How Fear and Anger Shape the Media Agenda

Expert at the National Analytical Center Zhansaya Oralbekova gave an interview to Ainagul Yelyubayeva, a journalist at the Nofake.kz portal. The text is taken from Nofake.kz.

In today’s media environment, facts often lose to emotions. News headlines shout, social media seethes with outrage, and fear and anger have become the main currencies of attention. Negative emotions turn out to be more “marketable” than arguments, numbers, and calm analysis. This directly affects how society perceives information and forms its conclusions.

Fear and anger work especially effectively. A headline that triggers anxiety (“You are in danger,” “This is being hidden from you”) or outrage (“Scandal,” “Betrayal,” “Outrageous decision”) instantly engages the reader. Rational verification of information requires effort, while emotional reactions are almost automatic.

Zhansaya Oralbekova, a behavioral science researcher at the National Analytical Center affiliated with Nazarbayev University, explains this by the fact that the human mind may be evolutionarily tuned to threats and survival. As a result, such negative information sends a signal to the brain that action or self-preservation is required.

“There is also a concept in neurobiology, neuroscience, and behavioral science called negativity bias — the tendency to focus on negative information. This means that negative content is remembered faster than positive facts because it affects the amygdala and the primary instinctive mechanisms of survival. People react to such content more quickly,” the expert notes.

Anger, in turn, mobilizes energy and creates a sense of control over the situation.

“Facts and statistics are processed more slowly and require cognitive resources, whereas emotions are perceived instantly. That is why emotionally charged messages are remembered better, spread faster, and generate more engagement,” the analyst уточнила.

At the same time, social networks and news aggregators do not merely reflect audience interests — they amplify them. Algorithms promote content that generates active interaction, and people react most actively to what frightens or angers them. Content creators adapt to this demand, and the share of calm, analytical material gradually decreases. Thus, emotions slowly displace facts from the public space.

However, clickbait thinking poses a serious threat to human mental health. Anxiety levels rise, and the ability to think about complex topics diminishes. Constant consumption of negative information increases cortisol levels, disrupts sleep, reduces stress resilience, and heightens conflict-proneness. A continuous flow of fear- and anger-driven content leads to emotional burnout, feelings of helplessness, and chronic stress. Social polarization intensifies, and people increasingly live in emotional bubbles where feelings are confirmed rather than facts.

So where is the line between emotional presentation and manipulation? According to Zhansaya Oralbekova, emotional storytelling still leaves room for reflection, independent choice, and the development of one’s own thoughts. Manipulation, on the other hand, imposes a rigid framework: this is white, this is black; this is good, this is bad.

“Emotions are unavoidable, but manipulation is not. One needs to choose the right emotions — not to pressure people with hysteria, threats, or fear, but rather to provide ‘nourishment’ that helps individuals become more conscious, patient, resilient, understanding, reflective, or empathetic,” she notes.

It is also necessary to create media programs that offer space for reflection and positive thinking. In particular, formats such as podcasts can be used, where a problem is explained openly and without haste. Such content is perceived by audiences as higher quality and more meaningful.

At the same time, viewers and readers themselves should engage critical thinking — checking information across multiple sources. Sometimes an information detox is very helpful: stepping away from the news flow for a certain period to give the brain time to analyze information.

“Such a pause allows you to understand where you are being manipulated and where attempts are being made to influence you,” Zhansaya Oralbekova notes.

At the same time, audiences can influence the formation of quality content by showing interest in serious topics.

According to the specialist, emotions themselves are not evil. They are an important part of human experience and communication. The problem arises when emotions replace reality instead of helping us understand it. Responsibility lies with several parties at once: with the media in choosing a balance between attention-grabbing and credibility, with platforms in configuring algorithms, and with audiences in developing media literacy and the ability to pause between emotion and conclusion.

Facts do not have to be boring, and emotions do not have to be deceptive. But as long as fear and anger sell best, they will continue to dominate. The only question is whether we are willing to pay for this with our attention, trust, and psychological well-being.

Author: Ainagul Yelyubayeva