I think the 24 hours news cycle likes to promote a whole lot of situations as the end of the world. Evolution means our brains are primed towards assessing, watching and processing threats much more than we do positives, and with PTSD that goes to a whole new level.
The 24 hours news cycle is basically about selling advertising space. You can often tell what angle the news segment will have just by seeing what the advertisements are on the show. It is not about providing quality, in depth, incisive, intellectually stimulating and promoting citizens engagement in their democracies (or whatever) it is about blowing things out of proportion, it is about all or nothing thinking - you are for or against us rather than you might not be interested in this situation and be thinking about something else, it is about magnifying situations beyond their impact with faulty science,
it is about making money for the advertisers. In fact if you are familiar with all of David Burns' distorted cognitions, quite a few appear on a regular basis.
In Australia, despite the scientific evidence the media keeps on with the "question" of climate change, when other countries around the world are putting programs in place. Neoliberalism in Australia means approximately 1 in 5 jobs in the CSIRO have been axed and we no longer have a Minister for Science because of the inconvenient truths.
If you watch the news in Australia you would sometimes think we are at imminent threat of a terrorist attack, but in actual fact 15 people died from terrorism in Australia in a 10 year period whilst 22,852 (or 22,825 can't remember) died from suicide in the same ten year period.
Fear and anxiety have their uses for capitalism, consumerism, social control and the ways in which a society will allow things to happen. There are bigger discourses at play here.
There are so many times, throughout history, that people thought the end of the world had arrived, our historical period is no more important and no less important than other periods of history.
Could clear and concise debate, which is reality based backed by solid research help the world, I believe so, but will we get it, I am pessimistic on this front, there are vested interests. This is not to say that there are not serious threats that we as individuals, communities and nations have to deal with but I don't think it is as over the top as it is portrayed.
You are much more likely to die from suicide or domestic violence than you are from terrorism but the billions are not spent on mental health or breaking the changes of domestic violence. But you would never know that from watching the news.
I would suggest
@Justmehere of limiting your exposure of the news - and perhaps go print based from reputable sources, rather than watching random televisual displays which may or may not be reality based.
I wish you did not feel in such as way as you did when you started this thread. I would argue in the negative and say no, WWW3 has not begun, except perhaps, in the minds of news and producers and news executives with the subsequent exploitation by advertising agencies and executives.
