us ourselves do not want something nasty like a world war or a global catastrophe to happen to this world, the other secretly hopes for a grandiose "boom".

The consequences of large-scale tragedies and conflicts are not only pain and suffering, but also the novelty, excitement and great unity of all people. We follow the news with a twofold feeling, in fear and at the same time hoping that some kind of madness will happen.

To escape from ourselves

Immersion in the events that are happening on the international arena helps us to distract ourselves from the problems that our small personal universe is full of. Watching the news serves as a kind of anesthesia for our brain. All emotional upheavals with which we live are temporarily forgotten and fade into the background.

“To take the news into account means to bring a shell to your ear and be deafened by the roar of humanity,” Alain de Botton subtly noted.

The same story is with watching TV, although they claim to be informative and imply stimulation of thinking. They serve as a great background noise when you really want to isolate yourself from problems and distract yourself for a bit.

In order not to get lost

Today the world is moving forward at such a rapid pace that it is becoming harder and harder to keep track of everything that happens: governments are overthrown in a week, politicians do not follow the promised course, some new advances in science and technology are constantly emerging.

Not only do we not want to be left behind - to be in the company of the very person who is unfamiliar with what is happening around us - we are also afraid to miss a kind of discovery that could turn our lives around forever.

Deep down, we all believe that if only we could find the right diet, adhere to a daily routine, or install the perfect time-scheduling app, we would finally be able to become more successful, achieve all goals, and maybe even avoid death.

If we consider news as a modern religion, then we can consider that it is such a faith that is based on continuous progress. We are following the news in the hope of finding out the recipe for a happy and long life. And the media makes us believe that he still exists, brainwashing us with more ducks like these:

• Scientists have discovered previously unknown benefits of daily red wine consumption.
• Sensation! Gene therapy still works.
• You will be surprised when you find out how healthy walnuts really are.

In the news, all of this is presented with incredible reverence, reminiscent of the one that inspired the pious Catholic pilgrim to touch the shins of Mary Magdalene in the hope of guaranteeing himself with this constant divine protection. At a time when the news is pouring in an uninterrupted stream, many anxiously ask the question: "What if suddenly something important happens, and I miss everything?"

It is possible to become a “news teetotaler”, but is it necessary?

Even if we really follow the news for other reasons than we are talking about, what is so bad about receiving important and interesting information from time to time?

From time to time - of course, nothing bad.

It sounds tempting: to give up all the news at once and at the same time do not miscalculate. This approach grants inner satisfaction. And at the same time you will have something to brag to your friends. This decision is akin to suddenly stopping eating meat or watching TV.

Many famous personalities also went into the "informational string".

American thinker Henry David Thoreau implored the public: “Don't read the Times. Read the eternal. " And Thomas Jefferson echoed: "I don't pick up a single newspaper, and I certainly don't read them every month, that's why I feel infinitely happy."

Although these people did not have a special love for the press, they still did not completely cut themselves off from the world of news. All of them had an idea of what was happening from correspondence or conversations.

Thoreau knew enough to protest against slavery and the Mexican-American War, and Jefferson was well informed that he even managed to become the third president of the United States.

The same thing is happening now with the so-called self-proclaimed "news teetotalers." It turns out that this abstinence is based on their own definition of "news." They consume little information from one source and avoid all others in every possible way. This is called a conscious choice, not complete isolation. The end result is filtering of information, but not a complete rejection of it.

Once you honestly admit to yourself the reasons for consuming news, you immediately stop believing that they are of any value in themselves. You will stop giving them serious importance and following them just because everyone does it.

You are free to choose which type of content to consume. However, deliberately giving preference to something, you need to take into account the factor that you leave yourself less time to consume another.

Try to think of the news as entertainment, with occasional sprinkles of educational material. Let's say in a ratio of 9 to 1. Then you can easily focus on their important and motivating component.

I don’t know a single truly creative person who would be an information addict, and not a writer, composer, mathematician, doctor, scientist, musician, designer, architect or artist. On the other hand, I know quite a few people without a creative streak who consume news like drugs.

I just can't imagine how to come up with a new idea, constantly being distracted by the news. If you're looking for new solutions, don't read them.

Rolf Dobelli author and businessman

Personal example and conclusions

There is no one-size-fits-all instruction on how much time and attention you need to devote to news while on the “information diet,” but here's how much I spend on it.

I check the headlines of news sites and the pages of the city newspaper several times a day, and sometimes listen to the radio in the morning when I get to work or drive. This allows me to maintain a conversation with the people around me and at the same time find out if something has happened that affects the sphere of my personal or professional interests.

The huge array of data that I pass through myself most often does not concern me in any way, but sometimes there are exceptions. For example, I wrote to a member of the city council when they came up with a permit to build a shopping center on a wilderness site adjacent to the city.

I spend little time following national politics and election races. And only because where I live, I am very limited in this. Oklahoma is a state where it absolutely doesn't matter who I vote for or whether I vote at all - we'll still elect the Republican congressmen. If I lived in a less politically oriented state, I would pay more attention to this issue, because such news concerns me personally.

I spend even less time on international news. I know that familiarization with them is supposedly one of the traits of a cosmopolitan citizen. But from a purely practical point of view, such knowledge is useless for me. This is just information for information's sake, and I don't see the point in that.

In general, if you count the time allotted for reading and listening to the news, then everything about everything takes me about thirty minutes. I hardly click on links on advertising sites, I don't watch reality shows or television news. The time that I have left I devote to reading books on topics of interest to me.

Works on philosophy, history, sociology, natural sciences and other branches of knowledge are much more instructive and useful for me as a person than news, which loses its relevance every 24 hours.

Books remain relevant for several years and even centuries and feed the mind in a way that no news can ever.

At the same time, books not only provide knowledge in a certain area, they contain a variety of models of thinking that allow you to better understand … what is being told in the news.