Shock Content and Consciousness: Why We Get Used to Information Noise and How Not to Ruin Our “Hearing”

Since 2019, social networks have become the primary source of news for Ukrainians, pushing traditional media into second place. Social media algorithms promote emotional content—posts or videos that appeal to readers’ and viewers’ emotions rather than to rational thought. Such content is often manipulative and prevents people from gaining a deeper understanding of events. Particularly dangerous in this respect is Telegram, which not only fails to filter content but is also quite likely linked to Russian intelligence services.

Media fast food from Telegram

Nevertheless, by the end of 2024, Telegram became the most popular messenger in Ukraine: 80% of Ukrainians used it for communication and 73% for reading the news. Because the majority of Ukrainians use this platform, reputable media outlets and civil society organizations also maintain channels there to expand their outreach. Moreover, many government agencies, including local authorities, do the same. This creates a vicious circle: people who want quick access to information subscribe to Telegram, and content producers have to create channels there in order to reach audiences which they cannot access through other means.

However, alongside the channels of media outlets, NGOs, and government agencies, Telegram also hosts a vast number of anonymous channels that spread emotionally charged, clickbait content of questionable quality. The anonymity of such channels removes any responsibility for the accuracy of what they publish. It is no surprise, then, that according to the Pylyp Orlyk Institute for Democracy, many Telegram channels fail to meet basic standards of completeness, accuracy, and balance of opinion. Unfortunately, dubious stories from these channels often spill over into mainstream media, where they gain legitimacy. For example, monitoring by the Institute of Mass Information shows that about 40% of online news in Ukrainian outlets originates from social media posts, and more than half of those cite Telegram—often without verifying the original sources.

One of the biggest problems with anonymous Telegram channels is that they publish unofficial “alerts” about large-scale missile strikes, along with photos and videos of the aftermath of enemy attacks. Such posts trigger strong public reactions, but their credibility is doubtful. And if the information is accurate, it effectively serves the enemy—something authorities and media have repeatedly warned about. Unfortunately, unlike traditional media, the owners of anonymous Telegram channels cannot be held accountable for such activity.

Another hallmark of social media messages (especially on Telegram) is the rapid posting of certain “facts” (or snapshots)—often unreliable and provided without context or analysis. By contrast, the core function of traditional media is to create a coherent “story”—filtering out insignificant or dubious information, highlighting important events and trends, and presenting them in the right context. Without this work, the audience is left not with a structured, logical picture of events but with a “kaleidoscope” of emotions, making it harder to grasp the essence of the processes at hand.

Consequences of consuming media fast food

Constant “emotional roller coasters” have long-term negative effects.

1. Gradual emotional exhaustion

What shocked us yesterday becomes just another video in the feed today. In psychology, this phenomenon is known as compassion fatigue. To avoid overload, people begin to tune out the news. The result is less empathy and more anxiety in the society.

2. An overload of information noise undermines trust in official sources

According to the Edelman Trust Barometer 2024, in countries overwhelmed by an excess of information and disinformation, trust in government and the media declines. In its place, cynicism arises along with a sense that the authorities are hiding something. Meanwhile, in Ukraine, anonymous Telegram channels sometimes serve as the first source of news about major events—further deepening distrust of official information.

3. Excess information without context distorts reality

The ability to think critically erodes, and as a result, people either conclude that “everything is hopelessly bad” or cling to naïve expectations of a quick victory. Mistakes in government communication have contributed to that. Over the past three years, the authorities have often fueled inflated expectations, circumventing difficult topics instead of engaging in an honest conversation about reality.

4. Information overload dampens civic engagement

An excess of contradictory information leads some people to avoid news and public debate altogether, and it can foster a sense of powerlessness: “nothing depends on us,” “nothing will change anyway.” In psychology, this is known as learned helplessness.

An information environment dominated by emotion, sensationalism, and anxiety shapes not only our perception of reality but also levels of public trust, civic engagement, and social cohesion. Yet this environment does not exist apart from us—we create it whenever we consume, share, or deliberately ignore certain content. So what can we do to remain grounded in rationality and resist the flood of unchecked emotional messages?

Tips for healthy media consumption

At the individual level, you can start small:

• Recognize the red flags

Excessive emotional tone, sensational headlines without details, anonymous sources, or questionable origins—all of these are warning signs that content may be manipulative or designed solely to capture your attention.

• Limit your intake

The habit of mindlessly scrolling through your feed leads to anxiety and emotional burnout. Set aside specific times for reading the news, and choose a handful of trustworthy sources—such as official government channels or established media outlets.

• Consume news mindfully

“Why am I reading or sharing this?”—a simple but effective question that helps you reflect on the message’s purpose and analyze it, rather than reacting emotionally or passing it along uncritically.

At the societal level, more systemic steps are needed:

• Develop media literacy

Critical thinking should be treated as a fundamental skill cultivated and reinforced in schools, universities, and workplaces. Educational programs on media literacy, explanations of the goals and methods used by dishonest content producers, and critical assessments of media quality all build resilience against information manipulation.

• Authorities must set the standard

The government should prohibit state institutions from using Telegram for both external and internal communications. Channels for public information can be established on Viber or WhatsApp, while internal communication should be conducted in secure environments. This would help shift a significant share of the audience that relies on official information away from Telegram. At the same time, people need clear explanations of the risks associated with using Telegram. Occasionally, debates on this issue resurface in the public sphere. In March 2024, MPs even registered a draft law to that effect—but since then, no progress has been made.

• Support quality media

Mechanisms such as the Ukrainian Cultural Foundation can be used to provide competitive support for quality media. For instance, part of the funds currently allocated to the nationwide TV marathon could be redirected for this purpose.

It is important to remember that the information war is an integral part of Russia’s war against Ukraine. Russia seeks to widen divisions within Ukrainian society, sow feelings of “betrayal” and apathy, and erode support for the Armed Forces. That is why we should treat our media consumption with the same care as the food we choose to eat.