The Balancing Act

Tyler Lovelace

tslovelace1@gmail.com / tl915117@ohio.edu

This year of 2020 keeps getting stranger and stranger, and the news has done everything it can to keep up with all the new complex situations that rise up every few days. With the COVID-19 breakout, this amplified public awareness even more and has caused several waves of panic to sweep over groups of people.  This leads to outbursts, sometimes random and sometimes not, of people rushing to clean shelves, deciding that bathroom tissue may become the new currency, and a moment later acting like nothing is wrong and beginning the cycle anew again.  This has been both helped and hindered by traditional news and citizen news alike with many of the unfortunate events that have occurred this year.  I have seen it among my own coworkers, family members, and seen it in my surrounding community - and every time it seems to get more absurd. 

"Mental Health", courtesy of https://shop.ucsc.edu/general-health-wellness/mental-health.html

During my time working from home daily, I found myself arguing with my father over his constant observation of the news.  He had it running in his office while he worked every day and then watched it for most of the evening when he finished.  He was consuming the other side of the argument than the one he stands on, which is good that he is diversifying his information intake, but I found myself asking the question time and again: when is it too much?

In the Theory of the Interlocking Public, as discussed by Kovach and Rosenstiel in our readings this week, it was posed that there are at any point three times of viewers to a piece of news - those that are knowledgeable to the situation and have an opinion on it, those that have no opinion and are interested, and those that are ignorant and wish to remain so.  The American Press Institute added on to this summary by adding that in this nature, journalism should be pluralistic and serve "...broad and diverse audience...whose individual members must be able to sort out the truth in order to make personal decisions about their lives and collective decisions about government and society." In this way, it is important to stay up to date on information - especially when we are in the throes of a worldwide pandemic or when vital issues of equality are being rightfully challenged and moved to be corrected.

At the same time, there becomes a point when that idea gets lost in the information overload, sensationalism, and politics.  Several mental health organizations have been outspoken on this topic, and other health professionals, like Dana Rose Garfin of Health Psychology, talk about how this zealous viewing activity leads to anxiety. Additionally, in the same article, Amy Norton reviews some staggering statistics on increased signs of post-traumatic stress disorder from similar viewing habits.

Having seen the messy outcome overexposure has caused in the past few months - and will continue to cause for the foreseeable future - the dialogue needs to shift to discussing how media channels should manage some unnecessary exposure and panic that is sometimes inadvertently or intentionally caused.  While the press has a duty to keep the people informed, they also have a duty to not incite panic through privileged use of First Amendment speech.