Would It Be Better If More Good News Was Reported?

News editors decide what to broadcast on television and what to print in newspapers. What factors do you think influence these decisions? Do we become used to bad news? Would it be better if more good news was reported?

This is essentially an undisputed fact that news editors play a crucial role in the broadcasting and printing of news. There’s a famous quote by Adlai E. Stevenson, the American politician and diplomat, which says that the newspaper editors are men who separate the wheat from the chaff and then print the chaff.

Several factors influence the decisions of news editors about the broadcasting and printing of news such as the importance, and relevance, of a particular story, audience interest, ethical considerations, fact-checking, and public response. Regarding whether we become used to bad news, there is a psychological tendency of the human brain to give more weightage to negative news.

The proportion of headlines denoting anger, fear, disgust, and sadness” grabs more attention from the audience than the positive news. However, a balanced, accurate, and unbiased approach is crucial for a well-rounded understanding of current events and their impact on society.


To commence, a news editor is a head honcho in the field of print newspapers as well as digital media. He’s responsible for content selection, headline and lead writing, managing headlines as well as editing and proofreading. He reviews news stories for clarity, coherence, grammar, and spelling, and while keeping in view the public interest and expectations from newspapers.

Several factors influence the decision-making of news editors. First, news editors keep in check the editorial policy of the newspapers and other broadcasting media outlets. Second, the editor has to maintain the relevancy of the newspaper for this he keeps up with current events, emerging trends, and technologies to ensure that the newsroom remains competitive and relevant.



As far as addiction to bad news is considered, multiple studies have been done to analyze that perspective. One of them has shown that headlines denoting anger, fear, disgust, and sadness earn more marketing in the USA.

Moreover, reporting on bad news, in particular, highlighting the issues involving conflicts and disputes is a mere disposition of conflict theory. This theory considers that society is dominated by competing interests and power dynamics. Beyond that, there is a psychological phenomenon involved known as the “negativity bias.”

Negativity bias is actually the tendency of the human brain to give more weight to negative information than to positive information. As a result, bad news captures the audience’s attention more conveniently.

Conclusively, a news editor is ultimately responsible for the content, quality, and authenticity of the newspaper. Besides focusing on the bad news equal attention and space must be given to the positive developments.

The reason lies in the fact that good news not only exerts a positive influence on the immune system and heart health but it altogether serves as a source of inspiration and motivation. Positive news indeed promotes psychological well-being and positive emotions in human beings. In essence, a positive and more balanced approach in journalism can offer a more balanced and holistic view of the planet Earth.

Share This Post:


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *