Thank you kindly for your warm response; most welcome indeed. I think one of the grand challenges for media is that we’re physically and chemically wired with an innate negativity bias, part of the inescapable condition of being human. Thus anything that smacks of untempered optimism activates our biochemical red flag system.
The current media, however, has exploited this doom-bait hack to maximum effect, supersaturating content with the triggers that fire our negativity response and keep us wondering whether we have enough pasta to survive the first few weeks of a general nuclear exchange. It’s addictive, and while it keeps us entertained, it doesn’t help us make better choices about the future. On a slight side tangent, one quick way to estimate whether the content is education or entertainment is to ask whether it helps you make choices about the future.
Regards your comment,
“I’m not sure there’s room for general purpose optimistic, progress-oriented media beyond the current players right now. But I could be wrong!”
I would say that I think there’s still enormous room for improvement and innovation. As I’ve said many times, we’re at the bottom of the s-curve for innovation in progress studies, not the top. What we think of as established progress media platforms are just in their infancy, and the best is yet to come. I think it would be incredible to build out a “Pivot” concept website that works off this theory, and I suspect it would do well, although I could always be wrong. It will be fascinating to see the progress studies movement climb the tech tree of content communications, and I’m really thankful I’m a tiny part of it.
Thank you kindly for your warm response; most welcome indeed. I think one of the grand challenges for media is that we’re physically and chemically wired with an innate negativity bias, part of the inescapable condition of being human. Thus anything that smacks of untempered optimism activates our biochemical red flag system.
The current media, however, has exploited this doom-bait hack to maximum effect, supersaturating content with the triggers that fire our negativity response and keep us wondering whether we have enough pasta to survive the first few weeks of a general nuclear exchange. It’s addictive, and while it keeps us entertained, it doesn’t help us make better choices about the future. On a slight side tangent, one quick way to estimate whether the content is education or entertainment is to ask whether it helps you make choices about the future.
Regards your comment,
I would say that I think there’s still enormous room for improvement and innovation. As I’ve said many times, we’re at the bottom of the s-curve for innovation in progress studies, not the top. What we think of as established progress media platforms are just in their infancy, and the best is yet to come. I think it would be incredible to build out a “Pivot” concept website that works off this theory, and I suspect it would do well, although I could always be wrong. It will be fascinating to see the progress studies movement climb the tech tree of content communications, and I’m really thankful I’m a tiny part of it.
Thanks again for your comment.