Where Do We Go From Here?

First, we have to accept the reality of it. Angertainment cannot be banned due to that pesky First Amendment. The distortions, lies, conspiracies, and misinformation spread by Angertainment, Inc. are protected speech.

Angertainment is a form of pornography. It distorts reality, appeals to deeply rooted impulses, and is immensely profitable.

The parallel with pornography even carries over into technology. Much of the earliest innovation in web design, payment systems, and user interaction originated on adult websites. Innovations developed there spilled over into everyday Internet activity. Angertainment has driven some innovation in the world of real journalism. Ubiquitous news scrolls that you see on news programs and news sites were first created by angertainment networks to help stimulate engagement. Real journalism has followed suit.

Angertainment also resembles an invasive species—kudzu, lionfish, emerald ash borer, lantern flies, and stink bugs. Angertainment has established itself in its own media ecosystem. It will never be eliminated. Our only hope is to contain its spread and attempt to mitigate its worst effects.

What Can We Do?

The first and most important step we can take is to give this form of content a name. We can call it what it actually is: angertainment.

It is not just “right-wing media.” The Wall Street Journal (at least its editorial pages) and The New Republic are right-wing media. Media such as Newsmax, Fox News, One America News, and their ilk are completely different.

When we talk about “media,” it is in effect shorthand for “news media.” That modifier—news—carries with it the implication that the content has been gathered ethically. It has been reported by people adhering to journalistic standards. When we hear the word “news,” we expect that what we are hearing has been verified; that it is true.

Angertainment is not bound by the constraints of real journalism.

Angertainment is non-verified, news-like content. It is being produced for profit. The political impact of it may be seen as a bonus by the producers. Or perhaps they are aware of the impact it has in undermining democracy and corroding public discourse, and they write that off as collateral damage. Or, perhaps, they support authoritarianism and are glad to see what’s happening. Or perhaps they are focused primarily on their profits and honestly don’t care what happens in civil society.

The best thing we can do to help combat the extraordinarily negative effects of angertainment is to call it out and give it its proper name. The truth is not something that exists somewhere on a continuum. Angertainment, Inc. stands outside the boundaries of anything that belongs on a scale with other news media from conservative to liberal. It is an outlier and needs to be identified as such. It is an invasive species. It is a threat to democracy.

Content presenters who make claims about a “stolen election” are not somewhere on the news spectrum. People who claim that mass killings and riots are being perpetrated by “crisis actors” cannot be viewed as operating in the same realm as serious news organizations. These people and their companies are profiting by spreading lies. This is a business that profits by undermining democracy, promoting intolerance, and supporting the possibility of one-party, minority rule and dictatorship.

In the “keep it simple, provide easy answers” world of angertainment, minority rights and real efforts to address our nations real problems are swept aside. As a result, a very large segment of the American population—angertainment fans—are being rewarded for obedience and indoctrinated with ignorance. Angertainers have recently begun accusing their opponents of “grooming” behavior—a nasty-sounding term that began appearing along with reports about sexual abuse perpetrated by powerful public figures. The behavior of the angertainment industry—the continuous feeding of its audiences lies and misinformation—is in fact a kind of anti-democratic grooming of the American population.

Step one in combating the corrosive effect of angertainment: Call it what it is. Say the word. Angertainment.

If you are called upon to explain what you mean by angertainment, be prepared to focus on the underlying principle.

Journalism relies on reporters who actively gather information. It involves fact-checking. Real news is verified. When real news organizations make mistakes, they provide corrections. And when they offer opinions, they label them clearly and make sure that their opinions are based on verifiable facts.

Angertainment takes real news, reshapes it, mixes in opinion, and doesn’t bother with verification. The angertainment industry is concerned primarily with attracting a large audience and, through whatever means available and monetizing it. Angertainment is, like pornography, a way to develop a lot of cheap, profitable content. Some people love it. They become fans. Angertainment businesses love that because it helps them make more money.

The Fox News Settlement

Angertainment, Inc. is impervious to routine fact checking. In reality, truth really doesn’t matter if it gets in the way of the story it wants to tell. But it is useful to remember that once in a while, the industry gets caught up in its own misinformation.

Fox News proved in 2023 that angertainers will, on purpose, tell lies to its viewers rather than risk losing some of its audience to other angertainment providers. The evidence came through the Dominion Voting Systems lawsuit regarding “stolen election” claims.

The evidence provided through internal communications at Fox—emails and text messages—showed that all the top executives at Fox News knew the truth. Unfortunately, other angertainment outlets were promoting the false claims. Fox was losing viewers to them. The Fox executives knew what they had to do: They had to lie.

Unfortunately for Fox, mistakes were made. The internal communications of the Fox executives were successfully subpoenaed for the lawsuit Dominion brought against Fox. People at Fox did a terrible thing. They put their internal communications in writing. Documentary evidence of their behaviour was found.  

The network had knowingly spread lies through the content it provided to its audience. It violated the fundamental principles of journalism. It paid $787.5 million rather than go to court and lose.

Fox News then proceeded to lie some more. It said, in a statement following the settlement, that it acknowledged “certain claims about Dominion to be false” and expressed regret for “giving voice to false accusations.” Yet the people at Fox continue to call themselves journalists.

The statement was disingenuous. Fox News does not do journalism. The $787.5 million they just paid proved it. Fox News is simply an angertainment business producing unverified, news-like content to make money.

Don’t Try to Change Anyone’s Mind

As Robert Heinlein once said, “Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.”

Do not try to change anyone’s mind. Consider the scenario of the avid sports fan. Assume for a moment that you are a big-time fan of the New York Yankees. You have a friend who is a diehard Boston Red Sox fan. Now, sitting down in front of the television set before the big game between these two rivals, what could you say to your friend to persuade them to switch allegiances and root for the Yankees?

The answer is—nothing. It’s impossible. Thats how fans (fanatics) are.

You will never present a case persuasive enough to convince an angertainment fan (fanatic) that they are misinformed.

What Can You Do?

While you cannot get someone to change their team allegiance, talking about individual players is a little bit different. When watching a sporting event, it’s easy to admire a great performance by an athlete, even if they are wearing the wrong teams uniform.

In discussions with angertainment fans, you can talk about the people you admire—reporters, commentators, pollsters, and even politicians. Be prepared to be specific. Talk about these people in the way you might describe a star player on a sports team. Make sure you phrase your admiration in terms of what you personally like or admire. And leave it at that. Confrontation will never move the needle, but if you can share real, meaningful thoughts about a “player” in the game of life, it might nudge someone in the direction of wishing that person was on their team. It’s not a game-changing strategy, but it might create a small crack in someone’s armor. You never know—maybe if you get someone started doing New York Times puzzles, it will lead them to the spelling bee, and then the crossword—and who knows, maybe into reading real news.

You can even express admiration for the business model. It’s a great way to make money. Let news organizations do the newsgathering. All you have to do is read and react. Low overhead. Tremendous opportunity for entrepreneurs. Gather an audience, say anything you want, and the First Amendment and libel laws will protect you. The only time you have to worry is when you actually know that something is false and you accidentally create a paper trail that shows you know it’s not true, and you keep repeating it anyway. It’s an amazingly profitable business.

The key is recognizing angertainment for what it is—not news, not journalism, but entertainment designed to profit from our political divisions. Once we start calling it by its proper name, we can begin to address its corrosive effects on our democracy.