Positive News Agency

The media, and especially the press, are usually full of negative news: murders, attacks, economic failures etc. It may be that experience has indeed shown that negative matters are of more interest to readers. Even if this is so, I believe that at least one page of positive news would be welcomed by readers. Readers would turn to this page - even if they found the negative stuff more interesting.

Editors might agree with me. Then they would ask where positive stuff is to come from. Negative stuff comes easily from the police or the law courts. But where is the source of positive stuff.

So my suggestion is that someone sets up a 'Positive News Agency'. This would be a news agency like Reuters. It would collect positive news and make it available on demand.

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Tony Alexander on April 16, 2009 at 9:11pm: Maybe there is something to be said about stories which have both positive and negative points, and the media choosing put a positive/negative "spin" on it?

Ditto for news which could be presented objectively, but is made to seem hopeful/ominous when speculation about the sequel is offered (e.g. the political ramifications of dignitaries meeting).

I think there's a lurking assumption that unless the "correct" perception is provided along with information, there is no "point" in giving the information. (Though some "context" is needed... perhaps in such a way as not to suggest one specific perception... which I think is often done well.)

P.S. I recall seeing news broadcast which had a segment called "On the Lighter Side". It's a way to force the agency itself to have some good news to present everyday. Perhaps this concept needs to be promoted.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Phil Bachmann on April 17, 2009 at 8:50am: A Good News Agency would provide different sorts of good news, I imagine at least three sorts:

Good news for everyone
- Cute kitten rescued from belfry.
- Lost teenager emerges from bushland hungry but safe.
- Rare tiger cubs born at local zoo.

Good news for people who don't get jealous
- Hollywood star back on her feet.
- Small business owner now worth $100 million.
- Australian Prime Minister awarded America's highest honour.

Good news for some but not all
- Labour Party wins election.
- Massive pay rise for teachers.
- Government starts to take global warming seriously.

I presume EdB was thinking of the "don't get jealous" category, but I would be interested in other peoples' ideas on what would constitute good news headlines.

Logistically I'm wondering whether it would be more efficient to have good news items supplied by existing agencies, but then maybe the reporters at these agencies are too jaded to do a good job.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Tony Alexander on April 18, 2009 at 10:44pm: That's a good point: what news is "positive" depends on the audience, and even then, it may only be positive for a portion of them. So in the end, there would be discretion on the part of the individual agencies when they collect positive news.

Would it work for the PNA to make all their news available to the public, e.g. on a free website?

I think there would have to some bias on the part of the PNA as to what constitutes positive news. If not, it would collect any news item that could be considered positive... this might lead its scope to being too broad and perhaps negate the PNA's purpose.

It would be good if major news agencies had representatives working with/for the PNA.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Phil Bachmann on April 22, 2009 at 2:24pm: Kim,

Yes we know people like bad news.

If I could hH (Blue hat) for a moment, could we focus on the topic:

Let's evaluate and shape the Positive News Agency idea so that the work required to implement it can be better seen.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Tony Alexander on April 23, 2009 at 1:16am: I've heard: "No news is good news".

PO: News is a black hat function

---> so it would have to favour negative/bad
---> good/positive "news" is a bonus, and beside the point
---> good/positive news that is relevant would entail restrictions/dangers/"lack of fit" being overcome/improved
---> news, a black hat function, informs us on what would constitute good/positive news
---> (bad) news encourages us to make good "news" happen (gives us purpose/focus)

....now i'm getting carried away, but please add your own if you want; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Tony Alexander on April 23, 2009 at 3:33am: I thought that's what I said (I tried to put "news" in quotes when it was good).

I realize I might have contradicted myself a bit, but PO's do that sometimes... :P; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by B Ashley on May 7, 2009 at 7:20pm: There is something of this sort in the UK - a free newspaper called Positive News that comes out four times a year and it is very nice to read too!
I too feel the weight that descends when I pick up the paper and am presented with the world's ills - all of them densely packed in a morning's reading. I tend to read The Guardian and I have noticed over the years how opinion has become more important than fact, so nowadays I can barely read an article about say ecological issues because of the bias. One way to introduce positivity into articles would be to explore the range of possible solutions that are being tried or thought about with regard to the particular problem being addressed in an article. And in the ecological field there are many diverse organisations and individuals working very positively and imaginatively so I don't see why this could'nt apply elsewhere.
The Guardian does attempt every now and again to do something like this - a sort of 'in depth' view, (often a series of opinionated articles,) but I think they could teach newbies at Journalism School to structure articles to include a paragraph or two of 'positive input' as a matter of course.
It is a serious deficiency really because it does not reflect real life which has a great deal of interest and positivity in it.
Those 'cat saved by fireman' stories that the media try and pass off as positivity have a disneyesque quality and should be banned on the grounds of amateurishness from so called professionals!; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Sarah Justine Packwood on May 9, 2009 at 5:07pm: Hello everyone
There are a few postive news agencies/sites out there already and I really enjoy them. For example "Ode Magazine" http://www.odemagazine.com/ and http://www.worldchanging.com/. Take a look!
Happy reading......I mean really happy reading :-)
Sarah; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Andy on May 12, 2009 at 9:07am: HAHAHAHA! (at Kim's "INGLISH INVADES EURO NATIONS" post) Ziz iz so funi!; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ian Webster on May 14, 2009 at 11:10am: Excellent idea, and there are many ways of disseminating positive news electronically. Perhaps this could be the first positive e-paper fed from a multitude of contributors in the same way as wikipedia is compiled. Just a thought.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Angela King on May 17, 2009 at 8:33am: This is a great idea ,I would love to be part of such a team, positivity = good vibes = happy thoughts = pure wellness = peace and joy 4 all .; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Angela King on May 17, 2009 at 8:36am: How much is it !!

Kim Jones said:
Thinking Training said:
If we all communicated by universally understood "code" would we become rather humourless robotic-types?"

Not unless we were also zombies without self-referential awareness. A bleak world it would be indeed without humour, much of which arises from things you describe such as the way the mind gives up sometimes on auditory patterns it fails to recognise.

We could a have a "Humour code." Humour codes would signal that what follows is a leg pull, for the sheer fun of a leg pull. Somehow, I fear that this might spoil the humour though? Why I rarely use smilies and other emoticons, because - pratfalls of email acknowledged - if you have to tell someone you are using humour then it kind of weakens the effect, doesn't it? Surely jokes work most effectively when they detonate suddenly, like a landmine, or a wet fart during hymn-singing in church?

"Emma Chissett?" the woman said to the sales assistant

"No, my name's Sally. I don't think we have an Emma here."

"No - Emma Chissett!?" the woman faintly demanded once again this time pointing to a book.

"Umm....nooo, that book is by Emily Dickenson"

"Emma Chissett???" the woman this time seemed quite frustrated

What was the woman saying?; ▶ Reply to This