I Must Be Allergic To The Media

I've noticed that since I stopped watching television (except for the occasional CSI or Mythbusters) there have been major improvements in my overall mood and mental health. I'm less stressed, more social, and more optimistic. It's even possible that the change is partly responsible for my recent "excellent" blood pressure reading, since I'm not seeing the deceptive advertisements and sensational news stories that always get my temper up.

Unfortunately, the television isn't the only route for such aggravations. Because of my interest in the presidential race (this being my first presidential election as a voter) I have been regularly visiting CNN.com for their political coverage. While there, I often look at other news items that catch my eye, avoiding videos in favor of text articles because I'm often listening to music. So I have become emotionally invested in ongoing stories like that of a man who was seen kicking and stomping on a baby by the side of a road, and refusing to stop until a police officer shot him.

I was happy to read that California is allowing gay marriage now, but not surprised to see news about protests. I followed a link to "iReport," which as far as I can tell is like youtube specifically for news. A story about protests at gay weddings sported a warning that it had been "flagged" as having "material that may be in violation of community guidelines."

Interestingly, on the upper corner of the same screen was the iReport logo with the words "Unedited. Unfiltered. News." It struck me as odd that an "unedited," "unfiltered" site would have guidelines restricting content. I looked up those guidelines, hoping for a simple explanation - after all, a little moderation is often necessary to stem the flow of idiocy that inevitably rushes in to sully any potentially beneficial institution.

It turns out there are rules against certain things on iReport. These include "obscene/lewd" content, anything that "poses a reasonable threat to personal or public safety," "Hate speech," and of course that old standby, "sexually explicit content."

Though I never actually got around to watching the video about the gay marriage protests, I suspect it might have been flagged for the "hate speech" rule. Interestingly, that particular rule doesn't specify the context of the speech that is prohibited; any hate speech is banned. If there's a story about, say, a drunken celebrity going on an anti-semitic tirade, or a politician expressing homophobic attitudes at a dinner party, or a man getting harassed in public by a mob of racists shouting slurs, any videos of these stories aren't allowed on this "unedited, unfiltered" news site, if the rules are interpreted literally.

I may have to quit my CNN political surveillance; it's just too stressful to be in such regular contact with the real world. Besides, I wouldn't want all those polls and commentaries to ruin the ending by telling me who's going to win.