Clara Landler
"We need to take a closer look at the way (negative) news is presented in the media, as well as the frequency of contact with the news, to prevent people from being influenced by negativity."
From the Is the news making us unhappy? study, 2019
You arrive relaxed in the arrivals hall at the train station in your city and look forward to arriving home relaxed. Already there, however, images of the most recent catastrophes flicker on info screens, which are hard to resist. One drama follows the next, rising new corona infections alternate with natural disasters, reports of wars, terrorist attacks, assassinations and corruption scandals. There seems to be no escaping the urgency of the negative information overload – and no answers to the question “What now?”.
This phenomenon has numerous backgrounds, which have been extensively investigated by a wide variety of scientific disciplines. The results are often contradictory and sobering, and there are hardly any findings that are considered to be reliable. What is certain, however, is that the selection of what becomes news arises in a complex field of dependencies. To put it simply, it can be said that the media have to finance themselves and in this context are centrally dependent on politics and business. The more readers that can be reached, the better the chances of being able to secure financing.
Brain primed for danger
In order to attract as much attention as possible as quickly as possible, the principle was followed for the longest time: "only bad news are good news". That negativity works excellently in this respect has a lot to do with the way our brain works. It is assumed that, due to evolution, the rapid recognition of danger represented a key survival advantage and that our brain is therefore shaped accordingly.
Especially our oldest brain regions such as the brainstem and the limbic system (especially the hippocampus with its strong connections to the amygdala) react rapidly to emotional stimuli and stressors. All impressions that could mean danger or salvation already lead to reactions long before our other parts of the brain have time to sort the information so absorbed. Not only do we all have the reflex to react more strongly to negative things, it is also well documented that negative information is processed faster and more intensively than positive information and is usually remembered better. This phenomenon is called “negativity bias”.
Only strong emotionality offers a comparable effect. They can also be used to focus attention quickly and intensively. We are touched by what comes close to us. If something is far away, it automatically plays a subordinate role for our brain. The more directly we feel affected, the more intensely we react. Images therefore have a stronger effect than words, for example. They create the illusion of spatial proximity.
The reporting also follows this logic. Local news can sometimes be “positive”. A firefighter known to everyone in town could be newsworthy in a local paper when he or she rescues a neighbor's kitten from a tree. However, if an event is far away, stronger incentives such as surprise or sensation are needed in order to be classified as relevant in our brain. These effects can be observed excellently in the world of tabloid media, among others. However, this logic has far-reaching consequences for world affairs and for us as individuals.
We perceive the world more negatively
The resulting focus on negative reporting, among other things, has clear consequences for each and every individual. A tool that is often quoted regarding our perception of the world is the “knowledge test” developed by the Swedish health researcher Hans Rosling. Conducted internationally in over 14 countries with several thousand people, it always leads to the same result: We assess the situation in the world far more negatively than it actually is. On average, less than a third of the 13 simple multiple choice questions are answered correctly.
Negativity - Fear - Powerlessness
Now it could be assumed that a negative perception of the world could also increase the willingness to change something and to become active yourself. The results from psychology and neuroscience paint a different picture. Studies on the psychological consequences of negative reporting show, for example, that after watching negative news on TV, negative feelings such as anxiety also increase.
A study also showed that the measurable effects of negative reporting only returned to the original state (before news consumption) in the study group that was subsequently accompanied by psychological interventions such as progressive relaxation. The negative psychological effects persisted in the control group without such support.
Media negativity can also have the opposite effect: the feeling of powerlessness and helplessness increases, and the feeling of being able to make a difference is lost. Our brain goes into a "mental crisis mode", our biology reacts with stress. We don't learn what we could do to change something. We learn that there is no point in confronting each other.
Being overwhelmed makes you immune to arguments, coping strategies are everything that creates an illusion of security, such as: looking away, avoiding the news in general ("news avoidance"), longing for something positive ("escapism") - or even support in a community and / or ideology - up to conspiracy theories.
Negativity in the media: what can actually be done?
Solutions can be found on different levels. At the journalistic level, the approaches of "Positive Journalism" and "Constructive Journalism" were born. What both approaches have in common is that they see themselves as a counter-movement to the “negativity bias” in classic media reporting and that both rely heavily on solutions based on the principles of “positive psychology”. Central are therefore prospects, solutions, ideas on how to deal with the diverse challenges of an increasingly complex world.
But there are also individually more constructive solutions than the coping strategies mentioned above. A well-known approach that has been proven to promote optimism and reduce the "negativity bias" can be found in the so-called mindfulness practice - which has also found expression in numerous therapeutic approaches. It is always essential to create as many opportunities as possible to consciously anchor yourself in the "here and now". The techniques used range from breathing exercises, various forms of meditation to physical exercises. With a little practice, one of the main causes of excessive demands and the resulting helplessness can be counteracted in the long term - at least as long as the cause of the individually experienced stress can actually be found outside and does not go back to deep-seated earliest imprints: the often so all-encompassing stress experienced in one's own body , which constantly accompanies our society today.
Photo / Video: Shutterstock.
