Ratio of Good news : Bad news
Sandeep, an avid reader of Tehelka recently refrained from picking up another of their issue as it was filled with 'bad' news. He goes on to pose a question. If this were to happen more frequently would 'bad' news never see the light of day?
The answer? No.
As humans we have a fascination for the 'morbid', in varying degrees.
Take Chanel for example; She asks, ' Why are we so fascinated with the “bad” stuff?....We cling to every heartbreaking clip, every shocking picture, and every nauseating piece of news, forcing ourselves to sit through a blow-by-blow account of what happened, what is happening, and the implications of everything that has happened thus far. It leaves us feeling sad, sick, angry, upset, and every other conceivable negative emotion, and yet we still watch.'
The 'average' person, I guess, to a certain extent, needs his dose of 'bad news'. The problem starts when its an overdose, and then the laws of economics apply. Too much of supply, too less of demand. Now does that mean there is an optimum level of 'morbidity' to be maintained while reporting news? If there is; how much is that? Can news people be guided by such a measure? Or should they just report news, not considering the content?
These questions have no easy answers. But note that too much of sugar coated, syrupy stuff is again met with disdain. Maybe its all about telling it as it is. Or maybe its not. The jury's still out on that.
The answer? No.
As humans we have a fascination for the 'morbid', in varying degrees.
Take Chanel for example; She asks, ' Why are we so fascinated with the “bad” stuff?....We cling to every heartbreaking clip, every shocking picture, and every nauseating piece of news, forcing ourselves to sit through a blow-by-blow account of what happened, what is happening, and the implications of everything that has happened thus far. It leaves us feeling sad, sick, angry, upset, and every other conceivable negative emotion, and yet we still watch.'
The 'average' person, I guess, to a certain extent, needs his dose of 'bad news'. The problem starts when its an overdose, and then the laws of economics apply. Too much of supply, too less of demand. Now does that mean there is an optimum level of 'morbidity' to be maintained while reporting news? If there is; how much is that? Can news people be guided by such a measure? Or should they just report news, not considering the content?
These questions have no easy answers. But note that too much of sugar coated, syrupy stuff is again met with disdain. Maybe its all about telling it as it is. Or maybe its not. The jury's still out on that.
Comments