This is your brain on terrorism

Summary

The video script explores how sensationalized media coverage of terrorism can distort public perception of risk, leading to fear and support for ineffective 'security theater' measures. It discusses the psychological impact of news stories versus statistics on our brains, the persistent fear post-9/11 despite the low actual risk of terrorism, and the economic incentives for media to continue dramatic coverage. The script suggests that understanding our cognitive biases and being skeptical of our fears is key to better assessing risk and supporting effective security strategies.

Takeaways

• 📺 Watching news coverage of terrorist attacks can be addictive and stressful.
• 📉 Our brains prioritize stories over statistics, leading to skewed perceptions of risk.
• 🦈 Frequent news stories about rare events, like shark attacks or plane crashes, make them seem more common than they are.
• 💡 Terrorism poses a very low risk to individuals compared to other dangers, but media coverage inflates our fears.
• 📈 Fear of terrorism remains high due to constant sensational news coverage, despite a lack of frequent large-scale attacks.
• 🎭 Security measures that look effective, like border walls and travel bans, are often just 'security theater' and don't enhance safety.
• 🔎 Effective security strategies involve espionage, intelligence, and emergency response, which are less visible and less sensational.
• 📰 Media outlets benefit from high ratings during terror attacks and have no incentive to reduce sensationalism.
• ⚖️ Politicians face pressure to implement dramatic security measures due to the heightened public fear driven by media coverage.
• 🧠 Being aware of how our brains misjudge risks can help us correct our perceptions and make better decisions about safety.

Q & A

What is the common reaction of people when they hear about a major terrorist attack?

People are likely to turn on the TV, particularly cable news, to get updates and watch hours of coverage to understand the situation better.

Why do news channels repeatedly show sensationalized segments about terrorist attacks?

News channels do this to attract viewership and ratings, as sensational stories are more likely to keep people watching.

What does Bruce Schneier suggest about how our brains react to scary news?

Bruce Schneier suggests that our brains are more influenced by stories than statistics, leading us to overestimate the risk of events that are frequently in the news.

How does the media's portrayal of terrorism affect the public's perception of risk?

The media's portrayal of terrorism can make the public overestimate the risk of such events, leading to heightened fear and potentially irrational responses.

What is the actual risk of dying from terrorism compared to other causes?

The risk of dying from terrorism is extremely low compared to other causes, such as choking on food while watching TV.

Why do people continue to watch terrorism coverage despite the fear it induces?

People watch terrorism coverage because they want to stay informed about potential threats to their safety, even though it can cause fear and anxiety.

What is the term Bruce Schneier uses to describe security measures that look good but do not actually increase safety?

Bruce Schneier uses the term 'security theater' to describe measures that seem to increase security but are ineffective in reality.

How does the fear of terrorism influence political decisions and public policy?

The fear of terrorism can lead to the support of hawkish responses and security measures that may not be effective, but seem to provide a sense of safety.

What are some examples of 'security theater' mentioned in the script?

Examples of 'security theater' include the border wall and the Muslim ban, which are public and visible but may not actually increase safety.

Why does sensationalist terrorism coverage make it difficult for politicians to resist implementing security theater?

Sensationalist coverage amplifies public fear, putting pressure on politicians to take visible actions that seem to address the threat, even if they are not effective.

What is the best defense against the psychological impact of sensationalist terrorism coverage?

The best defense is understanding the biases in our perception of risk and being skeptical of our fears, politicians, and the media's portrayal of threats.

Outlines

00:00

📺 The Impact of Terrorism News Coverage

This paragraph discusses the typical public reaction to news of a terrorist attack, highlighting how people tend to turn to cable news for extended coverage. The detailed reporting on such incidents can lead to heightened fear and anxiety, even though the actual risk of terrorism is low. The paragraph underscores that news consumption shapes our perception of threats more than statistical realities.

05:01

🔍 How Sensational News Affects Perception

This section explains how our brains prioritize stories over statistics, leading to misjudged perceptions of risk. It cites security expert Bruce Schneier, who explains that repeated exposure to sensational news stories causes people to overestimate the frequency and severity of rare events like terrorism, despite the actual low probability of such events occurring.

📈 The Discrepancy Between Fear and Reality

Here, the script delves into the lasting impact of 9/11 on American fear levels, noting that despite the lack of subsequent large-scale attacks, fear remains high due to continuous, graphic news coverage. The paragraph highlights how this skewed perception is perpetuated by media, which benefits from increased viewership during terror-related news cycles.

📊 The Real Risk of Terrorism vs. Media Hype

This part examines how media coverage contributes to an exaggerated perception of terrorism risks. It points out that the actual likelihood of dying in a terrorist attack is extremely low compared to other everyday risks. The continuous focus on terrorism in the news creates a false sense of its prevalence and danger.

📉 The Effect of Terrorism Fear on Public Policy

This segment explores how heightened fear of terrorism influences public policy and political responses. It discusses the concept of 'security theater,' where measures that appear to enhance security are implemented more for show than for actual effectiveness. Examples include policies like the border wall and the Muslim ban, which are popular but do little to improve safety.

🤔 Rethinking Our Response to Terrorism

The paragraph suggests that effective security measures are often less dramatic and more focused on intelligence and emergency response rather than public spectacles. It highlights the difficulty politicians face in resisting 'security theater' due to the pressure from sensationalist news coverage and public fear.

🧠 Understanding and Managing Our Fears

This section advises that while it's unrealistic to stop watching the news, being aware of our cognitive biases can help mitigate irrational fears. It encourages a critical approach to media consumption and a better understanding of how our brains process risk.

📉 The Realities of Terrorism Risk Perception

In this conclusion, the script reiterates that terrorism coverage in the media can distort public perception, leading to overreactions and support for ineffective security measures. It emphasizes the importance of skepticism towards fear-inducing news and the value of focusing on practical safety strategies.

😂 Media Blunders: A Humorous Example

This final paragraph provides a humorous example of media overreaction, describing an incident where CNN mistakenly reported an ISIS flag at a London Gay Pride celebration, which turned out to be a flag adorned with sex toys. It illustrates the potential for media to sensationalize and misinterpret events.

Keywords

💡Terrorist Attack

A terrorist attack is a violent act intended to create fear, perpetrated for a religious, political, or ideological goal, and deliberately targeting or disregarding the safety of non-combatants. In the script, it refers to incidents that trigger extensive media coverage and public fear.

💡Cable News

Cable news refers to television channels dedicated to providing continuous news coverage. In the video script, cable news channels are depicted as providing round-the-clock coverage of terrorist attacks, contributing to heightened public fear and anxiety.

💡Fear

Fear is an unpleasant emotion caused by the belief that someone or something is dangerous. In the context of the video script, fear is a major outcome of watching sensationalized news coverage of terrorism, leading to public anxiety and support for drastic security measures.

💡Security Theater

Security theater refers to security measures that make people feel safer without significantly improving actual security. Bruce Schneier's concept is used in the script to describe ineffective but visible actions like the border wall and the Muslim ban, which do not enhance safety but cater to public fear.

💡Risk Perception

Risk perception is the subjective judgment that people make about the severity and probability of a risk. The script discusses how media coverage skews public perception, making rare events like terrorism seem more common and threatening than they are.

💡Statistics vs. Stories

This concept highlights the difference between understanding risks through data versus through narrative accounts. The video script explains how human brains prioritize stories over statistics, leading to misjudged risks when exposed to frequent news stories about rare events.

💡Sensationalism

Sensationalism in media is the use of exciting or shocking stories at the expense of accuracy, to provoke public interest or excitement. The script criticizes cable news for sensationalizing terrorist attacks to boost ratings, thereby increasing public fear.

💡Media Consumption

Media consumption refers to the amount and type of media content that individuals consume. The script suggests that excessive consumption of terrorism coverage can lead to heightened fear and anxiety, influencing public opinion and policy support.

💡Hawkish Responses

Hawkish responses are aggressive or warlike policies, particularly in foreign affairs. The script notes that after terrorist attacks, increased fear from media coverage can lead to public support for such aggressive measures.

💡Perception of Safety

Perception of safety is how safe people feel, which can be influenced by factors other than actual safety. The script argues that media coverage and security theater create a false perception of increased safety without providing real security improvements.

Highlights

Chances are you'll turn on a TV after hearing about a major terrorist attack, especially cable news.

You'll watch hours of coverage over the next few days to find out exactly what's going on.

Watching this coverage makes you feel scared, stressed, and anxious.

Most people find terrorism coverage almost impossible to turn off.

Our brains care more about stories than statistics, causing us to overestimate risks based on news frequency.

The chances of dying from terrorism are virtually zero compared to other common risks.

Despite the low risk, constant news coverage keeps our fear of terrorism high.

News networks get big ratings boosts during terror attacks, incentivizing extensive coverage.

The economics of news drive sensational and scary stories to maintain viewership.

Terrorism made up two of America's top 10 fears in 2016, influenced by media coverage.

Heightened fear of terrorism leads to support for hawkish responses and ineffective security measures.

Security theater, like the border wall and Muslim ban, looks good but doesn't make us safer.

Effective safety strategies are often boring and don't make a splash, like espionage and intelligence.

Sensationalist coverage makes it hard for politicians to say no to security theater.

Understanding our brain's biases and skepticism towards media can help us process risks more accurately.

Transcripts

what will you do the next time you hear

there's been a major terrorist

attack chances are you'll turn on a TV

possible terror attack and specifically

cable news and apparently there's been

an explosion if it's a big attack you'll

watch hours of coverage over the next

few days is emerging now as a mass

casualty situation TR to find out

exactly what's going on it's a very

disturbing situation you'll learn

excruciating details about the attack we

don't know the extent of the injuries

haven't seen anything like it in my life

see of it replayed dozens of

times watch sensationalized segments

about how it happens what our response

should be we need to close our borders

and when the next attack might come this

kind of tragedy will not be the last one

of its kind watching this will make you

feel scared stressed and anxious could

the US be next but you'll keep watching

anyway most people find terrorism

coverage almost impossible to turn off

we watch news like this because we want

to be informed about potential threats

to our safety could what happened in

Paris

happen in the US but what if it does the

opposite what if watching terrorism

coverage makes us worse at knowing how

to keep ourselves

[Music]

safe one basic problem with how we

understand scary news is that our brains

care a lot more about stories than they

do about statistics we're not very good

at math so we often judge the severity

of a risk by how often we encounter it

that's Bruce schneer he's a security

expert who's written a lot of about why

our brains overreact to scary news

stories and those stories stick to us

more than the data does so we make risk

decisions more based on the stories than

a reality so if we see a bunch of

stories about shark attacks we think

shark attacks are common if we see a

story about a plane crash we will

overestimate the risks of flying we

don't do this because we're dumb it's a

basic psychology problem news by

definition is something that almost

never happens but that's not the way our

brains work if it's in the news if it's

talked about if we hear about it a lot

we confuse that with it being common and

you can see this problem most clearly

when it comes to terrorism the chances

of you or someone you know dying from

terrorism are virtually zero terrorism

looks scary but it kills a shockingly

low number of Americans you are way less

likely to die from terrorism than you

are from choking on food while watching

TV that being said after 9/11 Americans

consumed a ton of extreme shocking news

coverage about

and our fear that we would be killed by

terrorists spiked now You' think as time

went on and we went years without

another 911 that our fears of terrorism

would go down the same way they went

down after the Oklahoma City bombing for

example but they didn't we stayed scared

and you only need to turn on cable news

to understand why Terror in the streets

of Paris we have not ruled out terrorism

digital terrorism homegrown terrorists

TV news is packed with round-the-clock

coverage of the war on terror footage of

Isis training exercises a violent new

Isis video and endless debates about

potential threats posed by refugees and

sleeper cells and homegrown radicals

soall Lone Wolf threats lone wol lone

wolf when there is a terrorist attack

near or far cable news turns into

24-hour Terror networks the fear of

Terror attacks as many people wondering

if their country even their city is next

news networks get big ratings boost

during Terror attacks so they have no

incentive to tone down their coverage

this is the economics of news the way

you get that readership and viewership

is by being spectacular going with the

stories that are scary that are

threatening that are terrifying every

year MSNBC re-airs footage of the 911

attack so we never forget it's hard to

watch this stuff and not feel like

terrorism is a constant looming threat

the reign of terror shows no signs of

abating which helps explain why

terrorism made up two of American top 10

fears in 2016 our heightened fear isn't

due to a change in Risk it's due to a

change in our perception of that risk

how quick quickly we can hear the word

terrorism and imagine a scary story

about it in our heads and that

heightened fear causes us to overreact a

study conducted after 9911 found that

for people who thought another terror

attack was imminent watching TV news

made them more likely to support hawkish

responses to terrorism including things

like military action shock and it also

causes us to pursue security measures

that sound good but don't actually make

us safer and schne invented a term for

it he calls it security theater security

theater is a security measure that looks

good but doesn't do anything schneer

sees examples of security theater in

things like the border wall and the

Muslim ban the things that Trump has

made centerpieces of his National

Security strategy we've been talking

about this right from the beginning all

the efforts to keep the foreigners out

of the US are prime example of security

theater they're not going to make us

safer but they're big they're public and

there's a segment of the United States

that is scared and sees those things and

feels safer it's not just that these

strategies don't work it's is that

they're the opposite of the types of

strategies that actually do make us

safer if we actually want to be safer

often the best things to do are the

things that don't make a splash it's

going to be Espionage intelligence and

emergency response hiring foreign

translators this is boring stuff the

problem is the same sensationalist

coverage that makes us overestimate the

risk of Terror makes it really hard for

politicians to say no to security

theater do you think President Obama

fully understands the extent of the

threat when CNN is a 24-hour Horror

Story there's a lot of pressure on the

president to overreact are we doing

enough to to stop these kinds of attacks

and this helps explain why Trump's

security theater is so popular with his

supporters he Echoes the fear and panic

they see on cable news it's going to get

worse and worse you're going to have

more World Trade Centers when you're

scared you're going to be drawn to the

politician that does things that are big

that are public that are spectacular

invade a country build a wall now when I

started writing this episode I was sure

that Schneider's answer was going to be

to stop watching but I was wrong of

course we all have to watch the news we

can't turn away I couldn't Force someone

to do that I can have trouble doing that

myself well what then in some ways our

best defense is understanding what's

going on we can't stop our brains from

reacting the way they do all we can do

is observe it recognize that we have

these biases and try to correct for them

if I have one takeaway it's to

understand that your brain isn't

processing risk properly and the more

you can do that the safer you'll be I

know it's not a satisfying answer we

will almost certainly see another major

scary terrorist attack in our lifetime

one that dominates the news cycle and

fills our brain with extreme and violent

images we're going to hear pundits and

politicians calling for dramatic

response and we're going to feel very

very scared I even noticed myself

freaking out while researching clips for

this episode we are humans not machines

we can't just look at charts and data

and fix the part of our brain brains

that misjudges risk what we can do is

remember to be skeptical of our fears

our politicians and of the people on TV

for whom our terror is good

[Music]

business cable news's obsession with

scary terrorism coverage can backfire

pretty hilariously like in this CNN

segment from 2015 an unnerving sight

today at a London Gay Pride Celebration

an Isis flag only problem that is not an

Isis flag that is a bunch of

dildos