Avoiding outrage fatigue while staying informed

I've been an avid news consumer since ~2016 and early on I remember getting very outraged at articles, tweets and other pieces of news I read. Over time I realized that these articles want you to be outraged, and that the outrage is a form of control.

Over time though I picked up on these "outrage triggers" and that's helped me be much more objective about news I'm reading. I'll be reading an article and I can usually pick up the "tricks" writers use to generate outrage. I often find myself reading an article and go "oh look you want me to feel outraged right now".

Nowdays when I try to be informed about a story I will read an NYT report, a CNN report, a Fox News or other right leaning report, and then maybe one from DailyWire of Bannon's War Room. Skimming every article I often see spots where the outlet is trying to outrage their readers. NYT will report something that will outrage the left and as you "go right" on the reports you will start to see outrage directed to the right.

I’ve generally found that overtly biased outlets on the right aren’t a huge source of outrage for me because their spin is so blatant—once I notice the propaganda, it’s easy to tune out. The bigger frustration is knowing how many people take that coverage at face value. It’s not quite the same “outrage” the article describes, though.

By contrast, the NYT often feels more subtle and therefore more effective at stoking that sense of constant agitation. They’re meticulously fact-based, but their editorial choices—what they highlight, the framing they use—can seem designed to provoke a reaction rather than just inform. It’s not only about the content of the stories; sometimes it’s also about how they present or prioritize them. If you haven’t encountered this firsthand, checking out “NYTimes pitch bot” on Bluesky can illustrate how their style can veer into outrage territory. It’s a satirical account, but it often points out the patterns in the Times’ headlines and story angles that might otherwise go unnoticed.

You're absolutely correct, but you're missing an important detail.

I'm assuming you're more aligned politically with the left. If you're not, I apologize for the assumption. To someone who is more right-wing, the bias of e.g. NYT is just as blatant as Fox News is to you, and Fox may come off as "fair". This is because the propaganda is specifically intended to land with their own audience. It's tuned to your sensibilities.

It's very much a "fish in water" scenario. Trying to read articles from multiple sources can help, and questioning why you agree with one take over another. In the end, these are pretty sophisticated operations, and they know how to prey on their targets.

> NYT is just as blatant as Fox News is to you

After this past election cycle I don't see how people can make that comment with a straight face.

Media in general is very right leaning. Some like CNN and NYT are maybe slightly more left than far right fox news, but there aren't many "left leaning" mass market news sources that are essentially felating one party for millions of people.

NYT and CNN, etc are all very critical of democrats when there is a controversy. This is stark contrast to fox news which essentially is willful ignorance of anything bad republicans / trump has done.

The "normalization" of Trump's corruption by media in general should be enough to see which way they lean.

Its just that if anybody is slightly less than full blown fox news conservative they get labeled as left leaning by everyone in the media so there is some idea of "balance" but conservative media (fox news, conservative podcasts, etc) are overwhelmingly mass market and the majority.

Interesting to be around for the birth of a false fact like "the media is right leaning". Overnight you see people start parroting something that's clearly untrue.