Wired for the negative

Reading the news, one can easy to feel the world is falling apart.

But is it? Or is it us, thinking things are worse than they are?

When a major plane crash happens, the front pages worldwide scream, “Plane crashed in XYZ.” And if you have a flight coming up, seeing this can make you freeze.

It’s well-documented that negative news has a stronger emotional impact on us. This makes bad news live in our heads rent-free while the good stuff fades.

Skewing news to be more positive won’t work. Bad news IS important news. We want to read it. The news site City Reporter found that out when they ran only good news for a day. They allegedly lost two-thirds of their readership.

As Hans Rosling says in Factfulness: “Fears that once helped keep our ancestors alive, today help keep journalists employed.”

I stopped reading the news many years ago. I’ll skim the headlines to stay informed but only read the news that can impact my family and me. But I’ll also search for opposing information to better understand the broader context. This helps me avoid the negativity trap we’re all wired for.

But what if the news reported on negative events in a broader context? Imagine this headline: “Plane crashed in XYZ. 100,495 other planes landed safely today.” It looks weird, but would it change how we process bad news?

I don’t know.

Reducing the emotional toll of bad news with more thinking feels far-fetched. Emotions run on their own, while thinking requires energy and effort. That’s why we run most of our lives on auto-pilot. Thinking is hard work.

Still, it would be interesting to see. Who knows, it might change things.