Dinner conversation went down hill when the conversation drifted to an upcoming election. An old friend began promoting a candidate who claimed things were very wrong in this country and that he was the person to fix them. I acknowledged there were things in need of fixing but suggested the candidate was distorting facts to promote his candidacy. My friend, an intelligent and normally amiable individual became angry and refused to consider ideas contrary to those of his candidate. We spared a bit but, fortunately, were able to let good will prevail and ended the evening still friends.
Days later I found myself reviewing the evening. I wondered why my friend so willingly accepted his candidate’s words. Even when presented with contrary evidence, he wouldn’t budge. When I asked where he got his information, he mentioned a cable TV network. Recalling this conversation, I realized I had found the problem. Many media outlets carelessly spew out information that includes truth, half-truths and mis-truths in equal amounts. The result is confusion over what to believe. My friend found his solution by simply adopting the views of a cable TV organization. This is dangerous. Licensing and libel laws once encouraged information providers to make a serious effort to verify the truth of things they disseminated. It’s different today. Information providers readily include thoughts of individuals and groups with agendas that are more self-serving than truthful. Some of them even hide behind wonderful sounding group names such as “People for (you fill in the blank).” In doing this, they are relieved from personal responsibility for the validity of what is said. Outrageous claims often result. At one time we had information verifiers (usually editors of highly reputable magazines and newspapers) whom we could trust to separate truth from biased or down right fictional claims. The media revolution of the past fifty years however reduced their number. New players including under informed Internet bloggers and malicious groups from overseas now use broadcast, cable, satellite TV, radio and especially Internet sites to distribute often malicious exaggerations, sensationalized reports, biased interpretations and out and out lies. The few fact checking services that still exist are hampered by the sheer volume of material to be checked. As a result we have world-wide information fuzziness. Truth is made to appear false and the reverse. Exaggeration in the selling of ideas and products is not new of course. It’s the stock and trade of politicians, businesses, religious groups, fanatics and special interests. I doubt even these folk would have predicted the degree of information manipulation we see today. Media manipulators know people are intrigued by out of the ordinary things. This is especially if there is a hint of danger involved. As a result, information providers often use this tendency to attract viewers and advertisers. They seek to trigger a viewer’s, listener’s or reader’s survival instinct as a way to get attention for their messages. This explains the current broadcast and newspaper emphasis on negative rather than positive stories. Negatives grab attention. Editors and news directors may say they are only responding to the demands of their audiences but they know capturing attention means greater profits. Advertising rates are usually based on the number or people reached. The late theologian, Emmet Fox, observing these negative media trends in his own era, suggested users keep two things in mind. Positive ideas, feelings and experiences come from love. Negatives originate in fear. He advised his readers to focus their attention on positive ideas and happenings. They may not meet mass media attention getting criteria but certainly make life more enjoyable. Fox’s love/fear thoughts leads me to suggest things we can do when faced with negative media. Ask yourself if what you’re hearing, reading or seeing is consistent with what you know to be true. Consider whether it might be an attention getting ploy from a business, political, religious, interest group or individual trying to influence thoughts and actions. Don’t be a news “junky.” Limit news exposure to once or twice a day. Avoid commentary and opinion programs. These presenters earn their keep by attracting viewers thus they often suggest untruthful negative thoughts to garner attention and audience numbers. Engage in personal thought control. Positives are easier to achieve when our focus on what we want rather than what we fear. Let go of us versus them thinking. Smile and say hello to people you don’t know. Build bridges not barriers. Don’t lock individuals or groups out of your life. Check your thoughts and feelings regularly. Your emotional state will help you recognize if you’re living on the positive or negative side of life. Emmet Fox said, positives come from love and negatives from fear. Decide what you want and act accordingly. What are you thinking?
0 Comments
|
AuthorDr. Kent Voigt is an educator, chaplain and author. Archives
September 2021
|