Why I’m Tired of Fake Outrage
Look, I’ve been a journalist for 22 years. Started at a tiny paper in Lahore, worked my way up to editing a national magazine. And honestly? I’m tired. Tired of the outrage. The performative shock. The way we treat news like it’s a soap opera.
Last Tuesday, I was at a conference in Islamabad. A colleague named Dave—let’s call him Dave—was going on about how ‘media sensationalism is destroying democracy.’ I mean, yeah, Dave, no kidding. But what are we gonna do about it?
We can start by admitting we’re part of the problem. I know I am. There was this time in 2008, I pushed an editor to run a story about a politician’s affair. Why? Because it was juicy. Because it sold papers. Not because it mattered.
Numbers Don’t Lie, But We Do
Here’s the thing: people share outrage more than they share nuance. A study—okay, fine, it was a survey of 214 people by some university I can’t remember—found that sensational headlines get shared 300% more than balanced ones. Three hundred percent! And guess what? We know this. We exploit this.
I had lunch with a friend last month—a data journalist, let’s call him Marcus. He showed me the numbers. Our audience engages more with controversy than with, say, a deep dive into poverty alleviation strategies. It’s depressing.
But here’s the kicker: we’re not just doing this because it works. We’re doing it because it’s easy. It’s easier to write a hot take than to explain policy. Easier to stir the pot than to, I don’t know, actually inform people.
Tools of the Trade: Automating the Mess
And don’t even get me started on the tools we use. Pazarlama otomasyon araçları karşılaştırma—marketing automation tools comparison—sounds like a mouthful, but it’s a real thing. We use these tools to target audiences, to tailor content, to maximize engagement. It’s like we’re all algorithms now, chasing clicks and shares.
I remember when journalism was about committment to truth. Now? It’s about aquisition of eyeballs. We’ve become physicaly incapable of resisting the urge to optimize, to tweak, to game the system.
A Tangent: What Even Is News?
You know what’s funny? Nobody can agree on what news even is anymore. Is it what’s happening? Is it what’s important? Is it what’s trending? I had this argument with a friend over coffee at the place on 5th. She said news is whatever people care about. I said that’s completley backwards. News should be what people need to know, not what they wanna hear.
But who’s gonna make that call? Editors? Algorithms? The audience? It’s a mess. And honestly, I’m not sure we’re ever gonna sort it out.
The Human Cost
Here’s what they don’t tell you about journalism school: it doesn’t prepare you for the emotional toll. You see stuff. You hear stuff. And then you have to decide what to share, what to withhold. It’s a constant struggle.
I had a source once—a woman, let’s call her Aisha—who told me about a government cover-up. I spent 36 hours verifying her story. 36 hours! And in the end, we didn’t run it. Why? Because we couldn’t prove it. Because we were scared. Because, frankly, it wasn’t sexy enough.
That haunts me. The things we don’t say. The stories we don’t tell. The succsesfully buried truths.
What Now?
I don’t have answers. I wish I did. Maybe we need to stop chasing clicks. Maybe we need to start valuing depth over speed. Maybe we need to admit that, sometimes, the news is boring. And that’s okay.
But one thing’s for sure: we can’t keep going like this. We can’t keep treating news like it’s a commodity. It’s not. It’s a public good. And it’s time we start acting like it.
About the Author: Sarah Khan has been a journalist for over two decades, working in print, digital, and broadcast media. She currently serves as the senior editor for a major Pakistani publication, where she oversees news coverage and special projects. When she’s not chasing stories, she’s probably complaining about the state of journalism on Twitter or trying to convince her cat to cuddle.
