Talk:Mean world syndrome

Normally
Normally I don't do edits, but something about this didn't seem right. There were no sources cited and nothing beyond what could be mere opinion presented. Upload 42 14:32, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

And it is said objectively, with a point of view in mind, as the name suggest, which makes it look worst.. there is enough of good reason in the world to have the "mean world syndrome" not to point out good things about it

"Mean world Syndrome has very few references, thus indicating it is a figment of this writer's imagination, in psychological literature (a contradiction )and exists as a so-called 'new' disorder."

This sentence not only makes no sense in the context of the article, it makes no sense at all. I *think* it's trying to indicate that the person who created this article made it up, but it's hard to understand (what's the contradiction? is the person who wrote this trying to suggest that "psychological literature" is oxymoronic?). But if it's made up, it doesn't "exist" at all, and "so-called 'new' disorder," with "so-called" and scare quotes, seems like overkill. "MWS has very few references in psychological literature, and since it has not been thoroughly studied, people should not draw conclusions about it" is the only way I can read it so that it makes sense, doesn't make the article sound like it was written by someone with MPD, and is neutral and grammatical. Does this sentence even belong in the article?

"Is this for real? Media-induced PTSD where one of the symptoms is an insatiable desire to seek out violent images?  Sounds a little Onion-y to me.  At the very least, it needs to be reframed in terms of 'this is a proposed theory, this is who advances it, this is what they say it is' instead of just reeling off causes and symptoms in Wikipedia's voice." --Ross Hight

Seems to me to be the healthy reaction to discovering the true nature of society
Honestly, the world is a very mean and dangerous place. There are certainly a lot of nice people, but the society we live in is not a nice one at all. It's really a pathocracy, because to get to the top in this society, one must be a psychopath. An ordinary person can't do it, because they're not ruthless enough. The world is run by psychopaths, because these are the people who desire power over others and are willing to do whatever it takes to get it. From police officer to President and beyond, the power jobs attract psychopaths. If all of the people in these positions of power were tested for psychopathic traits, at least 90% of them would test positive. How can a system run by these people be anything but mean?

Honestly, this "mean world syndrome" is garbage, just like most of these new psychological conditions. It's just an attempt to characterize people with a different worldview as being mentally ill or unstable. Either you're just like everyone else, just like the media tells you you should be, or you're delusional, paranoid, confused, and in need of help. 208.114.161.24 00:02, 4 September 2007 (UTC) Nalencer


 * This is exactly what I thought when I heard of the Mean World Syndrome. I was like, "my god, this is the most retarded thing I have ever heard of". The world is a shitty, fucked up place. You are absolutely right, it's just another way for the media to tell us that something is wrong with us and that we "need" their help. 70.122.23.62 (talk) 19:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed?
I have added a couple of links to relevant sites. I think the "factual accuracy disputed" warning should be removed. I tried to find some citations in opposition but didn't have much luck. If someone has a link maybe it could be added. Tom harrison 17:35, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

I think the external links prove that it is no longer dispusted. I'm removing the sign. 24.147.141.127 02:04, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

The sense I indicated has been understood. Ergo, my edits are in fact a sensible statement. The correct conclusion, either way, was to delete the sentence as it was irrelevant. The separate comment about psycholgical literature whether contradictory or oxymoronic renders, again, the same sense and conclusion.

The wider issue on whether "psycholgical literature" is contradictory or oxymoronic (the same thing) is also met, whether understood by the editor or not - serendipitous for that person I suppose, or good intuition at least.

how do u make something a stub????

New user comment: This is not a disorder recognised by any national or international psychiatric organisation. The text of the article does not make clear that this syndrome is hypothetical. As such, it may be factually correct, but it still needs a warning attached. 163.1.143.122 23:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * This isn't a disorder. It's a phenomena described in media effects research under cultivation theory.  It was in my textbook, I'll reference it when I get a chance.  --Kraftlos (talk) 10:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah!
Is it though —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.148.2 (talk) 10:23, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

100% Pure Junk Science
This article has no relative worth in diagnosing a "real world" psychological problem, the person(s) described in this article are really only chronically pessimistic or suffer from other more traditional classifications. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.197.224.150 (talk) 03:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


 * We're talking about media and communications research, not psychology.  --Kraftlos (talk) 10:27, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. No one who researches or argues MWS is trying to cure or diagnose anything. The original post itself is proof of the theory; the poster thinks that every expression of theory is an attempt to create an illness. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.239.141.237 (talk) 01:55, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I'd agree that this shouldn't be linked with psychology (there's a link to the psych portal) or even science at all, this is based on the first sentence since its logically unfalsifyable; to establish whether someone believes "the world is more violent than it actually is" there would first have to be an established way of measuring 'how violent the world is' I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that is definately never going to happen. Maybe not 100% pure junk science, but definately over 60% so it meets my diagnostic criteria for being: a load of old shite, thats my subjective opinion, objectively, i still think it should be unlinked from psychology and perhaps linked with 'media and communications research as mentioned by Kraftlos

Yinmaru (talk) 09:50, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Mean World?
I think the media need much more scrutiny, and people need to think alot more. We all hear about stabbings and violence in society and everyone loves to talk about something and throw their moral two pennies in, but let's think for a moment. How many stabbings were there in the past compared to now? Were they reported as much? Is say 25 stabbing deaths a year in London within a population of 7 million really cause to panic and bring in draconian surveillance laws a la george orwell and 1984? Which is what is happening. When you factor in the rise in population too compared to the past (when we survived very well without video surveillance etc) then you have to wonder who is playing on peoples fears and why? Or are people and society just eating themselves up with their own self induced panic psychosis and control freakishness? Or is it the mean world syndrome...hmmm p.s also fears about change and society may compel people to worry disproportionately and put their fears onto things which the media then plays up. I know someone who constantly obsesses about their weight although not fat. Really other issues and unhappiness have led her to put all her worries on obsession with her weight. Is that what ths is too? Combined with peoples ignorance and we start to develop into a big brother nightmare which the government are all too eager to exploit to control and tax more and the media play up to. We cant have zero crime and perfect people. Its crazy and undesirable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.8.2.0 (talk) 21:25, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I hear what you're saying, but Wikipedia is not a forum. Please stay on the topic of the article itself.  --Kraftlos (talk) 00:00, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Expansion of Article
Are there any references to the same effect being caused by habitual internet use? The next versio nof the DSM will likely include internet addiction as a diagnosis. What does the DSM IV say? Jettparmer (talk) 18:45, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * That seems unlikely, because the syndrome comes from exposure to anti-social (violent, etc) activity on television. Discussing the content of TV programs with other people seems to less it, because the TV viewer is getting other sources of information. Internet use, if anything, should lessen Mean World Syndrome. Habitual Internet use might, however, cause one to over-estimate the number of cute kittens in the world. Graham king 3 (talk) 06:01, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

If you read above you'll notice this is not a 'real' syndrome (as in it is not medically/psychologically/scientifically backed). It just has the name syndrome. DSM IV has some mention of pathological internet use in its appendices, the closest diagnostic term would probably be 'impulse control disorder not otherwise specified' Its doubtful Internet addiction will bein in DSM V, the term addiction isn't widely accepted in scientific terms, possibly becayse it is overused (mainly in the media, in cases like this, reporting 'internet addiction'). If anything, pathological internet use will have some mention as part of a broader 'impulse control' or 'behavioural dependance' subcategory.

Yinmaru (talk) 12:08, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was move per request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:34, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Mean World Syndrome → Mean world syndrome –

Per WP:CAPS ("Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization") and WP:TITLE, this is a generic, common term, not a propriety or commercial term, so the article title should be downcased. Lowercase will match the formatting of related article titles. Tony  (talk)  18:12, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

hmmmm
What if they called it mad world syndrome rather than mean world syndrome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Superdoggo (talk • contribs) 01:48, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

More Diverse Set of Resources and Examples
This article is a good start that includes the basic need to knows about Mean World Syndrome. I think a good way to flesh out the article would be to research and provide information from a more diverse set of resources and examples. For instance - in the Mean World Syndrome documentary Gerbner addresses how the depiction of Black, Latino, and Middle Eastern folks in media plays into negative perceptions of them. I think this example and research to back it up would better illustrate the concept. Catfiorindi (talk) 21:04, 25 September 2020 (UTC) catfiorindi

Current Resource Possibilities
I agree that this article is a good start that includes the basic need to know about Mean World Syndrome. I have found some resources that I think would be good additions to the article including a source that speaks to how Gerbner's findings impact African Americans. https://www.healthing.ca/mental-health/is-the-news-giving-you-mean-world-syndrome, https://happiful.com/what-is-mean-world-syndrome/, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/mind/do-have-mean-world-syndrome-netflix-blame/, https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5527&context=gradschool_theses, https://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/violence/world_report/en/summary_en.pdf, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jad_Melki/publication/310784578_Early_childhood_exposure_to_media_violence_What_parents_and_policymakers_ought_to_know/links/5d880e2d299bf1996f935e23/Early-childhood-exposure-to-media-violence-What-parents-and-policymakers-ought-to-know.pdf?origin=publication_detail. JRDavisjr (talk) 08:49, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: True Crime and Misinformation
— Assignment last updated by Gmp76 (talk) 21:45, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Mass Media and Society
— Assignment last updated by Iamclandestined (talk) 04:25, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

For our contributions, we chose to edit, update, and add to the existing introduction, COVID-19 subheading, and evolution of the mass media section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Izzyabella2003 (talk • contribs) 20:36, 24 October 2023 (UTC)