Bad News Brains: How to Cope with Too Much Negative News
From distant conflicts and extreme weather to political upheaval and economic worries, the world is full of stressful events. New research from the Reuters Institute 2025 Digital News Report reveals that a significant percentage of the global population is opting out of following current events altogether.
One reason everything can feel so bad and urgent is that our brains are wired to alert us to danger. “The brain that paid attention to threats was the brain that survived,” explained Dr. Ali Jasemi, a developmental psychologist and lecturer at the University of Waterloo. In his article in The Conversation, “Why 40 per cent of people are avoiding the news, according to a psychologist," Jasemi shows how that survival instinct now collides with social media, podcasts, other online platforms, and 24/7 news channels.
Behind the Brain Science
For better or worse, humans evolved to give more weight to bad news. This is known as negativity bias, meaning the human brain pays closer attention to negative input than to positive information, attends to it more quickly, and remembers it longer. In the past, ignoring a threat meant a messy end, and overreacting resulted in a few moments of wasted vigilance. Hence, the threat response became the default reaction, reinforcing why negative news stands out so strongly.
In addition, bad news was local and relatable. News from afar didn’t necessitate immediate action. But due to the rapid expansion of communication infrastructure and media platforms, bad news now reaches us more quickly and constantly. It’s a deluge of negative input that our brains still view as immediate threats.
The Negativity Bias in Action
A study in Nature titled “Negativity drives online news consumption” shows exactly that. Lead authors Claire E. Robertson and Nicolas Pröllochs found that negative words in headlines drove higher engagement with news stories, while positive words decreased engagement.
Furthermore, each additional negative word in a headline increased consumption by 2.3 percent, showing how negativity bias shapes what people choose to read.
Researchers have coined the phrase problematic news consumption (PNC) to provide a framework for this tendency. As Jasemi explained, PNC results in preoccupation, dysregulation, and disruption to daily functioning, with 17 percent of American adults showing severe levels of PNC. The impact of news fatigue on minority populations may be even higher.
Tune In Differently
As tempting as it may be to disengage completely, Jasemi said that ignoring the media isn’t the answer. Strategies to help your brain adapt are available, and the goal is to manage exposure rather than avoid news altogether.
For example, confine news consumption to certain times of day, preferably when you have time to process what you are reading or watching. Another strategy is to choose depth over volume. Instead of trying to read about everything, pick a news item that feels especially relevant and explore a longer-form piece of information. Also, avoid “rage bait” media from content creators who depend on provoking viewers rather than informing them.
Finally, distinguish between information and action. Bridging the gap between awareness and agency depends on you finding a way to determine if you can act on what you are learning. Even small steps—writing an email to a politician, donating to a cause—can help regulate your brain’s danger response and turn awareness into something useful.
Dawn Patton Mangine is a Thermo Fisher Scientific staff writer.
Discussion Questions
- Discuss some sources of news for you and your family. Do you think those sources are trustworthy? How often do you tune into social media?
- What are ways you can help your brain and body regulate their reactions to the news you are consuming, especially if it’s negative?