What is a no negative press agreement?
A no negative press agreement binds a media outlet’s consent to publish information provided by a person with the condition that they be not portrayed negatively by the press.
Why would a person want that?
In recognising that the press has powers above and beyond every-day people to publish information and spread knowledge and perspective about an issue that can be damaging to an individual. An individual while motivated by the appeal of publicity, is also concerned about the potential damage caused by negative press.
Every person is the hero of their own story, from one’s own perspective they performed actions that were justified and motivated by their own intention and worldview, no reasonable person would be able to tell their story (other than purposefully) in which they are spun as the negative conspirator of a plot, actively causing negative events on the world for no reason.
Historically, humans have been motivated to care more about bad news than good news, for reasons that expand on the idea that bad news might ring your death (and be a cause of natural selection) and good news would be irrelevant for survival purposes. Today we are no longer in that historic period, yet we still pay strong attention to bad news. It’s clear that bad news can personally effect individuals – not only those in the stories, but others experiencing the bad news can be left with a negative worldview or motivated to be upset or distraught. In light of the fact that bad news is known to spread more than good news, and also risks negatively affecting us mentally, we are motivated to choose to avoid bad news, both in not creating it, not endorsing it and not aiding in it’s creation.
The binding agreement is designed to do several things:
- protect the individual from harm
- reduce the total volume of negative press in the world
- decrease the damage caused by negative press in the world
- bring about the future we would rather live in
- protect the media outlet from harming individuals
Does this limit news-maker’s freedom to publish?
That is not the intent. On the outset, it’s easy to think that it could have that effect, and perhaps in a very shortsighted way it might have that effect. Shortly after the very early effects, it will have a net positive effect of creating news of positive value, protecting the media from escalating negativity, and bringing about the future we want to see in the world. If it limits media outlets in any way it should be to stop them from causing harm. At which point any non-compliance by a media entity will signal the desire to act as agents of harm in the world.
Why would a media outlet be an agent of harm? Doesn’t that go against the principles of no negative press?
While media outlets (or humans), set out with the good intentions of not having a net negative effect on the world, they can be motivated by other concerns. For example, the value of being more popular, or the direction from which they are paid for their efforts (for example advertising revenue). The concept of competing commitment, and being motivated by conflicting goals is best covered by Scott under the name moloch.
The no negative press agreement is an attempt to create a commons which binds all relevant parties to action better than the potential for a tragedy. This commons has a desire to grow and maintain itself, and is motivated to maintain itself. If any media outlets are motivated to defect, they are to be penalised by both the other press and the public.
How do I encourage a media outlet to comply with no negative press?
Ask them to publish a policy with regard to no negative press. If you are an individual interested in interacting with the media, and are concerned with the risks associated with negative press, you can suggest an individual binding agreement in the interim of the media body designing and publishing a relevant policy.
I think someone violated the no negative press policy, what should I do?
At the time of writing, no one is bound by the concept of no negative press. Should there be desire and pressure in the world to motivate entities to comply, they are more likely to comply. To create the pressure a few actions can be taken:
- Write to media entities on public record and request they consider a no negative press policy, outline clearly and briefly your reasons why it matters to you.
- Name and shame media entities that fail to comply with no negative press, or fail to consider a policy.
- Vote with your feet – if you find a media entity that fails to comply, do not subscribe to their information and vocally encourage others to do the same.
Meta: this took 45mins to write.
Cross posted to lesswrong: http://lesswrong.com/lw/nvw