When have you gotten enough news?

I am quite sure that if you are reading this, I do not have to say much of anything about the economy this week. You are probably well-enough informed about the economy. The media has gone into overdrive to repeat again and again the gloomy, dark and depressing messages about recession, stock market decline and unemployment.

I tease with this quirky statement: I found that my life did not essentially change in the past week even with all the bad news.

But first, I have to go back to my favorite object lesson—that borderline and histrionic nurse I work with—Valerie. She came me more pause for thought with the question: when have you gotten enough information?

She had to go to watch President Bush's brief statement yesterday (Friday, October 10, 2008) morning. She announced that she was going to go to the other room to watch it and the other nurse went with her. Valerie came back sounding disappointed and informed those in the office that it was pretty much like his other statements this week. Well, yeah, I figured that.

In my managerial attempt, I made a philosophical comment that the President was trying to calm people down. It did not work because the semi-retired psychiatrist came with his I-phone and they (Valerie and the doctor) had to talk about the economy again.

The interesting part is that she had not heard anything new yesterday. She just kept repeating and repeating things. As I have mentioned before, Valarie has few limits and incessantly obsesses. She has a problem with setting limits and showing some self-restraint. She is constantly worried about missing something and she is a miserable soul for it, but I do not think she is missing anything.

Are you really missing anything?

I, like others, do not want to miss anything. The question is: in the course of a day, do you really miss anything? Anxiety makes us more sensitive and feel more vulnerable as if we have to stay more in touch.

Also, people with lower self-esteem pretty much do not want to look stupid. The effect of the Valeries of this world create the effect that if you do not know what Valerie seems to know, you are stupid. Gee, they need to pay more attention to the media just like Valerie so you are not looking stupid.

Well, just like the media, Valerie is just repeating things. I figure that 10 years ago, I would have gotten sucked in by Valerie.

I think I have grown personally to see through Valerie and I have found the power to choose not to be like her. So, I share with you my knowledge and whether it works for you is for you to decide.

Parsimony

In a grand sense Valerie serves as a metaphor for the media. The media repeats information. In fact, there is a broadcast principle called “Parsimony.” In the context of Broadcasting, “Parsimony” means that information is scarce and must be repeated and shared as much as possible. That is why the cable networks repeat their news commentary shows at least once in a given day—there is not enough newsworthy stuff happening every moment of the day. On top of that, the AP tends to do a number of rewrites of stories throughout a day or weekend to make the old news seem fresher even when the facts have not changed.

When considering parsimony with my term “media magnified informational intensity” (MMII), I think the media is saying the same things over and over through a given day but increasing the sense of distress for the viewer or listener. The media is kind of being like Valerie—making lots of noise and saying nothing much new, but the stress is being increased because you are exposed to it again and again.

The MMII can eventually give you the distorted sense that your life is going to “hell in a hand basket” with all the changes are are implied to be happening.

The different channels of information affect a number of our senses. You see the information in the digital video and audio clarity over and over again. You can feel the stress and immediacy in the stern tone of the anchors and commentators. You can see the vivid contrasts in the amazing graphs created by computers. You can feel the overwhelming emotion. Your stomach and muscles in your head begin to tighten as your imagination explores what could happen to you.

I think that with technology, and new ways of distributing information, the MMII can only get worse.

The essential luxuries

When it comes to news convenience is being blurred with necessity. It is my impression (perhaps a nostalgic one) that prior to 1979 before CNN came on the air, the news was limited to the 6:30 pm newscasts of the big three networks, the radio, the daily newspaper, and the weeklies. Information came at a slower rate because there were truly fewer opportunities to get the message out and the technology was limited compared to now. Now, there are numerous ways to get the message out.

The electronic age created the paradox of “essential luxuries.” The digital age has amplified the paradox. There are more ways to check information and there will be even more ways to check information in future. You can get information in your paper, on your radio, on your TV, on your home Internet connection, and now on your pagers and cellphones. Some people, in their anxiety have felt the need to constantly check all the different sources of information. Well, they do so at their own peril.

Not all on the cable channels is really news

Where I am going with this is that not all information that comes over the different news media is “fact.” Much of the information is nebulous “analysis” or “opinion,” which means it is an interpretation by the pundit or commentator or expert. For the most part, the political and economic news happens between 9am and 5pm. What happens after that are usually car accidents and crimes.

Furthermore the liberal commentators tend to be negative in their analysis (they more like “awfulize”), and what they say is of little practical use to the average person in the first place. (Conservative commentators are also mostly negative.) Commentators discuss what they think you should believe about a situation. The more negative the opinion, the more emotive and inflammatory they become.

Our bodies and minds are connected and I believe thus, increasing numbers of people are going to become sufferers of “Panic Disorder.” Those already having anxiety disorders such as Valerie will only have more panic attacks. They will not be able to pull themselves away from their TV's, I-Phones and Internet. They will suffer from the MMII effect and make themselves paralyzed.

So, I ask several questions. How much news and opinion do you really need to take in? How much do you really need to listen to so you know what is going on? How often do you really need to go to Drudge or Yahoo News to be sufficiently informed?

Some useful questions

There is a difference between being adequately informed and obsessing. I have decided that a few diagnostic questions are in order to decide how much is too much information? Some are pretty nebulous and vague, while some are blunt.

1. How much do I really need to know what is happening?
2. How much was a directly affected by the information on the news?
3. Did I really learn anything different over watching the news show on the cable channel at night?
4. How much new information was really there over the last hour?
5. How much of a consequence did I suffer because I missed the last hour's newscast?
6. Did I suffer any real consequence because I did not watch the news all day?
7. How much better do you really have it than other people?
8. How likely is it that you are really going to end up in the gutter homeless, broke and starving, and be totally abandoned by everyone you know?
9. (Six part) To gain insight about what is real and what is blown out of proportion by the people around you (family, friends or co-workers).

• Who is constantly talking about all the bad news?
• Are they the ones who are talking a lot about awful things and obsessing about the economy and politics?
• Do they ever admit that they are human and are wrong sometimes?
• Do they ever talk about positive things?
• Do they talk to hear themselves talk?
• How much of a control freak are they?

My answers to the questions

The diagnostic questions could go on and on. But I have determined that the news media pretty much chews my food for me. I have been extra busy at my job lately and I have been fine with catching the news once or twice a day. When I have listened to the news over a couple of hours, I did not learn anything new that I could use and I did not suffer any consequence for missing the news the whole day. And yes, Valerie is a control freak who seems to talk to soothe herself by talking loudly right when she comes in and she is hopelessly dwelling on stuff she can nether control nor change making herself miserable.

Concluding comments

You and I will still likely feel the weight of the current economic situation because it is all around us. People in all corners of society will talk about it, but they are saying nothing new. We can only take care of ourselves and no one else.

Okay, lets say you want to be able to fit in your office or at your family and social gatherings. You need something to talk about. I present to you that you only need to read the paper daily (hard copy or online) and one or two newscasts per day and you will be up to date.

If someone asks you a leading question about whether you have heard this or that on such and such a show? And you do not want to look stupid, I have two suggestions:

• No. I have been limiting my intake of news for the sake of good mental health and so far it seems to be working.
• No. I have been reading this really cool blog that suggests that only so much news is really necessary to be sufficiently informed.

Well, that is another note to myself and whoever else cares. Here is wishing yourself and me peace of mind in the midst of this turbulent time. Your feedback and comments are always welcome.

P.S. . . . I have been given what is hopefully my final set of revisions on my dissertation and I will get to defend in mid-November. If I do not write next weekend, please understand—I will be following my own advice in this blog by getting lost in the quagmire that I have been in for three years, and at least I have some hope that it is over soon.

Office conversations: The stock market and the financial crunch is currently the hot topic.

I took notes today about what was going on in one of the departments I oversee at the hospital. The nurses were on a roll. The two could just not stop obsessing over the Stock Market and the financial crisis.

It did not help matters that a certain semi-retired psychiatrist came in with his I-Phone and was checking stocks in the nursing station as part of the discussion. He also went into a history lesson that I felt he was probably ill informed to give to the two nurses including something about 1932 and the Great Depression.

The psychiatrist expressed his concern about the possible slippery slope if the recession became a depression. He felt that it could affect us here in the psychiatric hospital as people might stop coming in for therapy and help. Maybe so but in my observation, it only fueled the two nurses to obsess more--they went on for another 10 minutes.

There was talk about retirement plans and the safety of 403-B's and 401-K plans. There was the sound of panic. Fritz made his comment about his retirement plan is to drop dead at age 60.

I got tired of it and wound up doing an unsolicited fatherly intervention by giving them a copy of a story in today's USA Today about how the economy was bringing on stress. It at least shut them up until lunch time.

I went to the other office I oversee. They were talking about the dog one of the social workers was 'expecting' and 'pregnant with.'

Bizarre but then it was not about the recession and finances. The one who is expecting the dog to be born admitted that it is futile to be thinking about the financial stuff because she cannot control it. In fact she cited how she heard a life coach on the radio talk about focusing on only what you can control is important for mental health.

Bravo. Bizarre is sometimes better. Thinking about baby golden retriever puppies sounds quite obtuse, but the stress level is bound to be much lower than dwelling on the economy at this time.

Next . . .

I listened to the debate between Obama and McCain tonight while I gave the toilet an enema. (True--the toilet snack from walmart did not work, so I had to take it off and take it outside and wash it out with the garden hose).

Obama and McCain are both talking about things not being as bad as people think they will be—a recession but no depression.

In a sense, they are saying the same things. They are giving their versions of hope.

Which label would you prefer? In reality with our congressional system, neither plan is ever going to get passed in its pure form. Furthermore, I honestly think that the economy will straighten itself out before either one of their plans actually gets out of committee.

I have decided that in the last 48 hours, the media has really kicked up the stress level of the country. Yeah, the president has made enough statements throwing gasoline on the fire.

But in reality, we all decide how much we are going to let ourselves get stressed—me included.

I just have too many other things to do than fret over what I cannot control. Making the toilet work was my contribution to my family's and my own well-being tonight.

It was pretty satisfying and reduced my stress level to know I could do something like take it off and put it back on and it still works! No leaks either!

The slippery slope that politicians, media pundits, academics, and histrionic nurses dwell on frequently is rarely the reality. Toilets having problems is much more real and much more resolvable.

More on the weekend.

The rhetoric of our discontent.

The recession rhetoric is coming to a head again. The Labor Department figures came out this past week that 159,000 jobs were lost in September and the unemployment rate is now at 6.1 percent.

I assume that there will be more jobs lost and that there will be more lead stories on newscasts about how bad things are. I assume that there will be a multitude of analysts with opinions about who is to blame.

In addition to all the hard luck stories about retailers hurting for sales and consumers suffering because they will not be able to afford Christmas, there will be a lot of depressing rhetoric stories that will not accomplish anything but fill airtime and irritate and depress people.

Republicans will blame Democrats. Democrats will blame Republicans. Third party candidates will blame the two-party system. The hope is that enough people will buy into someone's argument to vote.

I do not think that everything is Republican or Democrat. When it comes to who is at fault for the recession, the answer is: everyone, but does it really matter? A recession will come around in 2018 or 2019—the economy goes in cycles.

Nevertheless, politicians have a tendency to blame the other party for recessions. It is blame for a political purpose in the here and now.

As it seems to me, political rhetoric in our day and age serves political purposes such as good sound bytes, and zingers to embarrass the other party. I am struggling to recall when rhetoric actually did something good.

Nevertheless, it is the way it is. It is also the way it is that the news media will continue to cover it as a news substitute.

Rhetoric is timeless. It has been around forever. People have been making cheesy and stupid arguments forever.

Rhetoric is someone's argument for some purpose. While it sounds logical, I tend to turn it off. Rhetoric is a form of logic, but it is of little substance. I tend to be rather dismissive of such office conversations around political rhetoric.

Rhetoric is a substitute for real stuff happening. It is like the non-dairy cheese or the non-dairy coffee creamer. Staying in touch with the political rhetoric does not seem to mean actual political knowledge.

There is actually little to know about news events. Rhetoric seems to puff things up to larger than necessary size.

Rhetoric in our current day is usually shallow. It is attached to passion and emotion. Again, it is of little substance so the emotion has to be there to carry it and make it seem like there is something there.

Because of its passion and emotion and shallowness, it is also nebulous. Try to narrow a politician on what they will precisely do in response to the sky falling, and you will likely get them to verbalize an enigmatic and obscure answer about some governmental action that is imprecise and incomprehensible.

You will regret you even asked 99 percent of the time.

Rhetoric usually works best in large groups of people already of the same opinion. Otherwise, rhetoric rarely convinces the other side to go along.

Rhetoric may lead to a “tit for tat” response that gets plays out in news stories and media pundit shows at night. I call this political drama. Some call it “mudslinging” where you are attempting to make the opposition look dirty.

Political drama is essentially wrestling in that gussied up pig sty called the political area. Again, it is stressful to watch, listen to, and read.

Concretely, coping for me in this time means limiting my news intake. Yes, I am currently looking through a “Time” or “Newsweek” and then reading the paper daily.

I look at Drudge Report online at least once a day. I will also listen to the news on the radio.

I just cannot watch morning news shows such as “CNN morning” or “Fox and Friends.” They sit and continue to perpetuate political drama at this time.

One other thing that works is to remind me that rhetoric is just people's opinions. Some opinions are going to be significant and others are going to be insignificant.

For example in today's democratic response to the president's weekly radio message, Ohio Governor Strickland, a Democrat, blamed the Republicans for the economy. Big whoop. (The fairness doctrine gets abused way too much.)

When President Bush or some other nationally prominent Republican blames Republicans for the economy then it is news. Likewise, if a prominent Democrat blames the Democrats for something, then it too will be news that will get my attention.

I guess the other coping issue is “discernment” of rhetoric. I aim to be a person of substance. I aim to discern when something or someone is real.

When someone is using lots of emotion and little specificity in their criticisms or judgments of someone or something, it is rhetoric. Once I hear the nebulousness and the vagaries, I usually turn it off.

You and I will not be able to escape the rhetoric that will be coming in the months to come. It will be everywhere. My message to myself and others is to practice discernment and turn it off as soon as I assess that it no longer has any value.