Let's face it. Ingesting news these days can be hazardous to your psychological health. Between Trump's latest Twitter tantrum, the pandemic, the breakdown of world order and slide toward authoritarianism, myriad ecological disasters, wars, widespread violence and incivility, and the latest data breach and misuse of our private information for political or monetary purposes, we can be overwhelmed with the relentless negativity of it all unless we come up with a strategy to cope with it. Here's mine. Please feel free to offer your own strategy in the Comments Section.
I've chosen to get most of my news these days either from online sources or our local West Hawai'i Today newspaper. "Online" doesn't mean Facebook, Twitter, or any other social media, as I'll explain shortly. I deliberately avoid Broadcast news (aka "the talking heads") except on rare occasions when the show offers an in-depth investigation into a particular topic rather than than the usual sound bites and attention-grabbing images.
My usual morning strategy is to meditate for half an hour (an attempt to prepare for what's to come) then I dive in to the news cesspool by scanning online versions of two of the following: Aljazeera, BBC World News, New York Times, Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal. The limit is just two of these each day because otherwise my head might explode. My sources are chosen to cover a reasonable range of perspectives presented in a responsible, analytic and thoughtful manner. It's often interesting to compare the way the same events are reported in two different sources, for example in terms of the importance given to the event and the context in which it is embedded. In the service of cranial defense I don't read every article, just those I consider essential to stay informed.
I also might read one or two op-ed pieces that are by people I respect
even though I disagree with them. I do this sparingly and with a
fairly high threshold. Examples of my vetted list include Washington
Post columnists George Will, Michael Gerson, Kathleen Parker, Ed Dionne and Fox News Congressional Correspondent Chad Pergram. I've recently added to the list independent commentator and historian Heather Cox Richardson
(thanks to SH for suggesting this source), who publishes a
well-researched daily analysis of the political scene. Although the
choices here are admittedly limited to more or less the center of the
political spectrum, they span enough of a range of viewpoints to
hopefully avoid the echo-chamber syndrome. For example, here are two op-eds that all of us liberals who are convinced Trump is finally on the ropes should read, one by the Post's Kathleen Parker, ("Don't let poll numbers fool you. Trump could still win." and the other by Andrew Mitrovica, ("How is it possible that Trump can still win?)
Following this my wife and I usually take our morning walk through the neighborhood (very calming), then eat breakfast. At breakfast I scan our local newspaper using the same technique of cranial defense as for my online sources.
As soon as possible after each of these masochistic exercises, I reach for two sorts of antidotes. The first is my favorite comic strips, both online and in our paper. Although I enjoy quite a few strips, there are three that for me have the highest antidote level: Bizzaro, Non-Sequiter, and my personal, all-time favorite, Far Side. Note that these selections are a reflection of my rather warped sense of humor, something I have explored before -- see What, Me Worry? These creative and odd-ball observations of the human condition are a blessed relief from the relentless negativity in the news of the day, and for a few moments they allow me to think of something else before I start my day.
The second type of antidotes are various accounts of the latest advances in science and technology, testimony to the fact there may be hope for humans after all. My main sources are a daily email summary of cutting-edge scientific developments presented by the scientific organization Sigma Xi, and news summaries by technology magazines Wired and CNET. Imagine, people who can communicate in complete sentences and who support their arguments with evidence!
That's it. I can't say that all these measures are 100% effective, but I'm convinced I would be confined to a rubber room without them. Stay Safe. Stay Sane. Don't let your brain be hijacked.
3 comments:
Yep, didn't see your earlier announcement or this blog. My avoidance of "News" is spottier and more thorough. I sometimes watch a little while Carole has ABC news on. Mostly I look for a location where I can't hear the news. She watches often. Mostly I mutter away out side. My main "news" source is to record the morning weather as far as I can see it. In fog, not very far, and we've had much fog this spring and summer. On a clear day I see about 200 miles. I record a few data points each day and then I look to see what birds are about and what they are doing. Often I report the bird news to eBird in Cornell. Often I walk a couple miles to do this, sometimes I don't. Sometimes Carole goes too. Then I look at how dry my plants are and I water the ones in dire need and check my records on the others to hit the minimal needs according to me (not too scientific). I catch notices in my email from some of the news sources and if I get interested I follow up, mostly w/ NPR and PBS. I listen to Science Friday sometime the week after on a podcast for science updates. Sometimes a few others. I used to listen to NPR while driving. I don't drive now, for 5 months. Sometimes I watch most the PBS Newshour if there was a really compelling event I want to know more about. Doesn't happen much. I subscribe to Heated which is a radical newsletter on climate crisis issues. It comes out 4 days a week So, I'm generally not well informed. I am generally happy. When I think about world events, national politics and world health I am unhappy.
Head in the sand here.
Love your suggestions for antidotes! Go humor and rationality!
Post a Comment