The Power of Mass Media - How to make you believe in anything
In this text, I want to hint at the fact that not all information from the media should be taken as truth. Media outlets depend on advertising, sponsors, or the state, which means they can never be fully independent or objective. An independent journalist or political analyst may live off personal income, an audience, or a sponsor. But there is no guarantee that even such a journalist or analyst will not, sooner or later, be pressured, silenced, or bought.
Why does this topic appear in the context of self-development and spirituality, when Way2Soul is primarily a space where the journey toward oneself and one’s soul begins? Because any external events and the information flow broadcast by mass media can steal our attention (and therefore our energy) and influence our emotional state and our decisions.
That is why it is useful to understand at least the basic principles of how this tool works — so as not to become its permanent victim and an energy battery.
There are specific technologies designed to make an audience believe something. A huge number of specially trained people work on creating content based on these technologies. Below are just some of the techniques used to shape certain beliefs or influence your choices.
Framing (choice of context).
The media presents information in a way that triggers specific emotions.
Example: “Protesters caused riots” (negative framing) vs. “Citizens are fighting for their rights” (positive framing).
Repetition (the illusion of truth effect).
The more often we hear a statement, the more likely we are to believe it. If a message is repeated daily, it begins to feel true even without evidence.
Example: Many Russians without critical thinking have no doubt that only “fascists” live in Ukraine who are “bombing themselves,” because they have been told this on television every day for several years.
Selection of facts (information bias).
The media shows only part of the information to form a specific viewpoint.
Example: The media reports: “Protests led to riots: several people were injured,” but does not mention that the protest was initially peaceful and that violence began after harsh police actions.
Displaying “experts” (appeal to authority).
The audience is shown expert opinions — but only those that support the desired narrative.
Example: A talk show discusses an economic crisis and invites only experts who blame the current government, while alternative views from other economists are excluded.
Creating an enemy image.
The media instills the idea of a threat and encourages fear.
Example: “Immigrants are taking our jobs!” This is often followed by left- or right-wing populists who build their campaigns on this theme and promise to “eliminate all enemies and problems.”
Creating emotional coloring.
Instead of facts, the media uses fear, pity, or anger.
Example: Television shows sad music and crying people to evoke sympathy for one side and blame the other. A side may be accused of something it did not actually do, or the basis for the accusation may be heavily exaggerated.
Sometimes such news triggers false emotions accidentally — when information spreads widely without prior investigation or fact-checking. In such cases, it later becomes difficult to change the opinions of people who have already reacted emotionally. In other cases, emotionally charged narratives are created deliberately.
Shifting attention.
The media distracts from important issues with less significant but loud news.
Example: While everyone is discussing a blogger scandal, unfavorable laws are being passed unnoticed.
Substitution of concepts.
The media uses softer or harsher wording to distort meaning.
Example: “Staff optimization” sounds better than “mass layoffs.”
Creating the illusion of a unified opinion.
The media suggests that “everyone thinks this way,” and therefore you should too.
Example: “Most people support this law!” (without real surveys or clarity about who this “majority” is).
False analogies.
The media compares incomparable things to persuade the audience.
Example: In Georgia, a pro-Russian party won elections using fear tactics, claiming that choosing pro-Western candidates would lead to war like in Ukraine.
Presenting a single case as a trend.
One isolated incident is shown as proof of a widespread problem.
Example: “A migrant committed a crime, therefore all migrants should be deported because the streets are unsafe.”
The effect of omission (hints and insinuations).
The media implies something without stating it explicitly to shape opinion.
Example: “The minister left the meeting immediately after an uncomfortable question from a journalist.” The wording itself already carries a negative implication.
This technique is often used when the media focuses on politicians’ statements instead of their actual actions. As a result, a large number of assumptions and conclusions appear that are not based on facts but fill the entire information space.
Demonization of the opponent.
An opponent is portrayed in an extremely negative light.
Example: “He wants to change the system? Then he is an enemy of the people!”
Creating a sense of urgency.
The audience is pushed to react immediately, without time to think.
Example: “Experts warn: if the spread of the virus is not stopped within the next 24 hours, the consequences will be catastrophic!”
Distortion of statistics.
The media uses data selectively or presents it misleadingly.
Example: “Crime has increased by 200%!” (If there were 2 cases and now there are 6, the context is very different.)
Creating a false dilemma.
The choice is presented as if only two options exist.
Example: “Either you support this law, or you want chaos in the streets!”
Labeling.
Emotionally charged words are used to influence perception.
Example: “Activists are lazy people who don’t want to work!”
Exaggeration of a problem.
A minor situation is turned into a major sensation.
Example: A fight happens on a bus, and the headlines read: “Public transport is becoming dangerous for passengers!”
As you can see, it is extremely difficult for an ordinary person to navigate all of this. We simply do not have the time to verify everything we see and hear in the media. But any information should be filtered and subjected to critical analysis, checked against your own values and principles before being accepted as truth. And most importantly, it is crucial to avoid becoming too emotionally involved in everything you see or hear in the media.
Sometimes a news event that has no direct connection to our lives can steal our attention for days. We start thinking about it, discussing it with others, making assumptions, and experiencing fear. As you understand, this is a very powerful drain of energy.
It is important to realize that the media is also part of a system. The role of the media is not only — and not always — to inform. This tool can also be used to deliberately extract energy from people. Ask yourself: how often do you see kind news or uplifting, inspiring stories in the media? The themes that most consistently capture attention are negativity, fear, gossip, sex, and degradation. This type of content occupies the majority of media space. Positive topics do appear — but much less frequently.