Media Negativity: Is it Harmful?
The internet: a vast sea of infinite information at the tip of our fingertips. Two clicks and I can see what’s going on across the world. I can connect with people in new time zones, learn about current events in different countries and cities. I can follow elections, learn a new language, and even check the stock market. With the internet, the possibilities of learning and being informed are endless and so much of that information stems from news and media. It is now more than ever never been easier to keep up with the news. But with so much happening in the world every day, how do our brains sift through what is important? When we are glancing at headline after headline, how do we know which stories are most urgent to read? The answer is, we don’t. It is impossible for human brains to sift through information and distinguish what is most important. That is why news and media sources do it for us. Have you ever noticed words like “threat” or “danger” seem to show up a lot in news headlines? Do you find yourself clicking on stories that invoke feelings of anxiety or fear? This is not a coincidence. United States’ news disproportionately covers negative news because it increases consumer engagement. Our brains perceive negative news as more important and tend to hold on to those memories for longer. Negative language and news coverage create a sense of urgency in our brain, making us feel reliant on the news and ultimately keep us coming back or clicking on headlines that invoke those feelings of fear and urgency. Claire Wardle’s article, Fake News. It’s Complicated., describes how journalists and media manipulate this human psychology by covering negative news or carefully choosing extreme and fear-provoking lexicons. I can’t tell you how many times I have opened the news app and seen a gruesome murder being covered, another threat, another random act of violence. I find myself sitting there and thinking is this really the world we live in? Are things really this bad? When I open my phone and read the news, it feels like crime, divisiveness, politics, safety, and everything under the sun is getting worse. I imagine this is something many people struggle with. The constant dichotomy of wanting to be informed but feeling just generally hopeless every time we exit out of the news. In reality, the answer is no. Things aren’t that bad. We are all victims of an overly negative media bias. Negative news and language are more eye catching to the brain. News media sources manipulate this phenomenon to increase consumer engagement, creating an overwhelming amount of negative content in news sources. However, constant exposure to negative news has a profound negative impact on our brains and experiences. It is important to identify negative biases in media to decrease negative side effects.
Freaknomics Podcast, Why is U.S. Media so Negative does a great job of explaining this concept. Two accredited researchers found that an overwhelming amount of U.S. media used negative terms linked to fear, hate, and morality to produce more “eye-catching” stories. I am sure many of you are familiar with the term “click-bait”, or, a misleading hook that grabs out attention so quickly we can’t help but click on the page. In many ways, these negative and eye-catching terms serve as click-bait. This is because the human brain tends to gravitate towards negativity because it seen as more important to our brain’s psychology. Terms linked to fear, hate, and morality stick out to our brains more, giving us the final push to click on the news story and engage in the content. Our brains hold on to these negative sentiments as they create patterns of anxiety and fear. I am sure you and I are more likely to remember words like “dire”, “threatening”, and “war on ____” than sunshine and roses. The relationship between negativity and engagement motivates journalists and media to produce more negative and triggering content to push numbers. Additionally, negative, and morally linked terms can accelerate a certain bias, influencing public opinion. This is best seen through coverage of elections. For example, Fox News has recently come under fire for promoting claims unjustly undermining elections and creating a sense of fear and distrust in certain elected officials. In this example, Fox News used terms like “fraud”, “stolen election”, and many other extreme terms to describe elections and influence how their readers perceive politics. In another example, the researchers from Freaknomics’ Why is U.S. Media so Negative found that 87% of national U.S. covid media and journalism coverage was overwhelmingly negative while only 64% of scientific jorunals had the same negative tone on the same covid-19 topics. But why? What do media reporters have to gain by painting covid in a more negative and dire light than scientific journals? The answer is simple. This discrepancy arises from media motivations. The increase in negativity drives up media engagement, benefitting the media sources. Words like “catastrophe”, “troublesome”, and “appalling” catch people’s eye by instilling a certain amount of fear. This fear keeps us coming back. Checking that story or following that event. It gives us a false sense of control to read about the things that scare us. This fear becomes linked to the media creating a toxic relationship the media exploits to keep customers consuming information. Oftentimes the information is distorted or presented in a way that overly catastrophizes a certain issue. It cultivates a toxic relationship between the consumer and the media. The feelings of anxiety and fear cause people to monitor stories more closely, and the cycle repeats.
The term “doom-scrolling” was created to describe this toxic relationship between reader and news outlet. The National Institute of Health describes doom scrolling as “a vicious cycle in which users find themselves get stuck in a pattern of seeking negative information no matter how bad the news is.” I can’t tell you how many times I have opened the news app and found myself obsessing over all the negative news in the world. Sometimes it seems like hours go by and I am on one disasterous news article to the next. Research in to doom-scrolling finds that this type of behavior linked to negative news coverage is not only very common and but very hard to resist. Researches found that many people experience feelings of sadness, isolation, and fear after sessions of “doom-scrolling”. This is because the constant negative exposure and outlook creates those brain patterns in our minds. The negative terms influence to think about things more negatively. This can cause feelings of helplessness, catastrophizes, and making us feel isolated and less connected from the world we live in. Long term exposure to fear and anxiety can lead to levels of depression which can be exacerbated by doom-scrolling in many people.
Which brings us here: How bad is doom-scrolling, really, and what can be done. While not life-threatening, doom-scrolling is harmful to people and can seriously affect their outlook on life. I know I certainly feel feelings of hopelessness if I see too many sad news stories. Constant exposure to a skewed sample of negatively biased news can affect the way we think and interact with the world, increasing depression and overall sadness. While the effect of doom-scrolling varies by person, there are steps that can be taken to mitigate the negative mental health side effects associated with reading the media. Scientific American suggests placing time-limits of around 15 minutes on news scrolling can limit long term negative mental health consequences. Time limits allow our brains necessary breaks from overwhelmingly negative content and can prevent a vicious, doom-scrolling cycle.
Like many people, I want to stay informed about the world. I want to keep up with news cycles, vote informed, and know what’s going on around me and across the globe. But, like many people, I find myself disheartened after reading the news. I find myself clicking on stories motivated by fear and chaos rather than intellectual curiousity or wanting general knowledge. The negative bias in the media is something that can change with attention brought to the issue. The first step is recognizing the negaitve bias is present, and teaching our brains not to internalize the negativity through time limits and critical thinking about media motivations. With change, we can create a news information ecosystem with the right balance of necessary “bad-news” coverage with out manipulating readers with negative click-bait.
