Of course, news websites and social media make it almost impossible to avoid the constant stream of major political events and horrific images of war.
In fact, all the horrific geopolitical predictions, and the images of people crying in front of corpses in war zones, leave a mark on one’s mental health.
A 2021 study concluded that viewing news of the coronavirus pandemic for just two minutes was enough to kill a person’s sense of optimism and lead to an “immediate and significant decrease in positive affect.”
“From a mental health point of view, one should stay away from these things for a while, especially images,” recommends Nathalie Krah, a member of the Professional Association of German Psychologists.
Nora Walther, professor of psychology at FOM University of Applied Sciences of Economics and Management, says: The fact that people are likely to be more attracted to seeing bad news is evolutionary.
“We click on disaster news headlines to search for information that protects us from a potential threat,” she added. “But if a person constantly surrounds himself with only bad news, there is a danger that he will no longer be able to think positively,” she added.
Compulsive desire
A 2022 study also concluded that there could be a link between a compulsive desire to read news and health problems.
For example, those affected by “problematic news consumption,” meaning they check the news uncontrollably, find it difficult to disengage from it, and continue to think about the events they read about long after they occurred.
Brian McLaughlin of Texas Tech University, one of the co-authors of the study that followed the Corona pandemic, says: “Seeing these events occur in the news can cause a constant state of alert in some people, enhance their motivation to monitor to the maximum extent, and also make the world seem like a dark and dangerous place.” “.
But, how can a person deal with what he reads, hears, or sees on social media in order to protect his mental health?
When a person sees a post with horrific images, it is common for them to search for more information, articles or publications. Since he seems to be seeking to confirm what he saw, he is searching for more pictures and information to support the validity of what he saw. This endless reading of negative news on the Internet is known as “destructive browsing.”
Natalie Krah suggests 3 solutions. The first is to avoid watching photos and videos. For the sake of mental health, one should not continue to search for disturbing images or videos on social media as they cause more psychological pain than written information.
The second solution – from Krah’s point of view – is to communicate with those close to him. This allows one to unburden oneself, share one’s feelings, and learn how others deal with horrific things in the news.
The third solution is to question the motives of those broadcasting the content. If a person follows certain groups on social media channels, he must always ask himself for whose benefit these images are being circulated. Is it an issue he wants to support? If the answer is no, he does not have to share it.
This does not mean that one should completely stop accessing news and information, as in the end it is important to help form opinion.
Stubborn attitudes
Sometimes, people’s attitudes are stubborn. How can one deal with this matter if it occurs within one’s family, close circle, friends, or co-workers?
This has been common since the height of the Corona pandemic, as some supported obtaining vaccines, while others rejected them. But there is a different movement now, where we share preferences and interests with other people before we form positions on current wars.
Here, Kara also suggests 3 solutions. First: If one cannot reach agreement on political differences, whether the war in Ukraine or the Middle East or both, one can stick to less divisive topics as long as the other person is able to do so as well.
Second: Critical examination of one’s positions can lead to rapprochement, as many differences of opinion reach an impasse not because of the substance but because of the reluctance of the parties to admit their mistakes.
The third solution is to realize whether irrelevant matters are fueling the disagreement. A person may be under a lot of pressure in the family or at work, and he vents his anger by sticking to his position regarding this war or that matter – strictly – when the issue is raised.
If conflicting positions on policy develop into heated arguments, what is the best way to calm the situation?
There is no golden rule for this, and if there is a failure more than once to reach common ground, it can be agreed that the two parties will not agree on this matter and put it aside. One might say, “Our feelings have gotten the better of us. Let us withdraw all the insults we have uttered.”
One must realize that calling someone stupid simply because of a difference of opinion is immature.