We humans are equipped to pay more attention to dangers than to pleasures. So, if you are writing to get attention, put a negative twist on your article. If you are writing for the other side of the aisle, put a negative twist on the nefarious schemes and comments from this side. Don't write that about 90% of humans have enough to eat. Write about 10% are inadequately fed.
Try to find and document horror, pain and loss. You want to get noticed? Show the bad. Think about it. If you do a good job picturing what is going well and describing people and places that are living morally and successfully, the conclusion is logically that those people and places can be forgotten about. It's the worst troubles that need to be highlighted. The conclusion then can be "Let's do something about this."
But those connected citizens get notified of every wildfire, every shooting, every government outrage, every difficulty. That leads to older people tuning out and younger people despairing of life. I realize that it is American and pioneer lore that each of us needs to stand on our own two feet. Yes, that notification business, that ding every time an item bringing more bad news arrives, that needs to go. I do recommend looking at a news source or two daily but as the Greeks saw 2000 years ago, moderation is important. Maybe mute the dinger until your favorite summative news hour rolls around and then check. I think the daily CNN newsletter is a good one and I am a fan of Google News but on the computer, not a phone. I am really not one to talk since I carry a burner flip phone that elicits snickers from the with-it group.
