Doomscrolling During a Crisis

Something bad is happening in the world. You know because you have been reading about it for three hours. You have checked five news sites, read dozens of social media posts, watched a live stream and followed a thread of analysis that ended in speculation. You know more than you did this morning. You feel worse.

Doomscrolling during a crisis is not ordinary phone use. It feels necessary. The threat is real, the stakes are high, and each new piece of information could be the one that changes what you should do. Except it almost never is.

Why crisis news is different

In normal times, checking the news is a routine with a limited emotional charge. During a crisis, the news activates the brain’s threat-monitoring system. Threat monitoring is adaptive: when there is danger, it pays to stay alert. The problem is that a digital news feed does not deliver danger and then resolution. It delivers danger and then more danger, mixed with speculation, opinion and emotional testimony, in a stream that never ends.

A landmark study of media exposure following the Boston Marathon bombings found that people who consumed six or more hours of bombing-related media in the week following the event reported higher acute stress than people who were directly exposed to the bombing [3]. Media exposure was a stronger predictor of stress than being there.

The evidence on crisis media and distress

Several large studies confirm the pattern:

• In a US nationally representative sample during COVID-19, greater media exposure was associated with increased distress, after controlling for demographics and prior mental health [1].
• A German survey of 6,233 adults found that COVID-19 media consumption was associated with more anxiety and depression symptoms, with dose-response patterns: more media, more symptoms [4].
• A prospective study of responses to the Ebola crisis found that media exposure predicted Ebola-related worry at a later time point, suggesting some directionality from media to distress [2].
• A commentary on media and pandemic distress noted that the same patterns had appeared across multiple events and argued that media exposure amplifies the psychological impact of crises beyond the direct threat [5].

A fictional example

The following is an illustrative example, not a real person’s story.

Daniel wakes to news of a natural disaster in a region where he has family. He checks three news sites before breakfast. His family is safe, which he confirms by phone. He checks the news again at work. And again at lunch. And again before a meeting. And again during the meeting. By evening he has consumed several hours of disaster coverage. His family is still safe. Nothing has changed since the morning call. But his body feels as though the disaster is in his living room.

Daniel’s initial check was adaptive. The call to his family was essential. Everything after that was the monitoring loop running without an off switch.

A structured approach

For a detailed plan, see news scrolling and anxiety: when staying informed becomes a trap, which covers the information-seeking loop in depth. The essentials:

1. Choose one or two trusted sources. A news site with professional editors, a public broadcaster, or a daily briefing newsletter. Avoid social media as a primary news source during crises: the commentary raises the emotional temperature without adding clarity.
2. Check at set times. Twice a day, morning and evening, is enough for almost any crisis. The situation will not change fundamentally between checks, and if it does, you will learn about it.
3. Set a timer. Fifteen minutes per check. When the timer ends, close the source.
4. Ask: what changed? After each check, ask whether you learned anything that changes what you will do. If the answer is no, the check was surveillance, not information.
5. Allow the uncertainty. Crises are uncertain. The feed cannot resolve the uncertainty, and consuming more of it does not bring resolution closer. The discomfort of not knowing is real, but the scroll does not fix it.

When to talk to someone. If crisis-related news consumption has become compulsive, if you are unable to function or sleep because of what you have read, if you are experiencing persistent intrusive thoughts about the event, or if your distress continues well after the crisis has stabilized, talk to a doctor or therapist. Acute stress reactions and anxiety during crises are normal, but sustained distress deserves support. In the UK, Samaritans: 116 123. In the US: call or text 988.