Welcome to 2024! I’m willing to bet that this year will be filled with news reports that have the potential to be very upsetting for many people. Can disturbing news be so upsetting that it actually traumatizes people and causes significant increases in stress levels? What about adult TV viewers? Can their stress levels be affected by the saturation TV coverage of real events on 24/7 news networks like CNN, FOX, and MSNBC? Regularly, we see in-depth coverage of mass shootings, horrible scenes of combat carnage and destruction, and gut-wrenching interviews with survivors of trauma. This year, of course, will also include election issues that have the potential to be exceptionally stressful for viewers. At a time when statistics show an alarming increase in mental-health problems, the question arises: “Can frequent depictions of war, murder, and political mayhem on TV traumatize the viewer to the point that psychological problems develop?”
In 2001, Propper and her associates were teaching a course on sleep and dreaming at a college in the Boston area. The course was already underway, and students had begun recording and documenting their dreams, when the events of 9/11 unfolded. Thus, the researchers had an opportunity to assess trauma themes in dreams both before and after 9/11, and to relate them to amount of TV viewing of the 9/11 coverage.
Analysis of students dreams before and after 9/11 demonstrated not only that post-9/11 dreams changed significantly compared to pre-9/11 dreams, but also that the dreams could be linked to amount of TV viewing of the horrific events. After 9/11, dreams contained more threat and danger themes and images, and more negative emotions expressed. These themes, images, and emotions tended to increase as the amount of time watching TV coverage increased. Thus, to the extent that dreaming can reflect efforts to process and resolve trauma and conflict, the authors concluded that extensive viewing of TV coverage of the 9/11 events served to increase trauma and conflict in viewers. It is also of particular interest to note that the students who spent more time talking with friends and relatives about the events of 9/11 did not show these threatening themes and negative emotions in their dreams. This finding is consistent with evidence from clinical psychology showing the therapeutic effects of talking with significant others following a personal trauma.
Propper and her associates believe their results show how media coverage of an event can negatively affect the emotional well-being of viewers. Reporting an event is one thing; saturating coverage with repeated replays over an extended period is quite another. Furthermore, if that coverage makes talking with friends and relatives less likely, then the negative effects of the saturation coverage are greatly compounded.
You might ask, “Should I switch channels when coverage of horrific events is on?” No, at least not all the time. That would be avoidance of facing uncomfortable aspects of reality. Such avoidance on a regular basis would help make you unable to process and cope with troubling realities. Face those realities, but make sure you talk them over with others to help you manage your coping efforts.
Avoiding troubling TV political news, of course, can be easy: Just watch the channel that reflects your beliefs. However, would that selectivity also be an example of avoiding facing uncomfortable aspects of reality? Yes, it would, and in fact it could be more psychologically damaging than simply avoiding all political news. Selectivity of channels would not only allow you to avoid facing messages you dislike, but also would provide you with justifications for doing so. Like total avoidance, adhering to news outlets on a regular basis that support your beliefs and help you both avoid and degrade the unpleasant, will likely obstruct your ability to process, evaluate, and cope with troubling information. Do not be afraid, therefore, to familiarize yourself with positions that run counter to your opinions. Doing will help you accept reality and to evaluate information logically and calmly.
TV coverage of horrendous events, of course, is only one potential source of stress to a consumer. How about newspapers and magazines? The January 22nd issue of Time has a section called, “The Top Risks of 2024.” Included are warnings that: (1) political dysfunction in the US might worsen; (2) the Middle East war could widen and pose risks to global stability; (3) NATO could be drawn into the Ukrainian war; (4) current weather patterns can have negative consequences for world agriculture, disease, energy, and political stability; (5) dictators may continue to upset efforts at cooperation and solidarity among stable nations around the world. Had enough? There are more but you get the idea—this is frightening stuff.
Based on the possibility of these risks becoming reality, would it be reasonable to predict that mental health problems in America will continue to increase; that the use of recreational mind-altering drugs like alcohol and marijuana will surge; and that hostile and aggressive actions among people will proliferate? Maybe so. However, you need not succumb to excessive anxiety about these possibilities. You can arm yourself against emotional upheaval by exercising and living a fairly healthy lifestyle; by educating—not indoctrinating—yourself with verifiable facts; by having healthy, adult, rational interactions with others; by empathizing and understanding the needs of others; by serving those in need; by enjoying nature—hearing the birds chirp, smelling the vegetation, seeing the vast array of plant colors, and basking in the warmth of the sun. Psychological research documents the beneficial effects of these coping tools that are all around you, tools that we know can combat anxiety, depression, and other debilitating feelings. Use them.
Psychology and Stress 