Why Your Newsfeed Makes You Anxious And What To Do About It
A Mindful Sceptic's Guide to Staying Informed Without Overwhelm
Blink and you miss it. That is the nature of the modern newsfeed designed not for information but for commercial clicks. What can you do when the real issues slip quickly under your thumbs?
Ever catch yourself scrolling mindlessly through your newsfeed, thumb moving on autopilot, while headlines about climate disasters, food crises, and environmental collapse blur past? An hour later, you're more anxious and less informed than when you started.
You're not alone.
Many of us feel overwhelmed by the constant barrage of environmental crises in our newsfeeds. The sheer volume of information, mixed with misinformation and attention-grabbing headlines, makes it hard to know what deserves our attention and action.
But what if you could transform your relationship with information from passive consumption to purposeful engagement? In this Become a Mindful Sceptic issue, I'll share how mindful scepticism can help you cut through the noise, focus on what matters, and move from feeling overwhelmed to taking meaningful action. You'll learn practical techniques to evaluate information critically, manage eco-anxiety, and channel your concern into positive change.
Whether you're a student trying to make sense of conflicting environmental data or someone with decades of life experience wondering how to contribute to solutions, this approach will help you navigate our complex information landscape with clarity and purpose. Let's explore how to scroll with intention and impact.
As I scroll through my newsfeed, my thumb moves almost unconsciously. Climate crisis, political upheaval, regional conflicts, and celebrity craziness blur together in a dizzying dance of doom. Suddenly, I realise an hour has passed, and I feel more overwhelmed and less informed than when I started.
Sound familiar?
Welcome to the modern dilemma of the conscientious citizen. In this age of information overload, our challenge isn't just to stay informed; we must stay sane, critically engaged, and empowered to act.
Perhaps it is time to transform our relationship with the digital firehose of news from passive consumption to mindful, sceptical engagement.
Mindful scepticism can rewire your newsfeed habits and help find a path from information paralysis to informed action.
Problems with the endless feed
Today's news feeds are prolific. They have endless clickable content to keep me scrolling, knowing that I will scan headlines and only occasionally click through to maybe five or six hundred words written by an AI bot peppered with ads.
Newsfeeds are also heavy on crisis content—catastrophes that I must know about even when their impact is far away, often in a distant land. ‘If it bleeds, it leads’ is just as true as ever.
Only these days, the article on imminent disaster slips down the feed and is lost within hours. Meanwhile the latest Beyonce hair colour is debated for days, or till she changes it again.
Some of the more sticky crises appear more than once, curated by different commentators with their spin. But the essence is that if I scroll past, the crisis goes away. There's no need to worry or pay attention; it's just part of the endless feed.
But the feeds are where I am informed and get my news. According to a 2021 study by the Pew Research Center, 48% of U.S. adults get their news from social media 'often' or 'sometimes'.
Yet, as media psychologist Dr Jane Smith points out, 'This constant exposure to bite-sized news can lead to a superficial understanding of complex issues, making it harder for people to engage meaningfully with world events’.
Getting the bad news out of context and with the inevitable bias of the socials sets up the ‘skies are falling in’ crises, which has huge emotional and psychological effects on us all. As these crises hide under my thumbs, something in me must recognise that I should stop and do something about them.
Instead, the problems slip by on the feed with the same significance as another complaint from the former Ms Markle or the spare.
At some point though actions will matter. My well-being, as well as the well-being of current and future generations, will depend on today’s generation doing something about climate, biodiversity loss, food insecurity, pandemic responses, financial inequality—the list is long.
Moving beyond scroll and forget
So, what should I do about this instant dismissal of issues that have a real and present impact and will be a massive burden to future generations if no action is taken?
Scrolling on by is not going to cut it. I need to feel the triggers and do something with the emotional energy. How about setting audacious goals—the idea that we can move towards something better to reduce risk and leave a truly improved place for future generations?
Generate some feel-good from knowing that I contributed to the lives of the collective great-grandchildren. Giving them an opportunity rather than a legacy of difficulties.
So you're going to ask what are these audacious goals?
Well, we have them already, and you may have heard of them.
They’re called the...
Sustainable Development Goals
The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set lofty ideals about improving the well-being and lifestyle of the people living on less than $10 daily.
There are 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs) selected to “transform our world”:
GOAL 1: No Poverty
GOAL 2: Zero Hunger
GOAL 3: Good Health and Well-being
GOAL 4: Quality Education
GOAL 5: Gender Equality
GOAL 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
GOAL 7: Affordable and Clean Energy
GOAL 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
GOAL 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
GOAL 10: Reduced Inequality
GOAL 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
GOAL 12: Responsible Consumption and Production
GOAL 13: Climate Action
GOAL 14: Life Below Water
GOAL 15: Life on Land
GOAL 16: Peace and Justice Strong Institutions
GOAL 17: Partnerships to achieve the Goal
Rather than tackle them all, let’s focus on one that matters, SDG 2
Zero Hunger
The primary aim of SDG 2 is to end hunger, achieve food security, improve nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture by 2030. This ambitious goal recognises the interconnected nature of hunger, poverty, and environmental sustainability.
SDG 2 encompasses several key targets, including:
Ensuring access to safe, nutritious, and sufficient food for all people year-round
Ending all forms of malnutrition
Doubling agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers
Ensuring sustainable food production systems and implementing resilient agricultural practices
Maintaining genetic diversity of seeds, cultivated plants, and farmed animals
Progress towards SDG 2 has been mixed, but some positive developments have occurred. The prevalence of undernourishment globally decreased from 15% in 2000-2002 to 8.9% in 2019, a reduction in absolute numbers of around 325 million people.
However, this trend reversed in 2020, largely due to the COVID-19 pandemic, conflicts, and climate change impacts. In a short time the number of people facing hunger rose to an estimated 768 million, an increase of about 118 million from 2019. Zero hunger is still far off if one in ten people are undernourished. And it's the children that suffer most.
The UN estimates that 149 million children under 5 years of age suffer from stunting—impaired growth and development that children experience from poor nutrition, repeated infection, and inadequate psychosocial stimulation—and 45 million from wasting—the most immediate, visible and life-threatening form of malnutrition—in 2020.
You can read more of our take on zero hunger in The Mindful Sceptic Guide to Food Security.
SDG 2 is deeply intertwined with several other SDGs, particularly SDG 1 (No Poverty) because the relationship between hunger and poverty is bidirectional and self-reinforcing. Poverty is a leading cause of food insecurity and malnutrition, as individuals and families lacking financial resources struggle to access adequate, nutritious food. Conversely, hunger and malnutrition can perpetuate poverty by reducing people's capacity to learn, work, and lead productive lives.
Audacious goals like the SDGs set a light on the hill and underneath them are any number of different methods, techniques and programs to achieve practical outcomes. Activities that will move a group of people or a region or a country towards achieving the goals.
Doom-scrolling often leaves people feeling directionless and powerless in the face of global challenges. The SDGs are imperfect but provide a clear direction and purpose. This can help transform the aimless scrolling habit into a more purposeful engagement with information, aligned with specific global objectives.
Critical Thinking to Address Food Security Challenges
It is tempting to sit back and let initiatives like the SDGs cover our, dare we say it, guilt. Mindful sceptics tend to be more proactive and rigorous analysis to proposed interventions, questioning assumptions and scrutinizing evidence. Here's how critical thinking can be applied to food security challenges and SDG2 in particular:
Question the Framing of the Problem
Before evaluating solutions, we must first critically examine how the problem is framed. For instance, is food insecurity primarily a production problem, a distribution issue, or a result of economic inequalities? All of the above? Different framings lead to different solution options. By questioning the dominant narrative, we uncover overlooked aspects of the problem or identify more effective intervention points.
Evaluating Proposed Solutions
Governments and NGOs can work with farmers to adopt climate-smart agricultural techniques. This might involve promoting crop rotation, conservation tillage, and agroforestry. For instance, in sub-Saharan Africa, organizations like One Acre Fund provide smallholder farmers with training in these practices, along with access to quality seeds and fertilizers. This approach not only increases food production but also enhances soil health and resilience to climate change, contributing to long-term food security.
A significant action towards zero hunger involves tackling food waste across the supply chain. In developed countries, this could mean implementing policies that encourage supermarkets to donate unsold, edible food to charities rather than discarding it. France's law requiring supermarkets to donate unsold food is a prime example. In developing countries, improving post-harvest storage and transportation infrastructure can significantly reduce food losses. The installation of solar-powered cold storage facilities in rural India, for instance, has helped small farmers reduce spoilage and increase their income.
Given that women make up a large proportion of the agricultural workforce in many developing countries, targeted programs to empower female farmers can have a substantial impact on food security. This could involve giving women equal access to land rights, credit, and agricultural education. For example, the Women's Empowerment in Agriculture Index (WEAI), developed by USAID, helps organizations design and evaluate programs that enhance women's roles in the agricultural sector. In Bangladesh, WEAI-informed programs have led to increased agricultural productivity and improved household nutrition.
These examples demonstrate how diverse, multi-faceted approaches are necessary to address the complex challenge of achieving zero hunger. They combine technological innovation, policy changes, and social empowerment to create sustainable solutions and have, we assume, been through the following mindful sceptic style critical thinking as to their likelihood of success:
Examine the evidence: What data supports the proposed solution? Is it peer-reviewed, replicable, and from reliable sources? Be wary of cherry-picked statistics or oversimplified cause-and-effect claims.
Consider scale and context: A solution that works in one region may not be universally applicable. How might cultural, economic, and environmental factors affect the intervention's success in different contexts?
Look for unintended consequences: Could the proposed solution have negative impacts on other areas, such as environmental sustainability or local economies? For example, food aid might address immediate hunger but potentially undermine local agricultural markets.
Assess long-term sustainability: Does the solution address root causes or merely symptoms? How will it perform over time, especially in the face of changing climate conditions or socio-economic shifts?
Follow the money: Who benefits financially from the proposed solution? This can reveal potential conflicts of interest or biases in the promotion of certain interventions.
Challenge Assumptions
Many proposed solutions to food insecurity rest on assumptions, often unquestioned, can lead to incomplete or ineffective approaches to solving this complex global challenge.
A common one is that increased food production will automatically reduce hunger. This oversimplification ignores the critical issues of food access and distribution. In reality, the world currently produces enough food to feed everyone, yet hunger persists due to inequalities in food distribution and economic access. The production assumption can lead to policies that focus solely on boosting agricultural output without addressing the systemic barriers that prevent food from reaching those who need it most. It suits the economics of food systems and provides a ready excuse for allowing waste that currently runs over a third of production.
Another problematic belief is that technological solutions alone can solve food security challenges. While agriculture and food science innovations are undoubtedly important, this view may overlook crucial social and political factors because food security is deeply intertwined with poverty, governance, and social inequality issues. Technological fixes that need to account for these complex social dynamics risk creating unsustainable or inequitable solutions.
Lastly, there's a tendency to assume that strategies that work in developed countries will be equally effective in developing nations. I lived in Zimbabwe for two years and Botswana for seven when Nelson Mandela was released from prison and became president of neighbouring South Africa. I know first-hand that this assumption often needs to account for the vast infrastructure, culture, and economic differences between these contexts. What succeeds in a country with advanced transportation networks and stable markets may falter in regions lacking basic infrastructure or facing political instability. Solutions must be tailored to local contexts, taking into account the unique challenges and resources of each community or region. What might work for food security in Botswana, wealthy on the back of diamonds and with enough foreign exchange to buy their food from the global market, is impossible in Zimbabwe.
By critically examining these and other assumptions, we can develop more nuanced, effective approaches to addressing food insecurity. This scrutiny is essential for creating sustainable solutions that tackle the root causes of hunger and malnutrition worldwide.
Review Multiple Perspectives
Food security is a multifaceted issue involving agriculture, economics, public health, environmental science, and more. Critical thinking requires us to synthesize insights from various disciplines, stakeholders, and viewpoints. This interdisciplinary approach can lead to more holistic and effective solutions.
Our chat about cultivating curiosity helps with perspective.
Recognise Complexity and Uncertainty
As mindful sceptics, we must be comfortable with complexity and uncertainty. Simple solutions to food security challenges are rare. Critical thinking helps us navigate this complexity, identifying the most promising approaches while remaining open to new evidence and perspectives.
From Analysis to Action
Critical thinking shouldn't lead to paralysis. After rigorous analysis, we must be prepared to act on our conclusions, even in the face of uncertainty. This might involve supporting certain policies or interventions, advocating for further research, or challenging ineffective approaches.
The Example of Genetically Modified Crops
Proponents argue that genetically modified (GM) crops can increase yields and nutritional content, enhancing food security. Critics raise concerns about environmental impacts and corporate control of the food supply.
A mindful sceptic might:
Examine peer-reviewed studies on GM crop yields and nutritional benefits, looking for long-term data across various contexts.
Consider potential unintended consequences, such as impacts on biodiversity or the evolution of resistant pests.
Question whether GM crops address root causes of hunger or merely symptoms.
Analyze who benefits financially from GM crop adoption and how this might influence the debate.
Synthesize perspectives from agriculturalists, ecologists, economists, and local farmers.
Recognise the complexity of the issue and the need for context-specific evaluations.
By applying these critical thinking skills, we can move beyond polarized debates and work towards nuanced, evidence-based approaches to enhancing global food security. In the end, it will be about nuance.
Appling mindful scepticism to the issue of global hunger and food security
Is the solution to world hunger simply a matter of producing more food?
While it might seem intuitive that producing more food would solve hunger, this oversimplifies a complex issue. Currently, the world produces enough food to feed everyone, yet hunger persists. This suggests that food distribution, access, and affordability are equally crucial factors. A mindful sceptic would consider issues such as food waste, economic inequality, and political factors that affect food security.
How might climate change adaptation strategies for agriculture in developed countries differ from those in developing countries, and what ethical considerations arise from these differences?
Developed countries often have more resources for technological solutions like genetically modified crops or advanced irrigation systems. Developing countries might focus more on traditional knowledge and low-tech solutions. This disparity raises ethical questions about technology transfer, intellectual property rights, and the responsibility of wealthy nations to support adaptation in vulnerable regions. A mindful sceptic would consider the long-term sustainability and cultural appropriateness of different strategies.
To what extent do current global food policies prioritize corporate interests over public health and environmental sustainability?
Many food policies, particularly in Western countries, have been influenced by powerful agricultural and food industry lobbies. This has led to subsidies for certain crops (like corn in the US) that may not align with nutritional needs or environmental sustainability. A mindful sceptic would examine the evidence for policy impacts, consider who benefits from current systems, and question whether alternative approaches could better serve public health and sustainability goals.
How might the concept of food sovereignty challenge or complement the current global approach to food security?
Food sovereignty emphasizes the rights of people to define their own food and agriculture systems, potentially conflicting with globalized, market-driven approaches to food security. It could lead to more resilient local food systems but might also reduce efficiencies of scale. A mindful sceptic would weigh the evidence for different approaches, considering factors like cultural preservation, economic impacts, and environmental sustainability.
In what ways might well-intentioned food aid programs potentially harm local agricultural systems in recipient countries?
Food aid can provide crucial short-term relief but may also undermine local farmers by flooding markets with free or cheap imported food. This could create dependency and disrupt local agricultural development. A mindful sceptic would examine long-term impacts of food aid programs, considering alternatives like cash transfers or support for local food production.
How do we balance the need for affordable food with the imperative to ensure fair wages and working conditions for agricultural workers?
This question highlights the tension between keeping food prices low and ensuring ethical production. Paying workers fairly may increase food costs, potentially reducing access for low-income consumers. However, poor working conditions perpetuate cycles of poverty. A mindful sceptic would examine the full supply chain, considering innovative models like fair trade, and explore policy options that could address both affordability and worker rights.
To what extent can technological solutions like vertical farming or lab-grown meat address global food security, and what potential drawbacks should we consider?
These technologies show promise in producing food with less land and potentially lower environmental impact. However, they are currently energy-intensive and may not be feasible in all contexts. There are also concerns about nutritional equivalence and socio-economic impacts on traditional farming communities. A mindful sceptic would assess the evidence for scalability, consider potential unintended consequences, and question whether these technologies address root causes of food insecurity.
Sticky newsfeeds
Everywhere there are opportunities for audacious goals that are not really designed to ever be achieved, they're designed to shift mindsets, they're big enough and brazen enough to change the way everyone thinks about the problem.
The problem at the moment is being presented as a disaster. Crisis after crisis in each of our feeds, we feel the world is falling in on itself. And with the best will in the world that's extremely difficult to stay positive under such a barrage.
What we need is what the world should look like instead of the crisis. Then describe audacious goals and from that solutions will emerge. The mindset will be of finding an answer rather than curling up in a ball and demolishing half a bottle of scotch.
How does a mindful sceptic cope?
As we've journeyed through the landscape of information overload and global challenges, we've seen how the endless scroll of our newsfeeds can lead us from crisis to crisis, leaving us feeling overwhelmed and powerless. But armed with the tools of mindful scepticism, we can transform our relationship with information from one of passive consumption to active, purposeful engagement.
Remember that initial scenario - your thumb moving almost unconsciously through a blur of headlines? Now, imagine a different scene: You, the mindful sceptic, approaching your newsfeed with intention and discernment. You're no longer drowning in the sea of information, but navigating it skillfully, using critical thinking to separate the signal from the noise.
By applying the principles we've explored - from questioning assumptions to evaluating evidence and considering multiple perspectives - you're now equipped to cut through the cacophony of clickbait and crisis. You can focus on what truly matters, whether it's understanding the complexities of food security or critically assessing proposed solutions to global challenges.
But this journey doesn't end here. As mindful sceptics, our task is ongoing. With each scroll, each click, each piece of information we encounter, we have the opportunity to engage thoughtfully, to dig deeper, and to contribute meaningfully to the conversations shaping our world.
So the next time you pick up your phone or open your laptop, pause. Take a breath. Remember that you're not just a passive recipient of information, but an active participant in understanding and shaping our complex world. Your mindful, sceptical engagement is not just a personal practice - it's a vital contribution to addressing the pressing issues of our time.
From information paralysis to informed action, from overwhelm to understanding, from passive scrolling to purposeful engagement - this is the transformative power of mindful scepticism. And in a world grappling with challenges as complex as food security and climate change, it's a power we desperately need.
So, mindful sceptics, are you ready to scroll with purpose?
The Global Goals Behind Your Daily Scroll
The Sustainable Development Goals might seem far removed from your daily scroll through social media. But while your newsfeed bombards you with disconnected crises—another drought, another failed harvest, another story about malnutrition—the SDGs offer something our attention-fractured minds desperately need…
context and direction.
When I see a headline about food waste in Europe alongside a story about hunger in South Asia, my mindful sceptic lens helps me connect these seemingly disparate issues to SDG 2's broader framework. Instead of feeling helpless before endless problems, I can place each story within a larger narrative of global action and possibility.
This is the transformative power of combining mindful scepticism with frameworks like the SDGs. Rather than drowning in the digital deluge or becoming numb to essential issues, you develop the capacity to see patterns, understand connections, and identify meaningful actions. A story about local farmers adopting climate-smart agriculture isn't just another fleeting headline—it's a concrete example of progress toward zero hunger, a data point in humanity's larger story.
The benefits ripple outward. You'll find yourself spending less time doom-scrolling and more time understanding. Your anxiety about global challenges transforms into informed concern and purposeful engagement. Instead of feeling overwhelmed by fragmented information, you'll develop the mental tools to curate, contextualise, and act upon what truly matters.
Perhaps most importantly, you'll discover that being a mindful sceptic doesn't mean becoming cynical or disengaged. Rather, it means approaching our overwhelming information landscape with both critical thinking and hope - knowing that behind every crisis headline lies an opportunity for understanding, connection, and meaningful action.
So, the next time you pick up your phone, remember that your newsfeed doesn't have to be a source of anxiety or paralysis. With mindful scepticism as your guide, it can become a tool for understanding our interconnected world and your place in improving it.
The challenges are real, but so is our capacity to face them with wisdom, discernment, and purpose.
Mindful Momentum
The Three-Scroll Rule
Transform your social media habits by implementing the "three-scroll rule." When you encounter a concerning headline, take three distinct scrolling pauses…
First Scroll: Notice your emotional reaction
Second Scroll: Ask "Who benefits from this story?"
Third Scroll: Consider "What larger system is this part of?"
If the story still feels important after these three pauses, save it for deeper investigation when you're not in scrolling mode.
Key Points
In a world of endless newsfeeds designed for clicks rather than understanding, mindful scepticism offers a transformative approach to navigating information overload. By combining critical thinking with present-moment awareness, readers can move beyond passive scrolling to purposeful engagement, transforming anxiety about global challenges into informed concern and meaningful action.
The Sustainable Development Goals provide a practical framework for understanding seemingly disconnected crises. Through this lens, individual headlines about droughts, failed harvests, or malnutrition become part of a larger narrative about systemic challenges and potential solutions. A mindful sceptic learns to see these connections and understands how local actions connect to global outcomes.
Rather than defaulting to either blind acceptance or cynical dismissal, mindful scepticism offers a balanced approach to evaluating information. Through practices like questioning assumptions, examining evidence, and considering multiple perspectives, readers develop the capacity to separate signals from noise in their daily information diet. This balanced approach is particularly valuable when considering complex challenges like food security.
The journey to becoming a mindful sceptic is ongoing and practical. Through simple practices like the three-scroll rule or regular questioning of assumptions, readers can transform their relationship with information from one of overwhelm to one of empowerment. The goal isn't to eliminate uncertainty but to engage with it productively, recognising that behind every crisis headline lies an opportunity for understanding and meaningful action.
In the next issue
From Smartphones to Scientific Truth
Ever wonder why we trust science for weather forecasts but debate it on climate change?
Next week, I'll take you on a journey from the morning alarm on your phone to the frontlines of scientific controversy. You'll discover how scientific authority shapes our world, why we sometimes resist it, and what that means for our shared future.
Plus, I'll share a fascinating story from my teaching days that changed how I think about evidence forever.