With the advent of the 24-hour news cycle, the ‘Breaking News’ syndrome becomes far too common nowadays. — Photo from pexels.com
THE launch of Channel News Network (CNN) by media mogul Ted Turner on June 1, 1980 in Atlanta, Georgia of the USA, gave the world its very first 24-hour television news station.
With this, our human perception and reception of the news changed forever.
At its inception, CNN had 1.7 million subscribers – today, it reaches more than 425 million homes in seven languages on television, digital and mobile devices.
With the introduction of the 24-hour news cycle, came along the term ‘Breaking News!’, with 1991 and the Gulf War being the watershed moment as the syndrome had struck a chord and audiences worldwide became hooked on continuous live news updates.
After Sept 11, 2001, cable networks began overusing these ‘Breaking News’ banners for even minor events to retain viewers.
Social media and smartphones (post-2009) then turned passive readers into active participants, making news such an addictive and endless cycle.
However, you may not be aware that the term ‘Breaking News’ is not new – it had first appeared in 1877, and had referred to ‘breaking the casing’ of a fixed printing press to insert a ‘last-minute update’.
The advent of the radio in the early 1920s had allowed the public to hear about events without having to wait for the newspaper; thus began the news ‘breaking into’ regular programming to create the first live interruptions of urgent important news items.
With such common overuse of the ‘Breaking News’ syndrome, many of us who are avid readers and followers of world news – be they political, economic, social, medical or in the field of the arts and entertainment – have been ‘over-exposed’ and even ‘addicted’ to such a point that it worries modern scholars and critics.
There has also been a significant decline in journalistic standards among certain quarters as the primary aim and mission of the media seemed to be driven more by an intense competition for high ‘Television Rating Points’ (TRPs), rather than in reporting intrinsic genuine newsworthy content.
A suggestion that many who report the news seem to seek a sense of sensationalism, coupled with whatever vested hidden agenda and political interests have persisted.
Accusations are also common that this shift towards bite-sized ‘urgent updates’ has made it harder for audiences to engage in real and deep sustained thinking about whatever topic or subject being highlighted.
Networks have also been using dramatic graphics and alert sounds to trigger what is termed a ‘cortisol loop’ in viewers; thus, keeping them in a constant state of alertness towards ‘news as they break’.
Probably the most serious of the many charges being made by critics is what is called the ‘Mean World Syndrome’ – a term, coined in the 1970s, which suggests a cognitive bias whereby constant exposure to violent or negative news makes people see the world as a more dangerous place than it actually is in real life.
It is that old popular saying: “If you say it often enough, it makes it so!”
There are simple ways to respond positively to such ‘doom-scrolling’ (another term used to describe the habit of continuously consuming negative news or distressing content), which often appears on social media or news websites and can often lead to feelings of anxiety, helplessness and negative perceptions of the world at large.
These are some useful aids:
- carefully choose reliable news outlets that provide balanced perspectives;
- focus on the positive and constructive stories with news that are fair and balanced;
- allocate a specific amount of time for consuming news each day, and avoid excessive scrolling;
- curate your social media feeds by unfollowing accounts that primarily or often share negative or sensational news;
- designate specific times during the day to check the news, and try not to refresh your feeds too much;
- turn off notifications to reduce temptations to check on a very frequent basis;
- find other activities to engage in such as reading, exercising, listening to music or hobbies, that can divert your attention from mindless scrolling;
- seek positive news, and be mindful about the news you consume and how it affects your mood;
- balance the negative with the positive stories and foster within yourself an optimistic, positive outlook on life in general.
I agree with fellow journalist and writer Simon Brooke, who wrote about this subject: “The truth is, though, that negative, even frightening ideas grab our attention.
“It’s mainly due to the part of your brain called the amygdala, the area that handles the powerful ‘flight or fight’ mechanism.
“This is what has kept us alive since we were the animals by warning us very rapidly and powerfully of any approaching danger.
“The good news that you read might be interesting and helpful but you’ll respond more quickly and profoundly to bad news, to risks and dangers.
“That’s why words such as ‘risk’, ‘fear’, ‘row’, ‘fury’, or ‘scare’, feature so often in media headlines. Get this fired up, and you’ve got my attention.
“Bad news is also attention grabbing because it’s unusual – the man bites dog story.
“Most of the time, things work OK. All the planes land safely at the airport; people have the correct treatment in hospital; and we all go home from work to our families without killing them (tempting though it be, sometimes).
“So when something goes wrong, it’s out of the ordinary and it ticks the all-important unusual box of the newsworthiness criteria.”
We are all attracted to reading the ‘bad news’ and they fire up our imagination, arouse our animal instincts, and give rise to that self-appraisal and innermost feelings: “I am so lucky that it wasn’t me!”
