The Resurgence of "Chicken Little"

Is it just me or is every "bit" of news I read forecasting that "we're all going to hell in a handbasket and the pace is picking up"

I generally scan about 5 newspapers, a couple of magazines and a few newscasts in a day and if I didn't know any better, I'd be tempted to either head for the hills or grab a noose.

Is the media "sensationaliziing" "doom" in order to increase revenues (grab market share)? Is it truely overblown or is itt really that bad (I don't think so)?

Have people become so ingrained with a "Chicken Little Syndrome" that they just don't care anymore?

The Economist - reuters

OF ED BALLS’S many qualities—including a brain some believe to be the size of a planet—subtlety and finesse have rarely been prominent. During his decade as Gordon Brown’s sidekick at the Treasury, he was brusque with bureaucrats, journalists and the occasional prime minister. As a regular for Demon Eyes—the amateur football team formed by young Labour Party apparatchiks in the 1990s, many of whom now run the country—he took a pugilistic approach to the beautiful game (“more like a rugby player”, according to one testimony). Even physically, he is the stout, rough-and-ready “real Labour” answer to sleeker peers such as James Purnell and David Miliband.

The theme appeared to be continuing this week when the schools secretary’s brutal assessment of the economy, given at a conference, was leaked. His remarks were bludgeoning: the economy will dominate politics not for a couple of years but for 15; this is a graver financial crisis than the 1930s’ (“and we all remember how the politics of that era were shaped by the economy”) and the worst global recession for over 100 years. Bedlam ensued: news bulletins led with the remarks while Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat treasury spokesman and Westminster’s premier sage of the dismal science, scolded this “doom-laden picture of Armageddon”.

Quickly, however, came some uncharacteristic fine-tuning from Mr Balls. Only the crisis in financial markets may be the worst for over a century, he clarified, not the actual recession. And even this he leavened with the kind of ambiguity he might once have mocked as mealy-mouthed—replacing the “I’m sure” in his original statement with an “I think” and a “probably”.

Mr Balls is a worldly enough politician to know that the guarantees of secrecy he has enjoyed at Bilderberg summits, where the great and near-great rub shoulders, do not obtain at Labour’s Yorkshire and Humber regional conference. He should also know from his time as a journalist that the media’s professed disdain for well-drilled politicians who never stray from the party line stops short of making life easy for those who do say something interesting. A small comfort to Mr Balls—and a source of alarm to everyone else— is that for all the contumely heaped on his remarks by journalists and opposition politicians, few are saying with any confidence that he was wrong.
If you create an economic crisis why wouldn't you also promote the hysteria, that would be logical wouldn't it?
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaverView Post

If you create an economic crisis why wouldn't you also promote the hysteria, that would be logical wouldn't it?


It gets to be even beyond the politico-economic front though and delve into the societal aspect of "armageddonisc" horror

Did you catch Nancy Grace and the Callie Anthony story. 5-6 months of a missing kid and how warped people are. It made you want to stick a pen in your eye

I don't expect "butterflies and rainbows", but neither do I expect sensationalistic gore
Tyr, Chicken Littles invariably surface during an economic downturn. They forecast doom and gloom till kingdom come. There are already some who are saying that this depression will be worse than the 30s depression (with unemployment of more than 25%). Or that the free market system as we know is history.

Mind you, the counterpart is the Polyannas, which spout like mushrooms during the good times (many times, the Chicken Littles morph into the Polyannas). Thus when NASDAQ was at 5500, the Polyannas were arguing when it will reach 6000, would it be soon or very soon? Of course, we all know what happened, NASDAQ crashed to 1100. Or when Nortel was trading at 120, the heated argument was about when it would reach 200 $, again, soon or very soon.

It is important not to take the Chicken Littles or the Polyannas seriously.
So if we can just get Polyanna to mate with chicken little, our press would tell us how it is without sensationalism?
I've seen Polyanna. Ain't gonna happen
no new posts