The “foreign influence” part is when mass shootings are a fraction of a fraction of the deaths, yet 50% of the news coverage.

The best kind of misinformation is misinformation that is true but not representative of the real situation. Have you checked our heart disease deaths? It is *factually* an issue many orders of magnitude more important to the average American. And yet…zero discussion seems to happen about it online?

And why wouldn’t there be foreign influence? It’s quite an easy checklist:

* do Russia and China have the technical capability to make social media accounts and post in English?: Yes, obviously.

* do Russia and China have any motive to drive fearful divisive narratives in the US?: Yes - we are their primary geopolitical opponent

With both of these true, to assume they’re not doing it for some reason out of kindness requires a lot of mental gymnastics.

It doesn't take foreign influence for shocking violence to get attention. Sensational news has been a big part of mass media as long as mass media has existed.

No but foreign influence does help when any comment pointing out that there are things more important for the country to fix than mass shootings(heart disease and obesity) are immediately downvoted and mocked.

Again, it doesn't suggest anything about foreign influence for a person to disagree with you. Telling people not to worry about (increasing) spectacular violence because they're more likely to die in a car accident reads as if you're changing the subject because you don't want to talk about it.

But violence isn’t increasing, it’s been decreasing for decades with an outlier uptick during COVID.

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/crim...

Thats my entire point. You’re talking about something that simply does not exist. But when nearly all of the online discourse acts as if we are less safe now, it’s easy to believe that is true. Even being aware of the statistics sometimes I feel that way.

Sensationalist media has always been a thing. Yet, at the exact same time geopolitical opponents were given a direct input to the media consumed by the average American, sentiment becomes much more negative.

In Germany there was a guy building homemade weapons who attempted to shoot up a Synagogue in Halle. It was all over the news. There is more frequent coverage because there are more shootings. No foreign power needed.

"The “foreign influence” part is when mass shootings are a fraction of a fraction of the deaths, yet 50% of the news coverage."

Not foreign influence, but simply that fear and outrage sells.

Why not both? They have the ability to make social media accounts and assist these fearful and outrages narratives, and they have the motive.

I.e. they are 100%, without a doubt, doing just that

I wouldn't count social media as the media. I certainly see social media and political groups/movements as having foreign influence. I see the media proper as just about the money.

You're telling me that "sensational and outrageous headlines" is a foreign influence operation?

Let's be serious. Yellow Journalism was thriving in its modern birthplace of USA long before PRC or RF even existed.

No, I’m telling you that sensational media is driven by demand.

Demand from consumers who interact with the internet.

Consumers who, on the internet, ONLY see upvoted comments about masa shootings and see anything talking about the more deadly issue of heart disease/obesity downvoted and mocked.