top of page

Toxic Thrill:
Addiction to Outrage in Politics

Navigating the Perils of Self-Righteous Indignation in
Today's Political Arena


By  Brock Cravy



In an era dominated by social media's relentless whirlwind and 24-hour news cycles, it seems that outrage has become the currency of political engagement. While this emotion has always played a role in public discourse, the current landscape showcases an unsettling trend: an addiction to outrage. This insidious phenomenon has woven its way into the fabric of our political culture, offering a dangerous and addictive high that threatens the very foundations of constructive governance.


As humans, we are wired to seek pleasure and avoid pain. This inherent tendency influences our choices, behaviors, and interactions. It is no surprise, then, that we are drawn to things that make us feel good, and conversely, repelled by those that elicit negative emotions. In this light, the allure of outrage is deeply concerning. According to a study published in Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, engaging with negative content leads to a more significant neurophysiological response compared to neutral or non-emotive content, underscoring our heightened engagement with such stimuli.


In the political arena, outrage offers a potent cocktail of emotions that, oddly enough, can feel pleasurable. The act of condemning, criticizing, and pointing fingers provides a momentary rush of righteousness. Social media platforms have become arenas where we can publicly display our indignation, gathering likes, retweets, and comments that validate our emotional state. It's akin to a virtual echo chamber where we hear our own voices reverberating with each outrage-laden post. A report by the Pew Research Center highlights that posts evoking anger or fear are more likely to be shared or go viral, reinforcing the cycle of outrage.


Take, for instance, the controversy ignited by media personality Tucker Carlson in June 2018. During an episode of his show "Tucker Carlson Tonight," Carlson made contentious remarks about immigration, suggesting that immigrants were making the United States "poorer and dirtier." His comments were widely criticized for their inflammatory language and divisive nature. While some saw this as an attempt to genuinely express his viewpoint, others accused Carlson of manufacturing outrage to boost his ratings and capture public attention. The ensuing uproar demonstrated how media personalities, with their immense influence, can contribute to the cycle of outrage for their own gains.


Similarly, in May 2020, Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden made a controversial remark during an interview on the popular radio show "The Breakfast Club." When asked about his record on racial issues, Biden said, "If you have a problem figuring out whether you're for me or Trump, then you ain't black." The media's reaction to Biden's comment was swift and intense. Critics argued that the statement was dismissive and offensive, focusing on the emotional impact rather than delving into the complex racial and policy issues at hand. The incident served as a stark reminder of how outrage can quickly overshadow substantive debates, preventing us from engaging in nuanced discussions about important matters.


These instances highlight how media personalities, intentionally or not, can fan the flames of outrage, directing public discourse away from substantive matters and into the realm of sensationalism. The addiction to self-righteous anger has emerged as the new drug of choice, captivating people from all walks of life. But unlike traditional drugs, the cycle of outrage addiction is particularly insidious. With each hit, the craving intensifies, and the need for a bigger, more emotionally charged spectacle becomes overwhelming. This escalating cycle blinds us to alternative perspectives, stifles nuanced discussions, and erodes the very essence of civil discourse.


The addiction to outrage is not just an individual issue; it has dire consequences for our society as a whole. As we become fixated on the next scandal, the latest gaffe, or the most shocking soundbite, we divert our attention from the substantive policy debates that truly shape our world. The urgency to remain outraged overshadows the critical need for well-informed, reasoned discussions that lead to effective governance.


Moreover, the addiction to outrage fuels division and polarization. It fosters an "us versus them" mentality that impedes cooperation and compromise. When our primary focus is on proving our opponents wrong, we lose sight of the common ground that could lead to meaningful solutions. In this hyper-charged environment, collaboration becomes a casualty, and progress becomes a distant dream.


Breaking free from the clutches of outrage addiction requires a collective effort. As individuals, we must acknowledge the seductive power of self-righteous anger and actively seek a more balanced approach to political engagement. This involves critical self-reflection, a commitment to understanding diverse viewpoints, and a willingness to engage in substantive discussions that prioritize solutions over sensationalism.


Media outlets also bear a significant responsibility in shaping the public discourse. Sensationalism and clickbait headlines may drive traffic, but they come at the cost of informed citizenship. Journalistic integrity and a focus on issues of substance can counteract the allure of outrage and encourage a more responsible and thoughtful form of engagement.


Ultimately, addressing the addiction to outrage requires a cultural shift that values empathy, open

bottom of page