4 ms·
I think we become victim to selection bias in reporting. There’s not much reporting when it’s just a beautiful day. Or even better than average over a longer th
by hcurtiss 5y ago
I think we become victim to selection bias in reporting. There’s not much reporting when it’s just a beautiful day. Or even better than average over a longer than average time. That leads one to conclude it’s all going to hell, when in fact the real problem is we have increasingly real time knowledge of all the disasters everywhere across the globe.
- jmfldn 5y agoGood point. I don't doubt climate change or anything like that but the world seeming bleaker now than in previous times is, at least partly, a function of selection bias. In the past, even a news-hungry person would consume a daily news show and a daily newspaper at most. News consumption was very constrained even for the news fiends. Now we have realtime global news 24/7 coming at us from everywhere. Furthermore some of this tech is bi-directional so it amplifies the negative catastrophic stuff as it increases engagement / eyeballs and therefore money. It's a classic vicious circle (or a virtuous one if you're on the side making money from it!). It's an insane information environment out there if you choose to over indulge. If you're not careful you're constantly assaulted by an avalanche of negativity, and the world can start to feel very dark indeed. It's really not though. People from my generation (old millenial / young gen X) often hark back to the 1990s as some sort of halcyon age, but imagine if we had today's tech then. Imagine the 90s refracted through today's tech / media landscape. I bet we'd have felt differently about it.
- fouc 5y agoIt's not just "increasingly real time knowledge" though.. The number of disasters are actually up.
- zz865 5y agoOr is it just because there are more people now? Someone posted the other day about how number of people dying is much lower than 100 years ago.