news

Tuesday November 1, 2022

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday November 1, 2022

U.S. Headlines Expressing Anger, Fear, Disgust, and Sadness Increased Hugely Since 2000

About 42 percent of Americans now actively avoid news coverage, according to the Reuters Institute’s 2022 Digital News Report. That’s up from 38 percent in 2017. Nearly half of Americans who’ve turned away from the news say that they are doing so because it has a negative effect on their mood. As it happens, a new study in the journal PLoS One tracking the headlines in 47 publications popular in the United States reports that they have trended decidedly negative over the past two decades. 

Coincidence?

June 12, 2019

In their study, the team of New Zealand-based media researchers used a language model trained to categorize as positive or negative the sentiments of 23 million headlines between 2000 and 2019. In addition, the model was finetuned to identify Ekman’s six basic emotions (anger, disgust, fear, joy, sadness, surprise), plus neutral, to label the headlines automatically. Using the 2019 Allsides Media Bias Chart, the publications were ideologically categorized as left, right, or center. For example, The New Yorker, the New York Times Opinion, and Mother Jones were identified as left; National Review, Fox News Opinion, and The New York Post as right; and A.P., Reuters, and The Wall Street Journal as center. (Reason was pegged as right-leaning.)

After turning their language model loose on the millions of headlines, the researchers found “an increase of sentiment negativity in headlines across written news media since the year 2000.”

June 5, 2012

Overall, the researchers find that the prevalence of headlines denoting anger since the year 2000 increased by 104 percent. The prevalence of headlines denoting fear rose 150 percent; disgust by 29 percent; and sadness by 54 percent. The joy emotional category had its up and downs, rising until 2010 and falling after that. Headlines denoting neutral emotion declined by 30 percent since the year 2000. Breaking these down by ideology, headlines from right-leaning news media have been, on average, consistently more negative than headlines from left-leaning outlets.

Why are negative headlines becoming more prevalent? “If it bleeds, it leads” is a hoary journalistic aphorism summarizing the well-known fact that dramatic, even gory, stories engage the attention of news consumers. In other words, journalists are supplying news consumers with what they want. Given the global reach of modern news media, there is always some attention-grabbing horror that occurred somewhere that can be highlighted between weather and sports on your local TV news.

November 4, 2020

Journalistic catering to people’s negativity bias ends up misleading a lot of their audiences into thinking that the state of the world is getting worse and worse. However, looking at long term trends, the opposite is the case. Yes, yes, there are wars in Ukraine, Ethiopia, and Yemen and, of course, a global pandemic during the past two years has killed around 6.5 million people so far. “For reasons I have never understood, people like to hear that the world is going to hell, and become huffy and scornful when some idiotic optimist intrudes on their pleasure,” wrote economist Deidre McCloskey. “Yet pessimism has consistently been a poor guide to the modern economic world.” (Continued: Reason) 

 

Wednesday October 7, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday October 7, 2020

‘Highly symbolic’: Canada’s Annamie Paul becomes first Black party leader

October 14, 2015

Annamie Paul, the first Black person to head a mainstream Canadian federal party, said on Monday that her victory was a sign that politics could become more inclusive.

Paul, a 47-year-old Toronto lawyer, beat seven other contenders to win the leadership of the country’s Green party late on Saturday.

“It is highly symbolic and highly important that I sit here today,” she told a news conference in Ottawa.

“What I bring is hope to all the people who have not seen themselves represented in politics to this point, hope it’s possible we can have a more inclusive style of politics.“

Paul is the second person of color to head a federal party in Canada after Jagmeet Singh took over the left-leaning New Democrats in 2017.

The prime minister, Justin Trudeau, has frequently said there is a need to address what he calls systemic racism in Canada.

Paul faces several challenges. The Greens have only three legislators in the 338-seat House of Commons and she herself is not a member of parliament.

February 3, 2017

Paul will contest a special election in the parliamentary constituency of Toronto Centre later this month but that seat is likely to be retained by the ruling Liberals. She came in a distant fourth in a bid for the same seat in a federal election last year.

The Liberals, who have only a minority of seats in the House of Commons and rely on the support of other parties, look set to govern with the New Democrats and therefore do need the backing of the Greens.

Paul said Canada faced two great challenges: the coronavirus pandemic and global warming.

“The climate emergency is and remains the existential crisis of our times and we cannot forget about it because it has not forgotten about us,” she said. (The Guardian) 

 

Wednesday October 31, 2018

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday October 31, 2018

What this year’s topical Halloween costumes tell us about the darkest fears of modern life

In 2018, traditional Halloween costumes simply don’t cut it. Vampires and witches are so uninspired, so overdone. You want real horror? Try looking outside.

October 27, 2005

Perhaps this explains why Halloween costumes are taking a turn for the topical, and why the New Yorker’s Emily Nussbaum attended a party this weekend dressed in the scariest costume she could think of: the New York Times’ midterm election poll. Other sightings include the usual array of Donald Trumps, multiple Ruth Bader Ginsbergs and the literal death of democracy.

This is nothing particularly new. A New York Times article from 1998 lists faddish Halloween costumes like Monica Lewinsky, Woody Allen, and Lorena Bobbitt, while Lewes in Sussex has long been famous for burning effigies of characters, from the pope in 2005 to Angela Merkel in 2012. But in recent years this seems to have crossed over into the mainstream. Last year, at the height of #MeToo, there seemed to be a clutch of ever-present Halloween “handmaids” wherever you went. While this is the third consecutive year that “Brexit” has been a viable (and common) outfit choice of outfit.

What does this tell us about our fears? The bad news is that our fears are so front and centre that you can dress as Trump, or a nation’s voting intentions, or the concept of institutionalised sexism, and people will understand. This ubiquity only really happens in times of genuine crisis. The good news is that these costumes are an act of rebellion. By dressing as “our fears”, we are mocking them. And by mocking them, we are diminishing them. As Stephen Colbert says, you can’t laugh and be afraid at the same time.

October 31, 2008

But few things are as dull as a Halloween party full of ultra-partisan topical costumes. Within seconds of entering, you know exactly how all the conversations will go. You will spend your evening having your ear bent off about some half-remembered statistic from the news, while wishing you could slink off and get drunk with the attendee dressed as Sexy Super Mario. It is good to wear your stripes on your sleeve and all, but Halloween should be stupid. Let’s keep it that way. (Source: Guardian) 

 

Tuesday August 21, 2018

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday August 21, 2018

Provincial government’s assault on democracy deserves jeers not cheers

You’ve got to hand it to Premier Doug Ford, and even if you don’t, he’ll provide the hand — as in a round of applause — himself.

April 1, 2017

Not content with arbitrarily slashing the size of Toronto council and cancelling regional chair elections already underway in York, Peel, Niagara and Muskoka, Ford recently took another broadside against democracy by limiting the number of questions he and his ministers will take during Queen’s Park news conferences to five and drowning out any additional media queries with loud clapping from dozens of government staffers.

At Ford’s announcement of $25 million to help Toronto combat gun violence on Aug. 9, journalists present noted that 50 provincial employees milled about for an hour or so until it was time to provide the premier and Attorney General Caroline Mulroney with an unhindered exit.

For some reporters it may have felt like déjà vu as similar shenanigans had been employed a week prior when Social Services Minister Lisa MacLeod announced plans to end the province’s Basic Income Pilot program.

According to Cynthia Mulligan of CityNews, after Ford and Mulroney left following the Aug. 9 news conference, most of the staffers scurried away themselves and showed little interest in answering questions about their reasons for being there. One of them did, however, let slip they were there on the taxpayer’s dime, which raises all sorts of questions, chief among them: how does permitting 50 government employees to stand around for an hour to clap like trained seals on cue fit with the pledge to reduce waste and make life more affordable for Ontarians?

While we’re at it, how does employing a “journalist” to rhyme off a collection of government-approved highlights in a series of taxpayer-funded videos via the Ontario News Now online channel square with the election promise of greater accountability and to be “the government for the people”?

Although both the Ontario News Now and “clap out” tactics began during the election, the fact the government seems intent on keeping them — and using our money to fund them — is deeply disappointing. Even Deputy Premier Christine Elliott seemed vexed by the clap out, and said she’d discuss it with Ford.

Someone should and remind him democracy isn’t a nuisance that rears its head every few years when the election writ drops. Democracy is about being accountable to the citizenry, and part of that entails answering questions from journalists who are there as proxies for the voting public.

Here’s hoping the government hits the “pause button” it’s so fond of on the clap out and other similar strategies. After all, open and transparent government is something we can all cheer for. (Source: Newmarket Era) 

 

Friday July 28, 2017

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday July 28, 2017

White House reveals Trump only decided on transgender ban yesterday

President Donald Trump sent out a series of tweets Wednesday morning saying that transgender people wouldn’t be allowed to serve in the U.S. military ‘in any capacity’ with no plan in place for active duty transgender personnel.  

February 3, 2017

‘This was a decision based on what was the best for the military and military cohesion and on the counsel of his national security team,’ said White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who was bombarded with questions about the ban at a televised press briefing.

With no details available, she offered no immediate assurance that a transgender service member wouldn’t have to get sent home from a deployment in a place like Afghanistan.

‘That’s something that the Department of Defense and the White House will have to work together as implementation takes place and is done so lawfully,’ Huckabee Sanders said. 

‘The implementation of the policy is going to be something that the White House and the Department of Defense have to work together to lawfully determine.’

Her comment came after a flat-footed Pentagon spokesman told reporters asking for details about the new policy announced on Twitter to ‘call the White House.’

Huckabee Sanders said Trump reached the decision ‘based on consultation that he’s had with his national security team’ to reach the conclusion.

She repeatedly cited ‘unit cohesion’ as the reason, and batted back inquiries about Trump’s campaign statements to be there to protect gay, lesbian, and transgender Americans.  

‘When the president made the decision yesterday, the secretary of defense was immediately informed, of as were the rest of the national security team that had been part of this ongoing conversation,’ said Huckabee Sanders.

‘Sometimes you have to make decisions and once he made a decision, he didn’t feel it was necessary to hold that decision and they’re going to work together with the Department of Defense to lawfully implement it,’ she said.(Source: Daily Mail)  

 

SaveSave