In the evening, finally, he sits down in his armchair and relaxes, soon thereafter returning to the newspaper. She is long-accustomed to the rustle of the pages and the various sounds which her husband will from time to time make in response to the story he is reading. In this case however there is something worthy of remark.
'But anyway there is good news' he says, 'the economy seems to be recovering…'
The idea of it, that the government will promote quality of life for the people; the mood in general, optimism - social reform, economic growth, cultural success…
'It's nice to have anyway' he says, 'although it doesn't make that much difference to me. A bit extra for quite a lot of people, and it could go up. Do you really think it will cause unemployment like they said on the TV?'
Reading the news outside, lying on the grass on a sunny spring day, he wonders whether to share the story alongside his own opinion. There is a new treaty on climate change…
Most often I think on hearing the exclamation 'good news', whether murmured or cried out, one would assume that the person speaking had heard or read some recent statement concerning the nature of reality and found its subject pleasing, but we should consider the issue more broadly. That we enjoy the dynamic reported, that what happened recently falls in line with our desires, is perhaps not the business of news. First we should I propose put quality, and here the defining feature, that it is true. Following on from this we might list the level of insight, the appropriate amount of detail, proper perspective, well-chosen tone, style even, as others to look for, understanding that such things to a degree depend on the positioning of the publisher. Most of all, however, we want the news we receive to be the truth. It is only on this basis that it can have a good effect.
As accurate representation of external event it provides the basis for social management via debate. First as individuals, we form a response, then through acquaintance we agree and disagree, learning, generating ideas, refining, feeding back into the organisations through which we structure responsibility.
The paradigm of today is that there is difficulty in the world, but that the lives of most of us are worse than they might be for the lack of high quality news. Much of what is made available is not purposed to deliver truth to the public.
The problem is such that I find myself unsure as to external event what did or didn't happen, inclined to suppose that there is exaggeration involved, and certain that the reporting is unfairly selective. As to insight I am confronted with arguments overly simplistic concerning cause. What detail there is does not give a sense of proportion. The perspective is one-sided. The tone is deliberately upsetting. The intended effect it seems to me, depending on the subject, depending on the piece, is to manipulate members of the public into offering support for or acquiescing to illicit private gain. Perhaps the worst of it, what is new, the news, is presented as always negative, things getting worse. No doubt, there is a real and very regrettable impact, to reduce the size of the audience, the level of engagement, the value of the debate.
The point I would like to make here is that more truth should lead to a less difficult world. Higher quality news would lead to a better debate, where today there is little and for what there is the standard is poor. We need to improve upon this, and although it is not unreasonable to hope for quick progress, inevitably to keep up good standards is hard work over many years. In the meantime I think we should remind ourselves of reality as considered over the long term. It is with this perspective, even if it is not new, that we can have the best effect, for herein are contained the good behaviours that we have preserved and built upon. This long-term perspective we might say is a strong truth.
We live for the most part happily in a world in which we have improved standards of living year after year, for centuries, across geographies, whatever the various perspectives on national or regional leadership, driven by growth and innovation, increasing efficiency through learning and the sharing of knowledge. This is the natural tendency of humanity. To achieve this we add value through the use of materials and the application of labour. The benefits of this we share, to some degree, helping others, occasionally reforming society, through consensus. All of this will continue for many centuries to come.
It is the perspective of the "new" to claim otherwise, that the growth of emerging markets is a bad thing, that geo-politics is obliged to get in the way, and yet we hear relatively little about our own room for improvement, and what we need to do to keep up this long-term perspective over the next few years and foreseeable future. If we allocate more of our time and energy to this then what is new should be better.
It is my view that both domestically and internationally there is a great deal of activity and expenditure in areas that are neither necessary nor desirable, and reducing these should be the priority, so that we can work towards better outcomes for the serious issues of our times.
He picks up his copy of the weekend newspaper and turns the pages, wondering what to read first:
'Globalisation back on track'
'Climate change slows down'
'Bad people arrested'
'Brexit a success'