You Are What You Read: Why changing your media diet can change the world

by Jodie Jackson

Do you ever feel overwhelmed and powerless after watching the news? Does it make you feel sad about the world, without much hope for its future? Take a breath – the world is not as bad as the headlines would have you believe.

In You Are What You Read , campaigner and researcher Jodie Jackson helps us understand how our current twenty-four-hour news cycle is produced, who decides what stories are selected, why the news is mostly negative and what effect this has on us as individuals and as a society.

Combining the latest research from psychology, sociology and the media, she builds a powerful case for including solutions in our news narrative as an antidote to the negativity bias.

You Are What You Read is not just a book, it is a manifesto for a it is not a call for us to ignore the negative but rather a call to not ignore the positive. It asks us to change the way we consume the news and shows us how, through our choices, we have the power to improve our media diet, our mental health and just possibly the world.

Genres: Nonfiction, Mental Health, Psychology, Self Help

132 pages, Kindle Edition

Published April 4, 2019

About the author

Jodie Jackson is an expert on the psychological impact of the news on our mental health and the health of our society. Her widely cited research has led to regular speaking engagements at media and mental health conferences around the world. Jodie Jackson is a partner at The Constructive Journalism Project and she holds a master’s degree in applied positive psychology.

Reviews

[Paul · Rating 4 out of 5]

When did you last see a good news story? We seem to have a diet of really bad news that never stops. Even when the presenter is talking about the latest disaster there is a ticker tape of sub-stories that expand to fill the vacuum of the entire day. It is just draining listening to or reading the stories that flood out of our media. I stopped watching a while ago now, and even though I buy the weekend papers, I tend to read the supplements rather than the main section. Thankfully though, there could be another way and campaigner and researcher Jodie Jackson wants to show us it.

First, though, you have to understand that psychology of why the media outlets produce the material that they do, Jackson goes into the details behind the headlines, why bad news rather than good news sells and the cumulative effect that this has on our mental well being. She addresses points on fake news, and churnalism, where journalists take a very liberal view of the truth in the speed to get the articles written for the ever hungry news machine.

She says that we don’t need to stop seeing bad news, being informed about significant world events is necessary, however, we need to limit our intake of it. What Jackson is advocating though is looking for alternative sources for your news, places that have taken time to do the proper research about a topic, can write with a balanced view and are seeking to inform rather than just go for the sensational headline. Seeking solution focused news sources that concentrate on innovation, initiative peacebuilding and positive responses to social issues need to make up a significant proportion of our media diet.

There are various methods and suggestions in the book that are very sensible. Stop reading the dirge from the media outlets that want sensational headlines and find those that have a more considered and balanced approach. Avoid the tabloids they are preaching to a base level of readers as well as trying to dictate the political agenda in a lot of cases. Read from different perspectives on the same story. Don’t forget though, we as the consumers of this actually hold the power, if we stop buying and watching the worst news channels then they will change as they will lose customers and then income. Jackson writes with a positive clarity about a subject that most people find unpalatable these days, but more than that there are things that you can do to change your media intake and make you a better-informed person.

[Nada Elshabrawy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Interesting!

[Doug DesCombaz · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fine points, lots of filler

If you are reading this, you may already be in the choir. In that case, you can safely move to the resource list at the end. If you have time to kill, some core concepts wrapped around anecdotes, quotes, and tropes.

But, yeah, as a recovering news junkie, I agree with the crux of the book,, and have been on a quest to be educated, engaged, and informed in a manner that is actionable (whatever that means).

[Mathilde · Rating 5 out of 5]

The fast pace and negative bias of the news leaves many - me included - feeling hopeless. For a while I shut down all news outlets from my life, but this felt wrong. There was surely another way to stay informed. Jodie Jackson makes a case for solution based news as a way to empower readers to take action. She does not suggests that it should replace investigative journalism, but rather complement it. She thinks that journalism can expose problems, and also highlight solutions.
Together with Hans Rosling book, Factfulness, Jackson’s book provides a much needed breath of fresh air and inspiration for my (seemingly eternal) pessimism.

[giggs · Rating 2 out of 5]

While interesting and thought-provoking, I found the book lacked organization.

At worst, there's a lot of padding.
At best, it feels like each chapter was written as a stand-alone article, and then everything was stitched together as a book. There's a lot of repetition, to the point where I had to stop several times wondering whether I'd somehow already read what I was reading.

It's a shame. The author did interesting research and has a lot to teach, I feel like the ideas presented here need to spread. I just find that the book doesn't do a very good job at it. Maybe I was just not in the target audience.

[Jason Hillenburg · Rating 5 out of 5]

Jodie Jackson’s You Are What You Read will cause a stir. Jackson’s book takes an unusual but well-reasoned position. She earned a degree in Positive Psychology and has built a reputation for researching the psychological impact negative news coverage has on the viewing public. The central thrust of her argument is that the media lacks a balanced approach to news coverage all too often slanted towards the dark and dire rather than incorporating solutions and the forward march of human progress into our informational diet. Naysayers may claim no such prejudice exists; networks and other outlets are simply covering the reality of our age. You Are What You Read aims, in part, our errors in appraising the current situation.

URL: https://www.jodiejackson.com/

She begins the book with a section laying out her motivation and purpose for writing the book, a sort of initial “argument” for everything that follows. It is a shrewd move charting her personal journey to writing this book as it brings added passion to the work rather than grounding it in dry research. Jackson does draw from the work of others to help make her point on a number of the book’s contentions, but You Are What You Read isn’t reliant on such references to state its case for readers.

Jackson gains reams of credibility by never viewing this issue through conspiratorial lenses alone. . There’s no inclination in her point of view towards casting the bias she sees as part of a conscious plot aimed towards shaping our attitudes and opinions, though she doesn’t discredit such possibilities. Her tacit acknowledgment of personal and even unconscious bias reporters bring to their work is an inescapable recognition of our own human nature. The book opens with an exploration about how perception transforms our understanding about events and their effect on us and the world.

AMAZON: https://www.amazon.com/You-Are-What-R...

Her cool command of language continues sustaining reader interest through later sections “Misread or Misled” and “Bad News Sells” examining the accelerating slide media outlets have made in the direction of “informtainment” rather than disseminating hard and objective content. I do not think Jackson disagrees with anyone who comes into this discussion believing or finishes this book understanding how the commercial and profit driven model of mass media casts a long shadow over our understanding of the world and one another. Ever in pursuit of advertising dollars, networks like CNN and Fox News pander to our growing alarm, division, fascination with abomination, and even our thoughts of “better him/her/them than me”.

“Too Much of a Good Thing” tackles how even the best-intentioned media outlets and individual reporters can cause more harm than good overexposing the public to negative news. She believes the often altruistic motivations driving people to pursue journalism run head long into the reality these attempts provoking empathy can produce fear, feelings of insignificance, paranoia, and depression. “The News Solution” puts forth her vision for how news organization and media hubs can better report the news in a responsible and conscientious manner. The remainder of the book goes into how our personal attitudes shape our connections and the need for a balance between news focused on solutions and problems. The skewing towards negativity is a central theme she revisits often in this book and leaves no angle of attack untaken.

Jodie Jackson’s You Are What You Read provides readers with an alternate take on how they perceive and why. She makes her arguments from a position of strength and backs up her assertions with solid reasoning and a lucid roadmap for changing the media landscape. This will be a compelling read for anyone studying modern media and its impact on our world.

[Cheryl M-M · Rating 4 out of 5]

I absolutely understand why some people, including the author choose to step away from the negativity that drives the media. It has become almost like a shark feeding frenzy with the audience baying for blood. The more traumatic, brutal and soul-destroying the news is the better.

The news of today isn't the news of yesterday. We used to have media outlets with journalists who strived to give the world, their audience, the facts and the truth, albeit as they perceived it through their frame of reference. Nowadays you get opinion based journalism, sensationalist tabloid pieces and a slowly declining number of outlets and individuals who report the facts.

On top of that our media outlets are controlled by conglomerates and moguls who have bought up the majority of them, so it has become a kind of monopoly. There is a good reason the peasants rose up to demand Rupert Murdoch not be allowed to buy yet another media outlet that reaches millions of people.

Monopolies change the way we receive information and more importantly they control the information we are being fed. They decide what to feed the masses, which means they can sway opinions and votes. Not exactly unimportant in our day and age when tempers are frayed and the extreme right is on the rise.

I think the saddest aspect of all of the above, aside from journalists not being journalists anymore, is that the majority of people don't realise they are being manipulated to think, vote and perceive information a certain way. That's not the same as being ignorant or uninformed. If you have no clue that someone is trying to dictate or influence your opinions, then you will be none the wiser.

It's a fact that the Russians have influenced political outcomes in multiple countries, and still are. They have buildings filled with people who plant false information and stories to influence the public - troll farms. Fact. It's also a fact that big media outlets no longer produce non-biased news.

We live in a world where the public is hungry for every detail of someone's life. Reality shows and Z-celebrities make money the more extreme, aggressive and dramatic they are. The other side of that coin is the fact that the public wants it to be delivered to them.

Jackson advocates for the audience to adapt a more balanced media diet. I concur with the general idea, however I do believe it is quite hard to do so. It's not easy for everyone to discern between fact and opinion, and whilst I agree that more positivity is needed to balance the negativity, I think it's becoming harder to find sources to deliver that.

Although the theoretical idea is one I believe will allow many to have a more productive life and be less stressed, I also believe it's important not to retreat into a false bubble of hope. I do believe it's important to educate people and to fight this war of negativity head on. You can't change something if you don't know it's already swallowed you whole and influenced you, which means helping others to understand what is happening is even more important.

This is an engaging and thought-provoking piece of non-fiction. In fact perhaps the world would be a better place if we had more voices like Jackson, who are trying to be heard through the cacophony of falsities. It is indeed a movement.
*I received a courtesy copy*

[The Literary Shed · Rating 4 out of 5]

Jodie Jackson’s You Are What You Read: Why Changing Your Media Diet Can Change the World is what all good non-fiction should be – exciting, challenging and perceptive.

That said, we are Jackson’s readership. The people who’ve stopped reading newspapers, watching the news, even watching terrestrial television because we’re irritated with the way in which information is handed to us, the way in which the press manipulates what we see, we read, we hear. We just get our news in a different way now. And we’re not the only ones.

The premise of this book is that the news we consume is predominantly negative and it inevitably impacts on our lives, the way we think, the way we act, the way we treat others.

‘We are familiar with the saying “You are what you eat”; a simple but effective summary that has made us increasingly aware of the impact that food has on our physical health,’ the author comments early on in the book. ‘… Well food is to the body what news is to the mind. … [T]he news affects our mood, our beliefs, our understanding of the world, our relationship to other people and our politics, but its impact remains largely unquestioned by the consumers who are affected by its content.’

In You Are What You Read, Jackson hands us the tools with which to protect ourselves against this insidious news cycle and shows us how to rethink the way in which we consume our news, thereby challenging the predominantly doom and gloom information that is ‘fed’ to us. It’s not about ignoring the bad things that happen but rather about not ignoring the positives, about allowing ourselves balance and the choice to make informed decisions about what is happening in our world and what we choose to do about it.

This is a thought-provoking read, the author providing us with enough intelligent prompts to look at how we interact with news without it appearing preachy or heavy handed. Certainly, we’ll be buying multiple copies of this book; we think it’s that important....

For full review: http://www.theliteraryshed.co.uk/read...

Thanks to the publisher for sending a review copy. This review was published originally as part of a book tour. All opinions are our own. All rights reserved.

[Siri Arntzen-Ratnarajan · Rating 5 out of 5]

I warmly recommend this book. After feeling thoroughly down from the doom and gloom of the daily news picture, this book was a true saviour! Not only do I now have a plethora of sources on constructive journalism, I have a better understanding of how and why the news diet is the way it is, the psychological effects, and what can be done to change it.

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

A short but extremely well written and well researched book on the benefits of solutions-focussed news. Makes its case well and, suitably, goes further than just telling us there’s a problem.

[Sophie · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have very little confidence in the news. I will say that I am a fan of media, journalists, reading, reporting, knowledge. But tabloids, hourly headlines and breaking news - ergh. I am angry at the lack of serious and sustained coverage of the climate crisis, frustrated at the bias and repetitive nature of UK media coverage and both the lack of accountability for the government and the royal family and the sway they both hold over mainstream media. The methods used to know-it-all in order to stay ‘relevant’ and grab readers aren’t always as extreme and damaging as the Milly Dowler phone hacking scandal, but are often similarly invasive and inhumane. I hate the way we forget the issues of last week, and feel like because we know something, that means we’ve done something. And yet… I can’t resist the urge to check, sometimes multiple times a day. For the most part, I don’t read intentionally, I am picky towards the headlines that grab me, I don’t read articles thoroughly, or even fully. And then when I realise this isn’t adding value to my life or the world, I challenge myself to avoid the news for as many days/weeks as I can. Which is a hilariously not helpful solution.

I was hoping this book could inspire me to change my media habits. Give me some ideas for how I can be more mindful, informed, balanced and healthy. And I think it has. The one point that kind of blew my mind was this…

If you are looking for entertainment, watch an entertaining television programme or read a magazine. We should try not to blur the purpose of the news with the purpose of entertainment.

I suppose because the news is delivered to me on the TV and radio alongside entertainment, and because I do get some sort of dopamine hit reading it online, I have honestly come to think of the news as a form of entertainment – often upsetting, aggravating, unfulfilling entertainment sure - but I don’t feel smarter or more motivated to act after exposing myself to the news presently so I don’t think of it as a way to educate myself, or help to make decisions. I do search up studies and read long-form research when I have a question on a particular issue, but not on a regular basis.

A dangerous consequence of our softened shock shield is that we are becoming less outraged by, more accepting of and indifferent to wrongdoing. Rather than responding to an issue that needs our attention with action, we are instead immobilised by apathy. In other words, we are becoming more cynical.

I completely agree with this statement and it’s something I’ve noticed in my personal experience. You can only be appalled and called to action by scandals so many times. Another good point this book makes is that many of us get our news from social media. The problem with this is that the algorithms give us content based on what we’ve previously clicked and liked, leading to ‘echo chambers’ or ‘filter bubbles'. This is not exclusive to social media, many news sites now curate our home pages in order to keep us there. Personalised news feeds are “narrowing our perception of the world and depriving us of the opportunity to learn, be challenged and think differently.”

I would argue we are also less willing to disagree. We have this need to be right, to be heard, to convince. So many of us have this perception that we hold the “in” opinion, and anyone disagreeing is not only wrong but needs to be avoided and maybe even shamed. Open discussion and considering another’s perspective, without the need to end up on the same page is a skill many seem to have lost. Especially with text online and social media, you don’t have the social cues, intentions and complexities you would feel in a face-to-face interaction, and others feel less human. Even if you feel someone is harming you with their perspective (the two big divisive issues that come to mind for me are people hesitant/against taking the covid-19 vaccine, or those who don’t understand or accept the rise in diverse gender identities and trans-rights issues, especially those involving children) two wrongs don’t make a right. All issues are complex, because people are diverse and complex. When we try and simplify an issue or only view it from our own perspective and experience, we lose something, often relationships. What sort of world do we want to live in? We will always have disagreements with people, I want to live in a more considerate, accepting and curious world. I want people to listen to my thoughts, so I should listen to theirs.

Martin Luther King Jr. himself was angered into action, though it was how he expressed that anger – with courage, patience and compassion – that brought about social progress by mobilising people in a constructive way. As he said in 1968, ‘It is not enough to be angry. The supreme task is to organise people and unite people so that their anger becomes a transforming force.’ When anger is unchanneled and perhaps combined with other psychological ingredients such as intolerance, hatred, revenge and excitement, it can be classified as rage. Rage, in the face of challenge, would bring about a different expression that may in fact hinder social progress.

On the flipside, sometimes it’s good to be passionate and stubborn. I liked how this book discusses not being prejudiced against so called ‘bad’ emotions like anger, sadness, fear and dissatisfaction. These are all natural and healthy feelings, and used in the right way can actually be very good, and productive. Solutions focused news doesn’t ignore problems. It fights problems. It’s about how we feel and what we’re doing. Do we feel hopeful about the world and the people in it? Are we taking action to stay consistent with our values, are we reassessing? The news shows us what’s possible for humanity. If it’s filled with violence and corruption day in, day out and no balance or light shone on ways to help, what toll does that take on our mental health and faith in humanity? There was also an interesting point about how Fox News in the US increased its viewership and made a bunch more money with less investment, less journalists and less research, by giving people newsreaders with personalities they could identify with and “trust”. If we chase profit, we risk losing integrity.

We could perhaps benefit from tuning into the news less frequently and reading it in more depth when we do… take[ing] a longer-term view on issues to include depth, analysis and reflection rather than simply breaking news.

Although it seems I have taken quite a lot away from this book, it's more of a "like it" than a "love it" for me. It feels long for the points it’s making and at times too informal and unorganised for my liking. I did like how the author shares previous attempts to bring solutions-focused news into the mainstream and why it didn’t succeed or how it could be done better. There were a few statements I disagreed with. One was that runners in recent years don’t have greater physical qualities than in the past, they simply have more mental energy because you have to see it to be it and if the media reports people running faster miles/marathons, more people will. This just seemed an unnecessary and untrue statement because there is access to better tech, sports science, training regimes, diets, etc now than there ever has been, though obviously mental strength is a big aspect too. Also I found the comparison of personalised news feeds to schools was weird, and I didn’t agree with using an extreme example to simply dismiss the idea of student-focusing (rather than results-focusing) schools more.

There is some great stuff in this book. It finishes with these, the “six effective ways we can change our media diet in a way that will help us become more informed, engaged and empowered”:
1. Become a conscious consumer
2. Read/watch good-quality journalism
3. Burst your filter bubble
4. Be prepared to pay for content
5. Read beyond the news
6. Read solutions-focused news

We all imagine that we create our own beliefs and opinions about what we read in the news. In reality, many of these beliefs and opinions are created for us, depending on where we have learning about the issue being reported. We all have a paper we enjoy reading, a programme we enjoy watching – but more to the point, who has the time to cross-reference each news story to gain different perspectives and analyse all the information to be able to draw our own conclusion? In our fast-paced daily lives, this kind of news consumption fits in well: we like to ‘know’ what is going on in the world so we are not caught off guard for being ignorant, and one source is more than enough at any given time for most people to feel they have a sense of what is going on. […] I want to highlight how much of the information we retain has been fed to us rather than researched and concluded ourselves.

[Wearsteel · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a demonstration of the need to review how you interact with media. It provides the bolster for the idea that critical thinking is important not just it’s application but also n it’s benefits.

How you both challenge and explore the media avalanche of news can both be of benefit to understanding and emotional wellbeing.

I would recommend supporting the ideas and framework this book champions. If you feel the need to know more by accepting less then this should be a appropriate way point towards a more fulfilling relationship with news output.

[Michael MacDonald · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good overview of Solutions Focused Journalism

This is a solid addition to any positive psychology enthusiast’s library.

It’s a quick yet insightful introduction to how your reading diet can affect the way you think, feel, and act.

Feed your brain well and boost your mood in positive tangible ways.

Definitely worth checking out.

[Danielle Batist · Rating 5 out of 5]

As media organisations globally are starting to embrace constructive journalism, Jodie fulfills a crucial role by engaging and empowering not just those who make the news, but all of us. If ‘You Are What You Read’ is about consuming stories that are good for you, then this very book is a great place to start.

[Mark Bowsher · Rating 5 out of 5]

Jodie Jackson’s book is more than just a dream - it’s a balanced, realistic love letter to constructive journalism. It addresses not just the industry of fast food style news journalism but how it effects our mental health. Optimistic and vital reading.

[Nicole · Rating 3 out of 5]

It talks about some basic principles for a reader. Good effort and genuine passion, but it can be easily done in an article not worth a book. As for the suggestion to the journalism, it's unrealistic and impractical.

[Claude · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting read on the toxic outcomes of the majority of today's media (fast paced, sensational, quantity over quality, the conglomerates annex ads, etc.)

[Gintare Balseviciute · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well researched, eye-opening book. I really liked that it not only highlighted the benefits of solutions journalism, but also provided tips on how to improve your reading diet.

[Bian Wenbo · Rating 3 out of 5]

The news pursues excitement, so it presents too many negative events that are difficult to see on a daily basis; news organizations pursue interests and need more readers, so they are destined to be unable to dig deeper.

In fact, this problem Neil Postman has long said in "Entertainment to Death", the solution is simple and rude, do not look at the news, to focus on the scope of their own capabilities.

The author of this book is not so absolute, he gives solutions from two aspects.

On the one hand, for news practitioners, use solutions-focused instead of problems-focused News, and carry out in-depth mining; on the other hand, to meet the reader's requirements to achieve six points, the original excerpt is as follows:

1. Become a conscious consumer
2. Read/watch good-quality journalism
3. Burst your filter bubble
4. Be prepared to pay for content
5. Read beyond the news
6. Read solutions-focused news
-- Chapter: THE POWER TO CHANGE.
Namely: 1. Become a tasteful reader; 2. Choose a high-quality information source; 3. Go beyond the prejudice to get out of the comfort zone; 4. Pay for the content; 5. Diversify the information source (don't read the news); 6. Be sure to If you read the news, you will see the type of news that focuses on the results.

So what kind of information is high quality?

A quality paper's popularity is not built on voyeurism, sensationalism or prurience. It offers its readers facts (in meaning context), ideas, interpretation; in short it presents a continuing education. It gives its reader the feeling that [s]he is getting a synthesised at at most most significant happenings and thinking of the day. -- The Elite Press: Great Newspapers of the World, John C. Merrill
According to this standard, the author provides a list of resources:

- Website: www.you-are-what-you-read.com This is the official website of this book;
- News organisations: ‘BBC World Hacks’, BRIGHT Magazine, The Correspondent, Delayed Gratification, INKLINE, Monocle, News Deeply, The Optimist Daily, Positive News, Solutions Journalism Network, Sparknews, ‘The Upside’ (by the Guardian), The Week, ‘What’s Working’ (by the Huffington Post), YES! Media

- Books:

The Better Angels of Our Nature: A History of Violence and Humanity by Steven Pinker
Breaking News: The Remaking of Journalism and Why It Matters Now by Alan Rusbridger
Broadcasting Happiness: The Science of Igniting and Sustaining Positive Change by Michelle Gielan
Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism and Progress by Steven Pinker
Factfulness: Ten Reasons We’re Wrong About the World – And Why Things Are Better Than You Think by Hans Rosling, with Ola Rosling and Anna Rosling Rönnlund
A Force for Good: How the American News Media Have Propelled Positive Change by Rodger Streitmatter
The Information Diet: A Case for Conscious Consumption by Clay A. Johnson
It’s Better Than It Looks: Reasons for Optimism in an Age of Fear by Gregg Easterbrook
Journalism of Outrage: Investigative Reporting and Agenda Building in America by David L. Protess, Fay Lomax Cook, Jack C. Doppelt, James S. Ettema, Margaret T. Gordon, Donna R. Leff and Peter Miller
The News: A User’s Manual by Alain de Botton
The Perils of Perception: Why We’re Wrong About Nearly Everything by Bobby Duffy
Progress: Ten Reasons to Look Forward to the Future by Johan Norberg
The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves by Matt Ridley
Utopia for Realists: And How We Can Get There by Rutger Bregman
The Vanishing Voter: Public Involvement in an Age of Uncertainty by Thomas E. Patterson

[Simon Howard · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very well-researched and well-referenced discussion of the psychological and social effects of news reporting that focuses excessively on negative stories, with little counterbalance from "solutions-focused" journalism.

I enjoyed reading this, but didn't find myself completely persuaded by the arguments. It felt more like the beginning of a conversation.

I wasn't convinced by the characterisation of journalism as almost exclusively negative. I think that is true of television news, which only ever reports on a handful of stories, and I also think it is true of news shared on social media, which is driven by unambiguously and simply expressed (and hence largely negative) emotions. I don't think it is true of other forms of journalism, including quality newspapers, which cover more stories and appear to me to be much more balanced between positive and negative - even if the front pages tend to be excessively negative. This is one reason I consciously choose to read newspapers. But perhaps I'm wrong - I'd be interested to see the evidence.

I would have liked to have seen more discussion of the role of social media in driving journalism. Jackson talks interestingly about the business aspects of modern journalism, and argues that if consumers change what they read then the media will respond. But I think there is a missing link here: in the modern media landscape, news tends to have to filter through social media to reach consumers. Social media is typically driven by simple emotions that can be captured in a single 'emoji' - sadness and anger are easy. The emotions associated with solutions-focused journalism, which Jackson categories as celebration of progress coupled with recognition that we need to go further, are not easily expressed drivers of engagement.

All of that said, I enjoyed this book, and think it is an important marker in the recognition of the psychological impact of a lot of news coverage. Much of the advice in this book is stuff I already do, so perhaps Jackson was preaching to the converted to some extent, but I often found myself agreeing with her perspective.

[Caroline Venables · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is so interesting and I hope everyone takes the chance to read it. It was fascinating to think of media, as you would food. What news you take aboard informs your outlook and view of the world.

The argument throughout the book is not that we should purely see/hear positive news but that there should be a more equal balance between the news we are fed now, brexit, brexit, wars, disasters and news that provides answers to problems. News that spreads hope and provides us with some notion that somebody, somewhere is working on making the world a better place. Just so that the news we consume whether it be on television or through the radio gives a more complete picture.

What I really liked how well researched the book was, I am guilty of thinking the world is getting worse. This belief is covered in the book and in reality, it isn’t. This is the point the author is trying to prove, I personally hear nothing but doom and gloom stories pretty much concentrating on what I said earlier.

An excellent book that everyone should read and schools should implement. Subjects like this should be raised in school so our children grow up learning about media bias, the inclusion of stories purely for revenue. So they can make more informed choices.

[Bukhari · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great insight on how our reading can affect how we perceive the world, due to how news is being portrayed. The author makes note of how the proliferation of bad news in the media gives the general impression that crime and disasters are on the rise, when in fact, news outlets exaggerate on bad news for their sales and to increase readership. She presents the arguments between solutions-based and problems-based news, in an attempt at reducing the feeling of being overwhelmed and helpless, and to also add a little positivity to the situation. She incites us to read more than just the surface of the news and go beyond in order to understand the issues surrounding it with more depth and refinement. We should also be willing to pay for content that has undergone thorough research and which are less susceptible at being manipulated. A short and interesting read. 

[M R · Rating 4 out of 5]

Like the idea of this book

It is good to know that someone is trying to stand up against the rather broken model of modern journalism.

Journalists are information leaders who drive the flow of information. If they keep driving us towards negative news, then we tend to overcompensate our feelings about the world around us.

The idea of solution based news is a good ideal to lead us towards a mentality of trying to fix problems rather than feeling helpless.

Modern psychology and management theories all talk about positiveness. It is indeed strange to find that journalism is unable to find the right balance.

My reason for a four star rating instead of five star is that the book feels repetitive in places.

[VG · Rating 3 out of 5]

Скучна и угоена книга с добра идея, за която всички трябва да знаят.

Ако вече не сте, струва си да се запознаете с журналистиката с фокус към решения на проблеми. Има нужда от промяна в начина, по който ни се поднасят новините и тази промяна би била постижима само ако масовият потребител вземе мерки относно информацията, която консумира онлайн.

Не си струва обаче да четете тези 181 страници. Спестете си няколко часа и вместо това почетете онлайн за какво става въпрос и разчистете новинарските източници, които следите. Има добри препоръки на сайта на книгата: https://you-are-what-you-read.com/sta...

[Luismi Fernández · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is worth a reading because it puts into perspective what the News are nowadays and what effects they have (given the fact the they are mostly negative all the time) in our mood and how they impact in our psychological well-being.

The author also explains what solution focus news are and how they can help to counteract the effects regular mostly negative news have on society.

It also gives a review and what the news outlet have become nowadays and how they are leaving aside what good journalism is supposed to be.

[JoAnna · Rating 5 out of 5]

Three-line review: Yes, yes, and more yes to all Jackson posits in this book about needing less negativity and bad news (helplessness) and more robust storytelling and solutions (hopefulness) in the media we consume. As an advocate of solutions-focused journalism, reading this book confirmed what I already knew to be true, but Jackson puts facts and research behind her assertions and presents them in a readable and convincing manner. I read with a pencil at the ready, making notes and underlining key passages to revisit in my own work.

[Buck Wilde · Rating 3 out of 5]

I thought it was going to be about the different genres of fiction or nonfiction and how they influence our worldview. Instead, it was about how news sources can't be trusted. Old media news incentivized tragedy and horror with the old "if it bleeds it leads" chestnut, and new media isn't held to even the laughable shadow of integrity that old media periodically dealt with. All the journalism is yellow, and meticulously handcrafted to make you as alarmed as possible. And his was written before COVID.

[mark barker · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great book. Pretty simple points made in an easy to understand description of the echo chamber we usually find ourselves in. I’m definitely going to apply some of the principles covered. I defiantly want to read solutions based media and media that presents each side of the argument. I’ve always wanted to do that but didn’t know where to turn. This book has those pointers.

[Nuha · Rating 4 out of 5]

‘a quality paper’s popularity is not built on voyeurism, sensationalism or prurience. It offers its readers facts (in meaningful context), ideas, interpretation; in short it presents a continuing education. It gives its reader the feeling that [s] he is getting a synthesised look at the most significant happenings and thinking of the day.’

[Bex · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5/5. If you're someone who is already aware of, or interested in this topic then it's likely that this book wont be groundbreaking for you. Nevertheless, it's an important (and short) read if you know very little about the impact or how to adjust your media diet.