Why Keeping Up with the News ≠ Being Truly Informed

For the first time, less than 40% of adults worldwide have a net worth under $10,000, down from 75% in 2000. Big stories often get lost, even if important. Why news consumption is like entertainment.

For the first time, less than 40% of adults worldwide have a net worth under $10,000, down from 75% in 2000. Now, more people have over $10,000 than under (thanks, Axios and FixTheNews).

Big global wins often get lost in the 24/7 news cycle, which focuses on what's most attention-grabbing rather than what's important.

News that truly informs is less "exciting" - think quarterly or annual updates instead of constant alerts.

New consumption (at least in the US) appears more defined by:

1. A laser focus on individual cases of horror.

I almost always click on news about a nearby murder or a plane crash. But my detailed knowledge of these cases doesn’t mean I can tell you whether these are becoming more or less common.

I’m not really “informed” because I lack context!

Because murders get engagement, the news will always include murders even if there are fewer of them.

If nearby murders stopped happening, the news would highlight the most gruesome state-wide incidents. I’d feel less safe despite actually being safer.

Similarly, wars will likely always be on the news. But to know whether wars or war deaths have increased in recent years, a journalist would have to research that specific question (FYI: war has increased lately as per a Vox deep-dive).

Wars and murders are guaranteed to engage, though crucial big-picture trends don’t.

2. Slant that has become commonplace.

Slanted news is exciting because it promotes our worldview and paints the other side as out of touch. The fact that the Olympic caterer increased their order of eggs got a lot more traction than the worldwide wealth shift.

People like sharing things that signal to others the beliefs they feel very invested in.

The worst aspect of this, though, is that this can make the status quo seem like a crisis, where the sane reaction appears to be to lose trust in humanity.

Consider the recent case of a Kansas teacher fired for sharing a QR code linking to banned books. This spread like wildfire in left-wing circles because it highlighted that red states censor library books. This spread in right-wing circles under the headline that the fired teacher shared "porn" with students.

The reality? The QR code led to Brooklyn library’s list of commonly banned books, which are often restricted for various reasons including sexual content, but also racism, violence, profanity, and LGBTQ themes.

Both sides are technically saying the truth, but neither side shows what the other side is seeing.

People underestimate how much they have in common with people of the opposing parties - and this is likely a big reason why.

We don’t talk about slant enough.

By understanding the limitations of our news diet, we can better interpret the world around us.

If you’re curious about alternatives to daily news outlets, I recommend checking out:

AllSides, which shows identical stories through different political lenses, showing how right, center, and left outlets frame the same events.

GroundNews, which is similar, but also shows what news pieces aren’t covered at all in left, center, or right wing outlets.

Vox, which focuses on big-picture trends and positive news stories.

FixThe News, the weekly newsletter that covers positive big news like how close humanity is to eradicating another disease.

These issues with our news worsen polarization and public trust. I’ll get into the impacts of this in my next post(s).