Media Influence, Extremism & Decision Making

Part 1

What are the psychological effects of media influence on decision making, especially when people want to make a correct decision based on their common sense and moral values but are constantly exposed to media messages that undermine or challenge their choice, and that conceal or distort the positive outcomes of their natural decision?

Decision making is the process of choosing among alternatives based on preferences, goals, and values. Media can influence decision making in various ways, such as providing information, framing issues, shaping opinions, and setting agendas. Media can also affect the psychological well-being of people who have taken a correct decision, but are constantly exposed to negative or biased messages that question their choice.

According to some studies, media influence can have both positive and negative effects on decision making and psychological outcomes. On the positive side, media can provide feedback, validation, and support for people who have made a correct decision, and help them cope with uncertainty, regret, or stress. Media can also enhance self-efficacy, confidence, and satisfaction with the decision. On the negative side, media can induce doubt, confusion, and anxiety for people who have made a correct decision (in their heart & mind), and make them feel insecure, guilty, or ashamed. Media can also undermine self-esteem, trust, and happiness with the decision.

The impact of media on decision making and psychological well-being depends on several factors, such as the type, content, tone, and frequency of media messages, the characteristics of the decision maker, the nature and importance of the decision, and the availability and quality of alternative sources of information. Some people may be more susceptible to media influence than others, depending on their personality, motivation, cognitive style, and emotional state. Some decisions may be more sensitive to media influence than others, depending on their complexity, uncertainty, reversibility, and personal or social consequences.

To reduce the negative effects of media influence on decision making and psychological well-being, people can adopt some strategies, such as:

- Seeking balanced and credible information from multiple sources, and critically evaluating the accuracy, relevance, and bias of media messages.

- Being aware of their own preferences, goals, and values, and sticking to their original decision unless there is new and compelling evidence to change it.

- Seeking support and feedback from trusted and knowledgeable people, such as family, friends, experts, or mentors, who can provide positive reinforcement and constructive criticism for their decision.

- Focusing on the positive outcomes and benefits of their decision, and avoiding dwelling on the negative or counterfactual aspects.

- Practicing self-compassion, gratitude, and optimism, and acknowledging their strengths and achievements related to their decision.

Part 2

How does media bias, especially when it is driven by an extremist ideology, affect the decision making and psychological well-being of the general public? How can people resist or overcome the negative effects of media bias on their judgment, emotions, and behaviour?

Media bias can have a powerful effect on people's decision making and psychological well-being, especially when it is aligned with an extremist ideology. According to some research, media bias can affect people's attitudes, beliefs, emotions, and behaviors in various ways, such as:

- Making them more susceptible to persuasion, manipulation, and propaganda.

- Making them more polarised, intolerant, and hostile towards opposing views or groups.

- Making them more prone to cognitive biases, such as confirmation bias, self-serving bias, or groupthink.

- Making them more anxious, depressed, or angry about the state of the world or their own situation.

Some people may start feeling guilty or regretful about their own decision if they are constantly exposed to media messages that contradict or criticise their choice. This can make them ignore or downplay the positive outcomes or benefits of their decision, and focus on the negative or counterfactual aspects. This can also make them doubt their own judgment, competence, or morality, and undermine their self-esteem, confidence, or happiness.

However, human understanding of things is not necessarily weak or irrational. People can also resist or counteract the negative effects of media bias by being aware and intuitive.

Part 3

How can extremism and media bias be countered on a large and massive scale? How can the masses be addressed and educated in such a scenario? What are the best strategies and practices to reach out to and influence the public, given the practical limitations and challenges of individual communication?

This is a very complex and important question, and there is no simple or definitive answer. However, based on some research, I can suggest some possible strategies to counter extremism and media bias on a large scale, such as:

- Developing media and information literacy skills among the public, especially young people, to help them critically evaluate the sources, content, and purpose of media messages, and to recognize and resist propaganda, misinformation, and fake news.

- Supporting independent, diverse, and credible media outlets and journalists, who can provide accurate, balanced, and relevant information to the public, and expose and challenge extremist narratives and media bias.

- Promoting dialogue, tolerance, and respect among different groups and communities, and fostering a culture of peace and democracy, where people can express their views and grievances without resorting to violence or hatred.

- Engaging and empowering local voices, such as civil society actors, religious leaders, women, and youth, who can offer alternative and positive narratives to counter extremism and media bias, and who can influence and inspire others in their social networks and communities.

- Collaborating and coordinating with national and international partners, such as governments, NGOs, media organizations, and academic institutions, who can share best practices, resources, and expertise on countering extremism and media bias, and who can monitor and evaluate the impact and effectiveness of different interventions.

Countering extremism and media bias is a long-term and multi-faceted challenge, and it requires a holistic and adaptive approach that takes into account the specific causes, dynamics, and consequences of each case.

Part 4

How long does it take for ordinary people to become accustomed to extremism? How can hatred and propaganda become normalized and accepted as a survival strategy by some people? How can biased information from various media channels impair the common sense and rationality of some people, and for how long can this kind of intoxication persist in the masses?

These are very difficult and sensitive questions, and there is no definitive or universal answer. However, based on some research, I can try to provide some general insights.

- The time it takes for normal human beings to get comfortable with extremism may vary depending on the individual and the context. Some factors that may influence this process are the intensity and frequency of exposure to extremist propaganda, the personal and social motivations for joining or supporting an extremist group, the perceived benefits and costs of doing so, and the availability and attractiveness of alternative options.

- Hatred and propaganda can become a normal thing for some people to accept it as a part of their survival, especially if they feel threatened, marginalized, or oppressed by another group or system, and if they believe that the extremist ideology offers them a sense of identity, belonging, or empowerment. However, this does not mean that they lose their moral compass or critical thinking completely. Some people may still experience doubts, guilt, or remorse for their actions, and some may eventually disengage from extremism if they encounter positive influences or experiences that challenge their views or values

- The biased sources of information from various channels can make the common sense take a backseat for some people, especially if they are exposed to them repeatedly and uncritically, and if they lack media and information literacy skills to evaluate the sources, content, and purpose of the messages. This can lead to cognitive biases, such as confirmation bias, self-serving bias, or groupthink, that can distort their perception of reality and reinforce their extremist beliefs. However, this does not mean that they are immune to counter-evidence or alternative perspectives. Some people may still be open to dialogue, learning, or change, if they encounter credible, respectful, and constructive communication from others.

The duration and intensity of this kind of intoxication may depend on the individual and the context as well. Some people may remain loyal to the extremist ideology for a long time, while others may gradually lose interest, disillusionment, or dissatisfaction with it. Some people may also face external or internal pressures or opportunities that may prompt them to reconsider or renounce their extremist views or actions.