Seeing as we live in an age where information is not always what it seems, I think it’s important to spend some time addressing the way we allow our perception of things to be shaped.
Let’s start basic. If you want to keep up with world events, what’s your go-to method of finding information?
If you’re just looking for wavetop-level stuff, you might check out some of the major networks on TV. Think CNN, FoxNews, etc. Most basic major networks also offer evening or morning news shows. Maybe you want to skim through topics a little faster so you can pick and choose the stories that interest you; in that case you might take a look at news websites instead. If you’re more focused on inflammatory, attention-grabbing topics, and don’t really sweat getting the whole story, you might get your news from social media (and subsequently find yourself outraged at something or somebody).
Here’s the thing. These news outlets, whatever form they come in, have operating costs. They have to pay reporters, editors, producers, webmasters, pay for websites, studios, office space, etc. To cover those expenses, they have to make money somehow. Even if they have the purest of motives and want to be a completely objective news organization, pure hearts don’t pay the bills. They need to sell advertising space.
Now the rule in advertising, whether online, on TV, or in print, is that the more eyeballs view a product, the more valuable that advertising space is. News directors and producers, then, aim to present the news in such a way as to increase the number of people looking at, clicking on, or buying print copies of what’s being presented. That’s why you’ll see an interesting headline and click on it, read the story, and say “wait, that headline was completely misleading!”
Practically speaking, this means stories are going to get prioritized according to their potential to attract viewers. Objective reporting of important stories takes a back seat to ratings. Even if a story is important for the public to hear, it’s going to get mothballed if it’s a snoozefest. What kind of stories get top billing? 1. Things that can be portrayed in a way that causes you outrage (because if you’re outraged, you’re more likely to return and keep watching, which causes you more outrage). 2. Things that are juicy gossip dressed up as news. 3. Things that are salacious, obscene, or grossly indecent. (Funny how these usually involve politicians.) 4. Things that are inflammatory and divisive (with CNN and MS Now usually taking one side, while FoxNews takes the other…think border issues, biological males in female sports, climate change, enforcement of the law, and any kind of prejudice you can think of). 5. Any story that allows the media to continually show pictures or video of an attractive woman on the screen (if she’s somehow connected to a murder, a conspiracy, a kidnapping, some wrongdoing, or anything else deemed sufficient to keep showing pictures of her). 6. Bad news or stories that will shock you. Bad news draws people more than good news does. “If it bleeds, it leads.”
(As an aside, you can see why, if you spend a lot of time watching the news, you’ll probably become angry, depressed, or anxious.)
Notice what doesn’t get covered: the normal stuff that you might actually care about. Every now and then you’ll see a story of a complete stranger stepping in to help somebody, or some kind of pet/critter news, and that will warm your heart for about 15 seconds before they move on to something terrible. The news networks are very deliberate in what they show you. In reality the ideal news model is to present the facts of a story, maybe provide a little context, and let the viewer decide its significance. But no, networks will usually only present the portion of the story that supports the larger narrative they’re trying to advance, then give lots of conjecture and opinion from a panel of “experts,” and ultimately try to shape public opinion rather than merely inform the public. That’s not journalism. That’s using your platform as an information weapon.
Don’t believe me? Don’t you think it’s odd that news networks with global reach and correspondents everywhere can’t cover more than 5-8 major stories in an hour without repeating at least half of those topics from earlier in the day? Even on a 24-hour news cycle? No, the topic list is chosen very deliberately. A strange example of this is the mid-decade redistricting that’s been happening this year and last. If you believe what’s being reported, starting in 2025, Donald Trump began a political war by leading efforts to gerrymander or redistrict multiple states to favor Republicans in elections. What you won’t hear about is how the state of New York started it in 2024 to give Democrats an edge.
So what’s the best way to get news? Honestly, you’re probably going to need to consult multiple outlets. There are a lot of them, and they’ll often try to get a leg up on their competition by being the first to break a story. That’s all well and good, but when speed is your goal, something usually gets sacrificed. They may be the first ones to break the story, but it’s not always 100% correct. I wouldn’t treat a given organization as the consistent winner; they kind of take turns in their ability to do a good job getting everything right. Going back to the importance of ratings, though, they don’t need to get everything right; they just need you to tune in. There’s little incentive to go back and update or correct reporting on a story that broke hours or days ago and has been overshadowed by more recent stories. The result? You get an incomplete (or even incorrect) perception of a story, that inaccurate story anchors itself in your mind, and then by the time you get additional information on it that changes how you digest the information, the world has moved on from it and it’s no longer “news.”
So what’s this mean? It means you can’t trust any single outlet to keep you informed. “Give the facts and let the viewer decide” is not a realistic mantra anymore. Right-wing or left-wing, watching only one will brainwash you and rob your ability to think critically. Know what type of media you’re ingesting. Is it center-right? Center-left? Extreme right or left? I’d recommend staying away from the extremes and sticking with the ones that give the most facts and least opinion. Read the news online (not the social media version) rather than watch it on TV or streaming; you’ll save time and anxiety that way.
There’s a lot of information out there. Be aware of who you’re trusting to give it to you and how much stock you’re putting in it. Honestly, the local news is often more important than what you’ll see on the national networks, so be sure to spend some time keeping up with that, too. In the meantime, even if you disagree with your neighbors or other people in your community on issues you see on the news, they’re still your fellow Americans. It’s okay to agree to disagree. Show them kindness, help ‘em out when they need help, and if you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all. Just because division is en vogue doesn’t mean you have to go along with it.