The news, our perceptions and beliefs

Shannon Bohrer

(2/2024) Our world can seem small in that so much of what occurs is reported daily, sometimes even hourly, and often as an event is happening. The news and other newsie sources feed us information twenty-four hours a day. I remember going to libraries while gathering research for college papers, and today, much of that same information can be found on my phone. We have access to more information than we could ever use, yet a steady firehose of information is sometimes not enough. You would think that having so much information would be satisfactory. However, sometimes, the information we seek is not for the purpose of learning but to confirm what we think we already know.

While experiencing the news, listening, watching, or reading, we are also aware that we have a diversity of news sources and outlets. With the theory of information freedom, one can find facts and opinions from multiple sources. The diversity also allows many to pick and choose the news source(s) they want. The issue with many of the sources is that no matter what you believe, you can find a news site that supports that belief. Conversely, one is also able to find information that contradicts one’s beliefs. As an example, if you research the pandemic (COVID), you can find documentation of false and misleading information. The false and misleading information was not just prevalent but widespread. No matter what you have read or been told, science is real.

Many of the news sources are social sites and not really news sites. Of course, we do have some national news outlets that are really in the entertainment and opinion business. And many of these sites are often disguised as news. Many of these sites are myopic, only reporting their own opinions and views. Trust in these sites is usually limited to individuals who believe what they are hearing. Conversely, the distrust for the same sites is often founded in the distrust of the sources themselves. Even the mainstream media, the primary and historical national news programs, have often been referred to as the Lame Stream Media, inferring they should also not be trusted.

"If Tell me what I want to know, I will believe you."

The diversity in the world of news is reflected in our divisive society, including our politics. Most people understand the differences between the political parties; at least, what they think and believe are the differences. For many people, the differences are so obvious, and not in a good way; they see the other party as the antithesis of immorality. These beliefs add to our divisive views and are often reinforced by news sources that present slanted and or distorted information. So, is the news source responsible for our beliefs, or does the news source reflect our beliefs?

Since we see ourselves as a divided nation, should we not expect divisive politics? In the past, there were politicians from both parties who worked together on projects that benefited everyone. Of course, to accomplish those tasks, members of both parties had some common beliefs. The belief that government works for the common good of the citizens, which today almost seems nostalgic. Yes, they had differences, as we all do, but they acknowledged the differences and focused on what they could accomplish - together. Today, parties often appear so separate and distinct, and the atmosphere resembles a hostile environment. For some, you must win, even if it requires lying. However, as Franklin Roosevelt said, "Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth,"

While we know that our differences are reflected in society, how do we acknowledge and resolve our differences? Another question we should ask is, do we want to? If we continue in our current direction, what will our future look like? If the past is prolog and nothing changes, what does our future bode?

Mark Twain was reported to have said, "if you don’t read the newspaper, you’re uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you’re mis-informed." If true, when the only news of the day was a paper, no one was informed. His quote could be used today, substituting different news sites and sources. However, which sites and sources would you use? A friend of mine once said that they had a great distrust of the mainstream media. The friend went further, saying they had a distrust of all media. Does that mean that the friend is uninformed?

Earlier, it was said that some people choose where they receive their news, providing the news fits with their beliefs. In this model, we are not turning to the news to be informed but rather to confirm what we already believe. Of course, a steady diet, from one perspective, does not inform anyone but only reinforces their currently held beliefs. Why are we afraid of hearing another perspective? Are our beliefs so strong that we automatically dismiss any contrary views?

Social psychologists, and they do exist, have studied this behavior. They say that people can have such strong beliefs that even when confronted with facts that discredit their position, they ignore the facts. It is as if the contrary facts do not exist. Social psychologists refer to this as "belief perseverance." One's beliefs can be so strong that people sometimes hold tight to their beliefs, even when confronted with facts that discredit their position. When individuals have firmly held views, information that challenges those views can be ignored. Political debate is a good example of "Belief Perseverance" since both sides often deal with the same facts, but the information is filtered differently.

While our world seems small because of the fire hoses of news, the world is also large because of the diversity of information available. Our political and social differences appear similar to tribal culture, but that does not mean that we as individuals should remain uninformed.

"You must always be willing to truly consider evidence that contradicts your beliefs and admit the possibility that you could be wrong. Intelligence isn’t knowing everything, it’s the ability to challenge everything you know," - Author unknown.