Over the last few years I’ve begun to curate my social media and content feeds so that I bypass the bulk of the negative, triggering posts and materials.  That’s not to say that I’ve created an echo chamber that caters only to my worldview, but I’ve intentionally started weeding out messaging designed to provoke a response.  So what’s the difference?

Most objective observers of culture would agree that media has (d)evolved.  There was once only a handful of same-story outlets for ‘facts’, ideas and beliefs.  The Internet has created a fabric of sites, feeds, and streams that anyone can contribute to.  This is good (sort of).  Having power over the outlets for information and ideas concentrated in the hands of a few was never a great thing.  There was zero innovation and zero diversity of thought.  But what we have now may not be better. 

Social media and news sites are a cacophony of blaring voices.  Media and journalism appear to have abandoned any sense of balance and objectivity.  It’s all about narrative, and the bias is not the least bit hidden.  Click-bait headlines are designed specifically to elicit an emotional response (and drive ad revenue).  Provocation, not information, is the new goal.  And I’m not sure we even have a diversity of thinking.  What we call ‘news’ is the same reflexive ‘follow-the scoop’ or ‘amplify the narrative’ sort of thing we got from the NBC nightly news or 60 Minutes.  

If the new way of things isn’t really different, why is the Internet realm different?  Because we now have millions of shrill voices from the extremes of culture, anyone with anything moderate or reasonable to say gets cancelled by one side or the other.  There are still no balanced viewpoints and even less civil conversation.  Everything is a moral imperative, and if you disagree (from either side), you are ‘the problem’.

So far, this all sounds pretty bad, right?  It doesn’t have to be.  I’ve muted the blaring voices (even amongst my friends).  On social media, it’s simply a click.  In person, it’s as simple as pointing out that there are two sides to every issue, and in most cases, they are both partly to blame for the problem and neither has a corner on the truth.  I haven’t watched TV news in 20 years.  I don’t have to participate in the news/hype cycle.  

Online, as in life, balanced perspective is key.  I had to learn to see things for what they are, not what everyone is all upset about and claiming they are.  If I got wound up about every issue that someone says is an existential threat to humanity or society, I’d be exhausted.  And a lot of people are exhausted.  I like to be informed.  But about real facts.  Not hyperbole and not emotional screaming.  Narratives are like bodily functions.  Everybody has them, and they’re typically not shared well.

As the world moves on (and it will), I hope we all learn that holding our virtual hands over our ears and screaming isn’t how we make the world a better place.  Following those who would constantly stimulate our adrenal glands won’t make your life (or anyone else’s) better.  Regurgitating talk radio (am I dating myself?) or podcast feeds about ‘what’s wrong with the world’ won’t endear you to anyone who isn’t wed to the same narratives.  We need to see the world through better eyes and listen with more compassion.