Living in a Mad World: How Information Shapes Our Reality
How Our Information Diet Alters Our Perception and Stress
The world has gone a bit mad. Venture over to social media and outrage, fear, and discontent are the norm. Smart people have seemingly lost their minds to the algorithm and billionaires are acting like your teenage troll trying to score points with their latest insult. In the real world, it’s not much better. Conspiracy theories run amok. Polarization is at an all-time high. Societal trust has evaporated. And survey’s keep showing us that people feel that safety is on the decline and that crime is on the rise.
During the 2024 election, democrats kept yelling, it’s not that bad! They’d point to crime statistics that showed that murder and violence is on the decline. They’d say that the economy was humming along, with inflation declining, strong GDP growth, and low unemployment. The argument that is was all “vibes” was not successful. And it’s not just that people report feeling this way. They act accordingly. We can see it in our parenting, as the distance kids are allowed to wander from home has evaporated to basically, don’t leave the yard. We can see it in our interactions. Just ask any long-term teacher or coach, who has seen the transition from parents being allies in the education of their kids to adversaries.
We can see it in the increase in zero-sum thinking, where people believe that in order for someone to win, they must push others down. Research shows that this trend is political party agnostic; with republicans and democrats alike adopting it, though with different emphasis. Democrats see it as the rich taking from the poor, while Republicans think immigrants take from non-immigrants. When we adopt a zero-sum mindset, recent research finds we’re less likely to trust and cooperate, more likely to be overly aggressive and hostile to others, and over emphasize short term gains over long term ones. We move from prosocial to antisocial. As one study concluded, “zero-sum view of the world thwarts a society’s ability to flourish by undermining trust and cooperation, with serious consequences for the foundations upon which our well-being and our society is built.” When the world seems zero-sum, we adopt a kind of competitiveness that is ruthless, self-centered, and often over the top. It’s me, not we. In my new book Win the Inside Game, I make the argument that the world has pushed us to turn our threat alarms to 11. We’ve convinced our brain that there are dangers everywhere, and it’s acting accordingly.
Our Information Diet
At the 2013 Boston marathon, Ethiopian star Lelisa Desisa had his breakthrough performance. In only his 2nd marathon, he outsprinted two seasoned competitors to claim victory. This launched Desisa’s illustrious marathon career, which include eight podium finishes at either Boston or New York, as well as a world championship victory in 2019. But it’s what occurred almost exactly 2 hours after Desisa crossed the line that the race is rightfully remembered for.
At four hours and nine-minutes into the race, two bombs went off within sight of the finish line. They were placed by two terrorist brothers, and ultimately killed three people and injured hundreds of others. A horrific and tragic act that shocked the world. Soon after, thousands of police combed the Boston suburb of Watertown, eventually finding the terrorists hiding in a boat. And most of us watched it unfold live. Over 40 million people tuned into the network TV coverage of the final hour of the manhunt coverage.[i] And countless others took to social media to follow along, and in some ways act as citizen detectives; scouring pictures, video, and police scanners for information.
An unexpected disaster sparks stress and anxiety. Our safe and secure world is shattered, especially for those who were in Boston and directly impacted. A 2013 study by Alison Holman, Dana Garfin, and Roxane Cohen found just that. A few weeks after the bombing, they evaluated the stress levels of hundreds of people who had been directly exposed or impacted by the bombing. These were people who were at or had a close relationship with someone who was near the site of the bombing, or suffered directly from the events. Understandably, these individuals saw a significant increase in stress. But those directly impacted weren’t the most stressed in the study.
The researchers also sampled thousands from across the country who had no direct connection. As you might expect, most of the people reported lower stress levels than those who were nearby. But there was an interesting wrinkle. Those from afar who consumed six or more hours per day of coverage of the bombing felt more stress than the folks who were directly impacted. In other words, sitting at home in front of the TV led to higher stress loads weeks later, than if you had a family member or close friend who was at the Boston marathon itself during the bombing. The researchers found a strong direct correlation between hours of media exposure and stress levels. Those who watched 10+ hours had nearly double the reported stress levels than those who watched less than one hour per day of coverage.
While shocking, this shouldn’t be entirely unexpected. The information we consume shapes our expectations for how the world works, shifting both our internal biology and behaviors. When we are inundated with a message that the world is threatening, we start to believe it. A 2008 study found that media exposure explains why Americans tend to see the rest of the world as a dangerous place. While other research shows a link between the amount of crime reported on the news, and the degree of fear people have over crime. A recent analysis found that social media consumption is linked to an increased fear of street violence. It’s not just the feeling of worry, news consumption is related to avoidance behavior as a way to deal with the fear of violent crime.
This effect isn’t limited to crime. A 2021 study in Spain found that the more news participants consumed about COVID-19, the more COVID was perceived as a major risk. Our perception is reality. Regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum, you aren’t immune to a heightened fear or threat response driven by information consumption.
In the 1970s, professor of communication George Gerbner coined a term for similar phenomenon, mean world syndrome. Gerbner found that we have a tendency to see the world as more dangerous and threatening than it actually is, and that it was related to the overabundance of violence on TV. If we are constantly consuming messages that the world is violent and threatening, we believe it.
Modern science tells us why. Our brain is predictive. It tries to prepare for the world it’s going to encounter. That’s the essence of our stress response. If we are constantly inundated with reports that the world is dangerous, our brain’s going to get the message. We update our views and behaviors for that environment. Way back when we were in a local, tribal society, any sort of information that a warring tribe was nearby, or a pride of lions was close, or that our leadership structure was unstable, proved helpful. It told our ancient ancestors whether to be on high alert or that they could relax. For much of our history, there’s been a high degree of overlap between information consumption and what’s actually going on in the world we occupied. In a local world, our perception and action are fairly well aligned.
Fast forward to today, and we occupy a world where that correlation no longer holds. The information we’re inundated with often has little connection with the reality we face on an everyday basis. Add in social media and it takes Gerbner’s mean world syndrome to another level. We not only have news that shifts our global view of the world we occupy, but social media creates a false sense of connection and intimacy. The ‘friend’ on Facebook, Instagram, or Tiktok feels closer than the presenter on the news. After all, we are watching the latter from their home, and can ‘interact’ with them through comments.
Of course, there’s more nuance then just consuming news equals fear. It depends on your prior experiences, expectations, and type of news consumption. But the principle holds. The information we consume plays a key role in shaping our brains predictions. And our brain doesn’t do a good job of separating the local from the global. Of understanding that the person who got robbed thousands of miles away doesn’t mean that you can’t go for a walk around the block.
The more real, authentic, and local the information feels, the greater the impact. It’s why there’s often a discrepancy for national perceptions versus local. In polls dating back decades, people tend to rate far off cities as much more dangerous than their local neighborhood, even if the overall crime rate in both areas is exactly the same. This trend has lasted because of how we utilize comparisons. We tend to rely on outside information when thinking about distant lands. We tend to reflect on our own experiences when thinking about local comparisons. Our information diet is making us miserable and scared. But, that’s only half of the equation.
Living in an Unfulfilled World
How do you handle stressful situations? Maybe you are at the starting line of a marathon, about to step out on stage to give a speech, or facing the impending doom of potentially being rejected after another job interview. We tend to think of stress as a negative, but the biological reality is that stress is to prepare us for the demands of whatever we’re going to face. Our body has a number of different ways to help us. Sometimes we’re inundated with more cortisol and feel jittery and anxious. Other times, our body releases more adrenaline and testosterone, and we feel a touch of angst but more excitement for taking on the challenge before us. Still others, we have this need to affiliate, as oxytocin courses through our body and we have a tend and befriend response. Which way we go comes down to our brain’s predictions. Do we have the resources to handle what’s before us? If you’ve put in the work, done the training, and think you have a shot at taking on that marathon, you’ll nudge more towards a challenge instead of a threat response.
But… it’s more than just our preparation that influences which way we go. It’s our inner security. If our foundational psychological needs are secure and strong, our threat alarm gets turned down. If our inner world is fragile and insecure, our threat alarm becomes hypersensitive. When we feel socially threatened, we’re more likely to be transform into the morality police, being overly judgmental as a way to protect our self. Research shows people are, by far, most likely to fall for conspiracy theories when they feel lonely, overwhelmed, anxious, or lost. Believing in a conspiracy moves us from being uncertain to the illusion of control, from being alone to being part of a special community. Conspiracy theories aren’t about logic or facts. They are about feeling good and eliminating anxiety and disconnection. In the meaning-maintenance model, researchers Steven Heine, Travis Proulx and Kathleen Vohs summed up dozens of theories with a straightforward paradigm: When our sense of meaning is disrupted, we experience a state researchers’ term disanxiousuncertilibrium, which then pushes us to grasp onto anything that gives a sense of control or security. Even if that something is delusional.
Put another way, when our world, self, or pursuits don’t add up, we experience a cacophony of negative sensations, and we do whatever we can to avoid or eliminate that experience. Sometimes that means joining a gang—be it real or online— to fill the void of lacking genuine belonging. Other times, it means trolling online to make us feel a touch of significance in a world that increasingly leaves us feeling less than. We have a self-preservation system that defaults to the quick fix. In my new book Win the Inside Game, I call this living in survival mode. And far too many of us have trained our brains to take up permanent residence here.
We need to train our brains to turn down the alarm. First, that means adjusting our information diet. To realize that a constant stream of junk food is going to make the broccoli seem less appealing. It’s reckoning with the infotainment world we live in, and the impact of the Instagramification of everything. If we keep telling our brain that the world is dangerous, eventually it gets the message. Second, it means helping people obtain the basic psychological needs that move them from insecure to resilient. Abraham Maslow created a hierarchy decades ago. Humanistic psychologist Carl Rogers wrote that we need an environment that provides genuineness, acceptance, and empathy. Golden State Warriors coach Steve Kerr relayed a similar message: "I want to make sure that my guys feel valued, respected, important, and relevant."[ii] In studying meaning in life, existential psychologist Tatjana Schnell simplified to focus on four key components. We need to feel coherent, significant, directed, and belonging.
Whether we like Schnell's, Rogers', or Kerr's paradigm, all converge on a similar theme: They clarify who we are, what matters, where we're going, and where we belong. When we fulfill these needs, we are more likely to see stressful situations as a challenge. When we are lacking, we default toward surviving. In short, when our world and our place in it add up, we have hope. We orient ourselves toward growth.
In nutrition, we are wrestling with the fact that we occupy an obesogenic environment, where everything from our food accessibility and palatability to city designs have pushed us to move less and eat more. We’ve done the same with our inner world. We’ve made quick, attention capturing information the main course, and thrown any deep, meaningful consumption off to the trash heap. We’ve got a world that is hyperconnected, but many are drowning in loneliness because we’ve prioritized superficial fitting-in over genuine belonging. We’ve told a generation that there work should be their source of significance, status, and meaning. And when it inevitably falls short, we wonder why burnout rates are sky high, especially in the caring professions of nursing and teaching.
There are no easy solutions. But if you’re looking around and wondering why the world seems a bit mad, overwhelming, or dangerous, it’s because we’ve created an environment that convinces us the real world is exactly that. Our brain is just doing its job. And in a desperate act of self-preservation, it keeps reaching for that candy bar to temporarily quench that sensation of hunger. It’s a losing battle. We need to deal with the underlying problem.
-Steve
This is an adapted excerpt from my new book Win the Inside Games, which is currently part of 20% off deal. Grab your copy today.