-
TheMadFool
13.8kI've heard people say "no news is good news" which I construe stems from recognition of the fact that newsreporting is heavily skewed in favor of bad events or people with the formula being, the worst gets the most coverage.
Perhaps some studies may already have been conducted to assess the general trends in newsreporting but I'm unaware of them. I wonder if good news is getting more media attention (these days) but the belief that this isn't the case hasn't gone away. People still think that no news is good news.
Do we blame the media for this bias? Not really; after all the media's prime directive is to feed the people what they want. If people want to see bad news then the media will simply have to oblige.
So, what's up with us then? Why are we, literally, begging for bad news? I'm no psychologist but aren't people who're drawn to bad events and people diagnosed as having some kind of mental pathology? I think people would be reluctant to associate with someone who's obsessed with the "dark side" of (human) nature, and yet everyone seems to act like a moth to the flame of bad news. Surely, if we're to be consistent, all of us, with zero exception, are mentally ill as evidenced from our media viewing/listening/reading histories.
I'm only offering an opinion on the matter and would like to hear your own opinions and/or the actual truth of the matter. -
Frank Apisa
2.1kIn a capitalistic society...that mostly is true. In a capitalistic society, newspapers and media are attempting to gain readership and viewership in order to make (or help make) profits.
Bad news sells...so there is lots of motivation for it.
In socialistic societies...the need for readership and viewership (with a profit motivation) is greatly lessened...and they tend to get MUCH less bad news and MUCH more good news. -
IvoryBlackBishop
299
Most is marketed to the 6th grade reading level, and just considered "short form" information which at most is a "poor man's" or "lazy man's substitute for reading full-length books anyway.
Much as how it's well documented that "negative" or "sensationalist" nonsense in the news sells to the lowest common denominator as cheap entertainment, while at the same time having negative social effects such as causing people to "catastrophize" and assume paranoidly that negative events disproportionately happen, in part due to the "negativity bias" hardwired into us for survivalistic reasons which tends to prevent or work against rational or intellectual thought, in favor of emotional reactions, silliness, superstitious behavior easily seen and documented in "junk food news" addicts.
Much of it is basically just the intellectual and other equivalents of the National Enquirer (e.x. reporting on every single Trump twitter post for the chagrin of superstitious people isn't "news" to begin with). -
TheMadFool
13.8kIn a capitalistic society...that mostly is true. In a capitalistic society, newspapers and media are attempting to gain readership and viewership in order to make (or help make) profits.
Bad news sells...so there is lots of motivation for it.
In socialistic societies...the need for readership and viewership (with a profit motivation) is greatly lessened...and they tend to get MUCH less bad news and MUCH more good news. — Frank Apisa
Well, that doesn't mean bad news lacks appeal in socialist societies. As I said the problem isn't with the media but with the people and whether you're a socialist or a capitalist or any other "ist", you are "people". -
unenlightened
9.2kI've heard people say "no news is good news" which I construe stems from recognition of the fact that newsreporting is heavily skewed in favor of bad events or people with the formula being, the worst gets the most coverage. — TheMadFool
I think it stems from happiness. For those of us that are so fortunate as to be in good health, in reasonable security, and have enough of essentials and so on, news. as in something new, is unlikely to be an improvement.
If on the other hand war pestilence and starvation are your everyday, then something new might be welcome. -
Frank Apisa
2.1kWell, that doesn't mean bad news lacks appeal in socialist societies. As I said the problem isn't with the media but with the people and whether you're a socialist or a capitalist or any other "ist", you are "people". — TheMadFool
My point was that in some societies...GOOD NEWS is more abundant than BAD NEWS. In most capitalistic societies (freer societies) more bad news abound than good...because bad news does sell newspapers...and increase viewership.
If you think not...fine with me. -
Congau
224Well, very often good news just isn’t interesting, not even for positive minded people like you guys. Good news is just normality hence no news is good news. Every day, thousands of airplanes take off and land all over the world, but you don’t want to see it reported in a newspaper, do you? “Good news! Flight DL527 landed safely at Heathrow today!”
What kind of good news is there that you don’t see enough of? Sport news is always good news since someone has always won, so if you are into sports, you should get your share. In other news, celebrity gossip is often good news, reporting on romance and happy weddings, so if that’s your cup of tea, you are well covered.
But how could you expect an abundance of good news in the more serious sections? Politics is about problems and about the continuous efforts to solve them. Occasionally there will be solutions, but they will never be final, and more problems are always waiting at the doorstep. How could it be otherwise?
There have actually been attempts to publish newspapers exclusively for good news, but they must have been full of terribly boring sunshine stories without much substance. I don’t think I would subscribe. -
BC
13.5kWhat people want is not 'bad news' or 'good news'; they want interesting news. In some fields (@Congau mentioned sports where there is at least 50% good news.) Science and technology reporting often involves interesting--therefore 'good'--news. Art, drama, film, and book reviews often involve interesting 'good' news: the art, play, film, or book were interesting, good, and worthwhile. Business news is quite often good news, and even when stocks fall, short sellers are happy.
Whether "good news" or "bad news" dominated depends on the source of your news. Local news stations tend to follow the "if it bleeds it leads" formula. The PBS News Hour doesn't use that approach. Neither do "leading" newspapers like the NYT, WSJ, and so on.
9/11 was, of course, very bad news. But the destruction of the World Trade Center twin towers was also absolutely fascinating. It provided interesting news for a long time. Bad news might be the same as good news. -
TheMadFool
13.8k"negativity bias" hardwired into us for survivalistic reasons — IvoryBlackBishop
Politics is about problems and about the continuous efforts to solve them — Congau
I think it stems from happiness. — unenlightened
What people want is not 'bad news' or 'good news'; they want interesting news — Bitter Crank
@IvoryBlackBishop, Congau, unenlightened, BitterCrank:
In line with IvoryBlackBishop's "survivalist reasons" and Congau's, "politics is about problems" and unenlightened's, "I think it stems from happiness", a theory about the issue takes shape:
It seems that the underlying assumption people have about society is basically that society is running smoothly (harmonious society) with particular emphasis on its moral aspects. This state is considered normal and thus wouldn't fall under the category "interesting" for BitterCrank.
Since a harmonious society is necessarily good, and people assume this is the norm rather than the exception, there is nothing "interesting" about good and ergo, it fails to be newsworthy.
If so, the primary concern for people should be when society malfunctions in some way, especially where moral issues are at stake, and so instinctively or deliberately people are on the lookout for bad news both literally and figuratively. The attraction for bad news, although may reflect some psychological issues, is actually the sign of a healthy society trying to identify its own problems and find solutions for them.
My point was that in some societies...GOOD NEWS is more abundant than BAD NEWS. In most capitalistic societies (freer societies) more bad news abound than good...because bad news does sell newspapers...and increase viewership. — Frank Apisa
Then according to my theory (above) such a society is actually in trouble: there's so little good happening, that good becomes newsworthy. -
ssu
8.5k
Again a great day as nuclear war between the US and Russia or between other countries hasn't happened!!!? Why are we, literally, begging for bad news? I'm no psychologist but aren't people who're drawn to bad events and people diagnosed as having some kind of mental pathology? — TheMadFool
Hooray for Mutual Assured Destruction, which has kept us from starting WW3! :up:
(Also today and yesterday she and others didn't turn the key. Even if she's ready to do it!)
Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.
Categories
- Guest category
- The Lounge
- General Philosophy
- Metaphysics & Epistemology
- Philosophy of Mind
- Ethics
- Political Philosophy
- Philosophy of Art
- Logic & Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Religion
- Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Language
- Interesting Stuff
- Politics and Current Affairs
- Humanities and Social Sciences
- Science and Technology
- Non-English Discussion
- German Discussion
- Spanish Discussion
- Learning Centre
- Resources
- Books and Papers
- Reading groups
- Questions
- Guest Speakers
- David Pearce
- Massimo Pigliucci
- Debates
- Debate Proposals
- Debate Discussion
- Feedback
- Article submissions
- About TPF
- Help
More Discussions
- Other sites we like
- Social media
- Terms of Service
- Sign In
- Created with PlushForums
- © 2024 The Philosophy Forum